ALL WELCOME TO THE SENATE PUBLIC
SAFETY COMMITTEE. WE HAVE EIGHT
BILLS TODAY. ONE BILL. MY BILL
S¼ B NINE, THREE THREE IS ON
CONSENT. UM I'LL ASK THE
SECRETARY TO CALL ROLL, BUT I
BELIEVE WE'RE GOING TO START AS
A SUB COMMITTEE. YEAH, AND WE
DON'T HAVE TO. DON'T CALL AGAIN
SINCE WE DON'T HAVE A ALL RIGHT,
RIGHT, SO WE'RE GONNA SINCE WE
DON'T HAVE A ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE
A ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE GONNA
START AS A SUBCOMMITTEE'S HER
BIRTHDAY IS TODAY. SO LET'S ALL
WISH HER A HAPPY BIRTHDAY. HAPPY
BIRTHDAY. YOU GUYS FEEL LIKE
SINGING, BUT THIS IS A SWELL WAY
TO SPEND YOUR BIRTHDAY. IT'S
QUITE USUAL FOR THE LAST 30
YEARS. MARY FEELS VERY LOVED
TODAY, RIGHT NOW, RIGHT? SO UM
SO AGAIN. I JUST WANT TO SAY
THAT WE'RE GOING TO START AS A
SUBCOMITTEE. WE ARE GOING TO
START WITH SENATOR BLAKE SPEAR.
SENATOR BLAKE SPEIER IS HERE.
SHE WILL BE PRESENTING HER FIRST
BILL. SHE HAS THREE BILLS. UP
TODAY. S¼ B 1002 SENATOR, YOU
WILL BE SPEAKING HERE AND THEN
YOUR WITNESSES WILL COME TO THE
D¯ÚI THE LECTERN. UM AND THEY
WILL BE TIMED AT TWO MINUTES, SO
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT'S
VERY CLEAR FOR LEAD WITNESSES,
SENATOR, THE FLOOR IS YOURS.
GOOD MORNING AND THANK YOU,
CHAIR AND COLLEAGUES. I'M
EXCITED TO BE HERE TO SPEAK IN
SUPPORT OF MY BILL S¼ B 1002. AS
I TESTIFIED IN FRONT OF THIS
COMMITTEE LAST WEEK, DESPITE
CALIFORNIA HAVING THE BEST GUN
SAFETY LAWS IN THE NATION, WE
STILL HAVE AREAS WHERE WE NEED
TO IMPROVE. SPECIFICALLY WE NEED
TO ADDRESS IMPLEMENTATION GAPS.
THESE ARE PLACES WHERE EXISTING
LAWS AREN'T WORKING QUITE AS
WELL AS THEY SHOULD. THIS BILL
IS A BIPARTISAN MEASURE, WHICH
ADDRESSES ONE OF THE MOST
PRESSING IMPLEMENTATION GAPS BY
ENSURING THAT PEOPLE HAVING A
SEVERE MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS ARE
NOT ARMED. TO BE CLEAR. WE ARE
NOT TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE WHO ARE
EXPERIENCING A MINOR DEPRESSIVE
EPISODE. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT
INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE BEEN
INVOLUNTARILY HOSPITALIZED,
DEEMED NOT GUILTY BY REASON OF
MENTAL INSANITY, PLACED IN A
CONSERVATORSHIP OR JUDGED TO BE
A DANGER TO OTHERS DUE TO THEIR
MENTAL ILLNESS, ACCORDING TO THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE. NEARLY 4800.
CALIFORNIANS REMAINED ARMED
DESPITE BEING PROHIBITED FROM
HAVING GUNS DUE TO MENTAL HEALTH
CONCERNS. THIS PROBLEM MAY GROW
AS COUNTIES IMPLEMENT S¼ 40
THREE FROM LAST YEAR, WHICH THAT
EXPANDED THE PARAMETERS UNDER
WHICH INDIVIDUALS CAN BE
INVOLUNTARILY COMMITTED DUE TO
MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES FROM 2012
TO 2022. THAT'S 10 YEARS,
CALIFORNIA AVERAGED OVER 120,000
MENTAL HOLDS OF ADULTS A YEAR.
WE ARE EXTREMELY VULNERABLE TO
SOMEONE SLIPPING THROUGH THE
CRACK THE CRACKS THE GAPS IN OUR
SYSTEM. A PERSON WITH A MENTAL
HEALTH CRISIS AND ACCESS TO A
GUN IS AT RISK OF KILLING
THEMSELVES OR SHOOTING OTHERS.
WE WANT TO REDUCE THAT RISK AS
MUCH AS POSSIBLE. SB 10 Ó TWO
STRIVES TO PLUG THESE GAPS AND
MAKE OUR COMMUNITY SAFER BY
IMPLEMENTING SEVERAL CHANGES.
FIRST IT PROVIDES COMPLIANCE
TIMELINES AND SETS UP A SYSTEM
WITH OVERLAPPING CHECKPOINTS TO
ENSURE SUCCESS. PEOPLE WHO ARE
INVOLUNTARILY COMMITTED TO A
HEALTH CARE FACILITY WILL BE
INFORMED MULTIPLE TIMES THAT
THEY HAVE 72 HOURS FROM
DISCHARGE TO GET RID OF THEIR
FIREARM. AND AMMUNITION BY
SEVERAL MEANS, INCLUDING SALE TO
OR TEMPORARILY STORING WITH A
LICENSED DEALER OR TURNING THEM
OVER TO LAW ENFORCEMENT.
MEANWHILE COURTS WILL BE
REQUIRED TO INFORM A NEWLY
PROHIBITED PERSON OF HOW TO
COMPLY AND THERE WILL BE A 14
DAY COMPLIANCE DEADLINE. SECOND
IT PROVIDES LOCAL LAW
ENFORCEMENT WITH THE INFORMATION
THAT THEY NEED TO FOLLOW UP.
THIS WILL IMPROVE VOLUNTARY
COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT WHEN
NEEDED. BUT I ALSO WANT TO
EMPHASIZE WHAT THIS BILL DOES
NOT DO. THIS BILL DOES NOT
CREATE ANY NEW FIREARM
PROHIBITIONS. INSTEAD IT IS
FOCUSED ON IMPROVING THE
OUTCOMES OF EXISTING LAWS WITH
ME TODAY I AM HAPPY TO HAVE
FERNANDO MEZA ON BEHALF OF THE
SAN DIEGO SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT.
THANK YOU. YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES
MORNING, MADAM CHAIR AND
HONORABLE PUBLIC SAFETY
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME IS
FERNANDO MEZA, AND I'M, A
PROPERTY INVESTIGATOR FOR THE
SAMUEL COUNTY SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT. ON BEHALF OF THE
SENIOR COUNTY SHERIFF KELLY
MARTINEZ, WHO IS THE BILL'S
SPONSOR. WE WOULD LIKE TO THANK
SENATOR BLAKESPEAR FOR AUTHORING
S¼ B 1002. THIS BILL ADDRESSES
CRITICAL IMPLEMENTATION GAPS
WITHIN EXISTING FIRE AND
PROHIBITIONS FOR PEOPLE
EXPERIENCING MENTAL HEALTH
CRISES. FOR 2017 TO 2023, THE
SHERIFF'S PROPERTY
INVESTIGATIONS UNIT, A TEAM OF
FOUR REVIEWED ON AVERAGE 8750.
5150 IN VOLUNTARY DETENTION
CASES PER YEAR. THIS AMOUNT DOES
NOT NECESSARILY AFFLICT ALL
INDIVIDUALS. IN THESE CASES
HAVING FIREARMS. IT SPOTLIGHTS
THE WORKLOAD ON LOCAL AGENCIES
LIKE OURS THAT MUST SORT THROUGH
AND IDENTIFY PROHIBITED
INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE FIREARMS
REGISTERED INTO THEIR GAME.
CURRENTLY WHEN INTERACTING WITH
PROHIBITIVE PERSONS AND
EDUCATING THEM ON THE LAW AND
THEIR RIGHTS. THERE ARE TIMES
WHEN WE ARE MET WITH RELUCTANCE
AND OR CONFUSION. UNFORTUNATELY
LAW ENFORCEMENT HAS NÓ MECHANISM
TO REFERENCE OR PHYSICAL POINT
OF DOCUMENT WHEN CONTACTING
INDIVIDUALS. IN ADDITION, THE
PATIENT NOTIFICATION OF FIREARMS
PROHIBITION AND RIGHT TO HEARING
FORM DOESN'T LIST LAW
ENFORCEMENT AS A RELINQUISHMENT
OPTION DESPITE IT BEING
AVAILABLE, CAUSING MORE
CONFUSION WHEN WE CONTACT THEM.
S¼ B 1002 WILL CLOSE
IMPLEMENTATION GAPS BY ALLOWING
LAW ENFORCEMENT THE ABILITY TO
REQUEST AS SIGNED PATIENT
NOTIFICATION FORM AND ESTABLISH
ESTABLISH A HARD DEADLINE FOR A
PROHIBITIVE PERSON TO SURRENDER
ANY OUTSTANDING FIREARMS THROUGH
THE AVAILABLE RELINQUISHMENT
OPTIONS. THE END GOAL IS TO
PREVENT ESCALATION OF A THREAT,
SERIOUS HARM OR DEATH OR
COMMISSION OF A CRIME. 70% OF
GUN VIOLENCE IN SAN DIEGO IS
SUICIDE. DISRUPTING ACCESS TO
FIREARMS DURING THESE TIMES OF
CRISIS REDUCES THE RISK AND
SAVES LIVES. WHEN THE
PROHIBITIVE PERSON IS BETTER
INFORMED, AND LAW ENFORCEMENT IS
BETTER INFORMED THERE WILL BE A
BETTER OUTCOME. THAT IS WHY THE
SAMUEL COUNTY SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT IS PROUD TO SPONSOR
OF THIS IMPORTANT LEGISLATION
THAT WILL HELP STREAMLINE AND
CLARIFY THE RELINQUISHMENT
PROCESS, MAKING EVERYONE SAFER.
WE RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR THE
COMMITTEE'S I VOTE AND WELCOME
ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR TESTIMONY. DO YOU HAVE ANY
OTHER PRIMARY WITNESSES? UH, NÓ?
OK DO WE HAVE ANYBODY THAT
WISHES TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO
THE BILL? OH I'M SORRY. WELL, I
WAS GONNA GET ALL THE MEAT. OK,
I'LL DO ME TOO. NOW I'LL DO IT
THE WAY THE CHAIR DOES IT. UH,
DO YOU HAVE ANY ME TOOS THAT
WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND GOOD
MORNING MEMBERS. USHA MALA ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE
SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT
OF 1002. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING
, REBECCA MARCUS, REPRESENTING
THE BRADY CAMPAIGN AND OUR
COLLEAGUES AT GIFFORDS AND
STRONG SUPPORT. OK NOW, IS THERE
ANYBODY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS
BILL, WHO WOULD LIKE TO COME UP
AND SPEAK AS A PRIMARY WITNESS?
ARE THERE ANYBODY THAT JUST
WANTS TO COME UP AND SAY WELL,
THEY OPPOSE IT WITHOUT BEING A
PRIMARY WITNESS. IF NOT, THEN WE
WILL BRING IT BACK TO THE
DIOCESE FOR ANY QUESTIONS,
COMMENTS. IT'S ME. ALL RIGHT.
WELL, I'LL MAKE A COMMENT. UM,
THIS IS THE KIND OF, UH
LEGISLATION THAT HELPS
ACCOMPLISH SAFETY BECAUSE WE ARE
ACTUALLY GOING TO. WE'RE TRYING
TO ENFORCE LAWS AGAINST THAT ARE
ALREADY THERE FOR PROHIBITED
PERSONS. A LOT OF THE GUN BILLS,
YOU KNOW, AS YOU KNOW, I. I
OPPOSE A LOT OF THEM BECAUSE
THEY'RE NOT DOING THAT THEY'RE
THEY'RE MORE AIMED AT OUR LAW
ABIDING CITIZENS, AS OPPOSED TO
THE PROHIBITIVE PERSONS. UH, SO,
UH, I APPLAUD YOU FOR BRINGING
THIS I THINK AS WELL THOUGHT OUT
, IT HELPS IMPLEMENT SOMETHING
THAT DOES BOTHER A LOT OF US.
UH, WE DO WANT PEOPLE WHO ARE
NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE GUNS NOT TO
HAVE THEM WHILE THE LAW ABIDING
CITIZENS WHO ARE EXERCISING
THEIR RIGHTS ARE ALLOWED TO
WITHOUT WITH AS LITTLE
INTERFERENCE AS POSSIBLE. SO
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR
BILL. UM, WE'LL WHAT I. I DON'T
GET TO MAKE IT NÓ. I'M JUST
KIDDING. I UNDERSTAND THAT.
YEAH. OH I KNOW THAT I AM WELL
AWARE THAT WE DO NOT HAVE A
QUORUM, SO WE ARE GOING TO, UH,
WE'LL HOLD THIS BILL UNTIL WE
HAVE A QUORUM AND WE'LL LET YOU
PRESENT YOUR NEXT BILL. OK UH,
THANK YOU, SENATOR FOR YOUR
REASONED COMMENTS ON THIS BILL.
