THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY,
UTILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS
WILL COME TO ORDER. GOOD MORNING
. WE'RE HOLDING OUR COMMITTEE
HEARING HERE ON THE OLD STREET
BUILDING IN ROOM 1200. I WOULD
ASK ALL MEMBERS TO REPORT AS
SOON AS POSSIBLE SO WE CAN STOP
SHAM. I WOULD LIKE TO WELCOME
EVERYONE TO OUR FIRST BILL
HEARING OF THE COMMITTEE OF
2024. UH, WE BEGIN THE HEARING.
WE HAVE FOUR BILLS ON TODAY'S
AGENDA. S¼ B 1374 BY SENATOR
BECKER HAS BEEN PULLED AS WELL
AS S¼ B 1413 BY SENATOR NEAL HAS
BEEN PULLED BY THE COMMITTEE.
AND I SHOULD STATE UM 1374 BY
BECKER WAS PULLED BY THE AUTHOR.
BEFORE WE HEAR A PRESENTATION OF
THE BILLS. LET'S ESTABLISH A
QUORUM. UH, PLEASE CALL THE
ROYAL SECRETARY. UH, WE KNOW.
OH, I FORGOT. WE DON'T I FORGET.
I FORGOT WHAT COMMITTEE I'M IN.
YEAH YOU NEED HALF THE
LEGISLATURE TO HAVE A FOREIGN.
YEAH. YEAH. SO IN LIGHT OF THAT
WE'LL START AS A SUB COMMITTEE.
AND WE WELCOME OUR FIRST AUTHOR,
SENATOR. HE'LL BE PRESENTING S¼
B 165.
GOOD MORNING, MR CHAIRMAN AND
MEMBERS. MY PLEASURE TO PRESENT
I'M BACK AGAIN WITH THE PITCH TO
KEEP AS MANY OPTIONS ON THE
TABLE, UH AS POSSIBLE AND I'LL
EXPLAIN IN A MOMENT HERE TO
PRESENT S¼ B. 1165 I WANT TO
THANK THE CHAIR AND THE
COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR WORKING
WITH OUR STAFF ON THIS BILL. IT
IS A REINTRODUCTION PLUS OF S¼ B
+619, WHICH WOULD DEVELOP AN
ALTERNATIVE OPT IN PERMITTING.
UH, SYSTEM AT THE èC èC THAT
WILL SIGNIFICANTLY ACCELERATE
THE APPROVAL OF MUCH NEEDED
TRANSMISSION CAPACITY IN
CALIFORNIA, PARTICULARLY AS WE
LOOK FORWARD TO THE TRANSMISSION
DEMAND OUTLOOKS THAT HAVE BEEN
PREPARED FOR THE LEGISLATURE. AS
YOU KNOW, CAL ISO ESTIMATES THAT
WE WILL NEED MORE THAN 7000
MEGAWATTS OF NEW TRANSMISSION
CAPACITY EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT
DECADE TO MEET ENERGY DEMANDS.
AND UNFORTUNATELY, OUR
PERMITTING SYSTEM WHICH INCLUDES
, UH PARTICULARLY WITH LARGER,
UH, CAPACITY TRANSMISSION
PROJECTS THAT REQUIRE A FULL èC
P èC N PROCESS AT THE èC PU
èC CAN TAKE AS MUCH AS 7 TO 10
YEARS TO COMPLETE AT A TIME WHEN
WE KNOW LOOKING FORWARD THAT WE
WILL NEED ACCORDING TO THE
OUTLOOK 10.74 BILLION IN
UPGRADES TO THE EXISTING SYSTEM
OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND MORE THAN
30 BILLION TO BUILD NEW
NON-EXISTENT TRANSMISSION
CAPACITY IF CALIFORNIA IS GOING
TO GET EVEN CLOSE TO MEETING OUR
G HÌ G REDUCTION GOALS. SALUTE
WHETHER IT IS ON EFFICIENCY. UH
UH, CAPACITY AND ALL THE REST.
UM THE CURRENT PERMITTING
PROCESS, ON AVERAGE, AS I
INDICATED, CAN TAKE A NUMBER OF
YEARS AND DELAYS IN PERMITTING
RESULT IN HIGHER INCREMENTAL
CONSTRUCTION COSTS. THEY
THREATEN THE ABILITY TO REACH
CLIMATE GOALS, BUT MOST
IMPORTANTLY, IT MAKES IT
INCREASINGLY DIFFICULT TO KEEP
THE LIGHTS ON IN CALIFORNIA,
PARTICULARLY DURING SUMMER PEAK
DEMAND TIMES. UH S¼ B 1164
BUILDS. SB 205, WHICH EXPANDS
FACILITIES THAT ARE ELIGIBLE TO
BE CERTIFIED AS AN EL Dð P OR
ENVIRONMENTAL LEADERSHIP. UH,
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT. UH, IT'S AN
OPT IN SYSTEM FOR I Ó U APPLIC
APPLICANTS TO CHOOSE TO HAVE THE
èC E èC CONDUCT AN EXPEDITED
TIME FRAME SEQUEL REVIEW. UM IT
AUTHORIZES. IT ALSO REQUIRES
SPECIFICALLY, UH THAT ANY
APPLICANT WHO CHOOSES THE OPT IN
PROCESS TO SPECIFICALLY AVOID
AND MINIMIZE IMPACTS TO
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES AND
DISTINCT THE DISTINCTION HERE
FROM THE PRIOR BILL IS IT
AUTHORIZED A SPECIFICALLY COST
RECOVERY, SO THE èC èC CAN
RECOVER ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
FROM PROCESSING THE
APPLICATIONS. CREATING AN
ALTERNATIVE OUTLET FOR THE
BACKLOG OF APPLICATIONS NOW AND
WHAT WE CLEARLY ANTICIPATE IN
THE FUTURE, UH, IS ESSENTIAL TO
MEETING OUR REDUCTION GOALS.
THIS WILL ALLOW THE PU èC TO
CONTINUE TO DIVERT MORE FOCUSED
RESOURCES TO PRIORITIES AND
CLEAN ENERGY PROJECTS. UM ACCESS
TO ACCELERATED AND ACCELERATED
PROCESS. THE BILL DOES NOT
CHANGE THE SCOPE OF S¼ QL REVIEW
IT ONLY CHANGES THE VENUE FROM
THE PUC TO THE èC E èC IN
AUTHORIZE AUTHORIZES THE 270 DAY
PROTOCOL. IN THE GOVERNOR'S VETO
MESSAGE FOR S¼ B 619 LAST YEAR,
HE STATED THE BILL
DECENTRALIZING PERMITTING
PROCESS CREATES CO ORDINATION,
CHALLENGES AND DUPLICATE
STAFFING. AND REMAINS COMMITTED
TO WORKING TO IMPROVE
TRANSMISSION. I WOULD PERMITTING
, I WOULD RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE
AND DISSENT WITH THAT. THE
THEORY OF WHAT THE GOVERNOR HAS
BEEN ADVISED, IS THIS IF YOU
CENTRALIZE EVERYTHING IN ONE
AGENCY THAT WILL NECESSARILY
THEREFORE RESULT IN EFFICIENCIES
IN SHORTER TIMELINES. I BEG TO
DIFFER. THERE IS SOMETHING
BECAUSE THE EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE
SHOWS JUST THE OPPOSITE. IN THE
CASE OF THE TIME IT TAKES FOR
CALIFORNIA TO ENTITLE MAJOR
CAPACITY TRANSMISSION 7 TO 10
YEARS IS NOT AN ACCEPTABLE
TIMELINE. WE AVERAGE OVER TWO
YEARS JUST FOR S¼ QL REVIEW.
WE'RE NOT GONNA MEET OUR G HÌ G
REDUCTION GOALS. WE'RE NOT GOING
TO BUILD THE GRID OF THE FUTURE
IF WE DEFEND THE STATUS. QUO
THERE'S SUCH A THING AS MISSION
CREEP, MR CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS.
THERE'S SUCH A THING AS
OVERBURDENING, A REGULATORY
AGENCY WITH EVERYTHING FROM SOUP
TO NUTS, AND I WOULD
RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT THAT THAT
HAS BEEN THE CASE WITH THE
CALIFORNIA PU èC AND IT
SPECIFICALLY THE PROBLEM. SINCE
THAT TIME, MY STAFF AND I HAVE
DONE MULTIPLE MEETINGS AND
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE
ADMINISTRATION. WE HAVE
CONDUCTED THOSE ALSO WITH THE
èC PU èC TO ENSURE THE
COMMITMENT TO IMPROVE THE
EXISTING PROCESS ACTUALLY
HAPPENS. I HAVE TO SAY THAT THE
ONLY THING WE'VE RECEIVED SINCE
LAST YEAR ARE VERBAL ASSURANCES
THAT THEY WILL CONTINUE TO LOOK
AT THE PROBLEM. UNTIL THERE ARE
CHANGES MADE TO THE TRANSMISSION
PERMITTING PROCESS. I WILL
CONTINUE TO MOVE S¼ B 1165 TO
IMPROVE TRANSMISSION
INFRASTRUCTURE. THIS IS CRITICAL
TO ACHIEVING OUR GHG REDUCTION
GOALS. WITH ME TODAY. I HAVE VON
WHITE WITH THE CENTER FOR ENERGY
EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE
TECHNOLOGIES. GOOD MORNING, MR
CHAIRMAN MEMBERS JOHN WHITE WITH
A CLEAN POWER CAMPAIGN. UM WE
SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION BECAUSE
OF THE REASONS STATED IN
PARTICULAR, WE ARE SEEING A
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF LOAD
GROWTH IN ADDITION TO
ELECTRIFICATION FROM BUILDINGS
AND TRANSPORTATION, WE'RE SEEING
DEMAND FOR ELECTRICITY FROM DATA
CENTERS. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
. UH WE'VE HAD FLAT LOAD GROWTH,
UH, AS THE CHAIRMAN KNOWS FOR
MORE THAN 30 YEARS AND THAT'S A
KEPT US WHERE WE ARE, BUT NOW
IT'S GOING THE OTHER WAY, AND
THAT PUTS PRESSURE ON THE GRID
TO BE ABLE TO MEET THAT LOAD.
AND THE TIME THAT IT TAKES, UH,
AND THE DUPLICATIVE REVIEWS THAT
ARE IN THE EXISTING SYSTEM
SIMPLY, WE CAN'T AFFORD IT.
WE'RE WE'RE USED TO BUILDING ONE
TRANSMISSION LINE AT A TIME AND
TAKING OUR TIME ABOUT IT. WE
NEED TO BUILD 678 LINES AT THE
SAME TIME, AND THAT MEANS WE
NEED TO HAVE A PROCESS THAT IS
THAT IS MORE EXPEDITED.
PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT, SO
WE'D ASKED FOR AN IPO. THANK YOU
ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT
OF THIS MEASURE? PLEASE COME
FORWARD AT THIS TIME. AND XAN
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION. NEW
PRIMARY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
ALL RIGHT, SEE NONE. WE'LL BRING
IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE. ANY
QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS BY
COMMITTEE, SENATOR NEWMAN. S¼ I
DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOUR KIND OF
BROADER THESIS ON THIS WHOLE
THING, UH, BUT TO THE EXTENT
THAT THIS BILL WAS VETOED LAST
YEAR, I GUESS YOU HAVE TWO
QUESTIONS. ONE IS A QUICK SCAN
SHOW. THERE WERE NÓ NÓ VOTES
LAST YEAR. SO FIRST QUESTION IS,
DID YOU CONSIDER TRYING TO GET A
VETO OVERRIDE ON THIS BILL?
SOMEDAY WE WILL DO THOSE STILL
EXIST. MR CHAIRMAN. IN THEORY,
IT'S STILL IN THE CALIFORNIA
CONSTITUTION. BUT YOU KNOW WHAT?
WHAT ASSURANCE OR EVEN
LIKELIHOOD DO WE HAVE IN THIS
CASE IF WE VOTE THIS BILL
THROUGH, UH, THAT IT WON'T GET
VETOED AGAIN. MR CHAIRMAN,
SENATOR, I THINK THE LEGISLATURE
NEEDS TO BE PERSISTENT AND
CONSISTENT BECAUSE OF THE NATURE
. THE CRITICALITY OF THIS
PARTICULAR NEED. WE HAVE EVEN
THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS. UH
ACKNOWLEDGES CORRECTLY, THE HIGH
DEMAND AND THE LIKELIHOOD THAT
THERE'LL BE A SUBSTANTIAL
INCREASE IN APPLICATIONS FOR
HIGHER CAPACITY. TRANSMISSION
INFRASTRUCTURE, PARTICULARLY
BECAUSE OF THE NEED TO MEET OUR
GHG GOAL. SO IN OTHER WORDS,
WE'RE GONNA HAVE MORE
APPLICATIONS IN THIS PROCESS FOR
MORE IMPACTFUL INFRASTRUCTURE.