I APPRECIATE IT. NEXT BILL IS
1038. IS THAT THE ONE YOU HAVE
NEXT? OK, 1019. ONE. THANK YOU,
CHAIR AND COLLEAGUES. I'M
EXCITED TO BE HERE TODAY TO
SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF MY BILL. SB
1019 LAST DECEMBER, THE NEW YORK
TIMES REPORTED THAT MANY
FIREARMS COLLECTED IN GUN
BUYBACK PROGRAMS ACROSS THE
COUNTRY, INCLUDING IN CALIFORNIA
ARE ESSENTIALLY RECYCLED AND
RESOLD ONLINE INSTEAD OF BEING
DISPOSED OF, OR DESTROYED. FOR
THOSE OF US FOCUSED ON REDUCING
GUN VIOLENCE AND TAKING GUNS OFF
THE STREETS. THIS WAS A SHOCKING
REVELATION AND A BIG FAILURE TO
HONOR THE PROMISE BEHIND GUN
BUYBACK PROGRAMS. WE ASSUME THAT
THINGS WERE AS THEY SEEMED, BUT
THEY WERE NOT. UNDER EXISTING
FEDERAL GUIDELINES. GUNS ARE
LEGALLY DESTROYED WHEN A SINGLE
PART THE SERIALIZED FRAME OR
RECEIVER OF A GUN IS DESTROYED.
BUT ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT
MAKE A GUN A GUN, THE BARREL
GRIP SLIDE, FIRING PIN AND
MAGAZINE COULD BE RESOLD. AS GUN
KITS AND COMBINED WITH A FRAME
OR RECEIVER TO MAKE A NEW GUN.
THIS IS ESSENTIALLY HOW GHOST
GUNS ARE CREATED. SB 1019
REQUIRES COMPLETE DESTRUCTION OF
FIREARMS ACQUIRED THROUGH GUN
BUYBACK PROGRAMS OR CONFISCATED
BY LAW ENFORCEMENT. THE SCOPE,
SILENCERS AND SUPPRESSORS
INCLUDED. THIS ENSURES THAT WE
FOLLOW THE ORIGINAL INTENT AND
PROMISE OF GUN BUYBACK PROGRAMS
TO REMOVE UNWANTED AND UNNEEDED
GUNS FROM CIRCULATION WITH ME
TODAY IS STEVE LINDLEY ON BEHALF
OF S¼ B 1019 SPONSOR, BRADY PRI.
PRIOR TO B TO JOINING BRADY.
STEVE WAS THE CHIEF OF THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
BUREAU OF FIREARMS. THANK YOU
FOR JOINING US TODAY. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING. HERE. YOU HAVE TWO
MINUTES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
SIR. UM AGAIN. MY NAME IS STEVE
LE AND I'M A 28 YEAR LAW
ENFORCEMENT VETERAN AND WAS A
FORMER CHIEF OF THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE BUREAU FOR
ARMS. I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE
BRADY CAMPAIGN WITH CERTAIN
EXEMPTIONS. CURRENT LAW REQUIRES
THAT RECOVERED FIREARMS BE
DESTROYED YET BECAUSE OF HOW
CURRENT FEDERAL REGULATIONS
DEFINE A FIREARM. IT MAY BE
CONSIDERED DESTROYED WHEN ONLY A
SINGLE PART OF THE FIREARM IS
STERILIZED FRAME OR RECEIVER IS
DESTROYED. AS A RESULT, SOME
BUSINESSES CONTRACTED BY LAW
ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES TO DESTROY
FIREARMS ONLY DESTROY THE FRAME
OR AND I SAW THE REMAINING
FIREARMS AND PARK KITS. BUT HE
BELIEVES HIS INCONSISTENT FOR
CALIFORNIA LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCIES TO PROFIT OR ASSET
OFFSET THEIR COSTS. BUT THE SALE
OF FIREARM PARTS WHILE THE
COMMUNITY AND THE STATE IS
INVESTING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS
AND SEEKING SOLUTIONS TO REDUCE
FARM VIOLENCE IN THE COMMUNITY,
THESE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES
SERVE CALIFORNIA HAS ALREADY
REJECTED THE IDEA THAT FIREARMS
AND LAW ENFORCEMENT CUSTODY
COULD BE SOLD AND TROD TO THE
COMMUNITY. YET SOME LAW
ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES ARE
ALLOWING PRECISELY THIS WHEN
THEY TURN OVER FIREARMS TO
VENDORS OR CONTRACTORS FOR
DESTRUCTION. AND THESE VENDORS
DESTROY ONLY ONE PART OF THE
FIREARM AND SELL THE REMAINING
THE SOLAR FIREARM PARTS THAT ARE
SALVAGED RATHER THAN DESTROY. IT
ALSO UNDERMINES THE INCREASING
USE OF GUN BUYBACKS. THROUGHOUT
THE STATE. FINALLY THIS BILL
ALSO REQUIRES THAT ALL LAW
ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES HAVE A
WRITTEN POLICY ON THE
DESTRUCTION OF FIREARMS,
IDENTIFYING FIREARMS TO BE
DESTROYED. KEEPING THOSE RECORDS
AND THE DESTRUCTION AND DISPOSAL
OF THOSE FIREARMS LAW
ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES THAT
CONTRACT WITH OR OPERATE UNDER A
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH
ANOTHER AGENCY, OR THE STORAGE
OR DESTRUCTION OF THESE FIREARMS
MUST ALSO HAVE A POLICY
IDENTIFYING THE OTHER AGENCIES
AND OUTLINING THE
RESPONSIBILITIES OF ALL INVOLVED
. THIS BILL WILL ASSIST IN
KEEPING FIREARMS OUT OF THE
HANDS OF PROHIBITED PERSON. AND
HOLD LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES
ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE COMPLETE
DESTRUCTION OF THE FIREARMS IN
THEIR CUSTODY. THANKS FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TODAY AND I
ASK FOR YOUR VOTE. AND THANK YOU
FOR YOUR BRIEF COMMENTS. DO YOU
HAVE ANY OTHER PRIMARY WITNESSES
WHO WISH TO SPEAK IN NÓ NÓ OTHER
PRIMARIES. RIGHT SO ALL THOSE
THAT WISH TO COME UP AND ADD
THEIR SUPPORT FOR THE BILL. YOUR
NAME THE ORGANIZATION YOU
REPRESENT, AND, UH YOUR SUPPORT.
YOU. REBECCA MARQUEZ,
REPRESENTING BRADY, CALIFORNIA
AND MY COLLEAGUES AT GIFFORDS
AND SUPPORT THANK YOU. JULIE
CHAPMAN, A VOLUNTEER WITH MOMS
DEMAND ACTION AND SUPPORT. GOOD
MORNING LAURA LANE, REPRESENTING
EVERY TOWN FOR GUN SAFETY IN
SUPPORT. YARD ALL VOLUNTEER WITH
MOMS DEMAND ACTION IN SUPPORT.
HIM AND FREDDY VOLUNTEER WITH
MOMS DEMAND ACTION IN SUPPORT.
GOOD MORNING. GILLIAN KING
VOLUNTEER WITH MOMS DEMAND
ACTION IN SUPPORT. LINDY SOLO
BAUER. LOCAL GROUP LEAD NAPA
VALLEY MOMS DEMAND ACTION IN
SUPPORT LIZ RUSSELL GUN VIOLENCE
, SURVIVOR MOMS ZOO, MAD ACTION,
VOLUNTEER AND SUPPORT. UH, GOOD
MORNING. UH ROWAN TIBO, STUDENTS
DEMAND ACTION, VOLUNTEER AND
SUPPORT. GOOD MORNING, CHRISTINE
SOTO DE BERI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
OF THE PROSECUTORS, ALLIANCE AND
SUPPORT ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.
ALL UH, NEXT STEPS WE HAVE, UH,
PRIMARY WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION
TO THE BILL. GO AHEAD AND STEP
FOUR. YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIRMAN MEMBER
SAM PAREDES, REPRESENTING GUN
OWNERS, CALIFORNIA AND THE
CALIFORNIA RIFLE AND PISTOL
ASSOCIATION. WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY
HERE TO OPPOSE THE BILL. WE JUST
WANT TO BRING UP A COUPLE OF
POINTS OF INFORMATION. FIRST OF
ALL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES,
AND THE STATE KNEW FULL WELL
WHEN THEY WERE SELLING THESE
GUNS TO CONTRACTORS TO DESTROY
THEM. THEY WERE GIVEN AN OPTION.
THE LOWER COST WAS TO DESTROY
THE RECEIVERS. THAT PORTION OF
THE GUN THAT IS THE GUN. THEY
KNEW FULL WELL THAT THE PARTS
WERE BEING SOLD. THAT THAT WAS
THE WAY TO OFFSET THE COST OF
DESTROYING THE GUNS. EVERY
CONTRACTOR OUT THERE WILL TELL
YOU THAT EVERY AGENCY THAT THEY
THEY WORK WITH KNEW THESE THINGS
FULL WELL, SO THIS WAS NOT A
SURPRISE. THAT'S JUST WHAT
HAPPENED NOW WE'RE NOT IN IN
OPPOSITION TO THAT. I JUST WANT
TO POINT THAT OUT FOR YOU,
EVERYBODY TO UNDERSTAND THE
EXACT SITUATION. THANK YOU. ALL
RIGHT. THANK YOU. IS THERE
ANYBODY ELSE THAT WANTS TO BE AN
OPPOSITION THAT WAS MIDDLE OF
THE ROTOR. SO DON'T TELL ME THAT
I GOTTA CALL IT LIKE I SEE IT,
UH, ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO ADD ON
AN OPPOSITION IF THERE ARE NONE?
UH, WELL, THAT COMES BACK TO THE
DÍAS. FOR COMMENTS FROM MY
COLLEAGUE. OH, IT'S ME AGAIN. NÓ
UH, MY ASSUMPTION IS THAT WHEN
SOMEBODY GOES TO TURN IN A
FIREARM TO BE DESTROYED, THAT
THEY FEEL LIKE THE WHOLE THING
IS GOING TO BE DESTROYED PEOPLE
THAT WANT TO ACCESS THE LEGAL
PARTS THROUGH OTHER MEANS HAVE
THE ABILITY TO DO SO. UH SO
AGAIN. THIS IS A ONE OF THOSE
BILLS. THAT MAKES SENSE. UH IT,
UH, ACTUALLY CARRIES OUT WHAT
PEOPLE HAVE EXPECTATIONS ARE AND
, UH AND IF THEY WANT THEIR GUN
OUT OF CIRCULATION, IT TAKES IT
OUT OF CIRCULATION. YEAH. SO
THAT BRINGS US TO YOUR THIRD
BILL. WELL THANK YOU. I'M TWO
FOR TWO WITH THE ONE MEMBER OF
THE COMMITTEE WHO'S HERE, SO
WE'LL SEE. WE'LL SEE HOW IT GOES
WITH NUMBER THREE. SO THANK YOU,
CHAIR AND COLLEAGUES FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS S¼ B 1038
CONS CONSISTENT THEME THROUGHOUT
MY PRESENTATIONS TODAY AND LAST
WEEK IS THE IDEA THAT GOOD CAN
BE BETTER THAT OUR GUN SAFETY
LAWS HAVE ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT
AND THAT IT IS TRUE WHEN IT
COMES TO GUN TRAFFICKING AND
PREVENTING GUNS FROM BEING USED
IN CRIMES. UNFORTUNATELY WE HAVE
SEVERAL INDICATORS THAT THIS IS
A GROWING PROBLEM IN CALIFORNIA.
SINCE THERE ARE SO MANY GUNS IN
OUR COUNTRY, IT'S NOT SURPRISING
THAT MANY FIREARMS END UP LOST,
STOLEN AND TRAFFICKED. ACCORDING
TO THE A Tð F THERE WERE OVER 1
MILLION MISSING GUNS REPORTED
BETWEEN 2017 AND 2022. AS
ALARMING AS THAT SOUNDS, THESE
NUMBERS SIGNIFICANTLY
UNDERREPRESENT THE ACTUAL TOTAL
OF MISSING GUNS BECAUSE MANY
PEOPLE DON'T REPORT LOST OR
STOLEN GUNS, LOST OR STOLEN.
FIREARMS ARE A DANGER TO SOCIETY
BECAUSE THEY ARE PRONE TO BEING
TRAFFICKED AND USED IN CRIMES.
IN ADDITION, THE NUMBER OF CRIME
GUNS RECOVERED IN THE STATE PER
CAPITA HAS GROWN BY CLOSE TO 70%
OVER THE LAST DECADE, ACCORDING
TO A UC DAVIS STUDY NEARLY
80,000 TRACEABLE GUNS USED IN
CRIMINALITY CAME FROM JUST 82
DEAL. IN CALIFORNIA, BUT THE
STRONGEST INDICATOR THAT WE HAVE
A GUN TRAFFICKING PROBLEM, ONE
THAT IS PARTIALLY FUELED BY
RETAILERS IS THAT THE AMOUNT OF
GUNS RECOVERED SHORTLY AFTER
PURCHASE IS GROWING. THE PERCENT
OF HANDGUNS RECOVERED IN A
VIOLENT CRIME WITHIN ONE YEAR OF
PURCHASE HAS TRIPLED. SO WHAT
CAN WE DO HERE? SB 1038 DOES
FOUR THINGS THAT WILL HELP
REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF GUNS
TRAFFICKED WITHIN OUR STATE ONE.
IT REDUCES THE AMOUNT OF TIME
THAT AN INDIVIDUAL HAS TO REPORT
MISSING FIREARMS FROM FIVE DAYS
TO 48 HOURS. THIS BRINGS US IN
ALIGNMENT WITH THE 11 OTHER
STATES THAT HAVE SHORTER
REPORTING TIMES THAN WE DO HERE
IN CALIFORNIA. NUMBER TWO. IT
BETTER EQUIPS THE Dð Ó J TO
TRACK FIREARMS AS THEY COME INTO
OUR STATE, NOT JUST AS THEY ARE
SOLD. THREE IT INCREASES
SCRUTINY ON THE DEALER'S MOST
ASSOCIATED WITH CRIME GUNS AND
FOUR IT REQUIRES DEALERS TO
ANNUALLY CERTIFY THEIR
INVENTORIES, GIVING THE Dð Ó J
AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT SOMETHING
TO HOLD THEM TO. NOW I WOULD
LIKE TO REINTRODUCE STEVE
LINDLEY FROM BRADY, WHO IS ALSO
TESTIFYING IN SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL. THANK YOU, SIR. YOU HAVE
TWO MINUTES. GOOD MORNING AGAIN.
STEVEN LEE. I'M HERE FOR, UH,
REPRESENTING, UH, BRADY. THIS
BILL ADDRESSES GUN TRAFFICKING
BY INCREASING SCRUTINY OF THE
BUSINESS PRACTICES OF CALIFORNIA
LICENSED FIRE DEALERS, THEIR
INVENTORY, IMPROVING THEIR
RECORD KEEPING AND REQUIRE
PEOPLE TO REPORT LOST OR STOLEN
FIREARMS WITHIN 48 HOURS. SENATE
BILL 1038 PROPOSES A FEW
PRACTICAL AND COMMON SENSE
SOLUTIONS TO THIS ISSUE. BILL
REDUCES AN INDIVIDUAL'S TIME TO
REPORT LOSSES. FIREARMS FROM
FIVE DAYS TO 48 HOURS. IF A
PERSON'S VEHICLE IS MISSING,
THEY WOULD NOT WAIT DAYS OR
WEEKS TO REPORT IT AS STOLEN.
NOR SHOULD THEY WAIT DAYS TO
REPORT A FIREARM, LOST OR STOLEN
. IT REQUIRES LICENSED FIRE AND
BE TO CERTIFY THEIR INVENTORY TO
THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE ANNUALLY AND ALLOWS
LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES
TO HOLD THE DEALERS ACCOUNTABLE
IF THEY DO NOT IMPROVING
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR LAWS AND OUR
SOLAR FIREARMS, ENSURING THESE
LOST DANGEROUS WEAPONS ARE
PROPERLY REPORTED TO LAW
ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES. THE
MANDATES OF THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE TO INSPECT
THE TOP 25 DEALERS LISTED ON THE
ANNUAL CRIME GUN REPORT WITHIN
ONE CALENDAR YEAR OF THAT
REPORT'S RELEASE IF FIREARM
DEALERS ARE IDENTIFIED AS MAJOR
CONTRIBUTORS OF CRIME GUNS, IT
IS COMMON SENSE THAT THEY
RECEIVE ADDITIONAL ATTENTION
FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
TO IDENTIFY AND HELP CORRECT ANY
BUSINESS PRACTICES THAT ARE
LEADING TO THAT DEALER BEING
AMONG THE TOP DISTRIBUTORS OF
CRIME GUNS IN OUR COMMUNITIES.
IT REQUIRES LICENSED FIRE
DEALERS TO REPORT ACQUISITIONS
OF FIREARMS FROM MANUFACTURERS
AND WHOLESALERS TO THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE. THE BEGINNING JANUARY
1ST. THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
TO ACCURATELY KNOW WHAT FIREARMS
ARE ENTERING OUR STATE AND THEIR
DISPOSITION, WHICH WILL GREATLY
ENCOURAGE YEAH. I'M SORRY.
DISCOURAGE ILLEGAL FIRE
TRAFFICKING, THE STRAIGHTFORWARD
, SIMPLE AND COMMON SENSE
MEASURES WILL SIGNIFICANTLY
ENHANCE LAW ENFORCEMENT'S
ABILITY TO TRACK FIREARMS AND
PREVENT THEM FROM FALLING IN THE
HANDS OF CRIMINALS. THANK YOU
FOR THE TIME THIS MORNING AND I
ASK FOR YOUR I VOTE. THANK YOU.
DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER PRIMARY
WITNESSES? I DO NOT OK. DO YOU
HAVE ANY PRIMARY WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL? OH, OK.
I'M SORRY. WE HAVE TO HAVE THE
ME TOOS FOR THE SUPPORT. I'M
SORRY. I KEEP FORGETTING OUR ME
TOOS. COME ON UP, IF YOU WOULD
LIKE TO ADD ON YOUR SUPPORT FOR
THIS BILL. AND STATE YOUR NAME
YOUR ORGANIZATION. REBECCA
MARQUEZ, REPRESENTING BRADY,
CALIFORNIA AND MY COLLEAGUES AT
GIFFORDS AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. CHRISTINE SOBER
PROSECUTORS ALLIANCE OF
CALIFORNIA IN SUPPORT, RIGHT.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT AT THIS
TIME, UH, DO WE HAVE ANY PERSONS
THAT WISH TO SPEAK AS A PRIMARY
WITNESS IN OPPOSITION? WE DO. MR
CHAIRMAN AND MEMBER SAM PATA IS
REPRESENTING GUN OWNERS OF
CALIFORNIA AND WE'RE HERE TO
EXPRESS OUR STRONG OPPOSITION TO
S¼ B 1038, WHICH ALTERS ONE OF
THE PROVISIONS OF 20 SIXTEEN'S
PROPOSITION 63 BY REDUCING THE
CURRENT TIME TO REPORT A STOLEN
FIREARM WITHIN FIVE DAYS TO JUST
48 HOURS. IF THE PEOPLE WANTED A
TIGHTER TIMEFRAME, THEY WOULD
HAVE VOTED SO AND, UH THERE'S A
PROVISION THAT SAYS THAT IF
THERE'S THE LEGISLATURE WANTS TO
IMPROVE OR FURTHER THE CAUSE OF
THE INITIATIVE. THEY CAN DO IT
BY MAKING IT TIGHTER. THEY'RE
NOT FURTHERING THE CAUSE.
THEY'RE CONSTRICTING THE CAUSE,
AND WE'RE PREPARED TO CHALLENGE
THAT IN COURT. WITHOUT QUESTION,
NÓ ONE WILL ARGUE THAT IT'S UH
IT'S IMPORTANT TO INFORM LAW
ENFORCEMENT WHEN A FIREARM IS
MISSING OR STOLEN. THE ISSUE
WITH THIS PROPOSAL, HOWEVER, IS
THAT THE REPORTING TIME FRAME IS
EXCEEDINGLY RESTRICTIVE AND THUS
PLACES INDIVIDUALS AT RISK OF
UNKNOWINGLY BREAKING THE LAW.
THE ORIGINAL FIVE DAY MANDATE
DREW CONCERN LAW ENFORCEMENT AND
THE COURTS BECAUSE THE
ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS ARE
PRIMARILY FOCUSED ON THE
LAW-ABIDING AND THUS PLACES AN
UNREALISTIC BURDEN ON GUN OWNERS
, THE BILL WOULD ESSENTIALLY
FORCE THEM TO ROUTINELY TAKE
INVENTORY OF THEIR BELONGINGS,
WHICH ARE REQUIRED TO BE UNDER
LOCK AND KEY. IT WOULD. IT COULD
BE WEEKS BEFORE SOMEONE KNOWS
WHETHER A SECURED FIREARM HAS
BEEN STOLEN. THIS BILL SHIFTS
THE FOCUS FROM THE CRIMINALS AND
PLACES ON RESPONSIBLE, LAWFUL
PERSONS FURTHER THE REQUIREMENT
FOR A DEALER TO ANNUALLY CER.
WHY THIS IS MIND BLOWING THEIR
THEIR INVENTORY IS UNNECESSARILY
ONEROUS. UNDER CURRENT
CALIFORNIA LAW DEALERS ARE
ALREADY INSPECTED. REGULARLY. UH
BY BOTH THE DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE AND THE BUREAU OF
ALCOHOL, TOBACCO AND FARMS AND
EXPLOSIVES AND EVERY FIREARM IN
THEIR INVENTORY HAS TO BE
ACCOUNTED FOR, SO THAT IS
ALREADY TAKING PLACE. UH, IT HAS
BEEN OUR CONSISTENT GOAL TO WORK
TOWARD THE COMMON SENSE LAWS,
AND THIS JUST IS NOT AAA LOT OF
COMMON SENSE. ALL ITS DOING IS
BURDENING LAWFUL DEALERS WHO ARE
REGULARLY CHECKED. AND IF THEY
HAVE MISSING FIREARMS THEIR
LICENSES ARE REVOKED. SO IT'S
NOT NECESSARY. ALL IT'S DOING IS
CAUSING MORE WORK AND FOR THE
LAW ABIDING CITIZENS WHO HAPPEN
TO HAVE A CABIN UP IN, UM THE
MOUNTAINS SOMEWHERE, AND THEY
THEY THEY KEEP A FIREARM THERE
AND THEY'RE BROKEN INTO AND IT'S
STOLEN. HOW ARE THEY SUPPOSED TO
KNOW WITHIN 48 HOURS THAT THAT
FIREARM WAS STOLEN? THEY WANT TO
REPORT IT, OF COURSE, BUT FOR
THEM TO REQUIRE BE REQUIRED TO,
UH, REPORT. WHEN IT HAPPENED, OR
WHEN THEY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT
IT HAPPENED. THE PROBLEM WITH
THAT IS IT'S THAT THE DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE AND THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA DECIDES WHEN THEY
SHOULD HAVE KNOWN. AND THAT
PRESENTS A BIG PROBLEM. THAT'S
WHY WE ARE IN STRONG OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER OPPOSITION
WHO WISH TO SPEAK AS A PRIMARY
WITNESS? OK YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES
. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. CHAIR
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. MY
NAME IS KEELEY HOPKINS, AND I'M,
THE STATE DIRECTOR FOR THE
NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION HERE
TODAY IN OPPOSITION ON BEHALF OF
OUR MEMBERS. SENATE BILL 1038
WRONGLY FOCUSES ON AND
POTENTIALLY PUNISHES THE VICTIM
OF A CRIME SHOULD THEY FAIL TO
REPORT THAT THEIR FIREARMS WERE
STOLEN AND THE VERY NARROW
WINDOW OF 48 HOURS, WHICH IS A
SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE FROM THE
EXISTING FIVE DAYS ALLOWED UNDER
CURRENT LAW. AND THE AFTERMATH
OF A BURGLARY OR THEFT. THE
VICTIMS HAVE A WHOLE HOST OF
CONCERNS THAT THEY'RE DEALING
WITH FIRST AND FOREMOST IS THEIR
PHYSICAL SAFETY AND THE PHYSICAL
SAFETY OF THEIR LOVED ONES. THEY
MAY EVEN BE STAYING SOMEWHERE
ELSE TEMPORARILY WHILE THEY DEAL
WITH HOME REPAIRS OR IMPROVE
THEIR HOME SECURITY. TO THEN
PLACE AN ADDITIONAL BURDEN AND
THREAT OF FACING PENALTIES FOR
NOT REPORTING IN THE MOMENT OF
HARDSHIP DISREGARDS WHAT THE
CRIME VICTIMS ARE GOING THROUGH.
VICTIMS ARE ALREADY INCENTIVIZED
TO REPORT THEFTS IN ORDER TO
FACILITATE THE RETURN OF THEIR
FIREARMS. BUT EVERY SITUATION IS
DIFFERENT. SO HAVING A VERY
NARROW AND ARBITRARY WINDOW OF
48 HOURS IS ONLY GOING TO
REVICTIMIZE THE VICTIM OF A
CRIME. SO FOR THOSE REASONS, WE
URGE YOU TO OPPOSE THIS, BILL.
THANK YOU. UH, THANK YOU, UH, AT
THIS TIME, WE'LL TAKE ANYBODY
WHO WISHES TO ADD ON JUST STATE
YOUR NAME AND, UH, THE
ORGANIZATION YOU REPRESENT.
THERE'S NÓ TESTIMONY ON THIS,
NOT SIR HERNANDEZ ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIA CRIMINAL JUSTICE.
WE'RE KIND OF A TWEENER. THERE'S
THIS TECHNICAL ISSUE ON
REFERENCE TO LEGAL TO A PERSON'S
REPRESENTATIVE, AND WE'RE
CONCERNED THAT THAT WILL CAPTURE
THE ATTORNEYS. UM, AND THEN
THEY'LL BE PUT IN POSITION TO
HAVE TO, UM, FORCE A PERSON TO
COMPLY WITH THE LAW. SO WE'D
LIKE THAT TO BE CHANGED. THANK
YOU. NEXT PERSON. MY NAME IS
ELIZABETH ROSE. MAY I'M A
CONCERNED CITIZEN AND A TWO TIME
VIOLENT CRIME SURVIVOR, AND I'M
VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THIS BILL.
SO I'M HERE IN OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU, MA'AM. ANYBODY ELSE? OK,
THIS TIME WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO
THE DÍAS FOR ANY QUESTIONS. UH
AND YOU WERE RIGHT. YOU ARE
ANTICIPATING THAT I MIGHT HAVE
SOME ISSUES WITH THIS. ONE OF
THEM IS THE LANGUAGE OF NÓ KNOWN
OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN. WE HAVE
THAT LANGUAGE IN A LOT OF OTHER
PARTS OF OUR LEGAL WORLD, AND,
UH, IT CREATES, UM VERY
ARBITRARY FROM YOU KNOW WHAT ONE
PERSON'S DEFINITION OF THAT
VERSUS ANOTHER ANOTHER IS, UH,
GOING FROM FIVE DAYS TO TWO DAYS
. THERE ARE MANY INSTANCES WHERE
, UH, YOU MAY NOT REALIZE, UH,
THAT SOMETHING IS MISSING, AND
SOMEBODY WILL SAY YOU SHOULD
HAVE KNOWN. UM BUT, UH, WHETHER
IT'S YOU KNOW, FIVE DAYS IS NOT
THAT MUCH LONGER THAN TWO DAYS.