GIVEN THAT THAT'S THE REALITY WE
NEED AS MANY OPTIONS ON THE
TABLE TO QUICKLY AND EFFICIENTLY
ENTITLE THIS INFRASTRUCTURE, AND
THAT MEANS IN OUR VIEW, ALL
HANDS ON DECK. I THINK THE
LEGISLATURE SHOULD BE PERSISTENT
. WE ARE COMMITTED TO CONTINUE
WORKING WITH THE GOVERNOR'S
OFFICE. WE'RE CONTINUE IN THAT
DIALOGUE AND WITH THE èC PU
èC, UH, BECAUSE CRITICAL AND WE
HOPE THAT IF THE LEGISLATURE
CONTINUES TO BE CONSISTENT IN
STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT FOR
REFORMS, LIKE OUR PRO PROFFERED
IN THIS BILL THAT THAT IS A GOOD
POSITION TO CONTINUE THAT
DIALOGUE WITH BOTH THE PUC AND
THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE, I, I
CAN'T WAIT TO HEAR YOUR CLOSE.
IF THAT WAS YOUR SIMPLY YOUR
ANSWER. APPRECIATE IT. GLAD TO
MOVE THE BILL HAPPY SUPPORT.
THANK YOU, UH, SENATOR DALLY.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIRMAN. GOOD TO
SEE YOU, SENATOR. SO, JUST A
QUICK QUESTION. YOU'RE JUST
BASICALLY MOVING THIS FROM PU
èC TO èC E èC. RIGHT? THAT'S
THAT'S THE NEW WHAT? SO MIKE, I
JUST GET RIGHT TO THE QUESTION.
WHAT DO YOU WHAT MAKES YOU THINK
THAT THE èC E èC IS GONNA DO
ANY BETTER THAN THE PU èC?
WELL, BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE OPTIC
IF AN I Ó U, FOR EXAMPLE, UH,
FILES AND APPLICATION OF
PARTICULARLY IN THE CASE IN THE
FUTURE, WHERE WE'RE GOING TO
HAVE MORE OF THE LARGER CAPACITY
TRANSMISSION INFRASTRUCTURE,
WHICH WOULD TYPICALLY REQUIRE
REQUIRE A MORE INVOLVED PROCESS,
AS YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON THE
SIZE OF THE TRANSMISSION
CAPACITY, THERE IS DIFFERENT
LEVELS OF REVIEW THAT ARE
REQUIRED FROM 50 KILOWATTS AND
BELOW TO VERY ADMINISTRATIVE,
YOU KNOW, MINISTERIAL REVIEW
THAT ARE THAT ARE CONSIDERED
BASICALLY INTERCONNECT PROJECTS
TO MEDIUM CAPACITY THAT REQUIRE
A PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT, FOR
EXAMPLE, RATHER THAN A WHOLE
CONSIDERATION OF THE NECESSITY.
IN PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND ALL OF
THAT, SO THERE'S COMPLEX,
WONDERFUL PROCESSES. WE'VE
EVOLVED IN OUR STATE TO DEAL
WITH THIS. THE REASON THIS CAN
PROVIDE SHORTER TIMELINES, AS IS
ACKNOWLEDGED IN THE STAFF REPORT
, UH, SOMETIMES MONTHS OFF THE
TIMELINE FOR S¼ QL REVIEW IS
WE'RE GONNA HAVE MORE OF THE
LARGER CAPACITY PROJECTS COMING
FORWARD TO MEET OUR GOALS. AND
BECAUSE OF THAT MORE
APPLICATIONS ARE GONNA NEED TO
GO THROUGH A MORE LENGTHY, MORE
COMPLEX PROCESS, SO THE MORE
PROJECTS THAT CAN QUALIFY TO OPT
IN TO THE èC E èC DOING A
SHORTER EXPEDITED S¼ QL REVIEW
WHILE THE PU èC LOOKS AT
QUESTIONS OF CONVENIENCE AND
NECESSITY MAY CREATE AN
EFFICIENCY AND MAY SHORTEN
TIMELINES, AND THAT'S IMPORTANT
FOR US TO BE ABLE TO MEET THE
GOALS OVERALL, AND THAT'S THE
POINT OF THE BILL. MY CONCERN IS
THAT I'M GONNA LAY OFF THE BILL.
I GET TO SEE IT AGAIN IN IN EQ.
UM BUT MY CONCERN IS THAT WE
GAVE THE POWER TO THE èC èC
LAST YEAR. I BELIEVE I CAN'T
REMEMBER THE BILL NUMBER, BUT IT
ALLOWS THEM TO BASICALLY BYPASS
THE LOCAL PROCESS TO SITE WIND
FARMS. WE GAVE WE GAVE THE CEC
THAT POWER AND WE'VE ALSO THIS
IS LIKE THE FOURTH BILL THIS
YEAR THAT WE'VE HUNTED TO THE
èC èC TO DO WORK AND, UH AND
THE RATEPAYERS PAY FOR THE èC
èC, WHICH WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT
RATES GOING UP, SO MY CONCERN IS
THAT YOU KNOW, WE OBVIOUSLY THE
GOVERNOR VETOED THE BILL LAST
YEAR WE SUPPORTED THE BILL. IT
IS VERY DIFFICULT IN CALIFORNIA
WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS
WHO WANT TO SAY WE DON'T NEED
ANY TRANSMISSION. WE JUST NEED
MORE BATTERIES. THAT'S THEIR
ARGUMENT EVERY TIME AND THE
LEGISLATURE SEEMS TO GO ALONG
WITH THAT. BUT WE REALLY DO NEED
TRANSMISSION. WE NEED TO UPGRADE
TRANSMISSION IN CALIFORNIA,
WHERE WE HAVE EXISTING LINES
THAT ARE ALREADY THE EASEMENTS
ARE THERE. WE JUST NEED TO MAKE
THEM A LITTLE LARGER AND WE
CAN'T GET IT DONE. AT THE END OF
THE DAY. THE GOAL THAT YOU'RE
TRYING TO GET TO I DON'T. I'M
NOT SURE THAT THIS IS THE RIGHT
AVENUE THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A
REAL DISCUSSION ABOUT. HEY CAN
WHERE? WHERE DO WE NEED THE
POWER IN CALIFORNIA NUMBER ONE
MAP THE WHOLE STATE FIND OUT
WHERE WE'RE SHORT POWER AND THEN
BUILD THE TRANSMISSION LINES. WE
DON'T DO IT THAT WAY. WE DO IT
THE OPPOSITE WAY WE GO AND SAY
LET SOMEBODY ELSE TRY TO FIGURE
OUT HOW TO BUILD IT. IT'S THE
SAME THING WE DO WITH WATER
INFRASTRUCTURE. WE PAST BONDS,
AND WE PUT IT WHERE THE VOTES
ARE. SO I I'M GONNA LAY OUT THE
BILL I. I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE
TRYING TO DO. BUT I DON'T KNOW
IF THIS IS THE REAL AVENUE TO
GET THERE. WE REALLY NEED TO
HAVE A UH, CONVERSATION ABOUT
WHERE WE'RE SHORT POWER IN THE
STATE AND HOW WE CAN GET POWER
THERE AND UPGRADE THE LINES AND
THEN WE NEED TO DO SOME
EXECUTIVE ORDERS TO GET IT DONE
BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY,
EVERYBODY HAS A DOG IN THE
FIGHT, SO I'M JUST USING THIS
OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT THE
REAL PROBLEMS IN CALIFORNIA WITH
TRYING TO GET POWER ANYWHERE.
AND I'M FRUSTRATED THE SAME AS
YOU ARE. I KNOW IN YOUR DISTRICT
YOU HAVE A HUGE RESOURCE OUT
THERE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET
TO WHERE WE NEED IT. I HAVE THE
SAME PROBLEM IN MY AREA. I HAVE
LOTS OF LAND. LOTS OF WIND. WE
CAN'T GET THE POWER TO WHERE IT
NEEDS TO GO. SO I LAY OFF, BUT I
HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET TO THE
POINT WHERE WE ACTUALLY LOOK AT
THE STATE AS A WHOLE AND FIGURE
OUT WHERE WE REALLY NEED TO MAKE
THESE TRANSMISSION INVESTMENTS
AND DO IT SO THAT WE CAN LOOK,
BATTERIES AREN'T GONNA SOLVE OUR
PROBLEM. FOR THE AMOUNT OF POWER
THAT WE NEED. WE'RE NOT GONNA BE
ABLE TO DO MICRO GRIDS AND
HANDLE IT. IT'S NOT. IT'S NOT
GONNA HAPPEN. SO THOSE ARE JUST
SOME COMMENTS. I'LL BE LOOKING
AT YOUR BILL AND THE COMMITTEE.
THANK YOU FOR CONTINUING TO
ADVOCATE FOR THE PROBLEMS THAT
WE HAVE. BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT
SWITCHING IT FROM ONE AGENCY TO
ANOTHER IS ACTUALLY GONNA SOLVE
THE PROBLEM. THANK YOU ANY
FURTHER DISCRETION DEBATE ON
THIS ISSUE BY COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
ARE SENATOR PAD. WOULD YOU LIKE
TO CLOSE? THANK YOU, MR
CHAIRMAN. BRIEFLY I THINK JUST
TO BRING IT BACK. FUNDAMENTALLY
WE DO KNOW WHAT THE PICTURE LOOK
LIKE. LOOKS LIKE OVER THE NEXT
20 YEARS DUE RESPECT TO MY
ESTEEMED COLLEAGUE AND THAT'S
BEEN ARTICULATED IN THE 20 YEAR.
TRANSMISSION DEMAND REVIEW. AND
IT'S VERY CLEAR BOTH ABOUT
INTERCONNECTING TO GENERATIVE
SOURCES TO STORAGE AND DELIVERY
OF POWER TO CUSTOMERS AND
CONSUMERS. THE GRID IS AGING. IT
IS REDUCING A YEAR BY YEAR IN
ITS EFFICIENCIES AND CAPACITIES.
WE HAVE TO DO UPGRADES TO THE
EXISTING SYSTEM. WE HAVE TO
IMPROVE INTERCONNECTION. WE HAVE
TO BETTER CONNECT TWO STORAGE
AND WE HAVE TO CREATE NEW THE STATUS QUO, AND
SO THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY. TO
PROVIDE A NUMBER OF PROCESSES,
WHICH COULD RESULT IN TIME SAVED
TO REACH TO REACH THOSE GOALS.
AND THAT'S WHY I WOULD
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR I
VOTE. THANK YOU. WE ARE LACKING
A QUORUM AT THIS TIME, BUT WANT
TO ESTABLISH WILL SEQUENCE YOU
HAVE ONE. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK
YOU. NEXT UP, SENATOR ALLEN.
YOUR BROTHER. THEY'LL BE SENDING
S¼ MY OFFICE ON THIS
BILL. I UNDERSTAND THAT TURN,
UH, TOOK A PROPOSAL AND AMENDED
POSITION, BUT I, I CERTAINLY
HOPE THAT WITH THESE AMENDMENTS,
UH THERE ARE CONCERNS WILL BE
ADDRESSED. UM SO THIS HAS TO DO
WITH THE LOW INCOME OVERSIGHT
BOARD, AND WE KNOW UH, THIS IS A
BOARD THAT WAS CREATED BACK IN
IN 2002 WITH THE PURPOSE OF
SERVING, UH, AS A AS A VOICE FOR
LOW INCOME FOLKS AT THE AT THE
èC P Ó èC. UM THIS BILL SEEKS
TO INCREASE OPPORTUNITIES FOR
LOW INCOME CALIFORNIANS TO
ACCESS ESSENTIAL SUPPORT
PROGRAMS OFFERED BY OUR
REGULATED UTILITIES. UH, THERE
WAS A REPORT THAT CAME OUT A FEW
YEARS BACK FROM THE L A Ó THAT
SAID THAT, UH, ONLY 40% OF
ELIGIBLE CALIFORNIA FAMILIES ARE
ENROLLED IN LIFELINE, WHICH IS
THE STATE'S PROGRAM TO PROVIDE
DISCOUNTS TO LOW INCOME
HOUSEHOLDS FOR HOME PHONE AND
CELL PHONE SERVICES. THERE WAS A
REPORT LAST YEAR. AFFORDABILITY
UH, REPORT FROM THE PU èC THAT
INDICATES THAT CARE, ONE OF THE
STATE'S PROGRAMS THAT PROVIDES
ELECTRIC AND GAS BILL DISCOUNTS
REPORTS VERY HIGH ENROLLMENT
RATES. BUT UH, WE SEE REALLY
SIGNIFICANT. I UH, GEOGRAPHIC
VARIABILITY IN PLACES LIKE
PLASTER COUNTY, NEVADA COUNTY,
SIERRA COUNTY. UM UM, CENTRAL
AND SOUTHEAST L A AS WELL,
INCLUDING AREAS OF MY DISTRICT.
SOME OF THE, UH SOME OF THE
PARTICIPATION IS COULD BE AS LOW
AS 20 TO 40. SO UM, AS AMENDED
THIS BILL DOES, UH, THREE THINGS
NOW. I MEAN, WE'VE ORIGINALLY I
THINK HAD A BROADER VISION FOR
UH, TRYING TO PROVIDE ACCESS.