BUT TWO DAYS IS PRETTY AND SO IT
DOES GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF
TIME TO FIND IT. UH IF YOU'VE
MISPLACED, UH, A FIREARM BEFORE
YOU GO AND REPORT IT, UH,
BECAUSE AND THE OTHER PART IS
WHEN YOU REPORT IT. WELL, WHAT
HAPPENS THEN? I. I MEAN, WHAT DO
THEY DO WITH THE INFORMATION
THAT YOU'RE REPORTING THAT A GUN
WAS? WAS LOST OR STOLEN. UH,
OTHER THAN IF THEY ARREST
SOMEBODY, AND THEY FIND THAT GUN
AND IT'S REGISTERED TO YOU, ET
CETERA, ET CETERA. THEY CAN GET
IT BACK TO YOU. UM IT'S NOT
GOING TO CONTRIBUTE TO A, UM A
REDUCTION IN CRIME BECAUSE
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GO RIGHT
OUT AND FIND THAT GUN AND ARREST
THE PERSON WHO TOOK IT BECAUSE
THEY HAVE ABSOLUTELY NÓ
RESOURCES TO DO THAT, OR TIME TO
DO THAT, SO REALLY ALL IT DOES
IS CREATE ANOTHER RESTRICTION ON
THE LAW BY THE LAW ABIDING
CITIZEN WHO IS INCENTIVIZED,
ACTUALLY, IN THAT CASE TO REPORT
IT SO THAT IF THEY DO FIND IT,
THEY'LL RETURN IT TO HIM. SO
FROM A GUN SAFETY PERSPECTIVE.
IT DOESN'T MAKE A LOT OF SENSE
TO ME BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING I
DON'T FEEL LIKE ANYTHING SAFER
AFTER THIS THAN BEFORE. SO IF
YOU WANTED TO ADDRESS A COUPLE
OF THOSE ISSUES. UH, I'M HERE TO
LISTEN. THANK YOU. YES THANK YOU
FOR YOUR COMMENTS. I THINK THE
MAIN POINT IS THAT LOST OR
STOLEN FIREARMS ARE A DANGER TO
OUR SOCIETY AND OUR CREATING A
BLACK MARKET, UH, THAT WE COULD
BETTER INTERVENE IN AND SO
HAVING CALIFORNIA BE IN LINE
WITH THE 11 OTHER STATES THAT
HAVE A 48 HOUR REPORTING PERIOD.
I THINK THAT THAT UM DOES NOT
SEEM OVERLY BURDENSOME TO ME AND
ALSO, UH, SEEMS IT'S LIKE IT'S
REASONABLE IN LIGHT OF THE
AMOUNT OF JURISPRUDENCE THAT HAS
ANALYZED THE PHRASE KNOWN OR
SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT THAT IS,
THERE'S A REASONABLENESS
STANDARD ABOUT THAT, CONSIDERING
ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES, AND SO I
TO ME THAT SEEMS LIKE, UM, A
RELATIVELY MODEST CHANGE. UM,
AND ALSO JUST LOOKING AT THE
REALITY THAT WHEN SOMEONE'S CAR
IS STOLEN, IT'S A IT'S A SIMILAR
TYPE OF REQUIREMENT. WE DON'T
ALLOW A LOT OF CARS TO BE, UM,
ON THE BLACK MARKET, AND SO
WHICH CAR IS ALSO BEING
DANGEROUS AND SOMETHING THAT ARE
HEAVILY REGULATED AND SO TO ME,
THIS SEEMS LIKE IT'S REASONED,
AND ALSO, WE JUST KNOW WE HAVE A
PROBLEM WITH THE NUMBER OF GUNS
THAT ARE USED IN CRIMINALITY. SO
THESE ARE WAYS TO TIGHTEN THINGS
UP SO THAT WE CAN REDUCE THE
NUMBER AND THE AMOUNT OF GUNS
USED IN CRIMINALITY, WHICH
PROMOTES PUBLIC SAFETY. HOW DOES
THAT ENHANCE OR REDUCE THE
CRIMINALITY ASPECT OF IT, UH,
WHEN WE ALREADY HAVE LAWS IN
PLACE THAT WHOLE DEALERS
ACCOUNTABLE IF THEY ARE MISSING
ANY INVENTORY. UH, WELL, FOR
EXAMPLE, THERE WAS ONE GUN
LOCATION, A DEALER WHO ACCOUNTED
FOR 1652 CRIME GUNS, SO THERE IS
A REALITY THAT THERE ARE PLACES
WHERE GUNS ARE BEING SOLD OUT
THE FRONT DOOR AND THEN
TRAFFICKED OUT THE BACK DOOR AND
WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE IT SO THAT
THAT IS NOT AS COMMON AND THERE
ARE MORE WAYS TO FOLLOW UP ON
THAT. SO KNOWING WHERE GUNS COME
FROM WHEN THEY ARE INVOLVED IN
CRIMINALITY HELPS US ADDRESS
THAT PROBLEM. OK AND WHAT YOU'RE
TALKING ABOUT IS A LARGE VOLUME
DEALER. AND THERE ARE OTHER
LARGE VOLUME DEALERS THAT DON'T
HAVE QUITE THE VOLUME THAT HAVE
NEARLY IT'S KIND OF THE
CORRELATES TO WHAT WHAT THE GUNS
USED. IN CRIMES LATER ON DOWN
THE ROAD. IT STILL DOES NOT
ANSWER THE QUESTION OF HOW DOES
THIS INCREASE SAFETY BECAUSE
THOSE GUNS ARE SOLD ANYWAY.
THEY'RE OUT THE DOOR. AND
WHETHER SOMEBODY THEN LOSES,
GETS IT STOLEN OR DECIDES TO
TRAFFIC. IT THE OWNER. THAT GUN
SHOP OWNER IS NOT HAS NÓ CONTROL
OF THAT WHATSOEVER, AND SO IS
THE A QUESTION WHETHER THEY ARE
PRACTICING IN SOMETHING THAT
THEY'RE GOING TO GET CAUGHT IN.
IF YOU DO IT EVERY IF YOU HAVE
AN INVENTORY EVERY YEAR VERSUS
EVERY TWO YEARS. BECAUSE MOST OF
THEM YOU KNOW IF THEY'RE SELLING
85,000 GUNS A YEAR. MOST OF THEM
HAVE NÓ. UH INCENTIVE FROM A
FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE TO ALLOW
ANY ILLEGAL STUFF THAT WILL
JEOPARDIZE THEIR BUSINESS. AND
SO I THINK THEY'RE ALREADY VERY
CAREFUL. IT'S JUST THAT THERE'S
ALWAYS GOING TO BE A CERTAIN
PERCENTAGE OF WHATEVER PRODUCT
THAT A CRIMINAL WILL TAKE AND
SAY, OK, NOW I'VE GOT SOMETHING
I'M GONNA SELL IT TO SOMEBODY
ELSE WHO'S GOING TO SELL IT TO
SOMEBODY ELSE AND BECOME PART OF
THE DRUG OR THE, UH, DRUG. THE
UH, THE, UH, GUN TRAFFICKING
WORLD. UM, THEY HAVE NÓ CONTROL
OVER THAT. AND I'M NOT QUITE
SURE HOW THIS IS GOING TO HELP.
UH, MISS SENATOR SKINNER. DID
YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? I'M
SORRY. I DIDN'T. UH I MOVE THE
BILL. YEAH WE CAN'T. YEAH SO ALL
RIGHT. WELL THANK YOU FOR YOUR
PRESENTATION. UH WE WILL HOLD
THE BILL OPEN FOR WHEN WE GET A
QUORUM. AND UH AND I APPRECIATE
UH UH, YOU PRESENTING YOUR BILLS
THIS MORNING? THANK YOU. WELL,
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. RIGHT? OK?
SENATOR EGGMAN. WE HAVE S¼ B
1025. YES THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, EVERYBODY. UM. I'LL BE
ACCEPTING THE COMMITTEE'S
AMENDMENTS AS REFERENCED IN THE
BILL ANALYSIS, AND THIS IS A
SIMPLE BILL WORKING ON SOME
ISSUES WE'VE BEEN WORKING AROUND
ON BEFORE AROUND, UH, VETERANS
DIVERSION COURTS. SO CURRENTLY
IF A VETERAN GOES TO JUST A
REGULAR MENTAL HEALTH DIVERSION
COURT, THEY CAN HAVE EITHER A
MISDEMEANOR AND OR A FELONY. UM
SO THIS JUST MAKES IT ALIGNED
THAT IF YOU GO TO VETERANS COURT
THAT YOU CAN ALSO HAVE FELONIES
HEARD IN THAT, OF COURSE, A VERY
DANGEROUS FELONY BEING EXCLUDED
AS THEY ARE FOR THEIR MENTAL
HEALTH COURT. THIS JUST BRINGS
THE TWO INTO PARITY AND WITH ME
HERE TODAY AS JUDGE MANLEY AND
TOM LAU S¼ VETERAN RIGHT? THE
PRIMARY WITNESS IN SUPPORT. COME
ON UP, JUDGE. YOU HAVE GOOD
MORNING. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I
AM STEPHEN MANLEY, A SUPERIOR
COURT JUDGE FROM SANTA CLARA
COUNTY, AND I'M HERE TO REQUEST
YOUR SUPPORT FOR THIS BILL. IN
CALIFORNIA. OUR VETERANS
TREATMENT COURTS HAVE PROVEN TO
BE ONE OF OUR MOST SUCCESSFUL
COLLABORATIVE EFFORTS BY JUDGES
OF OUR SUPERIOR COURTS. WHEN WE
CAN OFFER TREATMENT AS AN
ALTERNATIVE TO INCARCERATION.
FOR INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SERVED
THEIR COUNTRY. THIS BILL, AS THE
SENATOR POINTED OUT, WOULD
EXTEND TO VETERANS PARTICIPATING
IN A VETERANS TREATMENT COURT
THE SAME BENEFITS THAT HAVE
ALREADY BEEN EXTENDED BY THE
LEGISLATOR TO OTHER INDIVIDUALS
THROUGH THE MENTAL HEALTH
DIVERSION STATUTE. THE
COMMITMENT OF OUR JUDGES TO
MILITARY DIVERSION IS
DEMONSTRATED BY THE FACT THAT WE
PRESENTLY HAVE 46 VETERAN
TREATMENT COURTS IN CALIFORNIA.
AND THAT NUMBER CONTINUES TO
GROW EACH YEAR. MILITARY
DIVERSION IS ONE OF OUR MOST
SUCCESSFUL DIVERSION PROGRAMS IN
THE STATE THAT ARE OPERATED
THROUGH THE COURTS AND PROVIDE
MONITORING CLOSELY BY JUDGES AS
WELL AS TREATMENT. THOSE WHO
HAVE SERVED IN THE MILITARY HAVE
VERY UNIQUE NEEDS. AND THOSE
NEEDS ARE GREAT. APPROXIMATELY
30% OF VETERANS. RETURNING HOME
FROM SERVICE SUFFER FROM
INVISIBLE WOUNDS THAT OFTEN GO
UNRECOGNIZED. THEY INCLUDE POST
TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER
TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY. AS WELL
AS MAJOR DEPRESSION AND SEXUAL
TRAUMA. BUT ON TREATMENT COURTS
CAN INTERVENE WHEN VETERANS COME
IN CONTACT WITH THE CRIMINAL
JUSTICE SYSTEM. DISTINCT FROM
MENTAL HEALTH DIVERSION, OUR
PARTNERS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
THROUGH THE VETERANS
ADMINISTRATION. AND THEIR
TREATMENT PROGRAMS THAT ARE
UNIQUELY QUALIFIED TO PROVIDE
THE TREATMENT THAT THESE
INDIVIDUALS NEED. UNFORTUNATELY,
THE SYMPTOMS OF P Tð S¼ Dð THAT
INCLUDE FLASHBACKS AND RECKLESS
BEHAVIOR. AND PERCEIVED
ANTISOCIAL ATTITUDES ARE
DIRECTLY RELATED. THE CRIMINAL
OFFENSES THAT INCLUDE FELONIES.
WITHOUT TREATMENT. BEHAVIORS
WILL NOT CHANGE AND I URGE YOU
TO PLEASE SUPPORT THIS BILL.
THANK YOU. UH, THANK YOU, SIR.
DO WE HAVE ANY ANOTHER WITNESS
TO SUPPORT THE BILL AS A PRIMARY
WITNESS? GO AHEAD. YOU HAVE TWO
MINUTES, SIR. GOOD MORNING. MY
NAME IS THOMAS LAMP. I'M A
MARINE CORPS VETERAN AND THE
PEER SPECIALIST FOR THE VETERAN
TRANSITION CENTER OF CALIFORNIA,
PROVIDING REHABILITATION
PROGRAMS FOR VETERANS THAT ARE
INCARCERATED, PAROLED OR
HOMELESS. I JUST WANT YOU TO
IMAGINE IF YOU WERE A MILITARY
MEMBER RETURNING FROM SERVICE TO
SOCIETY, AND YOU'RE GRAPPLING
WITH THE AFTERMATH OF TRAUMA AND
THEN YOU TURN TO SUBSTANCE ABUSE
OR YOU REACT VIOLENTLY TO
PERCEIVED THREATS IN BECAUSE THE
HAUNTING SPECTER OF P Tð S¼ Dð
TRIGGERS YOU. THESE ARE THE
REALITIES FACED BY MANY OF OUR
VETERANS WHO UNFORTUNATELY FIND
THEMSELVES AMONG THE ROUGHLY
6000 INCARCERATED VETERANS IN
CALIFORNIA. VETERANS CURRENTLY
SERVING DETERMINATE TERMS IN èC
Dð èC R ARE NOT MANDATED TO
PARTICIPATE IN REHABILITATIVE
PROGRAMS FOR PAROLE.
CONTRASTINGLY INDETERMINATE
TERMS, NECESSITATE PARTICIPATION
IN ORDER TO BE PAROLED IN THE
STATISTICS ARE STARK,
APPROXIMATELY 1% RECIDIVISM RATE
FOR INDETERMINATE TERMS VERSUS
50% FOR DETERMINATE TERMS. S¼ B
1025 STRIPS AWAY THE OPTION OF
MERELY SERVING A SENTENCE AND
BEING RELEASED, REPLACING IT
WITH MANDATORY EVIDENCE BASED
REHABILITATION. TAXPAYERS ARE
CURRENTLY PAYING AROUND 100,000
PER YEAR. FOR 50% CHANCE THAT A
VETERAN MIGHT NOT REOFFEND.
ALTERNATIVELY THEY COULD BE
INVESTING ROUGHLY 30,000 PER
YEAR IN REAL PROLIM PROGRAMS
PRIOR TO INCARCERATION, WHICH
HAVE PROVEN TO BE ALMOST 99%
EFFECTIVE. THE CURRENT RETURN ON
INVESTMENT BOTH FOR THE PUBLIC,
AND THE OFFENDER IS NOT
PARTICULARLY GOOD AT THIS TIME.
THIS BILL OFFERS A PATH TO
BOLSTER PUBLIC SAFETY WITH
FISCAL PRUDENCE WHILE REDUCING
THE RATES OF INCARCERATION. IF
WE CLAIM TO SUPPORT VETERANS,
THEN LET'S ALL SUPPORT VETERANS
FOR TOO LONG. WE'VE BEEN
SLAPPING BAND AIDS ON WOUNDS
THAT DEMAND STITCHES THINKING WE
ARE GOING TO STOP THE BLEEDING.
BILL PROVIDES THOSE STITCHES. MY
NAME'S NOT JUST THOMAS LAMP FEAR
, BUT FOR NEARLY THREE DECADES
OF MY LIFE, I WAS KNOWN AS J
26950. A MILITARY VETERAN WITH
MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES IN THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS. I'VE EXPERIENCED
FIRSTHAND WHAT WORKS AND WHAT
DOESN'T THIS BILL WILL WORK AND
I ASK YOU TO SUPPORT IT. ARE
THERE ANY OTHER? UH SO I YOU'RE
NOT A MAIN WITNESS. SO THESE ARE
THE ME TOO. SORRY. OK SO NOW
IT'S ALL THE ME TOOS IN SUPPORT
OF THIS BILL. THANK YOU. LESLIE
CALDWELL, HOUSTON FOR THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT. GLEN
VALIANT, PRIVATE CITIZEN. I'M
PROUD FATHER OF A FORMERLY
INCARCERATED U S¼ ARMY VETERAN
IN SUPPORT. ALEXANDER VALIANT,
FORMERLY INCARCERATED VETERAN
AND GRADUATE OF THE VETERAN
TRANSITION CENTER. I'M IN
SUPPORT. ALL THE OTHER ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE
ASSOCIATION OF PSYCHIATRISTS AND
SUPPORT MADAM CHAIR AND SENATORS
CLIFF COSTA ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA JUDGES ASSOCIATION,
THE PROUD SPONSOR OF THIS BILL,
I WANT TO THANK JUDGE MANLEY AND
JUDGE AND SENATOR EGGMAN, UH,
FOR THE BILL. THANK YOU. IGNACIO
HERNANDEZ ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA ATTORNEYS FOR
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND SUPPORT OF
THE BILL. NATASHA MINCER, SMART
JUSTICE CALIFORNIA AND INITIATE
JUSTICE IN STRONG SUPPORT.
MORGAN ZAMORA FOR THE ELLA BAKER
CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND
SUPPORT COONEY ON BEHALF OF A
CALIFORNIA ACTION IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. ARAMBA EASTMAN WITH
THE STEINBERG INSTITUTE IN
SUPPORT. MELISSA COZ WE HAVE A
CALIFORNIANS FOR SAFETY AND
JUSTICE AND SUPPORT. JONATHAN
LAVA PACIFIC JUVENILE DEFENDERS
CENTER IN SUPPORT. YOUR BAD.
YEAH, YEAH. NÓ JUST ME. NÓ
PROBLEM. UM DO WE HAVE A MAIN,
UH, WITNESS IN OPPOSITION? GO
AHEAD. DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY,
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FOR THE
CALIFORNIA JAYS ASSOCIATION. UM
THE Dð, A S¼ ASSOCIATION HAD
SUBMITTED A LETTER IN OPPOSITION
UNLESS AMENDED. UM BUT THE
SENATOR WAS GRACIOUS ENOUGH TO
TAKE, UM, THE SUGGESTED
AMENDMENTS, UM IN COMMITTEE, AND
WE'RE VERY GRATEFUL FOR THAT. UM
AND I JUST WANT TO SAY AS A
VETERAN AND A CLOSE FRIEND, UM
AND LOVED ONE OF MANY COMBAT
VETERANS IN THE CURRENT
SUPERVISOR OF THE VETERANS COURT
AND RIVERSIDE COUNTY. I THINK
THE SENATOR FOR HER EFFORTS IN
THIS AREA. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE IN THE
ROOM? THAT'S UH IN OPPOSITION.
ANNIE TWEENERS. OK, SEE NAN? UH,
WE DON'T HAVE QUORUM. UM UH,
PLEASE LEAVE IT. YEAH, I KNOW. I
CAN I. I KNOW. AND I CAN ASK
THE, UH THE SENATOR CLOSE, BUT I
WILL SEE IF MY COLLEAGUE ONCE
HAS ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.
OK? UH I THINK IT'S A GOOD BILL.
I WILL MOVE IT WHEN WE, UH DO
HAVE A QUORUM. BUT YOU MAY
CLOSE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND
THANK YOU TO THE FOLKS WHO CAME
TO TESTIFY TODAY. THAT SIMPLE
COMMON SENSE. WE KNOW THAT
VETERANS COME BACK WITH ALL
KINDS OF WOUNDS SEEN AND UNSEEN,
AND THIS JUST PROVIDES PARITY TO
BE ABLE TO GIVE PEOPLE THE KIND
OF SERVICES THAT THEY DESIRE AND
DESERVE. I ASK FOR YOUR I VOTE
WHEN THE TIME IS APPROPRIATE.
THANK YOU. GREAT. THANK YOU. ALL
RIGHT. SO WE WILL. MR BECKER
HERE? YES WE WILL NOW GO TO SB
1161, SENATOR BECKER, YOU HAVE
THE MIC. GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK
YOU. COMMITTEE MEMBERS. HERE TO
PRESENT. UH S¼ P 161. THIS IS A
BILL THAT MAKES SUBTLE BUT MUCH
NEEDED CHANGES TO THE WELFARE
INSTITUTIONS CODE, OR WIC TO
ULTIMATELY STREAMLINE BOTH
ACCESS AND CEILING OPPORTUNITIES
FOR ELIGIBLE YOUTH IN THE
JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM. SEVERAL
SECTIONS OF W. I HAVE NOT BEEN
UPDATED TO REFLECT TIMELINESS OR
CHANGES IN MODERNIZATION. FOR
EXAMPLE, YOUTH WHO HAVE NEVER
SUFFERED ADJUDICATION MUST
DEMONSTRATE TO THE JUVENILE
COURT THAT THEY HAVE NOT
INCURRED ANY NEW LAW VIOLATIONS
INVOLVING CRIMES OF MORAL
TURPITUDE AND PROVE THEY HAVE
BEEN REHABILITATED. THE COURT
SATISFACTION THE SAME COMPLEX
PROCESS HELD FOR YOUTH WHO HAVE
WHO HAVE BEEN ADJUDICATED. DUE
TO THIS GAP IN CURRENT LAW,
YOUTH WHO WERE ARRESTED BUT
NEVER CHARGED, MUST UTILIZE THE
SAME COMPLEX PROCESS TO HAVE THE
RECORD SEALED. AS YOUTH WHO HAVE
BEEN FORMALLY ADJUDICATED. THESE
YOUTH WOULD HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL
THEY WERE 18 OR FIVE YEARS AFTER
THE REFERRAL TO PROVE THEY HAVE
NOT SUFFERED ANY CRIMES OF MORAL
TURPITUDE AND DEMONSTRATE
REVATION OF THE COURT, EVEN
THOUGH THEY WERE NEVER CHARGED
WITH A CRIME. THIS ALSO MAKES
CLARIFYING, UH, AMENDMENTS TO
WAKE IN A NUMBER OF AREAS,
INCLUDING ACCESS TO JUVENILE
RECORDS. RECORD CEILING CHARGES
RECORD CEILING WHEN CHARGES WILL
NOT BE FILED AVAILABILITY OF
INFORMAL PROBATION ACCESS TO
INSTITUTIONAL RECORDS AND
PRESERVATION OF FOSTER CARE
BENEFITS FOR NON MINOR DEPENDENT
YOUTH IN ORDER TO PROVE THE
CLARITY AND EFFI EFFICACY OF
WICK. BY DOING SO, IT
STREAMLINES THE OPPORTUNITIES
ELIGIBLE AVAILABLE FOR ELIGIBLE
YOUTH IN THE JUVENILE JUSTICE
SYSTEM. UH AND I WANT TO THANK,
UM, SPONSORS FOR WORKING WITH ME
ON THIS. UM UH UH, ON MAKING
THESE, YOU KNOW, VERY, UM SMALL
BUT VERY IMPORTANT CHANGES. AND
WITH ME I'VE GOT TWO WITNESSES,
JONATHAN LAER FROM THE PACIFIC
JUVENILE DEFENDERS CENTER AND
CALLING FOR FRESH LIFELINES FOR
YOUTH. THANK YOU. AND BEFORE YOU
GUYS BEGIN, I'D LIKE TO CALL FOR
A QUORUM. WELL, HOB HERE. HOP
HERE. SEYARTO BRADFORD BRADFORD
HERE. SKINNER SKINNER HERE,
WIENER. THANK YOU. WE HAVE
OFFICIALLY ESTABLISHED QUORUM.
YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS
JONATHAN LAVA. I'M AN ATTORNEY
IN THE CONTRA COSTA PUBLIC
DEFENDER'S OFFICE. I'VE BEEN
THERE FOR 27 YEARS AND I'M
TESTIFYING TODAY ON BEHALF OF
THE PACIFIC JUVENILE DEFENDERS
CENTER, THE SPONSOR OF SB 1161.
P Dð èC IS A STATEWIDE
ASSOCIATION OF YOUTH DEFENDERS
AND ADVOCATES WORKING TO IMPROVE
CALIFORNIA'S LEGAL SYSTEM FOR
YOUTH. THE GOAL OF S¼ P 1161 IS
TO CLARIFY, MODERNIZE AND
IMPROVE THE WELFARE AND
INSTITUTIONS CODE. SENATOR
BECKER'S BILL MAKES IMPROVEMENTS
IN A NUMBER OF AREAS, INCLUDING
RECORD SEALING ACCESS TO
JUVENILE RECORDS AND
AVAILABILITY OF INFORMAL
PROBATION. S¼ P 1161 ADDRESSES
MANY DIFFERENT ISSUES. BUT I
WON'T TEST YOUR PATIENCE BY
DESCRIBING ALL OR EVEN MOST OF
THEM TODAY. LET ME JUST GIVE YOU
ONE EXAMPLE OF A COMMON SENSE
FIX THAT REFLECTS THE SPIRIT OF
THE BILL. THE FORMER FOSTER
YOUTH BETWEEN AGE 18 AND 21, WHO
RECEIVED WHAT ARE CALLED
EXTENDED FOSTER CARE BENEFITS,
WHICH HELPS TO PAY FOR THEIR
HOUSING AND OTHER NEEDS.
SOMETIMES THE JUDGE WANTS TO
DISMISS THAT USE UNDERLYING
OFFENSE THAT THEY'RE ON
PROBATION FOR BECAUSE THE YOUTH
DID WELL ON PROBATION. HOWEVER
UNDER CURRENT LAW, IT IS UNCLEAR
IF DISMISSAL OF THE ORIGINAL
CASE MIGHT ACTUALLY TERMINATE
UNEXPECTEDLY. THE YOUTHS FOSTER
CARE BENEFITS S¼ B 1161
CLARIFIES THAT SUCCESSFUL
DISMISSAL OF THE CASE IS NOT
GOING TO RESULT IN A YOUTH
LOSING THEIR BENEFITS AND
BECOMING HOMELESS. S¼ P 1161
INCLUDES ABOUT A DOZEN COMMON
SENSE AND RATIONAL FIXES TO THE
WELFARE AND INSTITUTIONS CODE IN
WORKS HOPPING THESE IDEAS WE MET
WITH AND RECEIVED HELPFUL
FEEDBACK FROM THE JUDICIAL
COUNCIL AND THE CALIFORNIA
JUDGES ASSOCIATION BEFORE 1161
WAS INTRODUCED, AND WE WILL
CONTINUE TO DO SO THROUGHOUT THE
LEGISLATIVE PROCESS. THE SPIRIT
BEHIND THIS BILL IS
COLLABORATION, REFINEMENT AND
MODERNIZATION CONSISTENT WITH
THE REHABILITATIVE PURPOSE OF
THE JUVENILE COURT. S¼ 1161 HAS
BROAD SUPPORT AND KNOWN
OPPOSITION. WE RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR I VOTE. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. TWO MINUTES. GOOD
MORNING. MY NAME IS COLIN FORD.