UH, SINCE WE HAVE ALL THESE
DIFFERENT PROGRAMS THAT PEOPLE
HAVE ACCESS TO, AND WE'VE GOT TO
FIGURE OUT WAYS TO, UH, TO MAKE
IT EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO BE ABLE
TO HAVE THEIR ELIGIBILITY TO GO
ACROSS THE BOARD. UM, BUT HERE'S
WHAT THE BILL DOES NOW, SO IT IT
REQUIRES PU èC TO ESTABLISH A
PROCESS BY WHICH A CONSUMER
ENROLLED IN A LOW INCOME UTILITY
PROGRAM IS NOTIFIED OF THEIR
POTENTIAL ELIGIBILITY FOR OTHER
UTILITY ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS. IT
REQUIRES THE PU èC TO WORK
WITH. THE LOW INCOME OVERSIGHT
BOARD TO DEVELOP AN OUTREACH
STRATEGY TO IMPROVE ENROLLMENT
OF ELIGIBLE HOUSEHOLDS ACROSS
ALL LOW INCOME UTILITY
ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS, AND IT ADDS
A REPRESENTATIVE OF A LOW INCOME
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDER TO
THE OVERSIGHT BOARD. UH, THESE
ACTIVE NOTIFICATION AND RORE
EFFORTS ARE ARE, I THINK A
POSITIVE STEP TOWARDS INCREASING
ENROLLMENT RATES ACROSS ALL OF
THE REGULATED UTILITIES. UH,
THIS BILL BUILDS UPON THE
FOUNDATION THAT WAS LAID DOWN BY
OUR OUR COLLEAGUE. UH, WHO? I, I
THINK IS ON HIS WAY. UH, BEN
WESO. UM, UH, YOU KNOW THERE S¼
B 1208. AND THAT'S HOW I GOT
INVOLVED WITH THIS I. I LEARNED
ABOUT THIS FROM HIM. UH, AND
CO-AUTHORED HIS BILL. THIS WAS A
BILL THAT INITIATED A REPORT TO
EXPLORE STRATEGIES FOR ENHANCING
ACCESS TO VITAL SERVICES FOR LOW
INCOME COMMUNITIES. UM I'M NOT
SURE HE'S HERE YET, BUT, UM OK.
UM ANYHOW, III. I CERTAINLY YOU
KNOW, APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S TIME
AND CONSIDERATION FOR THIS FOR
THIS BILL AND ASK FOR AN I VOTE
WITH THE AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU,
SENATOR. WEEL, YOUR LEAD WITNESS
. YES. THERE HE IS. THERE HE IS.
UH, COME ON UP AWAY. SO YOU'RE
ON. LIKE USUAL, YOU'RE LATE, BUT
WE'RE GONNA TAKE YOU FROM WE'RE
GONNA TAKE YOU FROM WELL, COME
ON HERE. YOU'RE AMONGST FAMILY.
THANK YOU, AND IT'S A PLEASURE
TO BE BACK HERE WITH MY FRIENDS,
BUT, UH I'M HERE. UH UH.
REPRESENTING MYSELF AS A PRIVATE
CITIZEN. UH, SIMPLY, UH,
ADVOCATING FOR A BILL THAT I
THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT. UH UH,
TWO YEARS AGO. UH, THROUGH
THROUGH THE HELP OF A LOT OF
YOU, I HELP PASS. UH UH. SENATE
BILL. UH, SHE IS WHAT SO SORRY
ABOUT THAT. SENATE BILL 1208.
AND THIS IS A BILL THAT REALLY
SOUGHT TO ELIMINATE SILOS AND
MAKE IT EASIER FOR LOW INCOME
RESIDENTS. UH, TO QUALIFY. FOR
DIFFERENT PROGRAMS. SO I HELP TO
STREAMLINE. UH, DIFFERENT. UH
UH. PROGRAMS THAT HELP TO
ELIMINATE, UH TO CREATE A SAFETY
GAP AMONG THE PE, UH, THE MOST,
UH LOW INCOME AND NEEDY
FAMILIES. UH, IN DIFFERENT, UH,
BILLS THAT HELP VETERANS AND
HELP LOW INCOME FAMILIES AND
THIS BILL IN PARTICULAR. UH S¼ B
1208 WAS INTENDED. TO HELP MAKE
IT EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO OBTAIN
EITHER A TELEPHONE. UH UH, LOW
IN LOW COST TELEPHONE. OR ENERGY
SERVICES OR WATER SERVICES. THE
IDEA IS THAT THEY CAN APPLY IN
ONE LOCATION AND, UH, ALL THE
PROGRAMS THAT ARE, UH, CREATED
BY THIS LEGISLATURE WOULD BE
BECOME AVAILABLE TO THEM AND
ACCESSIBLE TO THEM. INSTEAD OF
HAVING TO GO TO EITHER, UH,
UTILITY SERVICE OR WATER SERVICE
PROVIDER INSTEAD OF HAVING THEM
WAIT IN LINE IN DIFFERENT
AGENCIES THAT THEY COULD, UH,
QUALIFY FOR THESE PROGRAMS IN
ONE LOCATION. SO WHILE WE'RE
THESE SERVICES ARE FIGURED INTO
OUR RATES AND RATEPAYERS ARE
PAYING FOR THEM. THEY'RE NOT
GOING TO THE PEOPLE THAT NEED
THEM AND DESERVE THEM AND THIS
IS SOMETHING THAT THE STATE HAS
TO SOLVE, ESPECIALLY THAT ZERO.
MONEY IS SPENT PROMOTING THESE
PROGRAMS SO IF PEOPLE DON'T KNOW
THEY EXIST, WHEN WILL THEY EVER
GET ACCESS TO THESE PROGRAMS? SO
THIS BILL, AND I'M GLAD THAT MY
CO MY COLLEAGUE AND MY FRIEND,
UH, SENATOR ALLEN IS RUNNING
THIS BILL. I'M HOPING THAT, UH,
YOU KNOW, II. I SAW THE
AMENDMENTS, I. I THOUGHT, UH,
MAYBE WE COULD WORK WITH THIS
THIS LEGISLATURE TO MAKE MAKE
THIS PROCESS EASIER STREAM LIKE
IT MAKE IT MORE ACCESSIBLE. WE
HAVE LOTS OF WONDERFUL PROGRAMS
THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO PEOPLE IN
OUR COMMUNITY THAT THEY DON'T
KNOW THERE EXIST. HOW ARE WE
GONNA MAKE IT AVAILABLE TO THEM?
I. I PUT TOGETHER A AAA FAIR ONE
DAY TO INVITE PEOPLE TO LEARN
ABOUT ALL THE WONDERFUL PROGRAMS
. WE OFFER THEM THAT THEY'RE
ELIGIBLE FOR, AND A LOT OF
PEOPLE SAY, HOW COME YOU DON'T
TELL US ABOUT THIS? WHERE DO I
GET INFORMATION ABOUT THIS? AND
THE STATE NEEDS TO PROMOTE THIS
AND GET US TO UNDERSTAND THAT
THEY'RE AVAILABLE. AND
UNFORTUNATELY THE ANSWER IS WE
JUST DON'T HAVE A BUDGET FOR IT,
AND WE DON'T SO WHY NOT MAKE IT
EASIER IF THEY LEARN OF ONE
PROGRAM? WHY CAN'T THEY LEARN OF
ALL WHEN THEY APPLY FOR ONE
PROGRAM, SO THAT'S WHAT THIS
BILL INTENDS TO DO. AND JUST TO
BACKGROUND WHY ARE WE HERE? IF
S¼ B 208 REALLY WAS THE BILL
THAT DID THAT? WELL WE WENT
THROUGH THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS
AND THERE WERE ENORMOUS
AMENDMENTS THAT REALLY WATERED
THE BILL DOWN. SO THIS BILL
INTENDS TO UH, MAKE IT SO THAT
MORE PROGRAMS ARE UNDER ONE
APPLICATION PROCESS, AND I THINK
WE HAVE TO CONTINUE TO WORK ON
THAT. THERE IS NÓ DOUBT IN MY
MIND THAT THIS LEGISLATURE HAS A
COMMITMENT TO LOW INCOME
FAMILIES AND HELPING THEM BE
PART OF THIS ECONOMY AND OUR
SOCIETY AND HELP HELPING THEM.
TO BECOME A BIGGER PART OF THIS
ECONOMY AND THIS SOCIETY. I HAVE
NÓ DOUBT THE LEGISLATURE WANTS
TO DO THAT. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO
SEE THAT COMMITMENT BE
TRANSLATED INTO A BILL THAT
REALLY COVERS EVERYONE. IN A WAY
THAT IS MORE COMPREHENSIVE WHERE
THEY'RE NOT HAVING TO SPEND DAYS
THAT COULD BE SPENDING EITHER AT
A JOB OR WITH THEIR FAMILIES
WAITING IN A LINE APPLYING FOR
SERVICES. AND IN MANY CASES
WHERE THEY'RE NOT EVEN AWARE
THAT THEY GET A REDUCED PHONE.
THEY'RE NOT EVEN AWARE THAT THEY
APPLY FOR REDUCED UTILITIES AND
WATER PROGRAMS. IF THERE IF IT'S
THERE, UH, THEIRS. TO, UM DRAW
WE AND RATEPAYERS ALREADY PAYING
FOR IT. WHY AREN'T WE
IMPLEMENTING THOSE PROGRAMS? WHY
AREN'T WE GETTING THEM INTO THE
HOMES OF FAMILIES THAT HE NEED
THEM THE MOST. SO IT REALLY
ENCOURAGED THIS LEGISLATURE TO
HELP SUPPORT THIS BILL. WORK ON
THIS BILL, MAKE GIVE THIS BILL
SOME BIG, UH, TEETH. HELP THESE
FAMILIES SURVIVE. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. THANK YOU. AND NOW WE'RE
GOING TO ASK. WHEN DOES THIS
ADDITIONAL, UH ME TOOS TO COME
FORWARD? IF WE'RE IN SUPPORT OF
THIS BILL STATE, YOUR NAME AND
YOUR ORGANIZATION. ALL RIGHT,
SEE NONE. NOW, LET'S ASK FOR
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION. ALL
RIGHT. WE GOT A TWEENER. GOOD
MORNING, MISS GOOD MORNING, MR
CHAIR MEMBERS. IGNACIO HERNANDEZ
, ON BEHALF OF TURN. UH, WE
PROUDLY SUPPORTED 1208 A COUPLE
OF YEARS AGO WHEN SENATOR
RUSSELL WAS THE AUTHOR. UM WE
HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT SOME OF
THE LANGUAGE MOVING THE EXISTING
DATE. UM MY UNDERSTANDING ON THE
AMENDMENTS. I THINK I'VE SEEN A
DRAFT OF IT. I THINK THE ADDRESS
MOST OF OUR CONCERNS, SO LOOK
FORWARD TO LOOKING AT THAT. WE
DO WANT TO JUST HIGHLIGHT, UM
THE DEFINITION FOR A LOW INCOME
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDER. WE
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S DONE IN
SUCH A WAY WHERE IT'S LIFELINE,
AND IT'S AN ONGOING COMMITMENT
TO SERVING THOSE SO JUST LITTLE
TWEAKS LIKE THAT, BUT WE'LL KEEP
AN EYE ON IT. UM BUT BASED ON
THE AMENDMENTS AS WE'VE SEEN
THEM DRAFTED UP, I THINK WE'LL
BE OK WITH THE BILL. THANK YOU
ANY ADDITIONAL WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION AND SUPPORT ARE
TWEENER. AREN'T SEEING NÓ. LET'S
BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.
ANY COMMITTEE MEMBERS HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS AS IT RELATES TO THIS
MEASURE? NÓ UH UH, SOON. ALL
FIRST. I WANNA THANK YOU FOR
WORKING WITH THE COMMITTEE AND
HELPING ADDRESS THIS AND, UH,
SENATOR WEISEL FOR YOUR EFFORT,
AND, UH, MOVEMENT AND AS WE ALL
KNOW. WE WANT CONSTITUENTS AND
CONSUMERS TO KNOW ABOUT ALL
THESE PROGRAMS, BUT
UNFORTUNATELY ONE SIZE DOESN'T
FIT ALL THE DIFFERENT PROGRAMS
BE IT. WATER TELECOMMUNICATIONS,
ELECTRICITY HAVE DIFFERENT
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA. THAT'S WHY
WE SUGGESTED THE AMENDMENTS THAT
WE PUT FORWARD TO YOU KNOW, MAKE
IT A LITTLE EASIER, BECAUSE WE
DO WANT FOLKS TO BE AWARE OF
THIS. WE REALIZE TO TAKE RATE IS
FAR TOO LOW FOR WHAT IS BUDGETED
FOR THESE PROGRAMS, BUT, UM
AGAIN, I WANNA THANK YOU FOR
YOUR EFFORT IN MOVING FORWARD,
AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO KEEP OUR
MINDFUL EYE AND MAKING SURE THAT
WE MAKE THIS AS EASY AS POSSIBLE
FOR CONSUMERS TO TAKE ADVANTAGE
OF IT. THE NOTE. WOULD YOU LIKE
TO CLOSE? YEAH. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU TO YOU, MR CHAIR. THANK YOU
FOR, UH, FOR OUR COLLEAGUE AND
FRIEND, SENATOR WEEL FOR COMING
UP TO THIS. UH AND YOU ALL YOUR
WORK IN THIS SPACE AND THIS IS
ALL ABOUT TRYING TO MAKE IT
EASIER FOR FOLKS THAT ARE
ALREADY VERY BURDENED. UH SO
THAT I EXPECT YOU ASTRO AND I
VOTE. THANK YOU BEFORE WE SEEK I
VOTE WE CAN STOP SEOR.
SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
BRADFORD. BRADFORD HERE. DALLY
DALLY HERE, ASHBY. ASHBY HERE,
BECKER. CABALLERO CABALLERO
HERE, DODD. DURAZZO DURAZO HERE,
EGGMAN. EGGMAN HERE, GONZALEZ.
GROWTH. GROVE HERE, LEMON. MEN.
MEN HERE. NEWMAN NEWMAN HERE,
RUBIO. CTO. SKINNER SKINNER HERE
, STERN WILK WILK PRESENT. YOUR
THING, RIGHT? YEAH. FORM IS
ESTABLISHED NOW BRINGING IT BACK
TO THE COMMITTEE WHERE SHE CAN,
UH, MOTION ON S¼ B 1480. IT'S
DUE PASS AS A MINUTE TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, AND
I QUICKLY GO OVER THOSE
AMENDMENTS TO ELITE LANGUAGE
EXPANDING THE LOW INCOME. UH,
OVERSIGHT BOARD DUTIES, REMOVE
REQUIREMENTS FOR ADDING NEW
LEGISLATIVE AND DHS èC DHCS
APPOINTEES TO THE LOW INCOME. UH
OVERSIGHT BOARD DELETE
PROVISIONS REQUIRING PU èC TO
EXPAND THE CURRENT ENROLLMENT
SYSTEM TO WATER AND
TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSISTANCE
PROGRAMS AND INSTEAD REQUIRE THE
PU èC TO DO THE FOLLOWING ADOPT
A PROCESS BY WHICH A CONSUMER
ROLLED IN A PU èC ADMINISTERED
LOW INCOME UTILITY PROGRAM
RECEIVES A NOTIFICATION AT
ENROLLMENT. PROVIDING
INFORMATION ABOUT THE OTHER
UTILITY ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS FOR
WHICH THE CONSUMER MAY BE
PRESUMABLY ELIGIBLE AND
INFORMATION ABOUT HOW TO APPLY
FOR THOSE PROGRAMS AND WORK WITH
THE LOW INCOME OVERSIGHT BOARD
TO DEVELOP OUTREACH STRATEGY TO
IMPROVE ENROLLMENT AND ELIGIBLE
HOUSEHOLDS ACROSS LOW INCOME
UTILITY ASSISTANCE. DOES THAT
ACTUALLY ACCURATELY REFLECT THE
AMENDMENTS? THAT'S MY BEST
UNDERSTANDING. THANK YOU. ALL
RIGHT, SO WE'RE SEEKING A MOTION
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY SENATOR
CABALLERO. SECRETARY. PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. DO PASS AS
AMENDED, AND WE REFER TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
BRADFORD BRADFORD I DELI. DALLY,
NOT VOTING. ASHBY, ASHBY. I
BECKER CABALLERO. CABALLERO, I.
DODD. DURAZO DURAZO, I EGGMAN.
EGM E GONZALEZ GROVE. GROWTH,
NOT VOTING. LEMON MIN. NEWMAN
NEWMAN. I RUBIO, SARTO SKINNER
SKINNER I STERN WILK. NOT
VOTING. WELL, NOT HAS SEVEN
RIGHT NOW. THAT BILL HAS SEVEN
VOTES WILL LEAVE THE WORLD OPEN
TO LET ABSENT MEMBERS ADD ON
THANK YOU, SENATOR ALLEN, EXCEPT
FOR SENATOR SKINNER WITH S¼ B
1210. HE'S LIKE ONE OF MY LESS
CONTROVERSIAL VOTE. MHM. THANK
YOU MEMBERS. I.
ONE MOMENT, PLEASE.
SENATOR SKINNER. YOU MAY BEGIN.
THANK YOU. CHAIR APOLOGIES FOR
THAT BIT OF DELAY. UH, PLEASE
PRESENT S¼ B 1200. LET ME BEGIN
BY INDICATING THAT I AM
ACCEPTING THE COMMITTEE'S
AMENDMENT S¼ B 1210. OH, IT'S 12
. YOU'RE RIGHT. I SAID 1200
BECAUSE THAT'S THE ROOM. WE'RE
IN, UH, YOU KNOW, WE JUST CAME
OUT OF SPRING BREAK ANYWAY. UM
LET US RETURN TO THIS BILL HERE.
S¼ B 1210. SO I AM ACCEPTING THE
COMMITTEE'S AMENDMENTS. I. I
WANNA JUST POINT OUT REALLY
QUICKLY FOR THOSE WHO YOU READ
THE BILL BEFORE THE AMENDMENTS
THAT I APPRECIATE, YOU KNOW,
WE'RE AT A POINT NOW WHERE IF WE
PUT A CAP ON THESE VARIOUS FEES
THAT COULD PUT RATE PRESSURE AND
WE HAVE VERY SIGNIFICANT RATE
INCREASES THAT ALL OF US WOULD
LIKE, UH, NOT TO SEE AS WE ARE
MOVING TO ELECTRIFY. BUT IN THE
MEANTIME, WE ALSO HAVE A HOUSING
CRISIS AND THE FEES THAT ARE
CHARGED AND THIS IS NOT JUST
ELECTRIC UTILITIES. WE'RE
TALKING SEWER HOOK UPS, WATER
HOOKUPS. UH YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT,
UH, WHATEVER OUR UTILITY IS SO
IN SOME CASES, YOU MIGHT HAVE 3
TO 4 OF THEM. YOU MIGHT ONLY
HAVE TWO. BUT THESE CHARGES ARE
OFTEN PER UNIT OF HOUSING SO YOU
CAN HAVE A MULTI FAMILY BUILDING
AND EACH UNIT IN THAT MULTI
FAMILY IS GOING TO BE CHARGED.
THESE LARGE DOLLAR AMOUNTS PER
HOOK UP. NOW IF YOU TAKE SOME OF
THE WE'VE OBVIOUSLY DONE A GREAT
DEAL IN THE STATE TO MAKE IT
EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO BUILD A.
THOSE ARE THE SECONDARY UNITS
AND I WOULD POINT OUT THAT OUR
LATEST DATA SHOWS THAT AT LEAST
70% OF THE ADS THAT HAVE BEEN
BUILT TO DATE ARE FOR FAMILY
MEMBERS. AND YET THEY FACE, UH,
HOOK UP FEES OF UNBELIEVABLE
AMOUNTS. A NEW WATER METER, FOR
EXAMPLE, IN, UH WITHIN ONE OF
THE, UH, DISTRICTS OF MY ONE OF
THE, UM UTILITIES. WITHIN MY
SENATE-DISTRICT A NEW WATER
METER IS YOUR CHARGED $28,000
AND AS FOR A SINGLE UNIT, SO,
MEANWHILE, WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE
HOUSING MORE AFFORDABLE. WE ARE
TRYING TO INCREASE HOUSING AND
THE IT'S CRAZY. THIS IS CRAZY,
SO, BUT I DO APPRECIATE THAT.
THEY THERE WOULD BE RIGHT
PRESSURES AND SUCH. SO I AM
ACCEPTING THE AMENDMENT TO TAKE
AWAY THAT CAP. BUT I'M GLAD TO
BE SPEAKING ABOUT IT. BECAUSE AS
THIS IS MY LAST YEAR, I HOPE
MORE OF YOU WILL FOLLOW THESE
QUÊ THESE ISSUES AND THAT WE CAN
. SOME AT SOME POINT BRING SOME
RESOLUTION BECAUSE NOT ONLY DO
THEY HAVE HIGH HIGH FEE YOU CAN
WAIT MONTHS SO A HOUSING UNIT
CAN BE FINISHED READY FOR
OCCUPANCY, EXCEPT IT DOESN'T YET
HAVE ELECTRIC OR WATER. AND IT
DOESN'T HAVE ELECTRIC OR WATER
BECAUSE THE UTILITY HASN'T
HOOKED IT UP. EVEN WITH THE
CHARGING OF THOSE FEES. NOW,
VARIOUS BILLS HAVE TRIED TO
ADDRESS THAT. WE'VE NOT YET SEEN
GREAT RESULTS. WE'RE NOT YET
SEEING ANY, UH, YOU KNOW,
REDUCTION IN DELAY, BUT NOW LET
ME GET TO THE BILL IN FRONT OF
YOU WITH THE AMENDMENTS THAT I
HAVE ACCEPTED. WHAT THE BILL IN
FRONT OF YOU NOW DOES IS ALLOW
FOR TRANSPARENCY BECAUSE THE
OTHER FACTOR IS, LET'S SAY YOU
WANNA, UH, BUILD YOU CAN'T EVEN
GO ON TO THE WEBSITE OR CALL
THESE UTILITIES IN MOST CASES
AND GET WHAT THE COST IS. IT'S
NOT. THEY'RE NOT TRANSPARENT.
YOU DON'T KNOW UNTIL YOU'RE
YOU'VE BUILT IT AND YOU'VE
SUBMITTED YOUR APPLICATION. THEN
ALL OF A SUDDEN BOOM. THEY HIT
YOU WITH THE WITH THE CHARGE SO
YOU CAN'T EVEN NECESSARILY PLAN
FOR IT. SO WHAT THE BILL NOW
WOULD BE IS REQUIRE THEM TO POST
TO BE TRANSPARENT ABOUT THOSE
CHARGES. SO WE KNOW IN ADVANCE.
AND GIVES, OF COURSE, THE
APPLICANT A BETTER UNDERSTANDING
, UH OF THE BASIS FOR THEIR
UTILITY CONNECTION AND HOOK UP
FEES AND ALSO LET YOU KNOW WHAT
THEY ARE. UM AND THEN AT, UH UH,
WITH THE COMMITTEE'S AGREEMENT,
WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT WHETHER
THERE'S SOME POINT IN AS THE
BILL MOVES IF IT DOES, WHETHER
THERE'S THE ABILITY TO PUT ON
THE ABILITY TO PAY OVER, SAY, A
YEAR PERIOD VERSUS THE, UH,
UPFRONT UH, YOU KNOW, INSTANT
PAYMENT FOR THAT LARGE FEE, SO
WE'RE STILL LOOKING AT A WAY TO
DO THAT. THAT COULD BE
REASONABLE AND NOT PUT A BURDEN
ON THE UTILITIES AND SUCH SO
WITH THAT I WOULD LIKE COREY
SMITH FROM THE HOUSING ACTION
COALITION TO, UH TO IS MY MAIN
WITNESS TO PRESENT ARE YOU HAVE
TWO MINUTES TO MAKE YOUR
PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. CHAIR
BRADFORD. THANK YOU, SENATOR
SKINNER COMMITTEE COREY SMITH ON
BEHALF OF THE HOUSING ACTION
COALITION. I FIRST WANT TO
APPRECIATE AND RECOGNIZE SENATOR
SKINNER'S BROADER COMMENTS, AND
THE HACK IS CERTAINLY DEDICATED
TO THIS WORK BEYOND 2024. WE ARE
A HOME BUILDING INDUSTRY FUNDED
NONPROFIT THAT ADVOCATES FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF MORE HOUSING AT
ALL INCOME LEVELS ACROSS THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND PROUD
SPONSOR OF SENATE BILL 1210,
BECAUSE WE HAVE CONSISTENTLY
HEARD ABOUT THE CHALLENGES THAT
UTILITY COMPANIES PRESENT IN THE
HOME BUILDING PROCESS. AND WHILE
1210 WILL NOT BE A PANACEA TO
THESE ISSUES, FEW THINGS MAKE IT
HARDER AND MORE EXPENSIVE TO
BUILD HOUSING THAN INTRODUCING
UNFORESEEN COSTS AND
UNPREDICTABILITY. AND THAT'S WHY
1210 IS A GOOD GOVERNMENT
MEASURE THAT WILL SOLVE A
PROBLEM THAT BUILDERS FACE THE
TRANSPARENCY AND AT THE
BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS,
ALLOWING HOME BUILDERS TO HAVE
AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THOSE
COSTS WILL BE REDUCES THE
OVERALL RISK ASSOCIATED WITH THE
DEVELOPMENT, UH AND CREATES MORE
EFFICIENCY. AS HOMES GET CREATED
NOT ONLY MULTIFAMILY BUT A Dð U
AS WELL AND IT'S AN ENVIRONMENT
RIGHT NOW WHERE IT IS
FINANCIALLY INFEASIBLE TO BUILD
HOUSING, AND WE NEED TO BE DOING
EVERYTHING WE CAN TO MAKE IT
EASIER. AGAIN THIS BILL WILL NOT
SOLVE ALL OF OUR PROBLEMS. BUT
THIS IS ABSOLUTELY A STEP IN THE
RIGHT DIRECTION. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU NOW ADDITIONAL
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT, STATING
YOUR NAME AND YOUR ORGANIZATION.
PLEASE FORM A SINGLE LINE. GOOD
MORNING CHAIR AND MEMBERS
REBECCA MARCUS ON BEHALF OF
LEADING CALIFORNIA IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. MORNING ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIA. YIMBY AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. SEAMUS GARITY WITH
LIGHTHOUSE PUBLIC AFFAIRS ON
BEHALF OF BUILD CASA AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. HØI. I'M MEG
SNYDER HERE ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA BUILDING INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION. UM, NÓ POSITION
TODAY, HOWEVER WE WE'VE RAISED
SOME CONCERNS WITH THE AUTHOR'S
OFFICE AND WE HOPE TO ADDRESS
THOSE MOVING FORWARD. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU ANY ADDITIONAL
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? SEE NOW
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION. ARE
THEIR LEAD WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR
WITH S¼, Dð, G AND E. WE DO HAVE
AN OPPOSED POSITION ON THE BILL.
BUT BASED ON THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS AND THE ACCEPTANCE OF
THOSE AMENDMENTS TODAY WE SHOULD
BE ABLE TO REMOVE OUR OPPOSITION
AND MOVE TO NEUTRAL. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU APPRECIATE THAT. GOOD
MORNING. UH ANDREW COZAR WAS
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATIONS
WITH THE AUTHOR AND THE OFFICE
AND THE CONSIDERATION OF THE
AMENDMENTS. WE'LL LOOK AT THEM
IN PRINT AND TAKE A TAKE THOSE
UNDER CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. MORNING MR CHAIR
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. I'M
CATHY VIEL WITH EAST BAY
MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT. UM
WE ARE A TWEENER. WE DO NOT HAVE
A POSITION SENT A LETTER OF
CONCERN. UM, WE APPRECIATE, UH,
THE AMENDMENTS TO THE BILL. THEY
DID ADDRESS OUR CONCERNS AND WE
ARE IN SUPPORT OF GREATER
TRANSPARENCY. WE DO PROVIDE THAT
INFORMATION ON OUR WEBSITE. AND
WE WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE TO
WORK WITH YOUR OFFICE AND THANK
YOU AND YOUR STAFF FOR THE
DISCUSSIONS WE'VE HAD SO FAR.
THANK YOU NEXT WITNESS. CHRIS
ANDERSON ON BEHALF OF THE
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA WATER
AGENCIES. UM, WE SUBMITTED A
COALITION LETTER IN OPPOSITION
TO THE BILL REALLY APPRECIATE
THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS AND THE
AUTHOR'S WILLINGNESS TO TAKE
THOSE CERTAINLY A POSITIVE
DIRECTION. UM WE'LL REVIEW THE
TRANSPARENCY LANGUAGE. IT'S
TRANSPARENCY IS CERTAINLY
CERTAINLY NOT SOMETHING WE'RE
OPPOSED TO, AND CONNECTION.
CAPACITY FEES ARE SUBJECT TO
EXTENSIVE TRANSPARENCY. MEASURES
UM, SO INTERESTED TO SEE WHAT
THE, UH, COMMITTEE OR THE FOR
THEIR AMENDMENTS LOOK LIKE,
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, BRANDON
. EAC PACIFIC GAS LIFE, UH, LINE
OF MY COMMENTS WITH EVERYTHING
THAT'S ALREADY BEEN SAID THANK
YOU. MORNING, JESSICA GAGER WITH
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
SANITATION AGENCIES. I'D LIKE TO
JUST ALIGN MY COMMENTS WITH
THOSE FROM AQUA AND WE LOOK
FORWARD TO SEEING THE AMENDMENTS
AND, UH, THE BILL MOVING
FORWARD. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING
, SPENCER SACKS WITH THE INLAND
EMPIRE UTILITIES AGENCY WITH,
UH, ALIGNING OUR COMMENTS WITH
THE PREVIOUS WITH AN OPPOSED
LESS AMENDED. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING CHAIR AND MEMBERS
ANTHONY TANNEHILL WITH THE
CALIFORNIA SPECIAL DISTRICTS
ASSOCIATION LIKE TO ALIGN MY
COMMENTS, ALSO WITH AQUA,
LOOKING FORWARD TO TAKE ANOTHER
LOOK AT THE AMENDMENTS. GOOD
MORNING CHAIR AND MEMBERS DEREK
DOLPHY, ON BEHALF OF THE, UH,
CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL UTILITIES
ASSOCIATION WOULD LIKE TO ALIGN
OUR COMMENTS WITH AQUA AND CASA
AND THE SPECIAL DISTRICTS
ASSOCIATION. THANK YOU TO THE
AUTHOR AND THE, UH, COMMITTEE
STAFF FOR WORKING WITH US. THANK
YOU. IN ADDITION, WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION HERE IN CæA NOW WE'RE
GOING TO BRING IT BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE. ANY QUESTIONS OR
CONCERNS BY COMMITTEE MEMBERS,
SENATOR GIRL THANK YOU, MR CHAIR
. I APPRECIATE THAT I. I WANT TO
THANK THE AUTHOR FOR TAKING THE
AMENDMENTS BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL
BILL, UM AND I'M NOT TRYING TO
BE SARCASTIC OR ANYTHING, BUT I
JUST LAUGHED WHEN I READ IT. AND
THE ONLY REASON I DID IT'S LIKE
MY GOSH, I DON'T THINK, UM MISS
SKINNER HAS EVER HAD TO BUILD
SOMETHING EVER BEFORE. UH
BECAUSE I GET I GET A COMMENTS
FROM MY BUILDERS. WE'RE SUPPOSED
TO HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND I
HAVE A HOUSING Tð COMPLETELY
BUILT. WAITING EIGHT MONTHS FOR
CONNECTIVITY TO UTILITIES.
THAT'S NOT THE UTILITY'S FAULT.
IT'S THE POLICIES THAT COME OUT
OF THIS BUILDING THAT CREATE A,
UM A, UH A DISCONNECT. I GUESS
YOU WOULD SAY NÓ PUN INTENDED,
BUT YOU KNOW THEY'RE TRYING TO
DO UNDERGROUND AND THEY'RE
TRYING TO ELECTRIFY EVERYTHING
AND THEY'RE TRYING TO DO YOU
KNOW 50 DIFFERENT THINGS THAT
POLICIES ARE CREATED OUT OF THIS
BUILDING, SO THERE'S NOT A LOT
OF ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO, UM, TO
CONNECT INDIVIDUALS ON HOUSING.
AND THEN YOU HAVE HOSPITALS AND
THINGS LIKE THAT. THAT TAKE
PRIORITY. AND YOU HAVE, UM,
BECAUSE WE HAVE TO HAVE
HOSPITALS THAT ARE ELECTRIFIED.
UM SO WE'RE TRYING TO EMERGENCY
PASS THROUGH AN IMMEDIATE
ELECTRIFICATION OF THE UTILITIES
AND IN UNDERGROUND. IF YOU LOOK
AT IT FROM A BUSINESS
PERSPECTIVE, AND I'M JUST GONNA
TALK ABOUT PG AND E FOR A
SECOND, AND I AM IN NÓ WAY
DEFENDING PG AND E. THEY HAVE A
LOT OF WORK THAT THEY HAVE TO
DO. BUT IF YOU LOOK AT
EVERYTHING THAT THEY HAVE TO DO
FOR UNDERGROUND, SO YOU TAKE
YOUR STAFF AND YOU'RE DOING
UNDERGROUND AND YET, SO THIS IS
NOT NEGLECTED. BUT THIS IS TAKES
SECOND PRIORITY OVER HERE WHEN
YOU LOOK AT THE WATER COST, UM
FOR THE CONNECTIVITY FOR AN I
HAD AN INDIVIDUAL TRY TO BUILD A
MOTHER IN LAWS, QUARTERS OR A
FACILITY RIGHT BEHIND THEIR
HOUSE TO BRING THEIR ELDERLY
PARENTS IN. AND IT TOOK ALMOST
TWO YEARS TO GET CONNECTIVITY
AFTER PERMITS WERE ALREADY
ISSUED. BUT EVEN BEFORE THEY
EVEN STARTED, IT WAS LIKE
$12,000 BEFORE THEY EVEN LAID
THE FOUNDATION BECAUSE OF ALL
THE FEES AND PERMITS AND
EVERYTHING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS
NOT AFFORDABLE IN THIS STATE
BECAUSE OF WHAT WE REQUIRE IN
THIS LEGISLATURE THAT WE PASS
DOWN INTO THE BUILDING
CONSTRUCTION PIECE OF IT AND THE
UTILITIES PIECE OF IT, SO I
APPRECIATE THE TRANSPARENCY. I
THINK EVERYBODY SHOULD BE
TRANSPARENT. UM, I DON'T THINK
IT I DON'T WANNA SAY IT DOESN'T
HELP. I MEAN, I THINK WHEN THEY
GO TO BUILD A LIKE A OR A MOTHER
IN LAWS, QUARTERS OR SOMETHING
IN THEIR BACKYARD, OR EVEN
BUILDERS THAT HAVE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING OUT THERE, THEY'LL LOOK
AND GO. OH IT'S $28,000 FOR A
WATER HOOKUP, AND THEY'LL KNOW
AND IT'LL BE TRANSPARENT AND
IT'LL BE AVAILABLE ON A WEBSITE.
BUT IT DOESN'T SOLVE THE PROBLEM
. AND SO I THANK YOU FOR TAKING
THE MINUTES AND NOT PUTTING ONE
MORE THING ON THE UTILITIES,
WHICH I THINK WILL JUST THE I Ó
U S¼. IT'LL JUST RAISE THE COST
OF UTILITIES, AND WE'LL PASS A
PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT COMES
INTO OFFSET THAT WITH TAXPAYER
DOLLARS TO REDUCE THAT COST, BUT
WE'RE NOT FIXING THE PROBLEM. IF
THAT MAKES SENSE, SO I THANK YOU
FOR TAKING THE AMENDMENTS AND
APPRECIATE YOU WORKING WITH THE
OPPOSITION. I'M CHAIR. MAY I
RESPOND YOU, MADAM CHAIR YOU MAY
THANK YOU, UM I APPRECIATE THE
PERSPECTIVE, BUT LET'S PARSE
THIS DOWN A LITTLE. THIS AFFECTS
. UM THE BILL WAS DESIGNED TO
AFFECT ANY AND ALL UTILITY
HICCUPS. NOT JUST ELECTRICAL. UM
AND IF WE TAKE IF WE JUST TAKE
THAT ONE EXAMPLE OUR I Ó ARE
THE ONLY BUSINESS THAT I'M AWARE
OF IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THAT THE LEGISLATURE GUARANTEES
A RETURN ON INVESTMENT. SO
WE'RE, UH YEAH. I WOULD JUST
LEAVE THAT ALONE THERE. YOU KNOW
WHO ELSE IS EVERYBODY ELSE IN
BUSINESS IS TAKING BIG RISKS.
SECONDARILY WILDFIRE IS REAL AND
WE HAVE DONE MUCH TO AND WE NEED
TO DO MORE TO HELP. UM LIMIT IT,
BUT WE HAVE NOT MANDATED THE
UNDERGROUND. AND THERE ARE UH,
YOU KNOW, THERE'S LOTS OF
EXPERTS WHO WOULD GIVE VARIOUS
OPINIONS AS TO WHETHER THAT IS
THE MOST COST EFFECTIVE WAY TO
DEAL BUT OUR AT LEAST IN THE
CASE OF PG AND E, THAT IS THE
ONE OF THE APPROACHES THEY'VE
CHOSEN TO TAKE, WHICH IS QUITE
AN EXPENSIVE APPROACH. UM THAT
WAS NOT MANDATED BY THE
LEGISLATURE. UM ADDITIONALLY,
UH, SOME OF THESE OTHER
UTILITIES THAT ARE AFFECTED BY
THIS, UM THEY? THEY ARE VERY FEW
MANDATES THAT THE LEGISLATURE
HAS PUT ON THEM, ESPECIALLY IN
RECENT TIMES. AND YET, THESE
FEES AND COSTS STILL EXIST. AND
QUITE SIGNIFICANTLY, AND, UH UM,
ANYWAY, SO I JUST WANTED TO PUT
SOME OF THOSE THINGS IN THE
RECORD BEFORE WE CONTINUED ON
THIS. I SURE DOUBT IT. I LIKE TO
JUST LEND A LITTLE BIT TO THIS
CONVERSATION, BECAUSE I THINK IT
IS. REAL I THINK I THINK YOU'RE
WHAT YOU BRING FORWARD IS
SOMETHING THAT PROBABLY 99% OF
THE PUBLIC DOESN'T UNDERSTAND
WHY HOUSING IS SO HIGH IN
CALIFORNIA. AS SOMEBODY WHO CAME
OUT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT. FOR 16
YEARS AND ACTUALLY DOING, YOU
KNOW. LAND USE DECISIONS AT THE
LOCAL LEVEL. AND TRYING TO
FIGURE OUT HOW TO DRIVE THAT
RATE DOWN. YOU HAVE YOU HAVE,
UM, SCHOOL IMPACT FEES. YOU HAVE
ARE IN CLIMATE GOALS, WHICH
REQUIRE ALL THESE LITTLE UTILITY
DISTRICTS AND LARGE UTILITY
DISTRICTS TO EXCHANGE THEIR
WHOLE FLEET. OF VEHICLES AND
EQUIPMENT BECAUSE THEY NEED TO
UPGRADE FOR LESS EMISSION
VEHICLES, WHICH IS A COST.
THERE'S BARGAINING UNITS.