AND I'M THE DIRECTOR OF POLICY
AT FRESH LIFELINES FOR YOUTH FLY
IS A NONPROFIT SERVING AT
PROMISE YOUTH IMPACTED BY THE
JUVENILE LEGAL SYSTEM. OUR GOAL
IS TO INTERRUPT THE PIPELINE TO
PRISON AND SUPPORT YOUTH ON
THEIR PATH TO HEALTHY, FREE AND
PRODUCTIVE LIVES. S¼ B 1161
ALIGNS WITH OUR MISSION IMPLIES
PLEASED TO SUPPORT IT. S¼ B 1161
MAKES A NUMBER OF CHANGES TO
CALIFORNIA'S RECORD CEILING LAWS
, WHICH ARE DESIGNED TO HELP
YOUTH MOVE ON WITH THEIR LIVES
AFTER THEIR CONTACT WITH THE
JUVENILE LEGAL SYSTEM. AT FLY.
WE BELIEVE THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE
STRONG OPPORTUNITIES TO SEAL
THEIR RECORDS SO THAT WHAT
HAPPENS IN THE JUVENILE SYSTEM
DOES NOT AFFECT THEIR CHANCES IN
THE FUTURE TO GET A GOOD
EDUCATION OR A GOOD JOB. BUT
UNDER CURRENT LAW YOUTH WHO ARE
ARRESTED BUT NEVER CHARGED WITH
A CRIME, OR EVEN REFERRED TO A
DIVERSION PROGRAM BY PROBATION,
MUST UTILIZE THE SAME LONG AND
COMPLICATED PROCESS TO GET THEIR
RECORD SEALED AS YOUTH WHO HAVE
BEEN FORMALLY ADJUDICATED. THAT
MEANS YOU HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL
THEY ARE 18 OR FIVE YEARS AFTER
THE REFERRAL, THEY HAVE TO
DEMONSTRATE REHABILITATION TO A
JUVENILE JUDGE. THEY NEED TO
PROVE THEY HAVE NOT BEEN
INVOLVED IN ANY CRIME INVOLVING
MORAL TURPITUDE. THEY MUST
FOLLOW THIS LONG AND COMPLICATED
PROCESS EVEN THOUGH THEY WERE
NEVER CHARGED WITH NOR INVOLVED
IN THE COURT SYSTEM TO BEGIN
WITH. 1161 IN A SIMPLIFIED
PROCESS THAT'S ALREADY IN THE
WICK CODE FOR YOUTH WHO COMPLETE
DIVERSION AND IMPLIES THAT
SIMPLIFIED PROCESS TO YOU WHO
EXPERIENCE AND EVEN LESSER
DEGREE OF INTERVENTION BY LAW
ENFORCEMENT OR PROBATION. WE
BELIEVE THIS IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE
OF HOW S¼ 1 161 IS A COMMON
SENSE BILL THAT FURTHERS THE
LEGISLATURE'S GOAL OF
REHABILITATING YOUTH AND
REDUCING THE RACIAL AND ETHNIC
DISPARITIES THAT ARE ALL TOO
PRESENT IN OUR CURRENT JUVENILE
LEGAL SYSTEM. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION AND SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. NEXT UP OUR ME TOOS IN
EITHER SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION,
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME YOUR ORG
AND WHETHER YOU SUPPORT OR
OPPOSE LESLIE CALDWELL, HOUSTON
FOR THE FOR PUBLIC DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT. MORGAN
ZAMORA FOR THE ELLA BAKER CENTER
FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND SUPPORT
IGNACIO HERNANDEZ ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA ATTORNEYS FOR
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND SUPPORT
NATASHA MINCER, INITIATE JUSTICE
AND SUPPORT MELISSA KOS TO
CALIFORNIA RECE THE JUSTICE AND
SUPPORT KELLY WALTERS FOR LEGAL
SERVICES FOR PRISONERS WITH
CHILDREN AND STRONG SUPPORT.
LEGAL SERVICES, UH, FOR
PRISONERS WITH CHILDREN AND ALL
OF A SUDDEN IN SACRAMENTO AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
I'LL TURN IT OVER TO DO WE HAVE
ANY OPPOSITION LEAD WITNESSES?
NONE. OK, WE'RE GONNA TURN IT
OVER TO THE COMMITTEE. WE HAVE
ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS
CONCERNS. I MOVE THE BILL. THANK
YOU. UM AND SENATOR I KNOW YOU
WOULD LIKE TO CLOSE BUT I ALSO
JUST WANT TO SAY CONGRATULATIONS
FOR TAKING ON ONE OF OUR
STAFFERS. JARED CONGRATULATIONS
FOR MOVING ON. UM SO HE'S DONE A
LOT OF WORK, SO I JUST WANNA
GIVE KUDOS. SO THANK YOU. WOULD
YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? UH, WELL,
THANK YOU FOR THAT. I AM VERY
EXCITED ONCE WE GET THROUGH THE
SENATE HÌ R PROCESS, WHICH
HOPEFULLY, ANY DAY HERE? UM, UH,
LOOKING FORWARD TO IT. THANK YOU
, UH, COMMITTEE. THANK YOU TO
THE SPONSORS. I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR AND I VOTE. DEFINITELY. ALL
RIGHT. CAN WE CALL A ROLL CALL
VOTE. S¼ P 161. THE MOTION IS
DUE PASS TO JUDICIARY. WELL I
WILL I SAY ART TO BRADFORD.
BRADFORD EYE SKINNER. I SKINNER.
I WIENER. THAT BUILDS ON CALL.
INSIDE CALENDAR. I'D LIKE TO
ALSO HAVE A MOTION ON THE
CONSENT CALENDAR. DO WE HAVE A
MOTION? BRADFORD MOVES WAHAB HIY
WAHAB. I èC R TO RADFORD.
RADFORD. I SKINNER I SKINNER I
WIENER. THANK YOU. THAT BILL IS
ON CALL. UM SENATOR SKINNER, IF
YOU WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT S¼ B
1001. OK? AND WHILE YOU'RE
GETTING READY, WE'RE GOING TO
CALL FOR A ROLL CALL VOTE ON
ITEM NUMBER ONE BLAKESPEAR S¼ B
1002. MOTION IS TO PASS TO
APPROPRIATIONS. WAH WAH I èC R
TO BRADFORD BRADFORD. I. SKINNER
SKINNER. I WIENER. THANK YOU.
BILL IS ON CALL. UH WE'RE GONNA
MOVE ON TO S¼ B 1019 BLAKESPEAR
MOTION IS DUE PASS TO
APPROPRIATIONS. WAHAB. I HAVE. I
SEYARTO SHE HAS LIKE THREE
BRADFORD BRADFORD. I. SKINNER
SKINNER. I WIENER. THAT BUILDS
ON CALL. WE HAVE ANOTHER BLAKE
SPEAR S¼ B 138 MOTION IS DUE
PASS YOU JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
WAHAB WAHAB. I ART TO BRADFORD.
CAN WE GET A MOTION FOR S¼? OH
I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY, 1038. OK
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SAY ARTO
BRADFORD. BRADFORD. I SKINNER
SKINNER. I WIENER. AND SOME EGG
AND THEN UH, SENATOR EDMAN, S¼ B
125 PRETRIAL DIVERSION FOR
VETERANS. CAN WE GET A MOTION?
THANK YOU, BRADFORD. THANK YOU.
MOTIONS TO BE PASSED AS AMENDED
TO APPROPRIATIONS. WAHAB WAHAB.
I SAY ART TO BRADFORD. BRADFORD.
I SKINNER SKINNER. I WIENER. ALL
RIGHT, THAT BUILDS ON CALL AS
WELL. AND THEN SENATOR SKINNER,
IF YOU WANT TO PRESENT, GO
AHEAD. ONE WE DIDN'T SO CAN WE
GET A MOTION FOR S¼ B 1019.
SENATOR SKINNER HAS MOVED IT
YES. RECALLING THE VOTE, WAHAB
AYE, I SAY ART TO BRADFORD.
BRADFORD I SKINNER SKINNER. I
WIENER AND THEN WE GOT ONE FOR
THE 1030 A. AND WE GOT ONE FOR
THE FIRST ONE. OK, ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU, GUYS. UH SENATOR, WE
CAN NOW HAVE S¼ B 1001. THANK
YOU, UM PLEASE PRESENT THIS BILL
. SO BOTH OUR U S¼ CONSTITUTION,
THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT AND OUR
CURRENT STATE LAW MAKES IT UM VÀ
. IT'S A VIOLATION TO, UH FOR US
TO EXECUTE THE STATE TO EXECUTE
A PERSON WITH AN INTELLECTUAL
DISABILITY. NOW OUR CURRENT
STATUTE REQUIRES THAT THAT
INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY BE
PRESENT. UH, THAT YOU MUST BE
CLEAR THAT THE PERSON HAS THE
INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY IN THEIR
DEVELOPMENTAL STAGE. SO IN OTHER
WORDS, BEFORE ADULTHOOD AND
FURTHER THAT IT MUST BE
DIAGNOSED BEFORE THAT TIME NOW
WHAT WE FACE IS THAT THERE ARE
CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE PEOPLE WITH
THESE, UM UH, SEVERE
INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES, WHICH
MEANS THAT THEY HAVE NOT. THEY
DO NOT HAVE THE INTELLECTUAL
CAPACITY. THE WHETHER WE, YOU
KNOW, USE IQ TESTS AS THE
INDICATOR OR WHAT THE VARIOUS
INDICATORS AND THERE'S THE TYPE
OF CIRCUMSTANCES A PERSON CAN
FACE WITH. THIS IS A PERSON WITH
DOWN SYNDROME, FOR EXAMPLE, A
PERSON WHO AT BIRTH, CERTAIN
BIRTH DEFECTS OR CERTAIN, UH UH
UH, INFECTIONS AT INFANCY THAT
CAN AFFECT BRAIN DEVELOPMENT.
SUCH THAT A PERSON IS
INTELLECTUALLY DISABLED, HOWEVER
, DEPENDING ON THE FAMILY
CIRCUMSTANCES, PERHAPS THE
SCHOOL THE CHILD WENT TO ANY
NUMBER OF CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE
THEY MAY NOT HAVE THAT MEDICAL
DIAGNOSIS BEFORE THE AGE THAT'S
LISTED IN STATUTE. SO ALL THIS
BILL DOES. IT STILL RETAINS THAT
REQUIREMENT THAT THIS HAS TO BE
AN INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY. THAT
WAS PRESENT AND OCCURRED IN
CHILDHOOD. UM BUT IT ENABLES THE
, UH THE AAA LAWYER REPRESENTING
THAT INDIVIDUAL TO GET THE
NECESSARY TESTING TO SEE IF IT
IS POSSIBLE TO DETERMINE AND
PROVE THAT THE PERSON HAD THAT
INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY FROM
CHILDHOOD AND TO BE ABLE TO
PRESENT THAT THEN IN THEIR, UH,
IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE TOWARDS
THEY'RE FACING THE EXECUTION.
THE DEATH PENALTY. NOW WHILE WE
HAVE A MORATORIUM RIGHT NOW, OUR
GOVERNOR IS NOT PROCEEDING WITH
THE EXECUTIONS. THE STATE COULD
AT ANY POINT, AND SO THIS IS TO
PROTECT THE STATE AND TO FOLLOW
THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT. THIS DOES
NOT COVER PEOPLE WITH MENTAL
ILLNESSES. SO I WANT TO RAISE
THAT RIGHT UP FRONT BECAUSE THE
Dð A S¼ LETTER IN OPPOSITION
RAISES QUESTIONS AROUND MENTAL
ILLNESS. THIS DOES NOT COVER
MENTAL ILLNESS. THIS IS
INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES ONLY,
UM AND SO YOU JUST CLARIFY THAT,
AND NOW I WOULD LIKE FOR, UM, MY
MAIN WITNESS, NISHA SHAW FROM
THE HABEAS CORPUS RESOURCE
CENTER TO PRESENT THANK YOU. YOU
HAVE TWO MINUTES. ISHA! SEAN
I'M, THE LEGAL DIRECTOR AT THE
HABEAS CORPUS RESOURCE CENTER.
SENATOR SKINNER'S STAFF ASKED ME
TO ADDRESS THE TECHNICAL CHANGES
S¼ B 1001 PROPOSES TO
CALIFORNIA'S LAW EXEMPTING FROM
EXECUTION PEOPLE WITH
INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY OR I Dð
FOR SHORT 22 YEARS AGO, THE U S¼
SUPREME COURT HELD THAT THE
EXECUTION OF A PERSON WITH I Dð
IS CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT.
CALIFORNIA CODIFIED THIS RULING
IN PENAL CODE SECTION 1000 THREE
176 WHICH THIS LEGISLATURE
UPDATED IN 2020 TO BRING WITH
CURRENT CLAN STANDARDS, S¼ B
1001 WILL FURTHER BRING
CALIFORNIA INTO COMPLIANCE WITH
GOVERNING LAW. FIRST THE BILL
CLARIFIES THAT A PERSON WITH I
Dð IS INELIGIBLE FOR THE DEATH
PENALTY. SECOND THE BILL
CODIFIES CASE LAW DEFINING THE
PROCEDURES TO BE USED WHEN A
PROSECUTOR SEEKS TESTING OF A
PERSON RAISING AN I Dð CLAIM.
THE LAW GOVERNING TESTING IN
THESE CASES IS UNIQUE AND COURTS
AND PROSECUTORS ARE NOT ALWAYS
AWARE OF IT. INDEED THE èC Dð
A'S OPPOSITION LETTER IGNORES
THE GOVERNING CASE ON THE ISSUE.
THE BILL ALSO WILL EXPEDITE
HEARINGS BY DEFINING THE
CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH A
PROSECUTION EXPERT CAN PERFORM
ADDITIONAL TESTING. IT IS
CRITICAL. WE PROTECT INDIVIDUALS
WITH I Dð FROM UNWARRANTED AND
INAPPROPRIATE TESTING. THIRD THE
BILL WILL EXPEDITE PROCEEDINGS
WHEN THE PARTIES AGREE THAT A
PERSON HAS I Dð BY GIVING COURTS
A TIME FRAME IN WHICH TO ACT.
AND FINALLY, THE BILL FURTHERS
THE LEGISLATURE'S GOAL OF
REMOVING BIAS FROM THE CRIMINAL
LEGAL SYSTEM. MORE THAN HALF OF
THOSE WITH I Dð OR DEVELOPMENTAL
DISABILITIES IN THIS COUNTRY
HAVE NOT BEEN FORMALLY
IDENTIFIED AS SUCH DUE TO THEIR
SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS, NATIONAL
ORIGIN OR A LACK OF ACCESS TO
RESOURCES, THE FAILURES OF OUR
SYSTEM TO IDENTIFY THESE PEOPLE
EARLY ON, SHOULD NOT EXEMPT THEM
FROM CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS
IN SOME S¼ B 1000 ONE'S
TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS WILL HELP
ENSURE THE STATE IDENTIFIES
PREVENTS THE EXECUTION OF PEOPLE
WITH I Dð AS THE CONSTITUTION
REQUIRES. THANK YOU. UM, NOT AS
A MAIN BUT WE DO THE ME TOOS.
THANK YOU, UM SPECIFICALLY STATE
YOUR NAME OREGON, WHETHER YOU
SUPPORT OR OPPOSE NATASHA MINSK
SMART JUST AS CALIFORNIA AND
INITIATE JUSTICE AND STRONG
SUPPORT. ERIC HARRIS. WITH
DISABILITY RIGHTS, CALIFORNIA
STRONG SUPPORT. LESLIE CALDWELL.
HOUSTON CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION IN
SUPPORT. DUKE COONEY ON BEHALF
OF A èC LU, CALIFORNIA ACTION
AND STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
LINDBERGH ON BEHALF OF CO
SPONSORS BEND THE ARC AND
FRIENDS COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATION
OF CALIFORNIA WITH DEEP
APPRECIATION TO THE AUTHOR AND
THE COMMITTEE FOR ITS WORK. WE
URGE AND I VOTE. MOLLY SHEEHAN
WITH THE CALIFORNIA CATHOLIC
CONFERENCE. A COSPONSOR ON THE
MEASURE AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
MORGAN ZAMORA FOR THE ELLA BAKER
CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND
SUPPORT MELISSA Kò SAID ON
BEHALF OF CALIFORNIANS FOR
SAFETY AND JUSTICE AND SUPPORT
KENNETH MON ON BEHALF OF
TRANSFORMATIVE PROGRAMMING WORKS
STRONG SUPPORT. IGNACIO
HERNANDEZ ON BEHALF OF THE AJ IN
SUPPORT. WALTERS ON BEHALF OF
LEGAL LEGAL SERVICES FOR
PRISONERS WITH CHILDREN AND
STRONG SUPPORT. AND ALL OF US IN
SACRAMENTO LEGAL SERVICES FOR
PRISONS WITH CHILDREN, STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE
ANY LEAD OPPOSITION WITNESSES?
TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU. UH IVY
FITZPATRICK, CALIFORNIA GS
ASSOCIATION. UM èC Dð A, UH UH,
RECOGNIZES THE CASE LAW THAT WAS
DISCUSSED. IN THE ANALYSIS AND
POINTED OUT BY THE HABEAS
COUNCIL ON THAT JUST TESTIFIED
IN SUPPORT. BUT èC Dð, A
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSES THE MEASURE
BECAUSE IT GOES FURTHER THAN
THAT BY CREATING A DE FACTO
PRESUMPTION IN FAVOR OF
INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY TESTS
PERFORMED BY DEFENSE EXPERTS AND
EXCLUDES THE PEOPLE, UM FROM
TESTING THE DEFENDANT UNLESS THE
PEOPLE CAN FIRST SHOW WITHOUT
EVER TESTING THE DEFENDANT THAT
THE DEFENSE TESTING WAS
UNRELIABLE, UM, REQUIRING A
PARTY TO SHOW THAT THE OTHER
PARTIES TESTING IS UNRELIABLE,
IS A NOVEL STANDARD IN CRIMINAL
JUSTICE. IT'S NOT APPLIED TO
OTHER CRIMINAL SETTINGS,
TYPICALLY ONCE A DEFENDANT HAS
PUT THEIR MENTAL STATE, UM AT
ISSUE, UM, AND INTO DISPUTE. THE
PEOPLE HAVE A LEGAL RIGHT TO
THEN TEST THAT EVIDENCE. THAT'S
WHAT THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
IS ALL ABOUT, UM, AND TO
INDEPENDENTLY ASSESS AND TEST
THE DEFENDANT. AT ITS HEART. THE
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IS A
SEARCH FOR THE TRUTH. AND èC Dð
A OPPOSES THIS UNBALANCED
APPROACH TO THE SEARCH FOR THE
TRUTH. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. DO
WE HAVE ANY ME TOOS IN
OPPOSITION, SAYING NONE. I'M
GOING TO TURN OVER THE
CONVERSATION TO THE COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE MEMBERS, SENATORS. HØI
WELL, I AM ALL FOR PROTECTING
THE RIGHTS OF OUR INTELLECTUALLY
DISABLED COMMUNITIES. UM, I
STRUGGLE WITH THE PART WHERE IF
THEY HAVE THAT THE PEOPLE CANNOT
TEST. TO ENSURE THE VALIDITY OF
THE TEST THAT THEY TOOK
PRIVATELY. ARE ON THE DEFENSE
ATTORNEY TOOK, UM THERE HAS TO
BE SOME KIND OF BALANCE AND
REASSURANCE FOR THE PEOPLE AND
ESPECIALLY FOR VICTIMS OF SOME
CRIMES. BECAUSE I CAN THINK OF
ONE IN IN PARTICULAR IS
PARTICULARLY HEINOUS. AND THIS
THIS WAS TRIED. BUT THEN THE
PEOPLE WERE ABLE TO COME BACK
WITH A, UM, A TESTING OF UH,
MENTAL STATUS OF THE PERSON AND
IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THAT
THERE WAS NÓ DISABILITY. AND UH,
SO WITHOUT THAT BALANCE, IT'S
DIFFICULT FOR ME TO GO DOWN THIS
PATH. WE HAVE ASSURANCES HERE IN
CALIFORNIA ESSENTIALLY THAT
PEOPLE THAT ARE GETTING THE
DEATH PENALTY DON'T SEE THE
DEATH PENALTY. SO IT IS. IT'S
MORE OF A LIFE IN PRISON. UH,
TYPE OF ISSUE. UM, BUT, UM, YOU
KNOW THAT THAT'S MY OPPOSITION
TO THIS IS ENSURING THAT THAT
JUSTICE IS THE SCALES OF JUSTICE
ARE ARE COME TO THE RIGHT
CONCLUSION, AND WE CAN'T DO
THAT. IF THE BURDEN OF
DETERMINING SOMEBODY'S
CAPABILITIES IS ONLY ON ONE SIDE
WITHOUT THE ABILITY FOR THE
OTHER TO CHALLENGE IT. UM AND I.
I DON'T SEE THAT. THAT'S THAT'S
THAT'S THERE. SO SHARE WITH YOUR
PERMISSION. CAN I ALLOW THE
HABEAS REPRESENTATIVE? SPEAK TO
THAT? YEAH, AND I'M SORRY. I
MISSED THE PART PART THE FIRST
PART OF THIS PRESENTATION. IT
MIGHT HAVE BEEN COVERED, BUT UH,
YES, SO THAT UM, SUBDIVISION
WOULD NOT PRECLUDE THE
PROSECUTION EXPERTS FROM TESTING
. IT WOULD JUST PUT SOME
GUARDRAILS AROUND WHEN THEIR
EXPERTS CAN TEST. UM AND THERE
ARE A COUPLE OF ISSUES HERE. ONE
IS THAT EVEN AFTER THE
AMENDMENTS THIS LEGISLATURE
PASSED IN 2020. WE HAVE SEEN AT
LEAST TWO CASES WHERE
PROSECUTION EXPERTS HAVE
ATTEMPTED TO ARTIFICIALLY
INFLATE SCORES BASED ON THE
DEFENDANT'S RACE OR
SOCIOECONOMICS STATUS, AND SO
THERE NEED TO BE SOME GUARDRAILS
AROUND. A PROSECUTION EXPERT
TESTING THE REQUIREMENT THAT IT
BE, UM THE PROSECUTION SHOW THAT
THE TESTING IS UNRELIABLE IS NOT
A HIGH BURDEN, AND, UM, THE
STATE ROUTINELY RETAINS EXPERTS
IN INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY IN
THESE CASES, AND ROUTINELY HAS
THEM REVIEW THE DEFENDANT OR
PETITIONER'S TESTING BEFORE
THEIR OWN EVALUATION, SO THIS
BILL ESSENTIALLY JUST ADDS A
REQUIREMENT OF TRANSPARENCY. UM
IF THE STATE'S EXPERT THINKS
ADDITIONAL TESTING IS NECESSARY,
THEY NEED TO EXPLAIN UH, THE
OTHER POINT I JUST WANT TO RAISE
IN TERMS OF THE COMMENT THAT THE
REQUIREMENT IS NOVEL. UH, THE
SUPREME COURT HAS ROUTINELY HELD
THAT DEATH IS DIFFERENT, AND
THAT CASES OF INTELLECTUAL
DISABILITY ARE DIFFERENT. THIS
IS A QUESTION OF CULPABILITY.
IT'S A QUESTION OF WHETHER
SOMEONE SHOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE
DEATH PENALTY. UM, AND AS YOU
SAY THE MAXIMUM PENALTY IF
SOMEONE IS FOUND TO BE A PERSON
WITH AN INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY
IS LIFE WITHOUT THE POSSIBILITY
OF PAROLE. THANK YOU FOR THAT.
CERTAINLY.
SENATOR WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE?
UM YES, I THINK, UH, I WAS
APPRECIATIVE OF OUR EXPERT FROM
THE HABEAS CORPUS TO, UH,
EXPLAIN THAT AND I THINK THAT
AGAIN. IT'S ONE OF THOSE
CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE WE HAVE
DIFFERENT, UH, A DIFFERENT SET
OF STANDARDS WHEN WE ARE DEALING
WITH DEATH PENALTY CASES. AND AS
I POINTED OUT IN MY OPENING, AND
IT'S BEEN SPOKEN TO ALREADY WHAT
? UH WHAT THIS BILL DOES IS
BASICALLY HELP ENSURE THAT IF AT
THE POINT, CALIFORNIA RESUMES
EXECUTIONS AND WE DO HAVE 650
PEOPLE ON DEATH ROW, UM AND WE
HAVE NOT PREVENTED ANY CASES
FROM IN OTHER WORDS, CASES CAN
STILL MOVE FORWARD IN COUNTIES
WITH A DEATH PENALTY PROSECUTION
THAT WHAT IF WE WERE TO RESUME
EXECUTIONS, WE WOULD HAVE AN
ADDITIONAL SAFEGUARD TO HELP
PREVENT SOMEONE WITH AN
INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY FROM
BEING EXECUTED. AND WITH THAT, I
ASK FOR YOUR I VOTE. THANK YOU.
UM, I'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT
BILL. AND IF YOU WOULD THEN WAIT
FOR A MOTION AND FOR SOME
MEMBERS TO RETURN. YOU HAVE YOUR
LAST NAME? THE BEST BILL? YES.
ALL RIGHT. NEXT UP. WE HAVE S¼ B
1000 THREE, 153, SENATOR WAHAB.
HM? THANK YOU. COLLEAGUES AND
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SB 1000.