THERE'S ALL KINDS OF COSTS THAT
GO INTO THE PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY
PUT THESE TO DO THESE PUBLIC
PROJECTS FOR US, AND THAT DRIVES
UP THE RATE AND A LOT OF THOSE
LAWS HAVE BEEN PASSED BY THIS
LEGISLATURE. AND IT'S A LITTLE
HERE AND A LITTLE THERE AND
PRETTY SOON IT'S $28,000 TO GET
A HOOKUP. AND IF YOU'RE BUILDING
100 UNITS IN A, UH YOU KNOW,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. IT'S
STILL 100 UNITS THAT HAVE TO
HAVE WATER PUT TO EACH ONE OF
THOSE UNITS AND EACH ONE OF THEM
HAS A TOILET AND EACH ONE OF
THEM HAS A LIGHT SWITCH IN
THERE. AND IT COST AND SO I
WOULD IMPLORE MOST OF THESE
LEGISLATORS TO GO LOOK AND FIND
OUT WHY THE COSTS ARE THERE IF
YOU GO AND DIG INTO YOUR LOCAL,
UM UTILITY DISTRICT, WHETHER
IT'S ELECTRICITY, WHETHER IT'S
WATER, WHETHER IT'S SEWER, UM
THERE'S A REASON FOR ALL THESE
COSTS. THEY'RE NOT REALLY
GOUGING YOU. THEY'RE THEY HAVE A
REASON THAT THEY HAVE TO PAY
THEIR EMPLOYEES. THEY HAVE A
PENSION FUND. THEY HAVE ALL
THOSE THINGS THAT IS REAL IN
CALIFORNIA, AND WE MANDATE OUT
OF THIS LEGISLATURE HOW THEY'RE
GONNA RUN THEIR BUSINESS. LIKE I
STATED EARLIER, WHETHER IT'S
ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS BUILDING
GREEN. ALL THOSE THINGS COST
MONEY, AND THAT'S WHY CALIFORNIA
QUITE FRANKLY, IS NOT
COMPETITIVE BECAUSE OTHER STATES
DON'T REQUIRE THOSE REALLY HIGH
BARS TO MEET THE STANDARD THAT
WE WANT EVERYBODY TO LIVE OUT IN
CALIFORNIA, AND THAT'S THE
DIFFERENCE. SO I I'M I'M I'M
GONNA SEE THIS BILL AGAIN, AND
I'M INTERESTED THAT WE JUST GOT
THE AMENDMENTS LATE. I WANT TO
LOOK AT THE MINUTES I'M GONNA
LAY OFF THE BILL. UM BUT I WANNA
JUST STATE THE FACTS. THE FACTS
ARE CALIFORNIA IS VERY EXPENSIVE
TO LIVE IN. IT'S BECAUSE OF THE
POLICIES THAT COME OUT OF THIS
LEGISLATURE AND WE LET THE WE
WANT THE PERFECT TO GET AWAY IN
WAY. THE GOOD FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE
ALLOW THESE UTILITY DISTRICTS TO
LET ATTRITION WITH THEIR
VEHICLES ROTATE OUT THEY CAN GET
THE LIFE OF THE OF THE ENGINE
THAT WAS IN THE BACKHOE THAT
DIGS THE DITCH TO DIGS UP THE
HIGHWAY. UM WE WOULD DRIVE THE
COST DOWN, BUT NÓ. WE HAVE TO
MANDATE THEM THAT THEY HAVE TO
REPLACE ALL THOSE PIECES OF
EQUIPMENT AND THEY ARE HUNDREDS
OF THOUSANDS APIECE, AND IN SOME
CASES, THERE ARE MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS AND THE RATEPAYER HAS TO
PAY THAT BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO
RECOUP THOSE COSTS. SO I JUST
WANNA GO ON RECORD FOR THAT.
THERE'S A LOT OF REASONS WHY
THAT COST IS HIGH, AND THEY'RE
ALL LEGIT. IF YOU TRACE THEM
DOWN, MOST OF THEM ARE BECAUSE
WE PASSED SOME LAW THAT REQUIRES
THEM TO DO IT SO THAT THAT IS AN
AREA WE COULD REALLY DO. SOME
GOOD IN CALIFORNIA IS IF WE
ACTUALLY ANALYZED OUR POLICIES
ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND SAID HEY,
LET'S LET SOME TIME TO GET THERE
AND ALLOW IT TO PHASE IN WHERE
WE DON'T HAVE TO JUST DROP DEAD
DATES. WE PICK DATES AND THEY
HAVE TO RESPOND TO THEM, AND IT
COST THE HOUSING TO GO UP
ELECTRICITY TO GO UP AND YOU'RE
RIGHT. THE IOS DO GET TO MAKE A
PROFIT AND I. I CHALLENGED THEM
ON WHY WE'RE UNDERGROUND IN SOME
AREAS WHERE WE DON'T NEED TO
UNDERGROUND AND WHERE WE COULD
INSULATE WIRES AND IT'S DRIVES
THE COST DOWN BECAUSE AT THE END
OF THE DAY, WE GOTTA DRIVE THE
COST DOWN. IF WE'RE GONNA ALLOW
CALIFORNIANS TO BUILD AND GROW,
AND THERE ARE SOME GROUPS OUT
THERE THAT THE WAY TO STOP
GROWTH IS JUST MAKE IT TOO
EXPENSIVE AND THEY'VE BEEN VERY
GOOD AT IT. AND THOSE ARE MY
FRIENDS IN THE ENVIRONMENT THAT
DON'T REALLY CARE ABOUT THE
ENVIRONMENT. THEY JUST CARE
ABOUT STOPPING GROWTH. SO I
WANTED TO GO ON RECORD TO SAY
THAT I'LL BE LOOKING AT THE
BILL. I APPRECIATE THIS
CONVERSATION BECAUSE I THINK THE
PUBLIC NEEDS TO KNOW WHAT'S
REALLY GOING ON. BECAUSE WHEN
YOU DO GO PULL THAT PERMIT, AND
IT'S $28,000 JUST FOR THAT.
THAT'S NOT COUNTING THE SCHOOL
FEES. YOU GOTTA PAY AND ALL THE
OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE TO GO ON
TOP OF IT. AND PRETTY SOON. IT'S
$300 A SQUARE FOOT BEFORE YOU
EVEN PUT A NAIL IN THE
FOUNDATION TO BUILD THE PLACE.
SO GREAT CONVERSATION. I LOOK
FORWARD TO SEEING IT IN
GOVERNMENT. THANK YOU. AND FOR
YOUR COMMENT, SENATOR STERN. UM,
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. I
APPRECIATE YOU, YOU DIVING INTO
THIS ISSUE, SENATOR, UM WE STILL
HAVEN'T REALLY LANDED THIS I
MEAN, THE QUEUE IS STILL THERE.
HOUSING IS STILL STALLED.
THERE'S STILL NÓ ANSWER. REALLY?
I LIKE THE 1. OF THE OF THE
VALUE. CONCEPT. I THINK THAT'S
UM JUST LIKE A BENCHMARKING
ABILITY THAT WAS IN THE ORIGINAL
BILL THAT I THINK IS GONNA BE
USEFUL FOR UM, BETWEEN UTILITIES
TO SEE WHO'S DOING BETTER THAN
OTHERS. AND I. I WAS WONDERING
SORT OF IN THE I. I DON'T I
DON'T I DON'T HAVE THE AMENDS IN
FRONT OF ME SO IN WHATEVER THIS
TRANSPARENCY, COMPROMISE THAT'S
BEING MADE. ARE WE GOING TO BE
ABLE TO KIND OF GO APPLES TO
APPLES BETWEEN UTILITIES LIKE IS
THE IDEA THAT YOU'LL KNOW OK, IF
IT'S NOT 1% AND WE'RE WE'RE
WE'RE CAPPING THAT. WHAT WE AT
LEAST KNOW WHAT PERCENT IT IT'LL
? IT'LL BE BASED ON THE AMENDS.
I OR JUST YEAH, SOMEONE COULD
EXPLAIN THEM A LITTLE MORE. IT'S
PRIMARILY THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS. SO WHAT I ACCEPTED
WAS REMOVING THE CAP, THE
AMORTIZATION PART AND THE
PRIORITIZATION OF HOUSING. THE
TRANSPARENCY PART IS PRIMARILY
JUST NOTICE OF WHAT THE
ANTICIPATED FEE IS. AND UH, YOU
KNOW, COMPARE COMPARISON SO YOU
CAN DETERMINE FAIRNESS. SO UH,
BUT BEYOND THAT, THERE'S NOT
REALLY THAT TYPE. I MEAN,
THERE'S A BENCHMARKING, ONLY
THAT YOU CAN COMPARE BUT NOT A
REQUIREMENT OF THAT, UH, PERCENT
TYPE. BENCHMARKING YEAH, AND I
JUST II. I WONDER WHAT THE
REPORT BACK FUNCTION OR THE
PUBLIC. MAYBE IT'S A PUBLIC
PUBLICATION OF THIS DATA. I'M
I'M TRYING. I'M STRUGGLING WITH
IF WE'RE USING TRANSPARENCY AS
THE TOOL AND NOT COMING IN AS A
CAP. IS THERE SOMETHING WITH
SOME TEETH TO IT SO WE CAN
REALLY KNOW TO SEND HER DOLLY'S
POINT, RIGHT? LIKE IF THE IF
THERE IS REALLY THAT VALUE THERE
AND THAT BIG OLD CLAY PIPE THAT
HOOKS UP FROM THE PERSON'S HOUSE
DOES NEED TO BE UPGRADED RIGHT?
THAT WATER COSTS A LOT TO GET TO
THAT NEW APARTMENT. WE GET THAT,
BUT LIKE, SORT OF HOW TO HOW TO
KNOW IF WE'RE GONNA BE
SQUEEZING, ESPECIALLY THIS IS
JUST THE BROADER COMMENT,
ESPECIALLY IF WE'RE GONNA BE
SQUEEZING ON DISTRIBUTED
GENERATION THIS YEAR AND PUSHING
BACK ME DURING AND PUSHING BACK
ON, YOU KNOW, SPEEDING UP NEW
TRANSMISSION OR PUSHING BACK ON
ALL THESE OTHER THINGS THAT WE
SAY ARE GONNA CAUSE RATE
PRESSURE. THIS HAS TO BE PART OF
THAT GIVE AND TAKE, TOO. AND
THIS IS SUCH A PRIORITY THAT I
JUST IF WE SOLVE FOR THAT BIGGER
PUZZLE, EVEN WITH THE FIXED
CHARGE IF EVERYONE HAS TO EAT
THAT, THEN, LIKE OK, ISN'T THAT
ROUNDING IT OUT ENOUGH TO LEAVE
ROOM FOR US TO HIT IN THE FUTURE
? A 1% KIND OF BENCHMARK. SO THE
THERE'S I'D SAY TWO MAIN
BENEFITS OF TRANSPARENCY IS ONE
THAT WHOEVER IS INVOLVED IN THE
BUILDING PROCESS WHEN KNOW IN
ADVANCE SO THEY CAN THEY CAN,
UH, YOU KNOW MORE, UH, MORE
ACCURATELY PLANNED FOR THE COSTS
OF ANY CONSTRUCTION, KNOWING
THAT ANY COST OF CONSTRUCTION
VARY OVER TIME ANYWAY. BUT STILL
THERE IS THAT BENEFIT AND THEN
SECONDARY BENEFIT IS BY BY ALL
THE UTILITIES AFFECTED WHICH, OF
COURSE, IS MANY. IT'S GAS. IT'S
ELECTRIC. IT'S WATER. IT'S
SEWER. ANY ANY TYPE? UM JUST
TRANSPARENCY ALONE CAN SOMETIMES
CAUSE AN AN Tð Dð TO THINK ABOUT
THEIR RATE AND POTENTIALLY
MODIFY IT BECAUSE YOU KNOW NOW
THAT IT'S PUBLIC, SO THEY'RE
JUST JUST THAT TYPE OF BENEFIT.
UM BUT IT DOESN'T GUARANTEE THAT
THE, UM THE COST PER THE HOOK UP
WOULD CHANGE. THANK YOU. SENATOR
WILL THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. UH,
FIRST OF ALL, I. I AGREE WITH
THE COMMENTS MADE BY SOME SOME
OF MY COLLEAGUES ABOUT THE
POLICIES THAT THAT COME OUT OF
COMING OUT OF THIS BUILDING, AND
I REMEMBER I WAS A PRIVATE
CITIZEN, SO IT'S BEEN QUITE A
WHILE AGO, I WENT TO A
GROUNDBREAKING OF DEVELOPMENT IN
MY HOMETOWN AND TALKING TO THE
DEVELOPER, AND IT WAS $75,000
MORE IN FEES THERE THAN IN
BAKERSFIELD. AND SO PRICES
PEOPLE, YOU KNOW PEOPLE OUT OF
THE MARKET, BUT THE FACT OF THE
MATTER IS THERE ARE THERE ARE
ARE ISSUES IN THIS CASE EXAMPLE
AGAIN. THIS IS ANECDOTAL, SO I
DON'T KNOW HOW IT IF IT COMES
OUT TO SCALE, BUT I MET WITH THE
DENTIST WHO JUST MOVED HER ONE
PERSON PRACTICE UP. TO MY CITY,
AND SHE WENT AND DID ALL THE DID
EVERYTHING SHE NEEDED TO DO. HER
FACILITY CAPACITY FEE WAS ALMOST
$30,000 FOR A ONE PERSON SHOP,
AND SHE WAS SHOCKED BY THAT. AND
THE GUY SAID, WELL, THAT'S
THAT'S OUR REGULATION. THEN SHE
WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT THE
REGULATION. IT HADN'T BEEN
UPDATED SINCE 1982 AND I DON'T
KNOW ABOUT YOU. I GO TO THE
DENTIST TWICE A YEAR. I LOVE
GOING TO THE DENTIST. I AM A
FREAK. BUT, UM BACK. IT USED TO
BE WHERE THEY RAN THE WATER ALL
THE TIME, RIGHT ALL DAY LONG
THAT YOU USE NÓ WATER NOW, SO IT
SHOULD NEVER EVER BEEN. YOU KNOW
THAT KIND OF MONEY, BUT THERE
WAS NÓ INCENTIVE FOR THEM TO DO
IT. AND THEY ALREADY THEY STUNG
HER. UH AND SO I ACTUALLY GOT
THAT WATER AGENCY REFORMED. UM
AND THEY GOT IN THOSE
REGULATIONS ARE CHANGED, BUT THE
OTHER THING WE DID IS WE
ACTUALLY PUT IN. I THINK IT WAS
THE FIRST IN THE NATION, A
RATEPAYER ADVOCATE FOR THAT NEW
WATER AGENCY TO PROTECT
CONSUMERS. SO MY ONLY CONCERN
ABOUT THIS IS THAT THE BUILDING
INDUSTRY WHO'S RESPONSIBILITY IS
TO BUILD HOUSING IS NEUTRAL. I'M
GONNA VOTE FOR IT TODAY BECAUSE
I HAVE FAITH IN YOU. AND THEN
I'LL RESERVE MY RIDE AS WE AS WE
MOVE FORWARD, BUT WE NEED TO
START TACKLING THIS ISSUE. SO OF
COURSE YOU NEVER WE NEVER DUCK A
FIGHT. YEAH SO ANYWAY WITH THAT
I AM A YES TODAY. THANK YOU ANY
ADDITIONAL COMMENT YOUR
QUESTIONS BY COMMITTEE MEMBERS
SEEN ON SENATOR WOULD YOU LIKE
TO CLOSE? YES THANK YOU. I
APPRECIATE IT. AND UH, WE COULD
HAVE A LONG DISCUSSION AS TO HOW
THESE DIFFERENT ENTITIES COME UP
WITH THEIR FEES. BUT ONE OF THE
FACTORS IS PROP 13. WHICH THE,
UM LEGISLATURE DID NOT MANDATE
BUT BASICALLY WHEN, UH WHEN ANY
OF THESE ENTITIES, ESPECIALLY
THE MUNICIPALS, OR LOCAL ONES,
THEY HAVE HIGH CAPITAL COSTS AND
THEY THEY NEED AND THEY ARE
RELUCTANT TO GO TO THE BALLOT
TO, UH EITHER, YOU KNOW, HAVE A
BOND OR SOMETHING ELSE TO DEAL
WITH SOME OF THOSE COSTS BECAUSE
OF THE TWO THIRDS REQUIREMENT
THEY INSTEAD WILL. AND OF COURSE
, THERE. YOU'RE RIGHT. UH, THE
DIFFERENT SENATORS WHO SPOKE TO
THIS THERE ARE FEES ARE THERE
EXCUSE ME? THERE ARE COSTS THAT
THEY MUST ABSORB AND SO ONE WAY
TO DO IT IS TO IN EFFECT, YOU
KNOW, SHARE IT THROUGH. UH THESE
TYPE OF HOOK UP FEES. UM, BUT
THE NET RESULT OF THAT WHILE IT
REAL. THEY PROBABLY DO HAVE
THESE REAL COSTS IS THAT IT
REALLY DAMPENS OUR ABILITY TO
ADDRESS OUR HOUSING CRISIS. SO
THERE ARE SO MANY FACTORS AND AS
THE JOKE WHICH TOO MANY PEOPLE
WHO ARE YOUNGER THAN ME WILL NOT
REMEMBER. BUT AS THE POGO, THE
CARTOONIST, POGO SAID, WE HAVE
MET THE ENEMY AND IT IS US BUT
WE ALSO NEED TO LOOK AT WHAT
WAYS WE CAN, YOU KNOW, TRY TO
START STRIPPING OUT THESE THINGS
. BUT RIGHT NOW, THIS IS A
TRANSPARENCY BILL ALONE. IT DOES
NOT HAVE ANY CAPS DOES NOT
CHANGE THE RATES THAT ANY
UTILITY WOULD CHARGE. UM AND IT
IS A SILENT IT REMOVES THE ISSUE
OF ANY KIND OF AM AMORTIZATION,
BUT IT ALLOWS FOR CONTINUED
DISCUSSION ON WHETHER WE COULD
CREATE SOME KIND OF MECHANISM TO
PAY THAT FEE OVER THE COURSE OF
A YEAR, FOR EXAMPLE, AND IF WE
CAN'T GET THERE WELL, THEN THAT
WON'T BE IN THE BILL, ULTIMATELY
, BUT RIGHT NOW, THE ONLY THING
THAT'S BEFORE YOU IS THE
TRANSPARENCY PIECE AND WITH
THAT, I ASK FOR YOUR I VOTE. WE
ARE LOOKING FOR A DUE PASS AS
AMENDED MOTION TO THE COMMITTEE
ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT. BUT BEFORE
WE DO THAT, I JUST WANT TO
CLEARLY STATE THAT AMENDMENT
DELETE PROVISIONS OF THE BILL
RELATED TO CAPPING FEES REQUIRED
10 YEAR FINANCING OF UTILITY
CHARGES AND PRIORITIZATION OF
UTILITY SERVICE APPLICATIONS FOR
HOUSING THAT'S CORRECT AND
EXPAND THE TRANSPARENCY
REQUIREMENTS TO INCLUDE PUBLICLY
OWNED UTILITIES. SO WITH THAT WE
HAVE A MOTION BY SENATOR STERN.
SECRETARY PLEASE CALL THE ROLL
ON S¼ B 12 2. BRADFORD BRADFORD
I DELI. REALLY NOT VOTING. ASHBY
ASHBY. I BECKER CABALLERO
CABALLERO, I DODD DURAZZO
DURAZZO I EGGMAN EGGMAN E
GONZALEZ. GROVE GROVE. I LEMON
LEMON. I MIN NEWMAN. RUBIO RUBIO
. I YARTO SKINNER. SKINNER I
STERN STERN. I WILK WILK. AYE.
11 TO 0. THAT BILL HAS 11 VOTES
WHO WILL LEAVE THE ROLE OPEN FOR
ABSENT MEMBERS TO ADD ON MEMBERS
. NOW WE'RE GONNA MOVE BACK TO
S¼ B 1165. SENATOR PADILLA MADE
HIS PRESENTATION EARLIER WITHOUT
A QUORUM. NOW WE'RE SEEKING A
MOTION. WE HAVE A DUE PASS
RECOMMEND. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY
SENATOR EKMAN. AND I WILL JUST,
UH, RESTATE THE MOTION DO PASS
THE COMMITTEE ON AN
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY SECRETARY.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON S¼ P
1165. BRADFORD BRADFORD I DELI.
REALLY NOT VOTING ASHBY. B
BECKER CABALLERO CABALLERO, I,
DODD DIAZO DURAZZO I EGGMAN EGM
I GONZALEZ GROVE. GROVE. I
LEMON. LEMON IM. NEWMAN. RUBIO.
RUBIO ARTO. SKINNER. SKIN OR
EYES. STERN STERN, I WILL WILK.
I 11 TO 0. THAT VOTE HAS 11
VOTES WHERE I'LL LEAVE THE ROLE
OPEN FOR ABSENT MEMBERS TO ADD
ON NOW WE'RE TO S¼ B 1380 THREE,
WHICH IS MY BILL AND I'LL HAND
TO GO OVER TO OUR VICE CHAIR,
SENATOR DOWLEY.
S¼ B 1380 THREE, BRADFORD. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR MEMBERS. I WILL
START BY ACCEPTING THE COMMITTEE
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS AND I
APPRECIATE THE COMMITTEE WORK
AND MY STAFF'S WORK ON GETTING
US TO THIS POINT. UH IN 2013
WHILE I WAS IN THE ASSEMBLY, I
AUTHORED A B 1299, WHICH
ESTABLISHED A BROADBAND PUBLIC
HOUSING ACCOUNT. UH, THIS
ACCOUNT MAKES MONEY AVAILABLE
FOR PUBLIC HOUSING AGENCIES TO
PARTNER WITH INTERNET SERVICE
PROVIDERS OR OTHER CONTRACTORS
TO MAKE NECESSARY FACILITY
UPGRADES IN ORDER TO CONNECT A
COMMUNITY TO A NEARBY BROAD.
NETWORK THE ACCOUNT HAS SINCE
BEEN EXPANDED TO SUPPORT
RESIDENTS OF LOW INCOME
COMMUNITIES IN PRIOR THE OFFER
OF FREE BROADBAND SERVICE AS A
CONDITION OF RECEIVING FUNDS
THAT COUNT WELL FINANCE UP TO
100% OF THE COST TO INSTALL
INSIDE WIRING AND OTHER
BROADBAND NETWORK EQUIPMENT.
UNFORTUNATELY THE BROADBAND
PUBLIC HOUSING ACCOUNT CONTINUES
TO BE WOEFULLY UNDER UTILIZED
FOR FISCAL YEAR. 2020 THREE 24
15 MILLION WAS ALLOCATED TO THE
FUND YET ONLY ABOUT 2 MILLION.
USED UH AND TWO IN 2020 THREE
TOTALING LESS THAN 15% OF
AVAILABLE FUNDS, MULTIPLE
MULTIPLE LOW INCOME HOUSING. UH,
PROVIDERS HAVE CITED THAT
EXISTING LAW REQUIREMENTS THAT
APPLICANTS GUARANTEE ACCESS TO
FREE INTERNET. SERVICES AS A
CONDITION TO A TEAM. PUBLIC
HOUSING ACCOUNT FUNDS IS A MAJOR
DETERRENT TO APPLYING FOR THESE
MONIES FURTHER EXISTING LAWS
RESTRICT ELIGIBILITY TO APPLY
FOR THESE FUNDS TO ONLY
LANDLORDS AND AGENCIES THAT OWN
AND ADMINISTER LOW INCOME AND
PUBLIC HOUSING. FINALLY BECAUSE
MOST PUBLIC HOUSING AND LOW
INCOME COMMUNITIES ARE UNABLE TO
PAY OR SECURE OFFERS OF FREE,
HIGH SPEED INTERNET, MANY HAVE
BEEN FORCED TO RESORT TO
WIRELESS SOLUTIONS. IN ORDER TO
PROVIDE, UM BROADBAND TO
RESIDENTS. VIRTUALLY ALL
RESIDENTS ARE ALL RECENT GRANTS,
I SHOULD SAY, PROVIDED BY THE BP
HÌ A HAVE BEEN FOR WIRELESS
SERVICES THAT HAVE NOT MET TO
èC UP STANDARDS FOR SPEED AND
REQUIREMENTS TO SOLVE THIS ISSUE
. 1380 THREE MAKES THREE CHANGES
IT WINDS THE ELIGIBILITY
APPLICANT POOL OF CALIFORNIA'S
BROADBAND PUBLIC HOUSING
ACCOUNT. IT CLARIFIES THAT NEW
INTERNET SUBSCRIPTION PLANS CAN
BE PROVIDED FOR FREE, OR AT
LEAST AT LOW COST TO THE
COMMUNITY. IT ENABLES. THE
BROADBAND HOUSING AUTHORITY TO
AWARD GRANTS TO DEPLOY, UH,
DEVICES THAT CAN IMPROVE
EXISTING BROADBAND SERVICES AND
REMOVES BARRIERS TO THE
DEVELOPMENT OF HIGH SPEED
BROADBAND INTERNET AND
COMMUNITIES THAT NEED IT THE
MOST, AND I WILL RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR YOUR VOTE. J LEAD
WITNESSES. I HAVE NÓ. I DO. I
HAVE MISS CALDERON CALAMA. I'M
SORRY. WE WILL DO SO. THANK YOU.
UM GOOD MORNING. UH, AMANDA
GOLDER. I'M WITH Kò BROADBAND.
WITH THE AMENDMENTS TAKEN TODAY
IN COMMITTEE CUP ROBIN WILL BE
IN SUPPORT OF S¼ B 1383, THE
PUBLIC HOUSING ACCOUNT FINANCES
FACILITY UPGRADES ON THE
CUSTOMER SIDE OF THE METER IN
LOW INCOME COMMUNITIES, WHICH IS
DISTINCT FROM ALL THE OTHER
GRANT PROGRAMS FOR BROADBAND. AS
NOTED, HISTORICALLY, THE PUBLIC
HOUSING ACCOUNT HAS BEEN
UNDERUTILIZED EVEN AFTER THE
EXPANSION OF ELIGIBILITY. IT HAS
BEEN STATED THAT THIS, UM THAT
THE REQUIREMENT FOR FREE SERVICE
IS A MAJOR DETERRENT. AND BY
REMOVING THIS CONDITION, UH,
THIS IT SHOULD ENHANCE THE
UTILIZATION OF THIS ACCOUNT.
THIS IS A GREATER NUMBER OF
CALIFORNIANS WHO NEED INTERNET
SERVICES. OF NOTE ALSO IS THE
BILL EXPANDS THE ELIGIBILITY OF
USING THE PUBLIC HOUSING ACCOUNT
FUNDS TO DEPLOY RANGE EXTENDERS
AND OTHER DEVICES TO IMPROVE
EXISTING BROADBAND SERVICES IN
LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS. THIS WILL
BE A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR MANY
HOMES IN THESE COMMUNITIES
BECAUSE THEY SUFFER FROM WI FI
RANGE ISSUES FROM UM FROM
INTERFERENCE AND PHYSICAL
BARRIERS CAUSED BY THE MATERIALS
UTILIZED WHEN MANY OF THESE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING STOCK WERE
WERE BUILT. AND SO FOR THIS
REASON WE SUPPORT THIS BILL
TODAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISHING
TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF SB 1000
THREE 183. SEEING NONE. ANYONE
HERE WISHING TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION OF S¼ B 1383. SEEING
NONE WILL BRING IT BACK TO THE
DIOCESE. YES MA'AM. THANK YOU,
MR CHAIR. UM I WANT OUR VICE
CHAIR. RATHER UM, FIRST OF ALL,
I WANNA THANK YOU FOR THE
ORIGINAL BILL, BECAUSE I KNOW I,
UH, THE FUND ALLOWED, UH, OLD
HOMES TO BE UPGRADED TO BE ABLE
TO SUSTAIN. UM, AT LEAST A HIGH
SPEED BROADBAND. NOW I KNOW THAT
THE REASON YOU'RE BRINGING THIS
UP IS THAT, UH, THE FUND HAS
BEEN UNDERUTILIZED. AND SO
CLEARLY THERE WERE, UH, THE
LANDLORD STATED THAT IT WAS
BECAUSE OF YOU DON'T HAVING TO
PROVIDE FREE ACCESS NOW MOVING
TOWARDS THIS BILL. HOW DO YOU
AND THIS IS MY PERSONAL, UH,
DEFICIENCY AND I HAVEN'T SEEN IT
. HOW DO YOU GET A LANDLORDS AND
OWNERS TO USE THE FUND? HOW DO
YOU ADVERTISE? HOW DO THEY FIND
OUT TO THAT? THEY THEY HAVE
ACCESS TO THIS AND THAT'S PART
OF THE OUTREACH THAT WE NEED TO
DO BETTER, BUT WE'RE WORKING
WITH WITH OUR INTERNET SERVICE
PROVIDERS AS WELL TO MAKE THIS
INFORMATION AVAILABLE AGAIN, AND
WE'RE NOT ELIMINATING THE FREE
WE JUST EXPANDING THE OPTION AND
SETTING THE BAR AT, UH, FEES
THAT CAN BE, UH UH, CHARGED IN
ORDER TO INSTALL THIS BUT OUR
BIGGEST CHALLENGE JUST AS A
COUPLE OF BILLS WE HEARD EARLIER
WAS ABOUT TO TAKE RATE AND HOW
DO WE GET FOLKS TO PARTICIPATE
IN THESE PROGRAMS? SO THAT'S
PART OF THE ONGOING PROCESS THAT
WE'RE GONNA BE WORKING AT TO
MAKE SURE THAT, UH, CONSUMERS
ARE AWARE THAT THESE PROGRAMS
ARE AVAILABLE, AND, UH, THE
SERVICES ARE AFFORDABLE AND FOR
SOME STILL BE FREE. YEAH,
BECAUSE I SEE THIS AS THE ISSUE
OF YOUR ASKED ME IT HAS BEEN
UNDERUTILIZED, BUT I COULD SEE
ALREADY THAT WE DON'T HAVE A
PLAN TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
ADVERTISE AND THAT THEY TAKE
ADVANTAGE. I JUST WILL CONTINUE
TO SIT THERE UNDER UTILIZED, BUT
THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND, UH,
THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR.
OK, ANY OTHER COMMENTS SEEING ON
WE WOULD ENTERTAIN EMOTION? I
WILL. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A
MOTION BY SENATOR RUBIO. UH MR
BRADFORD, WOULD YOU LIKE TO
CLOSE I? I I'D LIKE TO JUST
WEIGH IN REAL QUICK. THIS IS A
GREAT BILL. I KNOW THAT YOU'VE
BEEN WORKING IN THIS AREA FOR A
LONG TIME. UM I COMMEND YOU FOR
IT. AND I'M DEFINITELY IN
SUPPORT OF YOUR BILL. THANK YOU.
AND I CLEARLY HEAR YOUR CONCERNS
AS TO HOW DO WE DO A BETTER JOB
OF MAKING THE PUBLIC AWARE
CONSUMERS AWARE THAT THESE
PROGRAMS ARE AVAILABLE JUST
EARLIER? AS IN SENATOR ALLEN'S
BILL, THAT'S ONE OF THE
CHALLENGES THAT WE ALSO HEARD
OF. HOW DO WE MAKE SURE FOLKS
ARE AWARE THAT THESE PROGRAMS
EXIST AND, UH, THAT'S PART OF
THE EFFORT THAT WE'RE GONNA MAKE
IN MOVING FORWARD AGAIN. WE
PASSED THE ASSEMBLY BILL, UM, IN
2013, AND I WAS KIND OF
DISAPPOINTED AT THE NUMBER OF
PUBLIC HOUSING FACIL. TAKEN
ADVANTAGE OF THAT. SO THAT IS MY
CHARGE AND MY CHALLENGE TO MAKE
SURE WE DO A BETTER JOB OF THAT.
AND I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR I
VOTE AMENDED. DO YOU PASS THIS
AMENDED TO APPROPRIATIONS? THANK
YOU, MISTER. BRADFORD UH, THIS
IS A DUE PASS TO AMENDED. IT'S
YOU PASS AS AMENDED. DO PASS AS
AMENDED TO APPROPRIATIONS. THANK
YOU. ALL RIGHT. WOULD YOU PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL? BRADFORD BRADFORD
I DELI DELHI. I ASHBY. BECKER.
BECKER. I, CABALLERO CABALLERO.
I DODD DURAZO DURAZO, I EGGMAN
EGGMAN I GONZALEZ GROVE. GROVE
EYE, LEMON. LEONE I'M IN MEAN I.
NEWMAN RUBIO RUBIO IO. èC R TWO
I. SKINNER. STERN STERN EYE WILK
WILK. 13 TO 0. LEAVE IT ON CALL
13 TO 0 WILL LEAVE THAT BILL ON
CALL FOR ABSENT MEMBERS.
MEMBERS THAT CONCLUDES THE BILLS
THAT WE HAVE, UH UH, BEFORE US
TODAY, UH, BUT OUR VICE CHAIR
WOULD LIKE TO VOICE HIS CONCERNS
AS TO WHY WE POSTPONED THE
NEEDLE BILL FROM BEING HEARD
TODAY. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AS AS
I TOLD YOU WHEN I CAME IN HERE
ONE OF THE GREATEST CHAIRS TO
WORK FOR AND WORK WITH, BUT I
WOULD JUST WANT TO STATE THAT
YOU KNOW, SENATOR NINO'S BILL
GOT PULLED TODAY. HE HAD
WITNESSES COME IN FROM ARIZONA,
AND IT WAS UNBEKNOWNST TO HIM.
SO IN THE FUTURE, IT'D BE NICE
TO AT LEAST ALLOW THOSE
WITNESSES TO ADDRESS THE
COMMITTEE. I KNOW THE BILL IS
GONNA BE SET AGAIN. BUT YOU
KNOW, IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT HE
DIDN'T KNOW AND HAVE THE TIME TO
ALLOW THOSE PEOPLE NOT TO COME
ALL THE WAY FROM ARIZONA TO, UH,
BE WITNESSES FOR HIS BILL. SO I
JUST WANT TO STATE THAT AND ON
BEHALF OF, UH, SENATOR NILO, I
HE DIDN'T ASK ME TO DO IT, BUT I
JUST THINK IT'S WOULD BE THE
RIGHT THING TO DO TO ALLOW THOSE
FOLKS OR GIVE THEM MORE TIME.
UH, IF YOU'RE GONNA MOVE A BILL
WITHOUT THE AUTHOR'S KNOWLEDGE.
THANK YOU. AND I. I WILL
PERSONALLY TAKE RESPONSIBILITY.
I DIDN'T KNOW HE HAD UH,
WITNESSES FROM OUT OF STATE WHEN
, UH WE DECIDED TO HOLD IT OVER.
WE'RE STILL IN NEGOTIATIONS WITH
SENATOR NEAL AND HOPEFULLY MOVE
THIS MOVE THIS ISSUE FORWARD. SO
UH, WE'RE GONNA OPEN A ROLE FOR,
UH, ABSENT MEMBERS TO ADD ON
WE'LL FIRST START WITH US, UH,
S¼ B 165 BY SENATOR PADILLA.
PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS.
UM S¼ B 1165 DO PASS TO
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE.
CURRENT VOTE 11 0. BECKER.
BECKER. I, DODD. GONZALEZ. MM I
NEWMAN. èC TO èC R TO NÓ. 13
TO 1. WE STILL HAVE WE STILL
HAVE 13 TO 1. WE STILL HAVE.
THAT BILL IS NOW STANDS AT 13 TO
1. WE'RE GONNA LEAVE THE ROLL
OPEN AGAIN FOR ADDITIONAL
MEMBERS. LET'S CALL THE ROLL
AGAIN ON S¼ B 1 1165. S¼ 1165 DO
PASS TO ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
COMMITTEE CHAIR VOTING. I
GONZALES. GONZALEZ. I WE'RE
STILL WAITING FOR NEWMAN. UH,
THAT HAS 14 VOTES. WE'LL LEAVE
THE ROLL OPEN FOR, UH, ABSENT
MEMBERS NOW MOVING ON THE FILE
ITEM TWO S¼ B 1413 0 NÓ. I'M
SORRY WE PULLED THAT S¼ B 1480
BY SENATOR ALLEN. DO PASS IS
AMENDED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS CURRENT VOTE 70.
BECKER BECKER, I, DODD.
GONZALEZ. IN ZEALOUS. I GREW, UH
LEMON. LEONE I MIN MIN A. RUBIO
RUBIO. I NÓ STERN. STERN. I WILL
OH, WILKES, NOT VOTING. UM 13 TO
1. 13 TO 1. IS THAT ALL OUR
REMEMBER, SIR, THAT WE CALL NÓ
WAS ZOOMING ON HERE. HE ALREADY
VOTED ON THAT, OK? OH, YES. ALL
RIGHT. OH, WAIT A MINUTE. SORRY.
OK? YES, EVERYBODY'S VOTED. IS
THAT EVERYBODY UP ON THAT ONE,
SO WE'LL CLOSE THE ROLL ON 1480.
AND NOW I'M MOVING ON TO FOLLOW
ITEM FOUR. S¼ B 1210 BY SENATOR
SKINNER. PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT
MEMBERS. DO PASS IS AMENDED TO
LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE.
CURRENT VOTE 11 0 BECKER BECKER.
I DESERVE SENSE, GONZALEZ.
GONZALEZ I MIN MIN A. NEWMAN
NEWMAN. I SARTO SARTO NÓ. 15 TO
115 TO 1. IT'S UH, THE BILLS 15
TO 1 THAT MEASURES OUT NEXT
MOVING TO HAS TO BE 1380 THREE
BY BRADFORD, PLEASE CALL THE
ABSENT MEMBERS. DO PASS IS
AMENDED TO APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE CURRENT VOTE 13 0
ASHBY ASHBY. I GONZALEZ.
GONZALEZ 1383. BRADFORD. NEWMAN
NEWMAN. I SKINNER. 15 AND ZERO
RIGHT NOW. 15 0. CURRENT VOTE IS
15 0. WE'LL LEAVE THE ROLL OPEN
FOR ABSENT MEMBERS TO ADD ON SO
THAT EVERYTHING WE HOLD ON ONE
SECOND. YES, TO OPEN A ROLL
AGAIN ON FILE ITEM 1165 BY
SENATOR PADILLA. NEWMAN. NEWMAN.
I. THAT THAT'S EVERYBODY. UM, 15
TO 1. THAT'S EVERYBODY 15 TO 115
TO 1 THAT MEASURES OUT. YOU'RE
RIGHT. AND NÓ. AND THEN 1000
THREE. 183 IS THE ONLY ONE
THAT'S OPEN AND YOUR BILL WILL
CALL THE ROLL. UH, ON 1380
THREE. GONZALES. SKINNER. THANK
YOU. OK? 15 TO 0. ALL RIGHT, 15
TO 0. WE'LL CLOSE THE RO. ON
THAT MEASURE. I WANNA THANK YOU
ALL FOR, UH, PARTICIPATING HERE
TODAY. UH IN TODAY'S HEARING,
THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY
AND UTILITIES IS NOW ADJOURNED.
THANK YOU TO STAFF AND ALL THAT
ATTENDED.