THREE 153 WILL ADD TO THE
EXISTING YOUTH BILL OF RIGHTS
THAT YOUTH DETAINED IN JUVENILE
FACILITIES ARE NOT TO BE
DEPRIVED OF MENTAL HEALTH
RESOURCES. A JULY 2020 POLICY
STATEMENT PUBLISHED BY PUBLISHED
IN PEDIATRICS ESTIMATES THAT
BETWEEN 50% AND 80% OF JUSTICE
INVOLVED YOUTH HAVE A MENTAL
HEALTH DISORDER. MOST OF THESE
YOUTH HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCING
SOME VARIETY OF TRAUMA FROM A
YOUNG AGE, ACCORDING TO A 2017
REVIEW FROM THE U S¼ OFFICE OF
JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY
PREVENTION, HAVING A MENTAL
HEALTH PROBLEM WHILE INVOLVED IN
THE SYSTEM CAN INCREASE YOUTHS,
LIKELIHOOD OF RECIDIVISM OR
ENGAGING IN OTHER PROBLEM
BEHAVIOR. END QUOTE S¼ B FIF
1350 THREE EMPOWERS INCARCERATED
YOUTH AND PROMOTES ANTI
RECIDIVISM BY EMPHASIZING THE
IMPORTANCE OF ACCESS TO MENTAL
HEALTH RESOURCES IN THE YOUTH
BILL OF RIGHTS. I WOULD LIKE TO
INTRODUCE MY FIRST WITNESS,
CHRISTINE SOTO DE BERY, WITH THE
PROSECUTORS ALLIANCE OF
CALIFORNIA. THANK YOU. YOU HAVE
TWO MINUTES SINCE THE CHAIR IS
HERE. TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU,
SENATOR. THANK YOU SENATORS FOR
HAVING US HERE. CHRISTINE CELTA
DE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE
PROSECUTORS, ALLIANCE OF
CALIFORNIA. WE'RE HERE TO URGE
YOUR SUPPORT FOR S¼ B 1350
THREE, A MODEST BUT IMPORTANT
IMPROVEMENT IN THE PROTECTIONS
PROVIDED TO YOUTH CHILDREN THAT
ARE HELD IN OUR CUSTODIAL
FACILITIES HERE IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. THERE ARE CURRENTLY
EXISTING PROTECTIONS IN
CALIFORNIA LAW TO ENSURE THAT
THERE IS A SAFE AND HEALTHY
ENVIRONMENT FOR CHILDREN. WHEN
WE ARE HOLDING THEM AWAY FROM
THEIR HOMES. ADDITIONALLY
ALREADY IN EXISTENCE IN THE
STATE IS A YOUTH BILL OF RIGHTS
THAT ENSURES THAT CHILDREN ARE
NOT PROVIDE NOT DEPRIVED OF
FUNDAMENTAL NEEDS, SUCH AS FOOD,
SLEEP ACCESS TO FAMILY ACCESS TO
CLERGY. THIS BILL WOULD ADD
ACCESS TO MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES
FOR THOSE SAME CHILDREN, AS WAS
MENTIONED BY THE SENATOR, THERE
IS AN ALARMINGLY HIGH RATE OF
MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES WITHIN THE
YOUNG PEOPLE THAT ARE HELD IN
OUR CUSTODIAL FACILITIES
SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 6080. OF
CHILDREN ARE SUFFERING FROM SOME
MENTAL HEALTH NEEDS AND ARE IN
THE CARE OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA AND IN NEED OF THAT
TREATMENT. SADLY THIS MAY BE THE
FIRST OR ONLY OPPORTUNITY FOR
THESE YOUNG PEOPLE TO RECEIVE
MUCH NEEDED MENTAL HEALTH
TREATMENT THAT CAN FACILITATE
NOT ONLY THEIR WELL BEING, BUT
THEIR REHABILITATION. THIS IS A
SMART SAFETY INVESTMENT FOR US
HERE IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
IT IS APPROPRIATE AND DIGNIFIED
TREATMENT FOR OUR CHILDREN, AND
WE URGE YOUR STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER
PRIMARY WITNESSES? IN SPORT. IF
NOT, WE'LL JUST HAVE THE, UH, ME
TOOS COME UP, UH, YOUR STATE
YOUR NAME AND YOUR ORGANIZATION
YOU REPRESENT. THANK YOU. ERIC
HARRIS. DISABILITY RIGHTS,
CALIFORNIA SUPPORT. NATASHA
MINSK, SMART JUSTICE CALIFORNIA
AND INITIATE JUSTICE AND SUPPORT
LESLIE CALDWELL. HOUSTON
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT. JIM
LINDBERG FRIENDS COMMITTEE ON
LEGISLATION IN CALIFORNIA IN
SUPPORT WELL, THAT'S A COURT OF
CALIFORNIA RECEIVED TO JUSTICE
AND SUPPORT. MORGAN ZAMORA FOR
THE ELLA BAKER CENTER FOR HUMAN
RIGHTS AND SUPPORT CRAIG PUL FOR
ON BEHALF OF EQUALITY,
CALIFORNIA IN SUPPORT. Tð B
EASTMAN WITH THE STEINBERG
INSTITUTE IN SUPPORT. HENRY
ORTIZ WITH ALL OF US AND ON
SACRAMENTO AND LEGAL SERVICES
FOR PRISONERS WITH CHILDREN AND
STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU. AND
THANK YOU. OH WE GOT ONE MORE
ONE MORE KELLY WALTERS WITH
LEGAL SERVICES FOR PRISONERS
WITH CHILDREN IN STRONG SUPPORT.
ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR ALL YOUR COOPER AND GETTING
THROUGH THAT ONE PART OF IT. NOW
WE HAVE LEAD WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION. IS THERE ANYBODY
THAT WISHES TO BE A LEAD WITNESS
IN OPPOSITION? IS THERE ANYBODY
THAT JUST WANTS TO? HM? YES.
COME ON UP FOR CLARITY. DANIEL
SANCHEZ, CHIEF PROBATION
OFFICERS OF CALIFORNIA NOT IN
OPPOSITION TODAY, KIND OF IN THE
IN BETWEEN, BUT I WAS HOPING TO
MAKE A FEW BRIEF REMARKS. AS I
SAID, WE DO NOT HAVE A POSITION
AT THIS TIME, AND WE CERTAINLY
AGREE WITH THE SENATORS. GOALS
OF THIS BILL, UM AROUND ENSURING
ACCESS TO MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES
. WE DID JUST WANT TO NOTE FOR
THE COMMITTEE THAT IN ENSURING
AND GUARANTEEING THIS ACCESS
THAT WE MAKE SURE TO DO SO IN A
WAY THAT ACCOUNTS FOR SOME OF
THE CONSIDERATIONS, UM AROUND
BEING ABLE TO HAVE
INDIVIDUALIZED APPROACHES FOR
THOSE YOUTH. SPECIFIC NEEDS AND
MAKING SURE NOT TO PRESCRIBE THE
SPECIFIC TREATMENT OR SERVICES.
AND SO, UH, WE'VE ENGAGED IN
VERY PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS
WITH THE SENATOR'S OFFICE. WE
LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING MORE OF
THOSE, UM TO TALK THROUGH SOME
OF THOSE CONSIDERATIONS ON THE
SPECIFIC LANGUAGE. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, ANYBODY
LAST CHANCE. ME, TOO, IS IN
OPPOSITION. GIVEN THERE ARE NONE
. I'M GOING TO BRING IT BACK TO
THE DAIS. DO WE HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I MOVED
THE BILL. THERE IS A MOTION TO
MOVE THE BILL BY SKINNER. UH I
HAVE JUST ONE COMMENT, AND IT
KIND OF HELPS CLARIFY THAT, UH,
I'M NOT GONNA GO UP ON YOUR BILL
TODAY, BUT I'M NOT VOTING
AGAINST YOUR BILL TODAY BECAUSE
IT'S A LAUDABLE GOAL. WHAT I
WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN AND IN THE
FUTURE OF THESE AGENCIES ARE
ALREADY OVERACTED BY MANDATES
THAT WE HAVE SENT DOWN AND WHEN
THERE'S MANDATES THAT CAN BE
TURNED INTO LAWSUITS WHEN WE
DON'T GIVE THEM THE TOOLS THEY
NEED TO DO THE JOB. THAT'S THE
BIGGER PROBLEM IS, UH, AS YOU
VISIT THESE FACILITIES AND YOU
TALK WITH THE PEOPLE THAT ARE
INVOLVED, UH, A LOT OF THE
FACILITIES ARE UNDER THE GUN FOR
DOING A LOT OF THINGS, BUT WE'RE
NOT GIVING THEM WE DON'T SET
THEM UP FOR SUCCESS BY, UH,
ENSURING THAT INFRASTRUCTURE IS
IN PLACE. SO THAT THEY CAN DO
THIS SUCCESSFULLY. AND SO WHAT?
THAT'S WHAT THAT WINDS UP BEING
IS LAWSUITS THAT TAKE MONEY AWAY
FROM OUR ABILITY TO PROVIDE THE
INFRASTRUCTURE TO DO THAT. AND
SO WITHOUT THAT, UM IT IT'S HARD
FOR ME TO SUPPORT A BILL UNTIL I
HAVE ASSURANCES THAT WE'RE GOING
TO FUND THE INFRASTRUCTURE
THAT'S NEEDED TO DO THIS CARE
COURTS ARE THE SAME KIND OF
THING. WE HOISTED THAT UPON THE
COURT SYSTEM BUT DIDN'T GIVE ME
ANY TOOLS, AND NOW IT'S ALL
BACKED UP BECAUSE THEY CAN'T GET
PEOPLE THROUGH BECAUSE THEY
DON'T HAVE THE FACILITIES OR
ENOUGH JUDGES TO DO IT. SO UM SO
I'LL BE LAYING OFF YOUR BILL
TODAY. UH, WITH THAT, UH, WE CAN
GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE ROLE. OH,
I'M SORRY. YOU WANNA CLOSE MY
BANK? UH, AND SENATOR, I
APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. UM I
ALSO AGREE WITH YOU. SO IF YOU
HAVE ANY LANGUAGE CONSIDERATIONS
FOR US TO EVALUATE, WE'RE MORE
THAN HAPPY TO TAKE A LOOK AT
THOSE. WE ALSO ARE VERY HAPPY TO
WORK WITH. UM OUR, UH I'M GONNA
SAY A WITNESS IN OPPOSITION. I'M
SORRY. BUT YOU KNOW THE IN
BETWEENER, UM, SPECIFICALLY
BECAUSE WE DO WANT TO DO WHAT'S
RIGHT FOR THESE KIDS. UM, OTHER
THAN THAT, I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR AN I VOTE. THANK YOU.
SECRETARY CARL ROVE. S¼ P 1353
MOTION IS DUE PASSED TO THE
FLOOR. WYE, I SAY OUR TO
BRADFORD SKINNER. AYE, SKINNER.
I WIENER. YEAH. AVAILABLE. OH,
SHE'S GONNA RECESS. RECONVENE.
ALL RIGHT. UH, THAT IS, UH, IS
TWO VOTES IN FAVOR AND WE'RE
GONNA LEAVE IT OPEN OUR ON CALL.
THANK YOU. UM I JUST WANNA MAKE
SURE WE CAN ACTUALLY LIFT THE
CALL FOR SENATOR SEYARTO. UM WE
WILL START WITH ITEM NUMBER ONE.
AND MOVE IT ALL THE WAY FORWARD.
SV 1002 MOTION IS DUE PASS
THROUGH APPROPRIATIONS. CURRENT
VOTE IS 3 TO 0 SEYARTO, A SB
1019 MOTION IS DUE TO PASS TO
APPROPRIATIONS. CURRENT VOTE IS
3 TO 0 SEYARTO SEYARTO. S¼ B
1038 MOTION IS DUE PASS DUE TO
DISH. èC R Tð NÓ SE RTO NÓ SB
1025 MOTION IS TO PASS AS
AMENDED TO APPROPRIATION SEYARTO
NOT VOTING. SB 1161. THE MOTION
IS TO PASS DUE JUDICIARY. TOTO,
I S¼ B 1350 THREE. OH, WE GO TO
THAT ONE. AND CONSENT. THEY ARE,
TOO MOTION TO ADD S¼ B 933 èC R
TO I THANK YOU, UM FOR THE MOST
PART, ALL THE BILLS ARE STILL ON
CALL. WE WILL BE CALLING A
RECESS AND RECONVENE AT 1130 TO
LIFT CALLS AND GET A MOTION ON
SENATOR SKINNER'S BILL AS WELL
AS FINAL VOTES ON ALL THE BILLS.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
GUYS. STILL THERE.
SENATOR WEINER IS HERE. WE'RE
GOING TO LIFT THE CALL FOR ITEMS
ONE THROUGH EIGHT. WE WILL START
WITH ITEM NUMBER SEVEN AS IT'S
ON CONSENT. S¼ B 930 THREE.
WEINER. WIENER? AYE. THAT BILL
IS OUT. UM NOW WE WILL START
WITH ITEM NUMBER ONE S¼ B 1002.
UM CURRENT VOTE IS 5 TO 0 MOTION
IS 4 TO 0. SORRY DUE PASS TWO
APPROPRIATIONS WIENER WIENER I
THAT BILL IS OUT ITEM NUMBER TWO
S¼ B 1019 MOTION IS DUE PASS TO
APPROACH 4 TO 0 WIENER WIENER I
THAT BILL IS OUT ITEM NUMBER
THREE SB 1038. MOTION IS DUE
PASS TO JUDICIARY. CURRENT VOTE
IS THREE TO ONE WIENER WIENER I.
THAT BILL IS OUT 4 TO 1. WHAT WE
HAVEN'T GOTTEN TO THAT ONE YET.
YEAH UH, WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO
ITEM NUMBER FOUR. SB 1025 BY
SENATOR EDMAN MOTION IS DUE PASS
AS AMENDED TO APPROPRIATIONS
CURRENT VOTE IS THREE TO ZERO.
WEINER THAT BILL IS FOUR TO 00.
THAT BILL IS OUT. UH, NUMBER
FIVE S¼ B. 61 BY BECKER.
COMMOTION IS DUE PASS TO
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE CURRENT VOTE
IS 4 TO 0 WIENER WIENER I THAT
BILL IS OUT 5 TO 0. ITEM NUMBER
SIX SB 1001 SKINNER NEEDS A
MOTION. I. I MOVED WEINER MOVES
MOTION IS DUE PASS TO THE FLOOR.
WAHAB AYE, WAHAB. I SAY ARTO
BRADFORD. THE SKINNER I WIENER
WIENER. I MISS BRADFORD COMING.
WE'RE GETTING BRADFORD'S COMING,
SO WE'LL KEEP THAT OPEN. OK THAT
THAT IS STILL ON CALL. WE ARE
GONNA MOVE TO NUMBER EIGHT S¼ B
1350 THREE WAHAB MOTION IS DUE
PASS TO THE FLOOR. CURRENT VOTE
IS 2 TO 0 SEAR BRADFORD WEINER
WIENER, I THAT BILL IS ON CALL.
THANK YOU. NÓ NÓ. DEFINITELY, OF
COURSE, OF COURSE.
OK, SO WHICH ONE WAS IT? IT'S
SKINNER AND YOUR BILL. UM S¼ B
1001 SKINNER. MOTION IS TO PASS
TO THE FLOOR. CURRENT VOTE IS
THREE TO ZERO. BRADFORD BRADFORD
I 4 TO 0. THAT BILL IS OUT
NUMBER EIGHT S¼ B 1353 WAHAB
MOTION IS DUE. YOU PASS TO THE
FLOOR. CURRENT VOTE IS THREE TO
ZERO. BRADFORD ALRIGHTY.
BRADFORD LOVES THIS, ACTUALLY.
BRADFORD HØI. ALL RIGHT. THAT
BILL IS OUT 4 TO 0. ADJOURNED.
WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU.