SENATE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
WILL COME TO ORDER. GOOD
AFTERNOON, AND WELCOME TO THE
FIRST BILL HEARING OF THIS
COMMITTEE FOR 2024. AND MY FIRST
HEARING AS THE CHAIR OF THE
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE, WE
HAVE 23 MEMBERS ON TODAY'S
AGENDA, AND WE'RE STARTING A
LITTLE LATE, THROUGH NO FAULT OF
THE COLLEAGUES WHO ARE HERE,
THERE'S SOME CAUCUS ACTIVITY
TODAY THAT WENT A LITTLE BIT
OVER. WE APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S
PATIENCE, AS I KNOW WITH SOME OF
THESE MEASURES, THERE ARE MANY
SUPPORTERS AND OPPONENTS SO THAT
WE CAN COMPLETE TODAY'S WORK ON
A TIMELY BASIS. I WANT TO GO
OVER SOME TIME LIMITS ON
TESTIMONY. THE TWO PRIMARY
WITNESSES FOR EACH SIDE WILL
EACH BE ALLOWED TWO MINUTES, SO
A TOTAL OF FOUR MINUTES EACH
SIDE FOR ALL OTHERS WISHING TO
TESTIFY, PLEASE LIMIT YOUR
COMMENTS TO YOUR NAME, YOUR
AFFILIATION AND YOUR POSITION.
JUST THOSE THREE THINGS. WE ARE
UNABLE TO ESTABLISH A QUORUM AT
THE MOMENT. WE'LL DO THAT AS
SOON AS WE'RE ABLE. A COUPLE OF
ANNOUNCEMENTS. I THINK THIS IS
IN ORDER AT THIS TIME. BEFORE WE
HEAR FROM ANY AUTHORS. ITEM
SEVEN, WHICH IS SB 1505 BY
SENATOR STERN, IS OFF. WE WON'T
WE WILL NOT BE HEARING THAT
TODAY. WE ALSO HAVE 13 MEASURES
PROPOSED FOR CONSENT TODAY. AND
THE PROPOSED CONSENT ITEMS ARE
AS FOLLOWS. ITEM ONE SB 1068 BY
SENATOR EGGMAN. ITEM FOR SB 1394
BY SENATOR MINH. ITEM SIX SB
1487 BY SENATOR GLAZIER. ITEM
NINE SCR 102 BY SENATOR ALVARADO
GIL. ITEM 11 SB 932 BY SENATOR
SALGADO. ITEM 13 SB 1021 BY
SENATOR ARCHULETA. ITEM 15 SCR
115, ALSO BY SENATOR ARCHULETA.
ITEM 18 SB FOR 1417 BY SENATOR
ALLEN. ITEM 19 ACR 85 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER VEAL. VEAL
PADUA. THANK YOU. ITEM 20 ACR 87
BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER TO ITEM 21,
ACR 92 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER,
SCHIAVO. ITEM 22 ACR 93 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER DIXON. ITEM 23
ACR 98 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER LACKEY
. I AM NOT HEARING ANY REQUESTS
TO MOVE ANY ITEM FROM CONSENT
CLEARLY BEFORE WE ONCE WE HAVE A
QUORUM AND WE CAN TAKE A VOTE ON
THE CONSENT CALENDAR, WE'LL MAKE
SURE THAT OPPORTUNITY IS
PROVIDED AGAIN. AND LET ME JUST
CHECK AND SEE IF WE HAVE ANY
AUTHOR PREPARED. OR PRESENT.
NONE YET, SO WE WILL PAUSE AND
TAKE AN INFORMAL RECESS HERE
UNTIL WE GET AN AUTHOR COMING
IN. AND FIRST ONE WHO ARRIVES
WILL GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO
PRESENT. LET'S GET TO MICHAEL'S
ALL RIGHT. WE WILL END OUR
INFORMAL RECESS AND RESUME THE
PROCEEDINGS OF THE
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE. AT
THIS TIME, SENATOR MENGIBAR HAS
ARRIVED. YOU'RE WELCOME TO BEGIN
YOUR PRESENTATION. IF YOU'RE
READY. SENATOR MENGIBAR. THANK
YOU, MR. CHAIR. GOOD AFTERNOON.
SUBCOMMITTEE. TRANSPORTATION
FIRST, I REALLY WANT TO THANK
THE COMMITTEE FOR WORKING.
MISTER CHAIR. YOU YOURSELF FOR
WORKING WITH MY TEAM ON THIS
BILL. I KNOW IT'S BEEN, DAYS AND
WEEKS THAT WE'VE GONE BACK AND
FORTH. I APPRECIATE THE
ATTENTION TO, THIS, THIS, THIS
MATTER. I WILL BE ACCEPTING THE
COMMITTEE AMENDS. SB 1193 IS
LOOKING TO PHASE OUT THE SELL
SALE OF HARMFUL LEADED AIRPLANE
FUEL, ALSO KNOWN AS AVGAS. IT
ENDANGERS THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND
PARTICULARLY THE LONG TERME
HEALTH OF CHILDREN. THIS BILL
ALSO IMPROVES MITIGATION
MEASURES TO MINIMIZE LEAD
EXPOSURE FOR AIRPORT EMPLOYEES
IN THE PUBLIC. A LOT OF YOU,
LIKE MYSELF, HAVE MORE THAN ONE
AIRPORT IN OUR DISTRICT. IN MY
DISTRICT, I HAVE THREE AIRPORTS
WITHIN A TEN MILE RADIUS.
CONCENTRATE IN DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES, CONTINUING TO
CREATE NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON THEIR
HEALTH. JUST LAST YEAR, IN
OCTOBER, THE FEDERAL
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ANNOUNCED ITS FINAL
DETERMINATION THAT EMISSIONS OF
LEAD FROM AIRCRAFT THAT USE
LEADED FUEL CAUSES OR
CONTRIBUTES TO OUR AIR POLLUTION
THAT ENDANGERS PUBLIC HEALTH
UNDER THE CLEAN AIR ACT. NOW, I
WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR. THERE IS
NO EVIDENCE THAT SHOWS THAT
THERE IS A SINGLE THRESHOLD OF
SAFE LEAD EXPOSURE TO ABSOLUTELY
NO LEVEL, REGARDLESS HOW LOW THE
EMISSION IS, THERE'S NO SAFE
LEVEL LEADED AVIATION FUEL IS
MOST COMMONLY USED IN SMALL
PISTON ENGINE AIRCRAFTS AND IS
NOT USED FOR COMMERCIAL FLIGHTS.
LEAD HAS ALREADY BEEN PHASED OUT
IN MOST OF OUR PRODUCTS FOR ITS
DANGER TO THE PUBLIC, INCLUDING
IN PAINT AND GASOLINE. AND IN
FACT, WHEN CALIFORNIA PHASED OUT
LEAD IN GAS FOR OUR VEHICLES,
THEY DID THAT BEFORE THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT MADE A MOVE. AND ONCE
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MOVED
CALIFORNIA WAS EXEMPTED FOR OUR
STRONGER PROTECTIONS IN THIS
AREA. AS VÆ 1193 IS IN LINE WITH
PUBLIC HEALTH RECOMMENDATIONS
AND THE FEDERAL LEVEL APPROACH
TO PHASING OUT LEADED FUEL, I
RECOGNIZE THAT THERE IS
CURRENTLY A FEDERAL LEVEL LEVEL
PROGRAM, EAGLE, THAT WAS
ANNOUNCED IN 2022 THAT ALSO AIMS
TO DO THIS. BUT LIKE I MENTIONED
BEFORE, WE'VE ACTED BEFORE ON
SEVERAL ISSUES. THIS COULD BE
ANOTHER ISSUE. CALIFORNIA CAN BE
A LEADER ON. AND AS CALIFORNIA
GOES, SO DOES THE NATION. WE
WANT TO ALIGN A STATE LAW WITH
USC. US EPA'S DETERMINATION THAT
LEADED AIRPLANE FUELS ENDANGERS
THE LIVES AND SAFETY OF CHILDREN
BY BANNING THE SALE. THERE HAVE
BEEN SEVERAL LEADERS ACROSS THE
STATE, ONE OFF SOLUTIONS THAT
HAVE LOOKED TO ADDRESS THIS. MR.
CHAIRMAN, YOUR DISTRICT SANTA
CLARA, HAS BANNED THE SALE OF
THIS IN THEIR AIRPORT AT LONG
BEACH AIRPORT HAS LOOKED TO
SUBSIDIZE IN L.A. COUNTY. THEY
HAVE APPROVED MEASURES TO SELL
UNLEADED FUEL IN SEVERAL OF THE
AIRPORTS, RECOGNIZE THAT THERE
ARE SEVERAL STAKEHOLDERS.
PRODUCERS ARE LOOKING TO MAKE
THIS COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE TO
THAT. KNOW THAT ONE OF THE
AMENDMENTS IS TO PUSH BACK THE
FIRST PHASE IN TO 2027, TO
FURTHER PROVIDE AVAILABILITY AND
PRODUCE, UNLEADED FUEL OF OCTANE
OF 100, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THERE
IS ONLY COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE
FOR 94. SO SPECIFICALLY, THIS
BILL WILL BAN THE SALE OF LEADED
AVIATION FUEL IN OR ADJACENT TO
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES BY
JANUARY ONE, 2027. THEN BY
JANUARY 1ST, 2028, IN AREAS
ADJACENT TO URBAN GROWTH
BOUNDARIES. THEN LASTLY BAN THE
SALE ALL ACROSS THE STATE BY
JANUARY 1ST, 2030. WE WILL ALSO
INSTRUCT THE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION TO PUBLISH
GUIDANCE FOR AIRPORT OPERATORS
TO MINIMIZE THE ENVIRONMENT AND
PUBLIC HEALTH IMPACTS OF LEAD
EXPOSURE, OUR TEAM HAS BEEN
MEETING WITH OUR OPPOSITION
THÀNH. I THINK WE ARE CLOSE TO
ABOUT 10,000 MEETINGS WITH THEM,
WE WANT TO REALLY WORK SIDE BY
SIDE WITH THEM IN ENSURING THAT
THIS BILL GETS TO ITS INTENT. IF
YOU ARE SAT WITH ME IN OTHER
COMMITTEES, I HAVE SAID THAT I'M
NOT HERE FOR HEADLINES. I WANT
TO MAKE SURE THAT THE
IMPLEMENTATION IMPLEMENTATION
PROCESS IS ACHIEVABLE, THAT WE
WILL GET TO THE END GOAL, AND I
WILL BE I'VE COMMITTED TO
CONTINUING TO WORK ON FINE
TUNING, THE, THE LANGUAGE TO GET
TO A POINT THAT IT GETS TO THE
END GOAL. THIS CAME OUT OF WHAT
WE'RE SEEING IN MY WHAT I'M
SEEING IN MY DISTRICT AND ONE OF
MY AIRPORTS. I HAVE 37 DAYCARE
CENTERS AND SCHOOLS WITHIN A
MILE AND A HALF OF THESE OF THIS
AIRPORT. AND WE KNOW KIDS WHO
ARE WITHIN THAT CLOSE OF A
DISTANCE HAVE A 21% HIGHER
CHANCE OF HAVING LEAD IN THEIR
BLOOD, MR. CHAIR, WITH THAT, OH,
AND LASTLY, THE AMENDMENT, THE
SECOND AMENDMENT I TOOK IS TO
CREATE AN OPT OUT OPTIONS FOR
COUNTIES TO PURSUE IF THEY FIND
THAT UNLEADED ALTERNATIVE IS NOT
AVAILABLE. AGAIN, IF THERE IS NO
SOLUTION, I DON'T WANT THAT TO
BE A DEAD END. THERE IS AN OPT
OUT OPPORTUNITY FOR THE AIRPORT
TO PURSUE WITH THEIR COUNTIES
AND FOR THE COUNTIES TO ALLOW
FOR A ONE YEAR EXTENSION. NOW
HERE TO TESTIFY, MR. CHAIR, I'D
LIKE TO NOW TURN IT OVER TO, TWO
INDIVIDUALS. IF YOU ALL WANT TO
COME UP. WE HAVE MARIA VELEZ AND
JARED YAN.
THANK YOU. WHY DON'T YOU GO
AHEAD AND SELF INTRODUCE AND GO
IN WHICHEVER ORDER YOU'D LIKE,
PLEASE? THANK YOU. YOU'LL HAVE
TWO MINUTES EACH. SENATOR
MENGIBAR, ON BEHALF OF ALL
MINORITY COMMUNITIES, THANK YOU
FOR INTRODUCING THIS LONG
OVERDUE BILL ON UNLEADED AVGAS.
AND THANKS TO THE SENATE RULES
COMMITTEE FOR REFERRING THE BILL
AS A BROWN, SPANISH SPEAKING
LATINA, I AM HONORED TO ADDRESS
THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE TODAY
. MY NAME IS MARIA REYES AND I
HAVE LIVED IN COMMUNITY FOR OVER
52 YEARS. MY HOME IS LESS THAN
ONE MILE FROM REED AIRPORT, AND
MY NEIGHBORHOOD IS DENSELY
OVERCROWDED. OUR LOCAL
ELEMENTARY COMMUNITY SHARES A
SCHOOLYARD FENCE WITH REED
AIRPORT, AND WE HAVE
APPROXIMATELY 21 SCHOOLS AND DAY
CARE CENTERS WITHIN A 1.5 MILE
RADIUS OF THIS AIRPORT. MOST OF
MY NEIGHBORS NO HABLO INGLÉS
WORK IN CONSTRUCTION OR THE FAST
FOOD INDUSTRY. SURVIVAL IS A
DAILY STRUGGLE. THIS STRUGGLE
INCLUDES RAISING OUR KIDS AND
WORKING FOR JUSTICE, WORKING FOR
A WORLD FREE OF RACIAL
DISCRIMINATION, RACIAL
DISCRIMINATION. THÀNH THRIVES IN
COMMUNITY LIKE CASTLE,
TRI-VALLEY AND PACOIMA. AVGAS,
LADY MISSIONS ARE DANGEROUS TO
OUR HEALTH, AND YET NO ONE TAKES
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE
NEUROLOGICAL AND PHYSICAL
IMPAIRMENTS CAUSED TO OUR
FAMILIES. IN 2021, CASE'LL
RALLIED AND WE WON AN ACTION BY
SANTA CLARA COUNTY. THEY STOPPED
SELLING LEADED FUEL, BUT THIS IS
NOT ENOUGH. IF MY COMMUNITY IS
ASKING FOR RACIAL JUSTICE. AS
PARENTS, WE ALL WANT TO PROTECT
OUR CHILDREN. IF YOUR CHILDREN
LIVED IN MY COMMUNITY, HOW LONG
WOULD YOU WAIT? WE ARE ALL ABLE
TO HELP CHILDREN. WE ALL ARE
ABLE TO CHANGE THE LIFE OF A
CHILD. WHAT ARE YOU WILLING TO
DO TO CHANGE THE LIVES OF OUR
CHILDREN? OUR FAMILIES ARE NOT
STATISTICS. WE ARE HUMAN BEINGS
WHO DESERVE TO BE TREATED WITH
RESPECT, DIGNITY AND INCLUSION.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT
WITNESS. PLEASE GOOD AFTERNOON,
MISTER CHAIR. SENATOR MENGIBAR,
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. MY
NAME IS JARRETT YAN. I'M A
DEPUTY COUNTY COUNSEL AT THE
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA. AND I'M
COUNSEL TO THE AIRPORTS
DEPARTMENT. SO SANTA CLARA
COUNTY OWNS AND OPERATES TWO
AIRPORTS. REID-HILLVIEW AIRPORT
IN EAST SAN JOSE, WHICH, IS
REFERRING TO, WHICH IS ONE OF
THE BUSIEST GENERAL AVIATION
AIRPORTS IN THE STATE, AS WELL
AS SAN MARTIN AIRPORT, WHICH IS
A SMALLER, MORE RURAL AIRPORT,
IN 2018, WITH THE SUPPORT OF THE
THEN SUPERVISOR CORTEZ AND IN
RESPONSE TO COMMUNITY CONCERNS,
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONED A STUDY
EXAMINING THE EFFECTS OF LEAD
EMISSIONS FROM REID-HILLVIEW
AIRPORT ON ON THE SURROUNDING
COMMUNITY. IN 2021, WE COMPLETED
THAT STUDY AND THE, THE RESULTS
WERE, WERE AS TERRIBLE AS THEY
WERE UNSURPRISING. WE FOUND THAT
THERE WERE STRONG CORRELATIONS
BETWEEN GENERAL AVIATION
ACTIVITY AT REID-HILLVIEW AND
ELEVATED BLOOD LEAD LEVELS IN
CHILDREN IN THE SURROUNDING
COMMUNITIES, IN RESPONSE TO
THIS, THIS PUBLIC HEALTH CRISIS,
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CEASED
THE SALE OF LEADED AVGAS AT THE
TWO COUNTY AIRPORTS, STARTING
JANUARY 1ST, 2022, OUR STUDY HAS
SINCE BEEN PUBLISHED IN 2023 BY
THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
, SO SINCE 2022, UNLEADED AVGAS
HAS BEEN THE ONLY AVIATION
GASOLINE AVAILABLE FOR SALE AT
AT THE COUNTY AIRPORTS. AND WE
CONSIDER THIS TRANSITION TO HAVE
BEEN AN UNQUALIFIED SUCCESS,
THERE HAVE BEEN VIRTUALLY NO
IMPACTS ON AIRPORT OPERATIONS
AND AS A RESULT OF THE COUNTY'S
ACTIONS, WE'VE PREVENTED OVER A
TON OF LEAD EMISSIONS INTO THE
SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES, THE EPA
HAS RECENTLY INVITED THE COUNTY
TO PARTICIPATE IN A STUDY
ADMINISTERED BY THE NATIONAL
ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, THAT IS
STUDYING BEST PRACTICES FOR
TRANSITIONING AIRPORTS TO
UNLEADED FUEL AND WE ARE WORKING
AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN TO BE ONE
OF THE FIRST AIRPORTS IN THE
COUNTRY TO SELL, 100 OCTANE
UNLEADED AVGAS. SO I THANK YOU
FOR YOUR ATTENTION, AND I URGE
YOUR SUPPORT FOR THIS BILL. ALL
RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TESTIMONY. ARE THERE OTHER
SUPPORT WITNESSES IN THE ROOM?
YOU MAY COME FORWARD AND YOU CAN
STATE YOUR NAME, AFFILIATION AND
YOUR POSITION, WHICH WOULD BE
SUPPORT IN THIS CASE, BILL
MCGOVERN WITH THE COALITION FOR
CLEAN AIR STRONGLY IN SUPPORT.
ALSO, ONE OF THE SPONSORS. BIG
THANKS TO THE AUTHOR AND THE
CHAIR. GOOD AFTERNOON. KIM
LEWIS, REPRESENTING CHILDREN NOW
IN SUPPORT. 40 MILES AWAY WITH
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL VOTERS
IN SUPPORT. I'M ALSO DOING A ME
TOO IN SUPPORT FOR CLEAN WATER
ACTION, FAMILIES ADVOCATING FOR
CHEMICAL AND TOXIC SAFETY,
CLEANERS FOR KIDS, GRANDPARENTS
FOR ACTION NORTH COUNTY EQUITY
AND JUSTICE, INTERFAITH
COALITION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE, NORTH COUNTY CLIMATE
CHANGE ALLIANCE. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON, WHITNEY FRANCIS, ON
BEHALF OF THE WESTERN CENTER ON
LAW AND POVERTY, WE ARE PROUD TO
CO-SPONSOR AND SUPPORT THIS
MEASURE. ADDITIONALLY ON BEHALF
OF THE SHUTDOWN, WHITEMAN
AIRPORT COALITION IN PACOIMA,
CALIFORNIA, WE STRONGLY SUPPORT.
MATT BROUGHT ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA TEAMSTERS IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. KEVIN INSCOE WITH THE
FRIENDS COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATION
OF CALIFORNIA AND STRONG SUPPORT
. SHIRLEY LEWANDOWSKI WITH
TRI-VALLEY. ON BEHALF OF THE 4
MILLION PEOPLE WHO ARE SUFFERING
UNDER LEAD EXPOSURE. THANK YOU.
I STRONGLY SUPPORT SB 1193.
DAVID RAMIREZ, ON BEHALF OF THE
SAN FERNANDO VALLEY YOUNG
DEMOCRATS IN SUPPORT. RAQUEL
WELCH, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, IN
THE FLIGHT PATH OF
REID-HILLVIEW. THESE ARE MY
GRANDCHILDREN AND MYSELF. WE ALL
HAVE LEAD. ALL RIGHT, I STRONGLY
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. TOM WELCH,
BIXEL GROUP STRONGLY SUPPORT.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND
MEMBERS ORLANDO FUENTES WITH
LULAC COUNCIL, 2862 SACRAMENTO,
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN AMERICAN
CITIZENS AS CO-SPONSOR IN STRONG
SUPPORT. PAUL DYSON, BURBANK
RESIDENT, FORMER BURBANK AIRPORT
COMMISSIONER. STRONGLY SUPPORT I
THANK YOU. WE'LL NOW MOVE TO
OPPOSITION WITNESSES. YOU MAY
STAY HERE IF YOU LIKE OR MAKE
ROOM AS YOU LIKE, IN CASE THERE
ARE QUESTIONS FOR YOU LATER,
FROM ANY OF THE SENATORS HERE ON
THE DAIS, OR YOU MAY COME BACK
IF YOU'D RATHER SIT IN THE
THEATER SEATS, YOU CAN COME BACK
LATER TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. THANK
YOU, I UNDERSTAND THIS IS JARED
YOSHIKI, AND CHUCK STREET IS
THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
SIR. PROCEED IN WHICHEVER ORDER
YOU PREFER. YOU'LL HAVE TWO
MINUTES. THANK YOU, THANK YOU,
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, SENATORS
JARED YOSHIKI WITH THE AIRCRAFT
OWNERS AND PILOTS ASSOCIATION ON
BEHALF OF OUR COALITION, THE
CALIFORNIA PILOTS ASSOCIATION,
THE EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT
ASSOCIATION, THE NATIONAL AIR
TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION, AND
THE NATIONAL BUSINESS AVIATION
ASSOCIATION. WE ARE. WE RESPECT
THE AUTHOR'S INTENT TO AMEND
THIS BILL, WHICH WE REALLY
APPRECIATE. WE STILL MUST REMAIN
IN OPPOSITION TO THIS MEASURE. I
WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE
COMMITTEE STAFF FOR THEIR
EXCELLENT ANALYSIS, WHICH
ENCAPSULATES I THINK, THE
COMPLEX ISSUE WE'RE DEALING WITH
WITH LEADED AVIATION FUEL AND WE
ALSO WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR
AGAIN FOR HER WILLINGNESS TO
LISTEN TO OUR CONCERNS, AS WELL
AS TO UNDERSTAND THE
COMPLEXITIES OF AVIATION. WE
REALLY DO APPRECIATE THAT WHILE
WHILE THERE ARE CONFLICTING
STUDIES OUT THERE, WHEN IT
RELATES TO LEAD, NO ONE IS HERE
DEFENDING LEAD. ME LEAST OF ALL,
I AM NOT HERE DEFENDING LADY
AVIATION FUEL. IN FACT, WE WANT
THIS BILL IN THIS DISCUSSION TO
BE ABOUT HOW WE CAN FOCUS ON
WORKING TOGETHER TO FIND A
SUITABLE REPLACEMENT FOR THE
CURRENT, VERSION OF AVGAS.
COLLECTIVELY, WE HAVE BEEN
WORKING WITH THE FAA AND
HUNDREDS OF OTHER INDUSTRY
STAKEHOLDERS, FUEL SUPPLIERS,
DISTRIBUTORS THROUGH THE
ILLUMINATE AVIATION GASOLINE LED
EMISSIONS INITIATIVE TO FIND AN
INDUSTRY APPROVED REPLACEMENT BY
2030. WHILE AVIATION FUEL HAS
BEEN IDENTIFIED BY THE EPA,
ENDANGERMENT AS A AS A. EXCUSE
ME? WHILE THE EPA HAS IDENTIFIED
LEADED AVIATION FUEL, IT ONLY
REAFFIRMS WHAT WE, THE GENERAL
AVIATION COMMUNITY, ALREADY KNOW
TO BE TRUE, WHICH IS THAT LEAD
NEEDS TO BE REMOVED FROM
AVIATION FUELS, BUT IN A SAFE
AND SMART WAY. THE TRANSITION IS
UNDERWAY. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO
REMIND ALSO THE COMMITTEE THAT
WE ARE DOING THIS ON A NATIONAL
LEVEL, NOT JUST ON A STATE
LEVEL, BECAUSE THERE ARE 2000
AIRPORTS ACROSS THE COUNTRY THAT
ARE GOING TO NEED THIS FUEL AT
SOME POINT. THE ANALYSIS
CORRECTLY IDENTIFIED AS THE
NUMEROUS HURDLES THE FUEL
INDUSTRY FACES IN MAKING A
RECENTLY APPROVED 100 OCTANE
UNLEADED AVIATION FUEL
COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE AND
SUSTAINABLE AND IN SUSTAINABLE
QUANTITIES, WHILE THE AVIATION
INDUSTRY IS NOT LOOKING TO
FOLLOW THE AUTO INDUSTRY'S 20
YEAR TRANSITION TO UNLEADED
FUEL, 2030 LESS THAN FIVE YEARS
AWAY IS NOT AN UNREASONABLE
TIMELINE. THIS TRANSITION TO
UNLEADED FUEL NEEDS TO BE
ACCOMPLISHED SAFELY, WHILE
ENSURING ADEQUATE OFF RAMPS AND
AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE
IMPROVEMENTS IN PLACE. TO MEET
THE NEEDS OF THIS CRITICALLY
IMPORTANT INDUSTRY IN OUR STATE.
THE TRANSITION COULD AFFECT THE
COST OF FLIGHT TRAINING FOR
YOUNG PEOPLE SEEKING LUCRATIVE
CAREERS IN THE AIRLINES. WHEN
AVIATION PROGRAMS ARE ALREADY
EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE, YOU HAVE TO
WRAP UP. IT CAN AFFECT
NONPROFITS LIKE ANGEL FLIGHT
WEST THAT OFFER FREE FLIGHTS FOR
HEALTH CARE. AND LASTLY, 2030,
AS I'VE ALREADY STATED, IS NOT
ON A REASONABLE TIMELINE TO DO
THIS TRANSITION PRUDENTLY AND
SAFELY. AND FOR THESE REASONS,
WE MUST CONTINUE TO OPPOSE THIS
BILL. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
OKAY. THANK YOU. NEXT WITNESS.
THANK YOU, SENATOR CORTEZ, AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON
BEHALF OF VERTICAL AVIATION
INTERNATIONAL VÌ, REPRESENTING
NEARLY NEARLY 400 MEMBERS IN
CALIFORNIA AND RECOGNIZES THE
NATION'S LEADING VERTICAL FLIGHT
ASSOCIATION. WE EXPRESS OUR
STRONG OPPOSITION TO SB 1193.
WHILE WE APPRECIATE SENATOR
MENDOZA'S INITIATIVE TO ADDRESS
THE TRANSITION FROM LEADED
AVIATION FUELS, WE MUST OPPOSE
THIS MEASURE. OUR INDUSTRY HAS
DILIGENTLY PURSUED A SAFE AND
EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVE FUEL
THROUGH THE EAGLE INITIATIVE IN
COLLABORATION WITH THE FAA, WITH
A TARGET OF 100 LOW LEAD
REPLACEMENT FUEL BY 2030.
CURRENTLY, ONLY ONE UNLEADED
FUEL HAS RECEIVED FAA APPROVAL
FOR USE IN ALL PISTON FIXED WING
AIRCRAFT. HOWEVER THE FAA HAS
NOT YET APPROVED THIS FUEL FOR
USE IN HELICOPTERS. WHILE WE
EXPECT APPROVALS FOR HELICOPTER
USE, APPROXIMATELY 25% ARE
DEPENDENT ON LEADED AVIATION
FUEL. THIS INCLUDES HELICOPTERS
OPERATED AND MANUFACTURED BY
MAJOR EMPLOYERS LIKE THE
ROBINSON HELICOPTER COMPANY AND
TORRANCE, AND NUMEROUS POLICE
AGENCIES THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA.
WHILE VÌ SUPPORTS THE TRANSITION
TO UNLEADED UNLEADED FUELS, WE
ADVOCATE FOR A SAFE AND
RESPONSIBLE APPROACH BY ADHERING
TO THE FAA'S 2030 TIMELINE, WE
CAN ENSURE SUFFICIENT
INFRASTRUCTURE AND SUPPLY CHAINS
ARE IN PLACE TO FACILITATE A
SAFE AND EFFICIENT TRANSITION.
WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE
COMMITTEE TO OPPOSE SB 1193 IN
ITS CURRENT FORM. FURTHERMORE WE
URGE THE COMMITTEE TO SEEK
INSIGHTS FROM CALTRANS REGARDING
THE STATE'S READINESS FOR THIS
TRANSITION. THANK YOU FOR
LISTENING. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TESTIMONY. ARE THERE OTHER
OPPOSITION WITNESSES IN THE
COMMITTEE ROOM? IF SO, YOU MAY
COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR
NAME, YOUR AFFILIATION AND YOUR
OPPOSITION. JIM LITES, ON BEHALF
OF BOTH THE CALIFORNIA AIRPORTS
COUNCIL AND THE ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA AIRPORTS, WE ARE
OPPOSED, UNLESS AMENDED. THANK
YOU, MR. CHAIR. APOLOGIES FOR
NOT GETTING OUR LETTER IN ON
TIME, JACKIE. ON US, ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA FUELS AND
CONVENIENCE ALLIANCE,
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED. GOOD
AFTERNOON. ZACH CLEARY WITH THE
WESTERN STATES PETROLEUM
ASSOCIATION. WE HAVE AN
OPPOSING, LESS AMENDED POSITION
ON SB 1193. THANK YOU. STEVEN
DEVINE REPRESENTING YOUNG PILOTS
EVERYWHERE. THIS BILL WILL HURT
OUR TRAINING AND OUR ABILITY TO
PRODUCE PILOTS. I AM STRONGLY
OPPOSED TO SB 1193 AND IT WILL
KILL AN INDUSTRY. THANK YOU.
THAT'S WELL, WE'RE GOING TO
BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE
AT THIS POINT IN TIME. BUT
BEFORE WE TAKE UP ANY COMMITTEE
DISCUSSION OR DEBATE, I'M GOING
TO ASK THE COMMITTEE ASSISTANT
TO CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE, TO
ESTABLISH A QUORUM SO WE CAN
ACTUALLY VOTE ON THE BILL.
SENATOR CORTEZ HERE. CORTEZ
HERE. NILO HERE. NEIL HERE. ALAN
ARCHULETA. BECKER HERE. BECKER.
HERE. BLAKE. SPEAR. SHAKESPEARE.
HERE. DALLEY DALLEY. HERE. DODD.
GONZALEZ. LIMÓN NEWMAN. NEWMAN.
NEWMAN. HERE. WHEN PORTANTINO.
CIERTO. CIERTO HERE. UMBERG.
SENATOR. ALLEN. ALAN HERE. ALL
RIGHT. WE HAVE ESTABLISHED A
QUORUM, AND WE'LL COME BACK TO
THE COMMITTEE ON THIS BILL
BEFORE WE OBVIOUSLY TAKE UP ANY
OTHER BUSINESS AND HAVE FURTHER
DISCUSSION AMONGST THE COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. SENATOR BECKER. THANK
YOU. I WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR.
I JUST WANT TO SAY I REPRESENT
SANTA CLARA COUNTY, ALONG WITH
OUR CHAIR. AND, AS WAS
MENTIONED, THE REID-HILLVIEW
AIRPORT HAS BEEN AN ISSUE FOR,
MANY, MANY YEARS. AND
SIGNIFICANT INCREASES IN BLOOD
LEVEL AND LEAD IN THE BLOOD
LEVEL OF CHILDREN LIVING NEARBY
HAS, BEEN KNOWN FOR MANY YEARS.
AND THE COUNTY BECAME THE FIRST
JURISDICTION IN THE COUNTRY TO
BAN THE SALE OF LEADED AVIATION
GAS STARTING IN 2022. SO THE
COUNTY ONLY SELLS UNLEADED
UNLEADED AV GAS THAT IS
AVAILABLE ON THE MARKET NOW. AND
I CAN JUST REPORT THAT THE TWO
GENERAL AVIATION AIRPORTS HAVE
SEEN NO OPERATIONAL IMPACT THUS
FAR, SO I DO BELIEVE THIS BILL
TAKES A MEASURED APPROACH. IT
ALLOWS THE FUEL TO BE AVAILABLE.
WE HAVE THERE ARE A COUPLE
COMPANIES WE KNOW THAT ARE ON
THE BRINK OF COMING TO MARKET.
AND SO BY BEGINNING PHASING 2027
AND HAVING AN OPT OUT, I FEEL
THAT IS, GOING TO, YOU KNOW,
THOSE ARE THE THINGS I THINK
THAT YOU'VE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT
TO GIVE THE INDUSTRY MORE TIME.
SO SO, WE DO KNOW ALSO, YOU KNOW
, AS EVIDENCED, YOU KNOW, IN OUR
EXPERIENCE THAT IT IS
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR AND WE'VE
HEARD THAT TODAY THAT HAVE BEEN
IMPACTED. SO AGAIN, I APPRECIATE
THIS. I THINK I JUST WANT TO
AMPLIFY AGAIN THAT THE SANTA
CLARA COUNTY HAS DONE THIS AND
HAS HAD NO OPERATIONAL IMPACT.
AND I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE BILL
TODAY. THANK YOU, SENATOR, I'LL
MOVE IT WHEN APPROPRIATE. THANK
YOU, HAVE YOU TALKED TO PUBLIC
SAFETY ABOUT THEIR AIRPLANES AND
WHAT THEY USE FOR AVIATION FUEL
FOR BOTH THEIR HELICOPTERS AND
THEIR FIXED WING AIRCRAFT? NO SO
IN SO FAR, WE'VE BEEN GETTING,
TO FROM OBVIOUSLY THIS COMMITTEE
AND ALSO LOCAL GOV. BUT I AM
COMMITTED TO WORKING ON LANGUAGE
REGARDING TO HELICOPTERS TO FIND
A WAY TO, NOT IMPACT THAT AREA
WHATSOEVER. RIGHT. BECAUSE THAT
WHEN YOU TAKE A HELICOPTER DOWN
FOR ITS REGULAR ROUTINE SERVICE,
THAT HELICOPTER WILL BE DOWN FOR
SIX MONTHS TO A YEAR. AND THAT'S
REALLY SO THERE IS A THERE'S A
PLANNING THAT HAS TO GO WITH IT
WHEN YOU'RE TRANSITIONING.
ANYTHING MECHANICAL, WHETHER
IT'S A AIRPLANE OR A HELICOPTER,
THERE IS A TRANSITION PROCESS
THAT IT HAS TO GO THROUGH, YOU
CAN'T JUST IT'S NOT LIKE A CAR
WHERE YOU JUST GO CHANGE THE
ENGINE OUT, THEY HAVE TO GO
THROUGH THAT, EVERY FEW, EVERY
FEW YEARS ANYWAY, THEY HAVE THEY
HAVE. AND THAT'S WHAT I THINK
THEY'RE TRANSITIONING IS. AND
THAT IS A SAFE WAY TO TRANSITION
. THÀNH, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR
ARE YOU A PILOT BY ANY CHANCE?
YES, SIR. I DO HAVE A QUESTION
FOR YOU. WHEN YOU WERE FLYING,
THERE'S A ROUTE THAT YOU HAVE TO
REGISTER FOR. CORRECT? AND IF
SO, IF THERE'S AIRPORTS THAT
DON'T HAVE THE FUEL THAT YOUR
AIRCRAFT TAKES, WHAT HAPPENS? DO
YOU HAVE TO PLAN FOR THAT AND
NOT GO TO THOSE AIRPORTS AND
EXTEND YOUR YOUR TRAVEL
SOMEWHERE ELSE? ABSOLUTELY YEAH.
I MEAN, IF WE CAN'T HAVE A FUEL,
A USABLE FUEL IN THE AIRCRAFT OR
WE DO NOT HAVE A SUPPLEMENTAL
TYPE CERTIFICATE TO USE A NEW
FUEL, WE CANNOT USE THAT FUEL,
THE EXAMPLE I'LL GIVE YOU IS IF
CALIFORNIA WERE TO EVEN BAN LOW
LEADED FUEL IN 2030, LET'S SAY
YOU WOULD STILL HAVE PILOTS
COMING FROM ARIZONA, NEVADA,
ARIZONA INTO THE STATE THAT
MAYBE COULD NOT REFUEL IF THEY
DID NOT HAVE A SUPPLEMENTAL TYPE
CERTIFICATE WITH, FOR AN
UNLEADED FUEL. SO THAT IS
DEFINITELY A GOING TO BE AN
ISSUE IF THERE'S A EVEN A
PATCHWORK OF DIFFERENT UNLEADED
FUELS, WHETHER IT'S THE SWIFT 94
THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED BY SENATOR
, BY SENATOR BECKER, EXCUSE ME,
OR IF IT'S THE GAMMY FUEL WITH
THAT'S 100 UL, THERE'S GOING TO
BE A, A DIFFERENT PROCESS BY
WHICH THE PILOTS ARE GOING TO
HAVE TO PLAN THEIR ROUTES,
BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S
MIXABILITY BETWEEN DIFFERENT
FUELS. AND WE ALSO DON'T KNOW IF
COUNTIES APPROVE AN UNLEADED
FUEL, IF THE ADJOINING COUNTY IS
GOING TO APPROVE THE SAME FUEL,
A DIFFERENT FUEL, AND SO THERE
COULD BE MIS FUELING
OPPORTUNITIES OR AGAIN, THAT
FUNGIBILITY OR MIXED ABILITY
OPTION THAT MAY OR MAY NOT WORK
FOR THE AIRCRAFT ITSELF. SO
THERE'S A TECHNOLOGY COMPONENT
TO THIS THAT ISN'T QUITE THERE
YET, BUT THE FEDERAL REGULATIONS
THAT ARE DUE IN FIVE YEARS IS
WHAT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN BASICALLY.
THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE PLANNING.
AND THAT'S THAT'S SOME OF THE
ELEMENTS THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO
GET THROUGH RIGHT NOW, BETWEEN
NOW AND THEN. SO THAT IN THE
BIGGER SCHEME OF THINGS,
NATIONAL WISE, BECAUSE AIR
FLIGHT ISN'T JUST CALIFORNIA,
IT'S A LOT OF PEOPLE FLY BECAUSE
THEY CAN FLY TO UTAH AND WORK
HERE. SO, I THINK THAT IT'S
IMPORTANT FOR US TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE'RE NOT TRYING TO DO
SOMETHING SO FAR AHEAD OF WHAT
THE NATIONAL LEVEL IS DOING THAT
WE'RE MAKING IT MORE DANGEROUS
FOR OTHER PILOTS WHO ARE COMING
INTO CALIFORNIA. SO, ONE OF THE
OTHER THINGS I WANT TO KIND OF
DISPEL, JUST A LITTLE BIT, YOU
KNOW, A LOT OF THESE DISCUSSIONS
START WITH IT OVER IMPACTS JUST
MINORITY COMMUNITIES. I LIVED
UNDER THE FLIGHT PATH OF
BRACKETT FIELD AIRPORT. IN FACT,
I COULDN'T EVEN FLY MY KITE THAT
HIGH BECAUSE OF THE FLIGHT PATH
FOR THE AIRPLANES. IT IS NOT A
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITY AND
NEITHER IS UPLAND, WHERE CABLE
AIRPORT IS NEITHER IS TORRANCE,
WHERE TORRENCE AIRPORT IS.
NEITHER IS SANTA MONICA, WHERE
SANTA MONICA AIRPORT IS. SO
THESE AIRPORTS ARE ACTUALLY
LOCATED THROUGHOUT. AND WHATEVER
ISSUES THAT THERE ARE, WITH THE
WITH THE LEADED FUELS AND, OR
WHATEVER, THEY AFFECT EVERYBODY.
IT'S NOT JUST DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES. THEY AFFECT
EVERYBODY. AND THAT'S WHY THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS STEPPED
IN TO MAKE THIS TRANSITION. BUT
FOR ME, THIS IS THESE ARE
AIRPLANES. THESE AREN'T CARS
THAT YOU GET TO PULL OVER. IF
THE CAR IF THE ENGINE STARTS
PINGING. THESE ARE THESE ARE
AIRPLANES THAT IF THEIR ENGINE
STARTS PINGING AND THEIR ENGINE
GIVES OUT, THEY GET TO GO DOWN A
LOT OF TIMES HEADFIRST INTO THE
GROUND. I WAS ON ONE OF THOSE IN
LANCASTER CABLE AIRPORT, RAN OUT
OF GAS INTO THE GROUND. I THINK
IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE ALLOW,
ESPECIALLY IN SOME CASES LIKE
THIS, WE ALLOW A PROCESS THAT'S
ALREADY IN PLACE THAT IS WELL
PLANNED OUT, THAT IS WELL
COORDINATED TO OCCUR BEFORE WE
START PUSHING SOMETHING THAT
MIGHT BE A LITTLE UNREALISTIC,
BUT MORE THAN THAT IS ENTIRELY
UNSAFE WHEN IT COMES TO ENSURING
THAT THE TRANSITION HAPPENS IN A
MANNER, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE
TALKING ABOUT AVIATION IN A
MANNER THAT ENSURES THE SAFETY
AND THE RELIABILITY AS WE
TRANSITION FROM ONE TYPE OF FUEL
GOING INTO ENGINES TO ANOTHER
TYPE OF FUEL, THAT GOING INTO
ENGINES. THE PURPOSE OF YOU RUN
THE LEAD THAT'S IN ENGINES FOR
CARS, AND FOR THE PURPOSE OF
THAT LEAD, IT HAD A PURPOSE. AND
THAT PURPOSE WAS TO MAKE SURE
THE PISTONS GOT SEALED. OKAY.
AND IT REDUCED WEAR AND TEAR ON
THE ENGINES. SO THAT'S THAT'S
WHY IT WAS THERE IN THE FIRST
PLACE. SO NOW THEY WANT TO MAKE
THAT TRANSITION. THEY'VE GOT A
PLAN TO DO IT I THINK THE PLAN I
MEAN IT IS ONLY FIVE YEARS AND
THAT IS NOT A VERY LONG TIME, SO
I FEEL LIKE PUSHING IT A LITTLE
BIT FASTER, ESPECIALLY FOR AIR
AND ESPECIALLY FOR PUBLIC
SAFETY. AND I'M TALKING ABOUT
PUBLIC SAFETY, FIGHTING FIRES
AND THINGS LIKE THAT. WE DON'T
HAVE ANSWERS FOR THAT. SO I
THINK IT'S A LITTLE PREMATURE TO
START PUTTING TIMELINES AND
MANDATES ON SOMETHING THAT WE
DON'T HAVE ANSWERS FOR, AND THEN
START FINING PEOPLE WHEN THEY
CAN'T MEET THE MANDATE, UNTIL
THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS IN PLACE.
THERE'S NO WAY THAT WE SHOULD BE
FIDDLING WITH THE PROCESS THAT'S
ALREADY IN PLACE. AND THAT'S
WHAT I FEEL LIKE WE'RE DOING
HERE, IS WE'RE PUSHING IT UP,
NOT BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO SAVE
A BUNCH OF PEOPLE FROM LEAD.
IT'S BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE
WE'RE TRYING TO BE THE TIP OF
THE SPEAR. WELL, THE SPEAR IS
ALREADY OUT THERE, AND IT'S
NATIONWIDE. AND THAT'S WHERE I
THINK THIS NEEDS TO STAY. IS A
NATIONWIDE EFFORT. IT'LL BE DONE
IN FIVE YEARS. THAT DOES IT
SAFELY. AND SO THAT'S MY
CONCERNS WITH THIS BILL, I THINK
WE'RE GOING TO A SPACE THAT WE
DON'T NEED TO GO INTO. THANK
YOU, SENATOR DOLE. CAN WE CAN WE
SAVE YOUR RESPONSES? OKAY, WELL,
I ACTUALLY HAVE CLOSE AND I
ACTUALLY HAVE SOME QUESTIONS
THAT I'D LIKE TO HAVE ANSWERED.
SO I'M REALLY I'M WITH THE
OPPOSITION. I DON'T WANT LEAD. I
WORKED WITH, ASSEMBLY MEMBER
CRISTINA GARCIA ON THE EXIDE AND
EK FOR YEARS, TRYING TO FIGURE
OUT WHAT'S GOING ON WITH LEAD.
SO I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS.
NUMBER ONE, IN THE OLDER PLANES,
PISTON DRIVEN PLANES, THE LEAD
WAS THERE FOR A LUBRICATION I
BELIEVE. NOW CAN YOU I WANT TO
JUST TALK ABOUT THAT FOR A
MINUTE BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S
CRITICAL TO THIS DISCUSSION. AND
WE HAVEN'T HEARD ABOUT THAT YET.
SO IF YOU GO TO 100, OCTANE, ARE
THOSE OLDER PLANES STILL GOING
TO BE ARE THEY GROUNDED OR CAN
THEY FLY ONE 100. BECAUSE YOU
HELP ME WITH THE TECHNOLOGY
THERE. SO I THINK TO ANSWER YOUR
QUESTION, SENATOR DOLLY, A 100
OCTANE FUEL WOULD WORK FOR ANY
POTENTIALLY APPROVED ENGINE BY
THE FAA. SO WHETHER IT'S ON A
1966 PIPER CHEROKEE OR IF IT'S
ON A, YOU KNOW, 2022 CIRRUS SR22
. SO SAFETY WISE, THAT'S NOT THE
ISSUE. THEN CORRECT. SAFETY
WISE, AS LONG AS IT'S APPROVED
AND AS LONG AS IT'S APPROVED AND
THE FAA SAYS IT WILL WORK IN THE
ENGINE, TECHNICALLY IT CAN WORK.
THAT'S CORRECT. NOW THAT ALSO
HAS TO BE VALIDATED BY THE
MANUFACTURERS. AND IT HAS TO BE
AGAIN APPROVED BY THE FAA FOR
USE IN IN THOSE ENGINES. OKAY.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, IS THERE
ANY THAT WOULD BE KNOCKED OUT
BECAUSE THEY AREN'T THEY DON'T.
SO HOW DO I SAY THIS. THERE'S A
LOT OF TIMES WHEN WE PASS A LAW
AND THEY SAY, WELL, THEY CAN DO
IT, BUT THEY JUST DON'T DO IT
BECAUSE IT'S NOT ENOUGH OF THEM.
AND THE TECHNOLOGY OR THE
SCIENTIST OR WHOEVER BEHIND IT
DOESN'T DO IT, IS THAT WILL
THERE BE SOME THEY'LL BE KNOCKED
OUT. SO TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NO,
IT'S NOT TO SAY THAT THAT'S 100%
GUARANTEE, BUT AS MR. STREET
INDICATED WITH THE HELICOPTERS,
WE DON'T HAVE AN APPROVED FUEL
FOR HELICOPTERS. SO THOSE ARE
THE ONLY TECHNICALLY AIRCRAFT
THAT WOULD BE NOT ABLE TO
CURRENTLY USE AN UNLEADED FUEL
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT APPROVED BY
THE FAA. FIXED WING. YES. YES
SPARK IGNITION ENGINE. YEAH.
OKAY. GOOD. THANK YOU. NOW
SECONDLY, TO THE AUTHOR, ON THE
STUDY THAT WAS TAKEN FOR THE
AREA, I DON'T REMEMBER WHICH
AREA, WHICH I THINK IS YOUR
DISTRICT. WHEREVER THEY DID THE
LEAD BASED WAS THAT, SO HOW DID
HOW DID THEY DETERMINE THAT THE
LEAD WAS ACTUALLY JUST COMING
FROM THE AIRPLANES THAT WAS
CAUSING THIS SPIKE? WAS WAS IS
THERE AN EXIDE SITUATION WHERE
WE HAD A SMELTING POT CLOSE BY
OR WE HAD LEAD BASED PAINT, OR
WE HAD PIPES THAT HAVE LEAD SO
THAT WE COULD REALLY GET A GOOD
ANALYSIS OF WHY IT'S SO HIGH
THERE. IS IT ONLY WAS IT, RIGHT.
SO, I WANT TO HAVE MY WITNESS
ANSWER, BUT I'M GOING TO TRY
SOME, SOME OF THIS. SO THERE ARE
SEVERAL STUDIES THAT SHOW JUST
COMMUNITIES AROUND AND AIRPORTS,
NOT SPECIFICALLY TO JUST THE
AIRPORT. IN MY DISTRICT, THE
EXAMPLE THAT I GAVE WAS JUST
THAT THERE ARE 37 DAYCARE AND
SCHOOLS AROUND MY, MY, ONE OF MY
AIRPORTS. SO IF THE STUDIES SHOW
THAT THIS HAPPENS ACROSS THE,
ACROSS CALIFORNIA, YOU CAN
ASSUME THAT IT'S HAPPENING
THERE. ADDITIONALLY THERE HAVE
BEEN SPECIFIC STUDIES THAT I
THINK MY WITNESSES CAN TALK
ABOUT. YES. SO THANK YOU FOR
YOUR QUESTION, SENATOR. SO THE
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA DID A
STUDY OF REID-HILLVIEW AIRPORT,
AND WE HIRED A NATIONALLY
RECOGNIZED EXPERT, SAMMY ZAHRAN,
FROM FROM COLORADO STATE
UNIVERSITY TO, EXAMINE THE LINKS
BETWEEN GENERAL AVIATION
ACTIVITY AT THE, AT THE AIRPORT
AND THE BLOOD LEAD LEVELS OF THE
CHILDREN IN THE SURROUNDING
COMMUNITIES. SO, DOCTOR ZAHRAN
STUDIED, I THINK IT WAS 17,000
BLOOD LEAD SAMPLES FROM THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
HEALTH, THAT WERE TAKEN BETWEEN,
I BELIEVE IT WAS 2011 AND 2020,
AND MAPPED THOSE AGAINST A
NUMBER OF DIFFERENT, OTHER DATA
SETS THAT WE KNOW ABOUT RELATED
TO GENERAL AVIATION. SO CLOSER
TO THE AIRPORT VERSUS WHERE THE
CHILDREN LIVING CLOSER TO THE
AIRPORT VERSUS FARTHER THAN THE
AIRPORT, WERE THEY LIVING
UPWIND? WERE THEY LIVING
DOWNWIND? AND WERE THERE A LOT
OF PLANES FLYING THE MONTH THE
SAMPLE WAS TAKEN? WHERE THERE
WHERE THERE NOT A LOT OF PLANES
FLYING? WHAT WERE THE VOLUMES OF
AVGAS THAT WERE SOLD AT THE
AIRPORT AND ALSO CONTROLLING FOR
A NUMBER OF OTHER FACTORS, SUCH
AS WHAT IS THE AGE OF THE HOUSE
THEY WERE LIVING IN TRYING TO
GET AT? WELL, COULD THE LEAD IN
THEIR BLOOD HAVE COME FROM PAINT
OR ANOTHER SOURCE? AND EACH ONE
OF THOSE, THOSE FACTORS THAT
THAT WE STUDIED, DEMONSTRATED A
STRONG CORRELATION BETWEEN THE,
THE GENERAL AVIATION ACTIVITY
AND THE AND THE BLOOD, BLOOD
LEAD LEVEL. SO THERE WERE
DIFFERENT KIND OF DIFFERENTIALS,
BUT LIKE UPWIND WAS LOWER THAN
DOWNWIND. CLOSER WAS HIGHER THAN
THAN FARTHER, A LOT OF PLANES
FLYING YOU GOT HIGHER SAMPLES
THAN WHEN THERE WERE NOT A LOT
OF PLANES FLYING, AT AND WE FIND
THAT THAT STUDY IS CONSISTENT
WITH OTHER STUDIES THAT HAVE
BEEN DONE, IN NORTH CAROLINA AND
IN MICHIGAN, THAT HAVE LOOKED AT
THE BLOOD LEAD LEVELS AND KIDS
RELATIVE TO THE DISTANCE THAT
WE'RE LIVING FROM AIRPORTS AND
THE, AND THE EPA'S ULTIMATE
FINDING IN THIS PAST OCTOBER
THAT, FOUND THAT THAT LEAD
EMISSIONS FROM AVIATION, FROM
GENERAL AVIATION PISTON ENGINE
AIRCRAFT, ENDANGERS THE PUBLIC
HEALTH AND WELFARE. WELL, IF
YOU'RE IN FLINT, MICHIGAN, IT'S
THE PIPES. SO IF THAT IS SO
THAT'S MY REALLY WHAT I WANTED
TO GET TO IS THAT WE
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES
TYPICALLY DO NOT HAVE UPGRADED
WATER LINES. AND AND FAUCETS AND
ALL THOSE THINGS AS WELL, WHICH
CONTRIBUTE TO. RIGHT. SO THAT'S
WHY I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE IF THE STUDY I MEAN WE CAN
STUDIES CAN BE, YOU CAN
MANIPULATE A STUDY TO GET THE
ANSWER YOU WANT IF YOU WANT TO
DO THAT. BUT WE REALLY WANT TO
HAVE GOOD SCIENCE TO FIND OUT
WHERE ACTUALLY IT'S COMING FROM.
BECAUSE IF WE PASS THIS BILL AND
IT'S REALLY THE PIPES, IT'S NOT
GOING TO CHANGE THE SITUATION
FOR THE CONSTITUENTS WHO HAVE
LEAD IN THEIR IN THEIR BODIES.
SO THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO ASK
THOSE COUPLE QUESTIONS, SO ON
THE HELICOPTERS, WHAT'S YOUR
THOUGHTS? MY THOUGHTS IS I
COMPLETELY AGREE WITH SENATOR,
PUBLIC SAFETY IS REALLY
IMPORTANT FOR ME. AND I AM
COMMITTED TO WORKING WITH THE
OPPOSITION TO FIND LANGUAGE THAT
WILL NOT HINDER PUBLIC SAFETY
WHATSOEVER. THANK YOU. ANYONE
ELSE NEED TO BE RECOGNIZED?
SENATOR NEWMAN? YEAH, I JUST
HOPEFULLY BRIEFLY WANT TO I WANT
TO WE TOUCHED ON IT, BUT I WANT
TO HEAR A LITTLE MORE ON SUPPLY
CHAIN AND AVAILABILITY. SO BEST
CASE SCENARIO, REALISTIC
SCENARIO. IS THERE A REALISTIC
EXPECTATION TO EXPEDITE THE
DEVELOPMENT OF THIS MARKET AND
THE DELIVERY OF NON LEADED FUELS
TO SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF AIRPORTS
TO MEET THIS DEADLINE WITHOUT,
GROUNDING A WHOLE BUNCH OF
PLANES, THANK SENATOR NEWMAN, I
THINK IT DEPENDS, NOT BEING THE
FUEL SUPPLIER MYSELF, IT WOULD
BE HARD TO GAUGE WHERE THE
CURRENTLY APPROVED UNLEADED FUEL
IS IN THE PRODUCTION PROCESS, TO
MY KNOWLEDGE, THEY ARE STARTING
TO MAKE FUEL, BUT THE END TO END
INFRASTRUCTURE, GETTING IT FROM
HOUSTON TO CALIFORNIA HAS BECOME
A HURDLE. HOW THEY'RE GOING TO
SOLVE THAT HURDLE. I WOULDN'T
HAVE AN ANSWER FOR YOU AND DON'T
WANT TO SPECULATE WHAT THAT
ANSWER WOULD BE, BASED UPON THE
DEFINITIONS OF THE BILL, IT
WOULD INCLUDE APPROXIMATELY 50
ISH PERCENT OR SO OF THE
AIRPORTS IN CALIFORNIA. WOULD
NEED TO HAVE THIS FUEL BY 2027,
IF THAT PRODUCTION LINE IS A
MILLION GALLONS EVERY SIX WEEKS,
CALIFORNIA APPROXIMATELY BURNS
12 MILLION GALLONS A YEAR. SO
THE ECONOMIES OF SCALE MIGHT,
DEPENDING UPON HOW THEY PRODUCE
IT, FASTER OR QUICKER, WOULD
REALLY DEPEND ON HOW THEY'RE
GOING TO DO THAT. SO I WOULD
HATE TO SPECULATE, SENATOR, I'M
SURE IF I CAN GET AN ANSWER FOR
YOU FROM THE FUEL SUPPLIERS, IF
YOU WOULD LIKE ONE. I THINK, MR.
CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO ALSO RESPOND.
YOU KNOW, BEFORE YOU DO. I MEAN,
I ASSUME THIS IS SOMETHING YOU
ARE CONCERNED ABOUT, RIGHT? SO
PLEASE DO. ABSOLUTELY. WE'VE
ACTUALLY TALKED TO THE
PRODUCERS, THERE ARE ACTUALLY
TWO COMPANIES RIGHT NOW. GAMMY
IS SET TO HAVE 100 UNLEADED FUEL
READY BY, THIS SPRING BEFORE
SUMMER. ADDITIONALLY, AND THEY
BELIEVE THAT THEY HAVE ENOUGH,
THEY WILL PRODUCE ENOUGH FOR THE
ENTIRE CALIFORNIA'S FLEET, NOT
JUST 50% OF THE 2027.
ADDITIONALLY THE SECOND COMPANY
IS SWIFT THAT IS ON TRACK TO
HAVE COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE 100
UNLEADED FUEL. NEXT YEAR, 2025.
THAT IS STILL TWO YEARS AHEAD OF
MY FIRST PHASE IN YEAR. AND SO
TO SENATOR SENATOR'S KIND OF
BROADER POINTS, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S
INVOLVED IN CONVERTING THE FUEL
SYSTEM OVER? IT'S A DROP IN FOR
PISTON ENGINES. IT'S A DROP IN
REPLACEMENT. NOTHING HAS TO BE
ADJUSTED FOR ANY PISTON ENGINE
AIRCRAFT. NO, NO, BUT BUT FOR
THE FUEL SYSTEMS. RIGHT. DID
THEY USE THE SAME PUMPS? ALSO A
DROP IN ALL THE SAME. ALL DROP
IN. ALL RIGHT. APPRECIATE IT.
THERE WILL BE NO MAINTENANCE
REVAMPING OF ANY DISTRIBUTOR OF
ANY, THIS IS NOT THE CORRECT
TECHNICAL WORD. HØI ADDING
SYSTEM OF THAT FUEL IN THE
AIRPORT. NO, NOR OF THE OF THE
AIRCRAFT. OKAY. THANK YOU. YES,
SENATOR. THANK YOU. SENATOR FOR
BEING SO PROTECTIVE OF THE
GENERAL PUBLIC THAT IS SO
IMPORTANT IN YOUR BILL, MY
QUESTION AND CONCERN WOULD BE
THE AVAILABILITY TO GO AHEAD AND
SUPPLY ALL THE VARIOUS SMALL
AIRPORTS IN CALIFORNIA BY THAT
TIME, ARE WE ASKING TOO MUCH OF
THE PRODUCTION SIDE OF IT ALL?
WILL WE BE ABLE TO MEET IT? THIS
IS WHY I WAS VERY MINDFUL OF
DOING A PHASING APPROACH. YOU'VE
HEARD THAT THE FAA, YOU KNOW,
THEY'RE WORKING ON A POTENTIAL
THEIR INTENT IS FOR IN 2020
NATIONWIDE FOR THIS TO BE,
REPLACED WITH UNLEADED FUEL.
YOU'VE ALSO HEARD FROM THE
OPPOSITION THAT SOME OF THE
OPPOSITION, THEY DON'T BELIEVE
THAT'S, ENOUGH TIME. WE DO NEED
TO PULL A LITTLE BIT OF FIRE AND
OR INCENTIVE TO ENSURE WE GET
THIS GOING FASTER. I DO BELIEVE,
AND I'VE ALREADY COMMITTED. I
DON'T WANT A BILL TO JUST HAVE A
BILL. I WANT A BILL THAT IS
GOING TO ACTUALLY HAPPEN IN
2027. I AM HERE, I WILL BE HERE
IN 2027, I WILL COME BACK IF
REALLY THERE'S NO COMMERCIALLY
AVAILABLE, LEAD. I WILL COME
BACK IN 2026, 2027 TO DO A
CLEANUP OF MY OWN BILL. I ALSO
HAVE AN OFF RAMP MECHANISM.
SHOULD AN AIRPORT NOT HAVE
AVAILABLE FUEL THAT ALLOWS THEM
TO PETITION THEIR COUNTY TO BE
ABLE TO GET AN EXTENSION? I'VE
BEEN VERY MINDFUL TO ENSURE THAT
I'M NOT JUST DOING AN UMBRELLA
ONE SIZE FITS ALL FOR EVERY
SINGLE AIRPORT. I ALSO WOULD
TAKE NOTE THAT YOU ARE NOT THE
ONLY SENATOR THAT'S BROUGHT UP
TO ME, ENSURING THAT WE GET THIS
FUEL TO OUR SMALLER, AIRPORTS.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE
IT'S NOT GOING TO HINDER THEIR
DISTRIBUTION ROUTE AND SO FORTH.
SO CONTINUING, WE'LL CONTINUE
AND I WILL LOOK TO MY OPPOSITION
TO HELP ME ON ENSURING THAT WE
HAVE AVAILABILITY OF PATHWAY TO
GET THIS FIELD TO OUR SMALLER
AIRPORTS. YEAH. AND, MR. CHAIR,
FOLLOW UP QUESTION. YES, SIR.
YOU HAD MENTIONED A COUPLE OF
COMPANIES. ARE THERE OTHERS OUT
THERE THAT ARE CONVERTING THAT
WILL WHEN WE GET CLOSER AND
CLOSER, THERE WILL BE A
MULTITUDE OF COMPANIES THAT
THERE'S NEVER A BACKLOG OF
SUPPLYING THE AVIATION INDUSTRY.
THE FUEL THAT'S REQUIRED RIGHT
NOW, WE'VE ONLY HEARD FROM TWO
COMPANIES, UNLESS ANYONE ELSE
HAS HEARD OF ANYTHING. BUT EVEN
WITH JUST THOSE TWO, ONE ALONE
IS TELLING US THAT THEY CAN
ADDRESS OR MEET THE NEEDS OF THE
ENTIRE FLEET. SO HAVING TWO
WOULD BE GREAT. I DO ANTICIPATE,
SENATOR, THAT BY 2027, 2028 THAT
THIS WILL BE THE NORM FOR US IN
CALIFORNIA, THAT MORE AND MORE
WILL COME FORWARD AND MAKE IT
AVAILABLE. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU,
MR. CHAIR. SENATOR PORTANTINO,
THANK YOU, SENATOR. I KNOW
YOU'VE BEEN PUTTING A LOT OF
WORK INTO THIS. I KNOW IT'S AN
IMPORTANT ISSUE WITH YOU, AND I
APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATIONS
THAT YOU'VE BEEN HAVING WITH THE
COMMITTEE AND WITH THE ADVOCATES
ON ALL SIDES. I DO JUST WANT TO
THE RELIEF THAT'S WITHIN THE
BILL. IF THE TECHNOLOGY IF THE
PRODUCT ISN'T AVAILABLE, THERE'S
AN AUTOMATIC ABILITY TO EXTEND
THE CURRENT USE OF FUEL WITHIN
THE BILL. IT DOESN'T REQUIRE
CLEANUP BECAUSE YOU HAD
MENTIONED CLEANUP LEGISLATION
THAT YOU'D BE HAPPY TO COME, BUT
WITH EMBEDDED IN THE AMENDMENTS
THAT I THINK THE COMMITTEE IS
TAKING, IT ALLOWS AIRPORTS TO
HAVE AN AUTOMATIC EXTENSION OF
THE CURRENT USE OF FUEL. THERE
IS ALREADY, BUT I'M STILL
COMMITTING MYSELF TO SAY I DON'T
WANT TO IMPOSE BUREAUCRATIC
PROCESS WHEN SOMETHING IS SO FAR
OUT RIGHT THAT IT WOULD REQUIRE
EVERYBODY TO COME IN EVERY
SINGLE YEAR BECAUSE SOMETHING IS
TEN YEARS AWAY, WHICH I DON'T
THINK WILL HAPPEN, BUT THAT'S MY
COMMITMENT. SHOULD I NEED TO
COME BACK AND ADD FURTHER, OFF
RAMPS BECAUSE IT'S NOT ENOUGH
SINCE WE'RE AT 2026 AND WE'RE
NOWHERE NEAR TO HAVING
COMMERCIAL AVAILABLE UNLEADED
FUEL BY 2027. SO RIGHT NOW I
FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THE OFF
RAMPS THAT THE COMMITTEE AND MY
TEAM AND I HAVE WORKED ON, BUT
SHOULD ANYTHING NOT MOVE FORWARD
WITH SWIFT OR GAMI OR ANY OTHER
COMPANY, THEN I WILL COME BACK
AND READDRESS THAT IN A FUTURE
LEGISLATION. AND WHAT YOU'RE
ALSO COMMITTED TO CONTINUING THE
CONVERSATION WITH ALL OF THE
INTERESTED PARTIES AS THIS BILL
MOVES Ó 100. AND YOU'LL I MEAN,
THEY'RE SPENDING A LOT OF TIME
IN MY OFFICE WITH MY TEAM, MY
LEAD STAFFER ON THIS, I THINK IS
A COMPLETE EXPERT ON ON THIS
TOPIC, AND WE ARE COMMITTING THE
HELICOPTER PART OF PUBLIC SAFETY
IS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR ME.
WE'RE CONTINUING CONVERSATIONS
ON OTHER PROVISIONS, ON THE
GUIDELINES AND SO FORTH. AND
PATHWAYS TO ENSURE THAT OUR
SMALL AIRPORTS HAVE WILL HAVE
ACCESS TO UNLEADED FUEL 100. SO,
BEFORE THIS GETS TO THE FLOOR,
HOPEFULLY IF WE GET OUT OF THIS
COMMITTEE, IT WILL LOOK
DIFFERENT BECAUSE AGAIN, I WANT
THIS TO BE AS SUCCESSFUL AS
POSSIBLE. I WAS GOING TO USE A
BAD PUN, SO WE HAVEN'T LANDED ON
THE FINAL LANGUAGE. WE HAVE NOT
LANDED. WE'RE STILL SOARING IN
THE AIR RIGHT? BUT WE HAVEN'T
RUN OUT OF FUEL, SO WE HAVEN'T.
WE'RE NOT DIPPING THERE YOU GO.
SO I OBVIOUSLY I APPRECIATE YOUR
WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH THE
INTERESTED PARTIES. I THINK ALL
OF US WANT TO GET SOMETHING
THAT'S DOABLE, THAT PROTECTS THE
COMMUNITIES, THAT IS GOOD FOR
THE ENVIRONMENT, THAT'S GOOD FOR
EVERYBODY, BUT ALSO DOESN'T
GROUND THE INDUSTRY, AS WELL. SO
I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMITMENT TO
WORK, AND I DON'T WANT TO KILL I
DON'T WANT TO KILL THIS
INDUSTRY. I RECOGNIZE WE COULD
ALL SURVIVE WITHOUT THE
INDUSTRY, BUT THAT'S NOT MY
INTENTION WHATSOEVER, IT SEEMS
LIKE IT'S FUN. I'M SCARED OF
HEIGHTS. I WOULD NEVER DO IT,
BUT IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S A LOT OF
FUN, AND IT'S NOT SOMETHING I
WANT TO KILL. THANK YOU. ANYBODY
ELSE ON THE COMMITTEE. ALL
RIGHT. SEEN NONE, WE'LL GIVE YOU
AN OPPORTUNITY TO CLOSE SENATOR.
MANAGER, MR. CHAIR, AGAIN, THANK
YOU SO MUCH FOR WORKING WITH ME
ON THIS BILL. AND TO EACH, EVERY
SINGLE MEMBER, THERE'S A LOT OF
YOU THAT I SPENT THE WEEKEND
CHATTING WITH TODAY, CHATTING
WITH FOR YOUR QUESTIONS
CONCERNS. WE ARE TAKING ALL OF
THOSE BACK AND LOOKING TO ENSURE
HOW WE CAN ADD AND FURTHER MAKE
THIS BILL EVEN MORE BEAUTIFUL
THAN IT ALREADY IS, THIS IS
REALLY ABOUT SAFETY OF PUBLIC
HEALTH. AND I KNOW SENATOR SATO,
YOU MENTIONED THE SAFETY OF THE
PILOTS. I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT
EVEN IF IN IN NOT IN IDEAL
SITUATION, IF WE DON'T GET TO
THAT POINT, WE CAN ALWAYS LAND
THE, THE PLANES TO FIX
SOMETHING, RIGHT? WE CAN'T HALT,
LEAD POISONING OUR CHILDREN.
THAT'S MORE DIFFICULT TO DO. AND
I'M PRIORITIZING THE SAFETY OF
CHILDREN 0 TO 6. AND THE
COMMUNITIES. COMMUNITIES THAT IN
CALIFORNIA, THE TOP TEN,
AIRPORTS THAT POLLUTE THE MOST
ARE IN OUR DISTRICTS. THE
COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND MINE. THE
FIRST ONE IS IN LONG BEACH. THE
SECOND ONE IS MY AIRPORT IN MY
DISTRICT, SENATOR, ALLEN,
SENATOR BLAKE SPEAR, SENATOR
NILO, SENATOR BECKER, YOU ALL
HAVE AIRPORTS THAT ARE TOP TEN
MOST POLLUTING AIRPORTS IN OUR
STATE. THIS WOULD DIRECTLY
IMPROVE THE PUBLIC HEALTH OF
YOUR CONSTITUENTS WITHOUT. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN EYE VOTE
. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, SENATOR.
WE'LL COME, WE'LL ASK A
COMMITTEE. ASSISTANT TO CALL THE
ROLE AT THIS TIME. MOTION Þ. IS
THERE A WAS THERE A SENATOR
BECKER MOVED. SENATOR BECKER,
OFFERED THE MOTION EARLIER. IS
HE HER PRESENT? HE IS NOT. WE
PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE A MOTION
FROM SOMEONE PRESENT THAT
MOTION. A MOTION BY SENATOR
ARCHULETA. THIS IS FILE ITEM
NUMBER TWO, SB 1193. THE MOTION
IS TO PASS, AS AMENDED, AND
REFER TO THE COMMITTEE ON
JUDICIARY. SENATOR CORTESE A
CORTESE I NILO NO NILO NO.
ALLEN. ALLEN I ARCHULETA I
ARCHULETA I BECKER, BLAKE.
SPEAR, BLAKE. SPEAR I DALLY DODD
I DODD I GONZALEZ LIMÓN I LIMÓN
I NEWMAN I NEWMAN I WHEN, NO,
WHEN NÓ PORTANTINO I, I WILL SAY
I WANT TO SEE THE BILL
PORTANTINO I SATO NO SATO NO
UMBERG. 8 TO 3 ON CALL. 8 TO 3.
YEAH. ALL RIGHT. THE CURRENT
VOTE IS 8 TO 3. WE'LL LEAVE THAT
BILL ON CALL AND THANK YOU,
SENATOR. I THANK YOU TO THE
WITNESSES. SENATOR BENNETT IS
NEXT. YOU COULD ALSO GO TO THE
CONSENT CALENDAR, WHICH I'M
GOING TO DO THAT. ALL RIGHT,
SENATOR, WHILE SENATOR MIN IS
COMING FORWARD, I'M GOING TO ASK
COMMITTEE ASSISTANT TO, TO TAKE
UP THE CONSENT CALENDAR AT THIS
TIME. I CALLED OFF THE BILLS AND
THE AUTHORS EARLIER. I MUST
WONDER IF THE COMMITTEE
ASSISTANT WOULD CALL THOSE BILL
NUMBERS AGAIN. SO NOW THAT WE
HAVE A QUORUM, EVERYONE CAN HEAR
THE FINAL CONSENT CALENDAR. AND
THEN, WE'LL SEE IF WE HAVE A
MOTION ON. CONSENT CALENDAR. THE
BILLS ARE SB 1068. EGGMAN, SB
1394 MIN, SB 1487. GLASER SCR
102. ALVARADO GIL, SB 932 SATO
SB 1021 ARCHULETA SCR 115
ARCHULETA SB 1417 ALLEN ACR 85
VÆ VALLAPUDUA ACR 87 TO ACR 92.
SCHIAVO ECR 93 DIXON ACR 98.
LACHEY IS THERE A MOTION MOVE
MOVED BY SENATOR ALLEN? AND
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLL
. OKAY. SENATORS CORTESE AYE.
CORTESE AYE. NILO. NILO I ALLEN.
ALLEN. AYE. ARCHULETA ARCHULETA.
AYE. BECKER. BECKER I BLAKE.
SPEER BLAKE. SPEER. AYE. DOLLY.
DOLLY I. DODD DODD. AYE.
GONZALEZ. LIMÓN LIMON. I NEWMAN.
NEWMAN. AYE. WHEN WHEN I
PORTANTINO. PORTANTINO I SATO.
SIERRA I UMBERG. THAT'S 13. WE
CAN KEEP IT ON CALL. ALL RIGHT.
WE HAVE 13 EYE VOTES. WE'LL KEEP
IT ON CALL. THANK YOU. AND NOW,
OF SB 1271 IS SENATOR MIN'S
BILL. AND I'D. YOU'RE WELCOME TO
MAKE A PRESENTATION IF YOU'RE
READY. SENATOR. THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR. COMMITTEE MEMBERS, AFTER
THAT VERY LONG BILL PRESENTATION
BEFORE US WITH BAD METAPHORS IN
MIND, HOPEFULLY THIS WILL BE A
MUCH ZIPPIER AND PEPPIER BILL
ABOUT E-BIKES. SB 1271 WOULD
MODIFY THE DEFINITION OF E-BIKE
CLASSES TO CLARIFY WHAT THE
APPROPRIATE CLASS FOR A
SWITCHABLE QUOTE UNQUOTE E-BIKE
IS, IF ANY, AND WOULD ALSO
ENHANCE THE SAFETY AND
REGULATORY COMPLIANCE OF
ELECTRIC BICYCLES AND ELECTRIC
SCOOTERS BY REQUIRING ALL
E-BIKES AND E-SCOOTERS TO BE
MANUFACTURED WITH BATTERIES THAT
MEET THE STRINGENT STANDARDS OF
THE EUROPEAN UNION AND
UNDERWRITERS LABORATORIES. IN
RECENT YEARS, OF COURSE, WE HAVE
SEEN A WIDESPREAD ADOPTION OF
E-BIKES AND E-SCOOTERS, AND THIS
IS, OF COURSE, RAISED CONCERNS
AROUND TWO MAIN ISSUES POTENTIAL
SPEED AND FIRE RISKS WITH BAD
BATTERIES. OF COURSE, MOST
E-BIKES AND E-SCOOTERS ARE
POWERED BY LITHIUM ION BATTERIES
AND REPORTS OF FIRES LINKED TO
THESE MOBILITY DEVICES HAVE BEEN
ON THE RISE ACROSS THE COUNTRY
DUE LARGELY TO POORLY
MANUFACTURED BATTERIES OR ABUSED
BATTERIES. SB 1271 WOULD PROTECT
CONSUMERS IN THE PUBLIC BY
REMOVING LOW QUALITY POWERED
PERSONAL MOBILITY DEVICES FROM
THE MARKET. IN ADDITION TO
ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM WITH
BATTERIES, IT WOULD ALSO ADDRESS
A PROBLEM WITH SWITCHABLE
E-BIKES. MANY MANUFACTURERS HAVE
DEVELOPED BIKES THAT CAN SWITCH
BETWEEN DIFFERENT MODES,
ALLOWING A BIKE TO MOVE FROM A
SLOWER CLASS TWO THROTTLE MODE
TO A FASTER CLASS THREE PEDAL
ASSIST MODE. THESE CLASS THREE
DEVICES ARE NOT TECHNICALLY
CONSIDERED E-BIKES IN THE
VEHICLE CODE, AND CAN CAUSE
CONFUSION WITH REGARD TO
POLICING THESE VEHICLES. AS
CLASS TWO E-BIKES FOLLOW
DIFFERENT LAWS OF THE ROADS AND
CLASS THREE E-BIKES, WHICH CAN
GO UP TO 28MPH. THIS MEASURE
WOULD HELP PARENTS IN PARTICULAR
BY MODIFYING THE DEFINITION OF
E-BIKE CLASSES TO CLARIFY WHAT
THE APPROPRIATE CLASSES FOR
SWITCHABLE E-BIKES ARE. TODAY, I
HAVE WITH ME MARK VUKOVICH,
ADVOCATE FOR STREETS FOR ALL, TO
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF SB 1271.
YOU MAY PROCEED. GOOD AFTERNOON.
COMMITTEE I'LL BE BRIEF, E-BIKES
ARE THE FASTEST SELLING ELECTRIC
VEHICLES ON THE MARKET. THEY'RE
VERY POPULAR. PEOPLE LIKE THEM.
THEY REPLACE CAR TRIPS. THEY
BRING A FREEDOM OF MOBILITY FOR
IF, YOU KNOW, IF YOU CAN'T RIDE
UP A HILL OTHERWISE. AND USING
THAT MOTOR TO HELP YOU. BUT
THERE ARE TWO PROBLEMS. SO ON
THE BATTERY SIDE, AS SENATOR
MINH MENTIONED, THESE ARE
LITHIUM ION BATTERIES. AND AS
YOU'RE RIDING A BICYCLE, THEY
RATTLE, THEY CAN GET SAND AND
DIRT INSIDE. THEY CAN GET WATER
INSIDE. THEY GO FROM HOT
TEMPERATURES TO COLD
TEMPERATURES. AND THE RISK OF
FIRES HAS BEEN DOCUMENTED IN
BOTH SAN FRANCISCO AND NEW YORK
CITY. AND SO WHAT OUR BILL DOES
SPECIFICALLY IS PUT TO ALLOW FOR
TWO DIFFERENT REGULATORY
STANDARDS THAT WOULD REDUCE THE
LIKELIHOOD OF FIRES BY REDUCING
BASICALLY THE SHODDY E-BIKE
MARKET, THE BOTTOM OF THE BARREL
MARKET. AND THIS WILL PREVENT
THE POWERFUL THERMAL RUNAWAY
THAT HAPPENS WITH LITHIUM ION
BATTERIES. THAT TAKES A LOT OF
WATER TO PUT OUT COMPARED TO A
NORMAL, A NORMAL OR SORRY, A
SIMILAR SIZE DEVICE. THE SECOND
THING THAT THIS BILL DOES, AS
SENATOR MINH MENTIONED, IS KIND
OF CLARIFIES THE DEFINITION OF
E-BIKE IN A WAY THAT THAT
FUNDAMENTALLY DOESN'T CHANGE THE
DEFINITION, BUT I THINK
CLARIFIES IT WITHIN THE VEHICLE
CODE, THAT TRIES TO ADDRESS
THESE DEVICES THAT WE'VE BEEN
SEEING THAT ARE ESSENTIALLY
MOPEDS OR MOTORCYCLES THAT ARE
BEING RIDDEN BY CHILDREN. AND SO
BY CLARIFYING THAT, WE'RE TRYING
TO ENSURE THAT THE MARKET IS
FILLED WITH JUST REPUTABLE
DEVICES WHILE STILL BALANCING
AND NOT TRYING TO INSTILL KIND
OF A PROCESS OF REGULATORY
CAPTURE, STILL TRYING TO ALLOW
FOR A COMPETITIVE, DIVERSE
MARKET THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO
STREETS FOR ALL. WE LOVE E-BIKES
AT STREETS FOR ALL, WHILE STILL
ENSURING THAT THE CONSUMER HAS
SAFE PRODUCTS. THANK YOU. OKAY.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. IS
THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE
COMMITTEE ROOM WHO WISHES TO
EXPRESS A SUPPORT POSITION? IF
SO, COME FORWARD. AT THIS TIME,
YOU CAN INDICATE YOUR SUPPORT
ALONG WITH YOUR NAME AND
AFFILIATION. HI MEGAN
HOUSEWRIGHT WITH US SOLUTIONS,
WITH THE CHANGES OUTLINED IN OUR
TESTIMONY, WE ARE SUPPORTIVE.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU. DANNY WARD
WALLER, ON BEHALF OF CAL BIKE
AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU. SEEING
NO ONE ELSE COME FORWARD, WE'LL
ASK FOR OPPOSITION WITNESSES.
WAS THERE A LEAD OPPOSITION
WITNESS? SEEING NONE. COME ON.
FORWARD. YOU CAN Þ THERE IS A
LEAD OPPOSITION. PLEASE COME
FORWARD, SIR. OKAY COME FORWARD.
YOU'LL HAVE A COUPLE OF MINUTES.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU. PLEASE
IDENTIFY YOURSELF. MY NAME IS
BOB MITTELSTAEDT. I'M WITH,
E-BIKE ACCESS. WE ARE A MARIN
COUNTY GROUP OF BIKERS. WE'RE
STRONGLY IN FAVOR OF LEGITIMATE
E-BIKES. WE'RE STRONGLY OPPOSED
TO ILLEGITIMATE MOTORCYCLES THAT
ARE BEING MISLABELED AS CLASS
TWO THROTTLE E-BIKES, I AM
SPEAKING MILDLY IN OPPOSITION TO
THE BILL FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE
OF SAYING THAT IT DOESN'T GO FAR
ENOUGH. THE PROBLEM IS THAT
THERE ARE SOME MANUFACTURERS,
AND TO SAY A NAME SUPER 73 IS
THE PRIMARY ONE. THAT IS SELLING
AS A CLASS TWO E-BIKE, A BIKE
THAT IT CALLS MULTI-CLASS OR
MULTI-MODE. AND IT PURPORTS TO
HAVE CLASS ONE, CLASS TWO, CLASS
THREE CAPABILITY PLUS A FOURTH
MODE, WHICH IS UP TO 30 TO
35MPH, WHICH IS WAY OVER THE 20
MILE PER HOUR LIMIT. THEY TRY
AND JUSTIFY THAT BY SAYING,
WELL, THEY SHIP IT IN THE CLASS
TWO MODE, AND IT'S ON THE RIDER,
THE TEN YEAR OLD KID. IF HE
PUSHES A BUTTON LIKE CHANGING
THE VOLUME ON AN IPHONE AND
SHIFTING INTO THESE HIGHER MODES
, IT'S LIKE IF THE LAW WERE THAT
CHILDREN OF ANY AGE COULD DRIVE
A CAR IF IT WERE LIMITED TO TEN
MILES AN HOUR, AND FORD SHIPS A
MANUAL TRANSMISSION CAR IN FIRST
GEAR AND SAYS, WE'VE COMPLIED,
AND IT'S ON THE KID. IF HE
SHIFTS INTO SECOND, THIRD OR
FOURTH, SO, THE PROBLEM IS SOME
MANUFACTURERS HAVE TRIED TO TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF THE THREE CLASS
SYSTEM, IN MAKING THESE MULTI
CLASS BIKES. I HAVE ASKED THE
PROPONENTS, IS THERE ANY
LEGITIMATE BICYCLE ON THE MARKET
NOW THAT IS LIMITED TO THE THREE
CLASSES AND THERE IS NONE. YOU
CAN'T GO FROM A CLASS TWO TO A
CLASS THREE BECAUSE CLASS TWO IS
THE ONLY ONE WITH A THROTTLE. IF
YOU GO TO CLASS THREE, YOU CAN'T
DO IT. IF YOU'VE GOT A THROTTLE
BIKE. ONLY REASON ANYBODY'S
TALKING ABOUT MULTI CLASS IS
BECAUSE THEY WANT THESE FAST
BIKES. SO WHAT UP HERE AT TWO
MINUTES. SO WHAT CAN BE DONE
ABOUT IT? I THINK I WOULD GO
BACK TO WHAT WAS IN AB 1778
DAMON CONNELLY'S BILL FROM MY
DISTRICT WHERE HE JUST SAYS AT
THE END OF EACH CLASS,
REGARDLESS OF MODE THAT
CLARIFIES, IT TAKES CARE OF THE
PROBLEM. OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK
YOU. ANYONE ELSE IN THE
COMMITTEE ROOM THAT WANTS TO
COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE AND
EXPRESS OPPOSITION? ALL RIGHT.
SEEING NONE, WE'LL BRING IT BACK
TO THE COMMITTEE AT THIS TIME.
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS, SENATOR
ALLEN AND THEN SENATOR NEWMAN
AFTER THAT. YEAH. I'D LIKE TO
GET SOME RESPONSE TO THE
COMMENTS THAT WERE JUST MADE. I
MEAN, I, YOU KNOW, WE ALL WANT
TO ENCOURAGE MORE E-BIKES, BUT
FOR THOSE OF US THAT ARE USUALLY
ON OUR, HUMAN POWERED BIKES,
THEIR SAFETY ISSUES ASSOCIATED
WITH FOLKS GOING BY, YOU KNOW,
CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, IN CLASS
THREE, I MEAN, SO I, I'M
INTERESTED IN THIS. I WANT TO
LEAVE A RESPONSE TO SOME OF THE
ISSUES RAISED. MR. CHAIR, I
PERMISSION TO HAVE MY WITNESS
SPEAK ON THIS IN RESPONSE. YES,
SIR, SENATOR ALLEN, I APPRECIATE
THE QUESTION, AND I AND I FULLY
RESPECT THE WITNESS. AND SO WHAT
I WILL SAY IS THIS IS THE WHAT
WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE WITH OUR
BILL, WHAT OUR BILL DOES IS IT
SAYS THAT A CLASS BY. SO RIGHT
NOW THE VEHICLE CODE SAID A
CLASS ONE BICYCLE MUST BE THIS
MUST BE THIS, IT MUST BE THIS.
IN AN EFFORT TO ADDRESS THIS
ISSUE OF HOW BICYCLES ARE
CLAIMING TO BE MULTI CLASS, EVEN
THOUGH ARE TECHNICALLY IN
VIOLATION OF THE LAW.
REGARDLESS, WE ARE SAYING THAT
BICYCLES MAY NOT IN A CLASS 3RD
MAY NOT HAVE A THROTTLE. THAT IS
WHAT WE'VE ADDED WITH THE
COMMITTEE. WE MAY NOT BE MAY NOT
HIT 28MPH IF IT'S A CLASS TWO,
AND BY CLARIFYING THOSE KNOTS,
THEY MAY NOT DO THAT. WE BELIEVE
WE ARE EFFECTIVELY ENDING THIS
MULTI CLASS BICYCLE ISSUE AND
THAT'S WHAT OUR FULL INTENT IS.
SO WHILE WE DON'T EXPLICITLY SAY
THAT MULTI CLASS BICYCLES EXIST,
WHAT WE BELIEVE WE'RE DE FACTO
DOING IS ENDING THIS, ILLICIT
USE OF THE TÂM MULTI CLASS
BICYCLE AND JUST TO INTERJECT MY
UNDERSTANDING AND TELL ME IF
THIS IS RIGHT, MARK, IS THAT,
THAT IS THAT IF, IF A BILL DOES
GO, IF A BIKE DOES GO OVER 28
MILES AN HOUR AND OR DOES HAVE A
THROTTLE, IT WOULD BE CLASSIFIED
AS A CLASS THREE BICYCLE BIKE,
RIGHT, IF IT HAS, IF IT GOES
ABOVE 28MPH AND HAS A THROTTLE,
IT WOULD NOT BE CLASSIFIED AS AN
E-BIKE AT ALL. ANY BIKE AT ALL.
RIGHT? IT WOULD BE ABOVE AN
E-BIKE WOULD BE, I GUESS,
ESSENTIALLY A MOPED. RIGHT. DID
YOU WANT TO? YES. THE PROBLEM WE
HAVE IS AND I'M GLAD WE'RE
ACTUALLY ON THE SAME PAGE, AND
IT'S JUST A MATTER OF HOW TO
IMPLEMENT IT. IF YOU DON'T WANT
TO HAVE MULTI CLASS BIKES, THE
WAY TO DO THAT IS TO HAVE A NEW
SUBSECTION THAT SAYS YOU CAN'T
HAVE MULTI CLASS BIKES. THE
PROBLEM WE HAVE NOW IS SUPER 73
AND THE OTHERS ARE THE MOST
POPULAR THING BEING SOLD WITH A
THROTTLE. AND THERE IS VERY LAX
ENFORCEMENT. IT'S VERY DIFFICULT
FOR THE POLICE TO ENFORCE. I'VE
TALKED TO LOCAL POLICE AND THE
LAST THING YOU WANT TO DO IS
CHASE DOWN A KID ON A SOMETHING
THAT SAYS, IT'S CLASS TWO. I'VE
WORKED WITH SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO
BAN THESE BIKES AND THEY SAY
THEY'RE MARKED CLASS TWO. WHO
ARE WE TO SAY THEY CAN'T BE
CLASS TWO? SO I THINK I THINK
THE SIMPLE WAY TO RESOLVE THIS
AND TO MAKE CLEAR THAT MULTI
CLASS E-BIKES ARE NOT PERMITTED
IS TO SAY MULTI CLASS E-BIKES
ARE NOT PERMITTED, I WOULD
ACCOMPLISH THAT PERHAPS A LITTLE
MORE ELEGANTLY BY SAYING THE
SPECIFICATIONS MAXIMUM SPEED OF
20 FOR A THROTTLE BIKE IS
REGARDLESS OF MODE. BUT IT'D BE
EVEN MORE EXPLICIT TO SAY, AND
YOU CAN ONLY HAVE ONE CLASS. HAS
THAT BEEN CONSIDERED THIS THIS
PROHIBITION ON MULTI CLASS
BIKES? THE CHALLENGE THE
CHALLENGE IS AND I KNOW I
APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THAT THE
WITNESS IS ADDING. THE CHALLENGE
IS THAT A CLASS AND WE'RE
GETTING REALLY INTO THE MINUTIA
HERE WITH CLASS TWO E-BIKE WHICH
YOU KNOW CAN BE WHICH WHICH HAS
A LOT OF PERMISSIONS. IT HAS A
THROTTLE BUT GETS MAXED OUT AT
20. IT CAN EFFECTIVELY BE A
CLASS ONE BICYCLE BECAUSE A
CLASS ONE BICYCLE IS A LESS
POWERFUL DEVICE. A CLASS ONE
CANNOT BE A CLASS TWO, BUT A
CLASS TWO CAN ACT AS A CLASS
ONE. IT CAN ACT AS ONE. JUST TO
BE CLEAR, AND I THINK THAT'S
WHERE THE CHALLENGE IS, IS THAT
WE'RE NOT TRYING TO ALLOW CLASS
THREE E-BIKES TO CLASS THREE IS
BEING BEING THE ONES THAT CAN
HIT 28MPH. WE'RE NOT TRYING TO
ALLOW CLASS, CLASS THREE E-BIKES
TO BE EXPANDED. WE ARE LIMITING
THAT IN THE WAY THAT WE WE'VE
WRITTEN THE BILL. BUT THE
PROBLEM IS, IS THAT JUST BY THE
INHERENT NATURE OF THE
DEFINITION, THE EXISTING IN THE
VEHICLE CODE CLASS, CLASS TWOS
CAN FUNCTION AS CLASS ONES. AND
THAT'S THAT'S NOT A BAD PROBLEM.
IT'S NOT THE PROBLEM WE'RE
SEEING WITH THE SUPER73 BICYCLE.
AND THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM THAT I
WOULD SAY BIKE ADVOCATES ARE
REALLY FEELING. THE PROBLEM IS
CLASS THREE IS THE CLASS THREE
GOING 28MPH AND THEN CLASS
THREES WITH A THROTTLE, AS THE
GENTLEMAN MENTIONED, THAT IS NOT
AN E-BIKE. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO SOLVE. THIS. THAT'S DO
YOU NEED TO HEAR FROM THE OTHER
WITNESS AGAIN I'M TRYING TO
AVOID REDUNDANCY A LITTLE BIT
HERE. SENATOR. THIS HAS NOTHING
TO DO WITH YOU. I'M THIS IS AS
LONG AS YOU AVOID. I WON'T BE
REDUNDANT. THE PROBLEM IS NOT
CLASS THREE, THE SUPER 73
SECONDS ARE CLASS FOUR, WHICH
THEY CALL UNLIMITED. AND THAT'S
WHEN YOU GET UP OVER 28 TO 30 TO
35. AND A CLASS TWO CANNOT BE A
CLASS ONE. IF AN E-BIKE HAS A
THROTTLE, RIGHT, IT CAN ONLY BE
CLASS TWO, RIGHT. SO YOU CAN'T
GO BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN TWO
AND ONE UNLESS WHAT THEY'RE
SAYING IS, OH, WE'LL JUST RELY
ON THE CHILD TO TURN OFF THE
THROTTLE. BUT THAT'S NOT GOING
TO HAPPEN. EVERYONE CAN ALWAYS
BIKE SLOWER, YOU KNOW. YEAH,
YEAH. AND THE FOCUS IS ON THE
CAPABILITY OF THE MOTOR. ANYWAY,
HOPEFULLY YOU GUYS CAN ALL GET
TOGETHER. I APPRECIATE THAT. AND
I THINK SENATOR NEWMAN. MISTER,
MISTER, MISTER CHAIR GO AHEAD.
THANK YOU. SENATOR. SENATOR
NEWMAN. SO SENATOR ALLEN STARTED
WITH MY LINE OF QUESTION, BUT
BUT I WANT TO ASK FOLLOWING UP,
ASSUMING WE PUT THIS LEGISLATION
INTO CODE, WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT
ENFORCEMENT? HOW CAN IN LAW
ENFORCEMENT OR OTHER PARTIES
IDENTIFY VISUALLY THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN A CLASS TWO AND A CLASS
THREE IN A WAY THAT WILL MAKE A
DIFFERENCE? HAS THAT BEEN
CONSIDERED? YEAH. SO I WOULD
SAY, FIRST I JUST TO ADDRESS
SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT HAVE
BEEN RAISED EARLIER, I THINK
THAT PART OF THE NUANCE THAT
WENT INTO THE DRAFTING OF THIS
BILL WITH THE BACK AND FORTH,
WAS TRYING TO SHAPE A FRAMEWORK
FOR DEALING WITH THESE PROBLEMS
WITHOUT DETERRING E-BIKE
ADOPTION GENERALLY. AND THOSE
ARE THE COMPETING PRINCIPLES
BEHIND THIS. AND SO WE I THINK
GOING FORWARD, WE'D CERTAINLY
LIKE TO CONSIDER OTHER FIXES TO,
TO THIS FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM OF,
OF THINGS THAT LOOK LIKE NON
BIKES THAT LOOK LIKE MOPEDS OR
SOMETHING OTHER THAN A BIKE, AND
HOW DO WE GET THAT UNDER
CONTROL. THAT, THAT IS PART OF
THE GOAL OF THIS PROBLEM. BUT
HOW DO WE DO THAT IN A WAY THAT
DOES NOT DETER E-BIKE ADOPTION
OVERALL. AND SO WE'LL CONTINUE
WORKING AND FIGURING OUT WHAT
MAKES SENSE. BUT WITH RESPECT TO
THE SPECIFIC QUESTION, I'LL
DEFER TO AGAIN, MY WITNESS, IF
HE MIGHT TESTIFY. I MEAN, AGAIN,
I SUSPECT THAT YOU'RE RESTRICTED
WHAT WE DO HERE THAT THE
CONVERSATION WILL CONTINUE AND
IT WILL BE ABOUT ENFORCEMENT,
ABOUT THIS WILL NOT BE THE LAST
E-BIKE BILL. WELL, I MEAN, IT
MAY BE ABOUT TECHNOLOGY, BUT I
MEAN, CLEARLY TO SENATOR ALLEN'S
POINT, THIS IS A THIS IS A BIG
PROBLEM IN ALL OF OUR
COMMUNITIES TO USE A REALLY KIND
OF COARSE EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW,
WHEN YOU BUY TWO TOY GUN, IT'S
GOT ORANGE ON IT. RIGHT? SO IS
THERE SOME CONSIDERATION, CAN WE
MAKE THIS CLEAR? YOU KNOW, WHAT
CONFORMS TO WHICH CLASSIFICATION
SO THAT YOU GET A GREATER
LIKELIHOOD OF ENFORCEMENT AND
HOPEFULLY DETERRENCE THROUGH
THAT? ANYBODY SENATOR NEWMAN AND
I JUST WANT TO I'M NOT 100. I
DON'T HAVE THE BILL IN FRONT OF
ME. I BELIEVE I'VE AND I'M
WILLING TO BE CORRECTED BY THE
COMMITTEE CONSULTANT THAT WE
HAVE A CLASSIFICATION MARKING
STANDARD WITHIN THE BILL THAT
SAYS THAT IT MUST BE MARKED AT
ITS CAPABILITY. AND SO IT'S NOT
A PANACEA ANSWER TO YOUR YOUR
QUESTION, BECAUSE THERE ARE
DEVICES RIGHT NOW THAT THAT LOOK
INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM A NON
E-BIKE. RIGHT, I READ IT I GUESS
IT'S THE MARKING LIKE THE SERIAL
NUMBER OF THAT OR IS IT
SOMETHING MORE VISUAL. IT'S A
IT'S A POINT MARKING THAT HAS A
CERTAIN KIND OF FONT SIZE
REQUIREMENT THAT HAS TO BE
MANUFACTURED ONTO THE BICYCLE
ITSELF. YOU HAVE TO PUT A LITTLE
LABEL. YEAH. OKAY. PUT A LITTLE
LABEL THAT SAYS CLASS TWO ON IT.
THE PROBLEM IS, IS THAT YOU HAVE
A MANUFACTURER SUPER73 AND
OTHERS WHO ARE STICKING THAT
LABEL ON, EVEN THOUGH THEY KNOW
FULL WELL IT ISN'T. THE CEO OF
SUPER73 HAS SAID ON RECORD THAT
THEY ARE FLYING UNDER THE RADAR
BECAUSE NOBODY IS ENFORCING THE
LAW. RIGHT. BUT MY PROPOSAL
WOULD BE TO PUT SOMETHING IN
THIS BILL THAT THAT IS SORT OF
LIKE A PRIVATE ATTORNEY
GENERALS, PROVISION THÀNH. SO
BECAUSE BUT ANYTHING SHORT OF
THAT, WE'RE JUST GOING TO STICK
IF I, IF I MIGHT I DO NEED TO
STICK TO THAT IF I, IF I MIGHT
WE HAVE A BILL. I APPRECIATE THE
INPUT. WE'VE GOTTEN LOTS OF
SUGGESTIONS. AND TO ANSWER YOUR
QUESTION, SENATOR, I MEAN, THE
WAY I THINK WE ENVISION THE BILL
IS, IS THAT IT GETS AWAY FROM
THE PROBLEM IS THIS CLASS TWO IS
THIS CLASS ONE IS THIS CLASS
THREE. IT WOULD BE CLEARLY
MARKED AT ITS HIGHEST
PERFORMANCE LEVEL. AND SO IF,
FOR EXAMPLE, A LAW ENFORCEMENT
OFFICER SAW A KID, YOU KNOW,
GOING 28 MILES AN HOUR DOING
SOME DANGEROUS STUFF AND, AND
PULLED THEM OVER, ASK THEM
QUESTIONS, THEY COULD SEE THAT
THE BIKE WAS CLASS THREE
IMMEDIATELY AND RECOGNIZED THAT.
SO THAT WOULD BE PART OF IT.
NOW, AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A
PANACEA. AS AS YOUR POINT AND
SENATOR ALLEN'S POINT, THIS MAY
BE THE BEGINNING OF A SERIES OF,
OF BILLS. AND I'LL JUST SAY THAT
LAST YEAR, THIS SAME BODY PASSED
A BILL OF MINE THAT AUTHORIZED
THE MINETA INSTITUTE OF
TRANSPORTATION TO COME UP WITH A
SET OF BEST PRACTICES AND
RECOMMENDATIONS. AND I AROUND
E-BIKES AND E-BIKE FRAMEWORK.
AND THESE QUESTIONS ARE
COMPLICATED AND RIGHT NOW,
WHAT'S HAPPENING ACROSS THE
STATE IS THAT EACH LOCAL
JURISDICTION IS COMING UP WITH
THEIR OWN PATCHWORK THINGS. AND
SO, AGAIN, THIS IS ONE FIX. IT'S
NOT A ONE SIZE FITS ALL PROBLEM.
I'M SURE THERE ARE OTHER THINGS
WE COULD DO BETTER, BUT THIS IS
A BILL DESIGNED TO ADDRESS SOME
SERIOUS PROBLEMS AND IN WAYS
THAT I THINK WILL HAVE IMMEDIATE
IMPACT. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
AND WE'LL COME AROUND TO YOU. WE
GOT SEVERAL PEOPLE WHO WOULD
LIKE TO ASK QUESTIONS ON THIS. I
GUESS THIS IS THE SECOND BILL
THAT WE'RE THE SECOND BILL IN
OVER AN HOUR OF COMMITTEE
HEARING SO FAR, AND I'M ALL, I'M
ALL I'M ASKING IS THAT WE DON'T,
I RESPECT EVERYBODY'S RIGHT TO
ASK QUESTIONS, JUST LIKE I WILL
HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY. BUT TO
AVOID WITNESS REDUNDANCY. WE'RE
GOING TO GO NOW TO SENATOR BLAKE
SPEER, FOLLOWED BY SENATOR
NGUYEN, SENATOR ARCHULETA, AND
THEN SENATOR SALADO. OKAY. THANK
YOU, I APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD. AND THE
SPONSOR, WE ARE A FIVE E-BIKE
FAMILY, AND WE HAVE CLASS ONE,
TWO AND THREE. AND IT SEEMS TO
ME LIKE THE PROBLEM AND I SEE ON
OUR STREETS ALL THE TIME, THE
PROBLEM IS ACTUALLY THE CLASS
TWO, WHICH IS THE THROTTLE, NOT
THE PEDAL ASSIST BIKES, THE
THROTTLE, AND THEN TAKING THE
GOVERNOR OFF OF THAT SO THAT IT
CAN GO FAR BEYOND 20 MILES AN
HOUR. SO SO, YOU KNOW, THE KIDS
WHO ARE RACING AROUND ON THOSE
WITH THE THROTTLE, THEY WANT TO
HAVE A MOTORCYCLE OR A MOPED.
THEY DON'T THEY REALLY DON'T
WANT TO BE PEDALING. AND THEY
LARGELY ARE NOT PEDALING. AND SO
WHAT I WANTED, IT SEEMS TO ME
LIKE IT IS TRUE THAT THIS IS ONE
BILL, AND THERE ARE MANY OTHER
BILLS THAT ARE NEEDED, AND WE
NEED TO DEAL WITH THAT CORE
PROBLEM, BUT WE ALSO NEED TO NOT
CHILL E-BIKE USE, ESPECIALLY FOR
KIDS WHO ARE FROM AGE ABOUT 10
TO 16, BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE
KIDS WHO CAN GO TO SOCCER
PRACTICE AND SCHOOL AND
EVERYTHING WITHOUT HAVING TO BE
DRIVEN. SO, AND IN MY COMMUNITY,
THAT'S LARGELY THE GROUP THAT
YOU SEE, BECAUSE WHEN THEY GET
TO BE 16 AND THEY CAN GET A CAR
IF THEY WANT TO AND CAN AFFORD
IT, THEY DO. SO WHAT I WANTED TO
REALLY UNDERSTAND IS WHAT EXACT
PROBLEM, IF IT'S LABELING TO THE
TOP LEVEL, WHICH IS WHICH YOU'RE
CALLING CLASS THREE BECAUSE IT
GOES UP TO 28 MILES AN HOUR.
WHAT IS ACTUALLY THE BENEFIT OF
THAT? BECAUSE TO ME, THE CLASS
TWOS ARE ACTUALLY THE BIKES THAT
ARE THE BIGGER PROBLEM, NOT THE
CLASS THREES. WELL, AGAIN, I'LL
DEFER TO MY WITNESS HERE, BUT I
THINK THE PROBLEM IS IT'S BIKES
THAT ARE MULTIMODAL, RIGHT. THAT
THEY COULD BE A CLASS ONE, CLASS
TWO OR CLASS THREE. BUT YOU
KNOW, THE KIDS WILL TYPICALLY
TAKE THEM TO CLASS THREE. SO I
THINK IT'S THE SAME PROBLEM
YOU'RE DESCRIBING WITH THE CLASS
TWO, WHERE THEY TAKE OFF THE
GOVERNOR AND ALLOW IT TO GO
SUPER FAST. THIS IS THE SAME
PROBLEM WITH THESE MULTI MODAL
BIKES AS I UNDERSTAND IT. AND SO
WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO WHAT THE
PROBLEM IS, IS THAT WHEN YOU
HAVE KIDS, YOU KNOW RIDING QUOTE
UNQUOTE CLASS TWO BIKES THAT
HAVE BEEN DESIGNED TO BE ABLE TO
BE EASILY SWITCHED TO CLASS
THREE AND GO MUCH FASTER,
THERE'S NOT A REAL FIX FOR IT
BECAUSE THESE ARE TECHNICALLY
CLASS TWO BIKES. AND SO THE
PROBLEM THAT THIS IS TRYING TO
ADDRESS IS TO ADDRESS, TO
BASICALLY CLEARLY LABEL THAT
THIS BIKE SHALL BE LABELED AT
THE TOP PERFORMANCE LEVEL, THAT
IT COULD BE CLASSIFIED AS. AND
SO BY DOING THAT YOU SAY, OKAY,
YOU CAN'T YOU CAN'T RIDE THIS OR
THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS YOU KNOW,
CERTAIN ALL THE, ALL THE
PROHIBITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS
THAT POTENTIALLY COME WITH CLASS
THREE BIKES. BUT MARK, GO AHEAD,
SENATOR BIXBY, WHILE I
APPRECIATE THE CONCERN YOU'RE
BRINGING UP ABOUT THROTTLE
E-BIKES, CLASS TWO E-BIKES, THE
I GUESS THE ISSUE TO BE
SPECIFIC, ARE THESE BICYCLES
THAT ARE CLAIMING TO BE BOTH
CLASS TWO AND THREE AT THE SAME
TIME, WHICH MEANS THAT THROTTLE
GETS YOU VERY, VERY FAST AND
THOSE BIKES, BICYCLES ARE
CAPABLE OF 28MPH. AND THIS AS,
AS THE AS THE WITNESS MENTIONED.
THIS IS IT'S NOT LEGAL WITH THIS
WITH THIS E-BIKE COMPANY IS
DOING AND SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING
TO DO IS, IS CLARIFY IN THAT
ASPECT THAT THERE SHOULD NOT BE
A BICYCLE THAT BOTH LETS YOU
THROTTLE AND HITS 28MPH. AND SO
THE ISSUE I THINK YOU'RE RAISING
ABOUT CLASS TWO IS, IS ONE THAT
WE'RE OPEN TO DISCUSSION AND
LEARNING MORE ABOUT AND IN
DEALING WITH POTENTIALLY AS
WELL. BUT THAT THAT'S NOT
EXACTLY THE PRECISE ISSUE WE'RE
TRYING TO HANDLE AT THIS PRECISE
MOMENT. BUT SO YOU FEEL LIKE
YOUR BILL, IT DOESN'T ALLOW A
BICYCLE TO HAVE A THROTTLE AND
GO TO 28 MILES AN HOUR, BECAUSE
IF IT IF IT IS LABELING IT AT
ITS HIGHEST CLASSIFICATION, THEN
IT COULD HAVE THE THROTTLE AND
SAY IT'S JUST CLASS THREE IN IN
THE CLASS THREE DEFINITION THAT
WE WORKED ON WITH THE COMMITTEE,
WE SAID THAT A CLASS THREE
BICYCLE THAT MAY GO 28MPH, WHICH
IS EXISTING STATUTE, MAY NOT
HAVE A THROTTLE. THAT IS WHAT
WE'VE ADDED IN OUR BILL. OKAY,
OKAY. THANK YOU. CHAIR THANK
YOU. SENATOR NGUYEN. YOU'RE
NEXT. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I MY
QUESTION IS ACTUALLY IN THE
BATTERIES. HOW DO YOU ENFORCE
THAT? I MEAN, BATTERIES ARE SOLD
ON AMAZON, BATTERIES ARE SOLD.
HOW DO WE ENFORCE IT TO MAKE
SURE THAT IT'S TESTED AND THAT
IT'S NOT? I MEAN, QUITE FRANKLY,
YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THEM ARE
COMING FROM CHINA AND THEY'RE
NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH THE
TESTING THAT YOU'RE REQUIRING
HERE OR ASKING FOR. SO HOW DO WE
ENFORCE THAT, I THINK LIKE WE'D
ENFORCE ANY OTHER LAW THAT WE
HAVE PROHIBITING CERTAIN TYPES
OF PRODUCTS. RIGHT, BUT AGAIN, I
DEFER ON THE SPECIFICS OF MY
WITNESS, BUT I THIS IS SET OF
PROHIBITIONS, RIGHT? I THINK
THAT'S RIGHT. BUT MY FURTHER
ANSWER TO YOU, I MEAN, SO IT'S
THE LAW NOW. SO THE LAW HAS TO
BE FOLLOWED BY FURTHER ANSWER IS
THAT COMPANIES LIKE AMAZON TEND
TO THEY USUALLY TRY TO FOLLOW
THE LAW WITH THEIR MANUFACTURERS
AND TRY TO REQUIRE THAT THOSE
BATTERIES MEET CERTAIN
STANDARDS. AND SO WE BELIEVE
THAT IF WE PASS THIS IN THIS
THIS LEGISLATIVE BODY PASSES
THAT, THAT THE AMAZON COMPANY
WILL, WILL FOLLOW THAT LAW. AND
SO THEY'LL ENFORCE THAT ON THE
ON THE MANUFACTURER SIDE, ON
THE, ON THE SALES SIDE AS WELL.
AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE FURTHER
LANGUAGE THAT WE'RE STILL
DEVELOPING. AND WE'RE GOING TO
WORK ON THIS IN THE NEXT
COMMITTEE AROUND REQUIREMENTS OF
THE STATE FIRE MARSHAL AS WELL.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE
GOING TO GO TO SENATOR
ARCHULETA, FOLLOWED BY SENATOR
SALADA IN THE INTEREST OF TIME,
MR. CHAIR, MY QUESTIONS WERE
ANSWERED. THANK YOU, SENATOR.
THANK YOU, SENATOR SERRANO. MINE
WAS ON THE BATTERY ISSUE ALSO,
IS THIS GOING TO REDUCE THE
AMOUNT OF FIRES THAT ARE BEING
THAT ARE CURRENTLY A PROBLEM, AS
YOU MENTIONED, BECAUSE WE HAD A
BILL LAST YEAR, 712 THAT SAID
PEOPLE CAN STORE THESE INSIDE
AND THE LANDLORD CAN'T DO
ANYTHING ABOUT IT. SO IS THIS
GOING TO REDUCE THAT? BECAUSE
THAT'S THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT.
IF IS THIS GOING TO SUPERSEDE
THAT LAST YEAR'S LAW REQUIRING
THE TENANT THAT LANDLORDS ALLOW
THEIR TENANTS TO STORE THE
E-BIKES INSIDE? NO, IT'S NOT
GOING TO SUPERSEDE, BUT IT'S
GOING TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF
FIRES THAT ARE OCCURRING BY
HAVING HIGHER QUALITY BATTERIES,
BECAUSE IF THAT'S A REAL PROBLEM
, YEP. WE'RE BACK TO HER
QUESTION. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO
ENFORCE THAT, SO AGAIN, I THINK
THAT THE GOAL, THE GOAL IS WE
BELIEVE IT WILL REDUCE FIRES
BECAUSE MANY OF THE FIRES AND I
DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S LIKE
QUANTIFIED DATA ON THIS, BUT IT
SEEMS ANECDOTALLY, LIKE MOST OF
THE FIRES THAT ARE OCCURRING ARE
AMONG THE CHEAPER BATTERIES THAT
ARE CONTAMINATED. MANUFACTURED.
YEAH, EXACTLY. SO, AS FAR AS
ENFORCEMENT, AGAIN, I WOULD
REPEAT MARK'S POINT. I MEAN, HOW
DO WE ENFORCE ANY LAWS? THE
QUESTION BUT, YOU KNOW, I WE
HAVE A CERTIFICATION PROCESS, WE
HAVE PROHIBITIONS. AND IF IT
BECAME AN ENDEMIC PROBLEM WITH A
BUNCH OF SMALL OFFSITE
MANUFACTURERS FLOODING THE
MARKET WITH BATTERIES, WE MIGHT
HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE DRAWING
BOARD. BUT AGAIN, SITES LIKE
AMAZON HAVE A LOT TO LOSE BY BY
BASICALLY BLATANTLY VIOLATING
THE LAW. SO, WE I GUESS WE'LL
CROSS THAT BRIDGE IF WE GET TO
IT. YEAH, I WOULD PROBABLY LIKE
TO SEE THIS BEFORE WE DID THE
OTHER ONE. THANK YOU. YEAH YES.
ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO, SEE NO
ONE ELSE THAT WISHES TO BE
RECOGNIZED AT THIS TIME. SENATOR
NEIL, YOU DO. ALL RIGHT, JUST,
VERY QUICKLY, I WHEN I FIRST
READ THIS, I THOUGHT YOU HAD A
GOOD IDEA, BUT IT, IT THE
SOLUTION MAY BE NEEDED A LITTLE
WORK, BUT IT'S INTERESTING THAT
THE ENTIRE DISCUSSION HERE HAS
BEEN ABOUT CLASSIFICATION OF
BIKES, BUT I THINK YOUR PRIMARY
INTENT WAS SAFETY. YEAH RIGHT,
SO I'M. IT KIND OF CLOUDS THE
ISSUE A LITTLE BIT, AND, AND IF
THE BILL IS GOING TO ADDRESS
THAT, IT NEEDS WORK. AND I CAN
TELL BY THE DISCUSSION, THE, THE
SAFETY ASPECT OF IT, I ENDORSE
WHOLEHEARTED. BUT I'M GOING TO
LAY OFF THE BILL BECAUSE I DON'T
KNOW WHERE IT'S GOING TO END UP.
THEN THE DISCUSSION SORT OF
SUPPORTS THAT. WELL, AGAIN, I
THINK WHILE WE'RE OPEN TO
FURTHER SUGGESTIONS, I THINK THE
BILL IS A GOOD BILL, AS IS. IT'S
ALREADY BEEN SUBJECT TO A LOT OF
NEGOTIATION WITH STAKEHOLDERS.
WE'VE ALREADY, YOU KNOW, SEEN AT
LEAST ONE GROUP COME OFF OF ITS
OPPOSITION, AND WE'RE BALANCING
PRIORITIES AROUND CIVIL
LIBERTIES. WE'RE AROUND, YOU
KNOW, E-BIKE ADOPTION. SO IS
PUBLIC SAFETY IS THE GOAL OF
THIS, BUT IT IS A BALANCING ACT
WITH OTHER PRIORITIES AS WELL.
SO I THINK THIS BILL IS AS IS I
KNOW THERE'S OTHER IDEAS OUT
THERE. IT SEEMS LIKE WE'VE HEARD
QUITE A FEW TODAY ON HOW TO ALSO
MAKE E-BIKES SAFER IN OTHER
WAYS, AND THOSE COULD BE THE
SUBJECT OF FUTURE BILLS. BUT I
THINK THIS BILL IS PROBABLY, WE
HOPE, GOING TO STAND ALONE AS
IS. WE DON'T ANTICIPATE A LOT OF
FUTURE AMENDMENTS ON THIS. ALL
RIGHT. THANK YOU, SENATOR MINH,
MUCH OF THIS COMMITTEE'S FOCUS
WAS ON THE CLASSIFICATIONS AND
NOT ON THE ENFORCEMENT ISSUES,
WHICH AT SOME LEVEL MIGHT BE
ANOTHER BILL. BUT BACK TO THE
CLASSIFICATIONS OR AMENDMENTS
REQUESTED. DO YOU TAKE THOSE
AMENDMENTS? YES, WE DO TAKE YOUR
AMENDMENTS. SORRY, I SHOULD HAVE
SAID THAT AT THE OUTSET AND WANT
TO THANK THE STAFF FOR WORKING
WITH US. I JUST WANT TO MAKE
THAT CLEAR, WITH THAT, WE CAN
ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THE BILL
IF THERE IS ONE. SENATOR NEWMAN
MOVES THE BILL, THE MOTION IS TO
PASS, AS AMENDED, TO RULES. THIS
IS FILE ITEM NUMBER THREE.
SENATORS CORTEZ I DESI I NILO
ALLEN. ALLEN I ARCHULETA I
ARCHULETA I BECKER A BECKER I
BREAKSPEAR BREAKSPEAR I DALLY
DODD DODD I GONZALEZ LIMÓN LIMÓN
I NEWMAN NEWMAN I WHEN I WHEN I
PORTANTINO PORTANTINO I CIERTO
CIERTO I UMBERG. 11 TO 0 SO I'M
ON CALL. ALL RIGHT. THE BILL HAS
11 I VOTES AND WE'LL LEAVE IT ON
CALL. THANK YOU EVERYONE. WE'RE
GOING TO MOVE AHEAD TO ITEM
FIVE, AND WELCOME SENATOR ASHBY
TO PRESENT ON SB 1313. ALL
RIGHT. I'VE WATCHED SEVERAL
SENATORS COME TELL YOU THEY'LL
BE QUICK, SO I'M NOT EVEN GOING
TO SAY IT. I DON'T JINX MYSELF.
READ THE BILL. ALL RIGHT. THANK
YOU, MR. CHAIR. TODAY I AM HERE
TO PRESENT SB 1313. IT'S THE
SAFE ROADS ACT. IT ADDRESSES THE
MISUSE OF AND
VEHICLES, SPECIFICALLY DRIVING
ASSISTANCE IN MONITORING
SYSTEMS. THE BILL PROHIBITS
INDIVIDUALS FROM USING,
PURCHASING, POSSESSING,
MANUFACTURING, SELLING,
DISTRIBUTING DEVICES DESIGNED TO
INTERFERE WITH A VEHICLE'S
SAFETY MONITORING SYSTEM
VIOLATIONS WOULD CONSTITUTE
INFRACTIONS UNDER THE VEHICLE
CODE, WITH PENALTIES ESCALATING
FOR REPEAT OFFENDERS. ADVANCED
DRIVING ASSISTANCE SYSTEMS ARE
BECOMING INCREASINGLY COMMON IN
OUR MODERN VEHICLES. THEY AID IN
ALERTING DRIVERS OF DANGEROUS
LANE DEPARTURES, LANE CENTERING,
AND WARN DRIVERS OF POSSIBLE
OBSTACLES IN THE ROAD. YOU KNOW
THIS CAR BEEPS AT YOU WHEN YOU
GET TOO CLOSE TO SOMETHING IN
FRONT OF YOU. ADDITIONALLY,
THESE SYSTEMS DETECT IF A DRIVER
IS DISTRACTED. THESE SYSTEMS
INCLUDE CAMERAS TO MONITOR THE
DRIVER'S EYES, THEIR HEAD
POSITION, AND THE SENSORS THAT
DETECT THEIR HANDS ON THE
STEERING WHEEL. ALL FULL ATTENTION
AND ENGAGEMENT BY THE DRIVER.
UNFORTUNATELY, DRIVERS WHO ARE
CIRCUMVENTING THESE SAFETY
SYSTEMS THROUGH THE USE OF
AFTERMARKET DEVICES OR BY USING
HOMEMADE TECHNIQUES ENTIRE
ONLINE MARKETPLACES ARE
DEDICATED TO SELLING WHAT THEY
CALL NAG REDUCTIVE DEVICES.
REDUCTION DEVICES DESIGNED TO
STIMULATE A DRIVER'S HANDS ON
THE WHEEL BY APPLYING PRESSURE,
OTHER DRIVERS RESORT TO USING
WEIGHTED MAGNETS, WATER BOTTLES,
HAIR CLIPS, AND VARIOUS OTHER
ITEMS TO ACHIEVE THE SAME
EFFECT, WHICH IS TO BYPASS
IMPORTANT SAFETY FEATURES. THE
LACK OF LEGISLATION TO DETER
THIS BEHAVIOR HAS LED TO THE
INCREASING AVAILABILITY OF THESE
DEVICES, UNDERMINING EFFORTS TO
PROMOTE ROAD SAFETY. IT'S VITAL
TO ENSURE OUR ROADS ARE SAFE
FROM ACCIDENTS CAUSED BY
DISTRACTED DRIVING. YOU KNOW
THAT SB 1313 ADDRESSES THIS
ISSUE BY UPDATING CALIFORNIA'S
TRAFFIC LAWS TO KEEP PACE WITH
TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENTS IN
OUR VEHICLES AND DETER MISUSE OF
SAFETY TECHNOLOGY, AND ALSO TO
DETER MANIPULATION. I DO HAVE A
LEAD WITNESS WITH ME TODAY,
CHAIRMAN, THIS IS KURT
AUGUSTINE. HE'S THE SENIOR
DIRECTOR OF THE STATE AFFAIRS, A
STATE AFFAIRS FOR THE ALLIANCE
OF AUTOMOTIVE INNOVATION. ALL
RIGHT, MR. AUGUSTINE, THE FLOOR
IS YOURS. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
AND MEMBERS AGAIN. MY NAME IS
KURT AUGUSTINE. I'M THE SENIOR
DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS
FOR THE ALLIANCE FOR AUTOMOTIVE
INNOVATION, WHICH IS THE TRADE
ASSOCIATION OF THE AUTO
MANUFACTURERS, AS WELL AS MANY
OF THE TECHNOLOGY PROVIDERS FOR
VEHICLES. THE SENATOR HAS DONE
AN EXCELLENT JOB OF LAYING OUT
THE BILL. SO I'M NOT GOING TO GO
INTO THAT. I'LL QUICKLY
SUMMARIZE THAT WE'RE PROUD TO BE
THE SPONSOR OF THIS BILL AND TO
WORK WITH THE SENATOR.
AUTOMAKERS HAVE DEVELOPED
MULTIPLE SAFETY SYSTEMS THAT SHE
ADDRESSED IN HER REMARKS, AND
THEY'RE IMPORTANT FOR ROAD
SAFETY, PEDESTRIANS, PASSENGERS,
VEHICLE DRIVERS, ETC. AGAIN,
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS HAVE BEEN
SPENT ON THIS ON THESE SAFETY
DEVICES. UNFORTUNATELY, WE'RE
HERE TO TAKE TALK ABOUT
SOMETHING THAT'S COMPLETELY
CONTRARY TO THAT. THINGS THAT
ARE TO DEFEAT THOSE SAFETY
DEVICES. SO THESE DEVICES OFFER
NOTHING BUT TRYING TO OVERRIDE
SAFETY. THEY HAVE NO LEGITIMATE
PURPOSE AT ALL. IF YOU DO A
QUICK GOOGLE SEARCH, YOU WILL
FIND MANY PLACES THAT ARE
SELLING THESE ONLINE. NOW,
SURPRISINGLY, CALIFORNIA DOES
NOT HAVE A LAW PREVENTING THE
USE OR SALE OF THESE DEVICES.
THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER STATES
THAT WERE IN THE SAME PLACE, AND
WE HAVE WORKED IN THOSE STATES
TO SECURE PASSAGE OF THOSE
BILLS, SO IT'S SIMPLY WE WANT TO
SUMMARIZE, TO SAY THAT
AUTOMAKERS SUPPORT ANY EFFORT TO
MAINTAIN THE PROVEN SAFETY
FEATURES AND TO HELP ELIMINATE
THESE DEFEAT DEVICES THAT
OVERRIDE SAFETY AND SIMPLY WOULD
ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF THIS
MEASURE. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK
YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. IS THERE
ANYONE ELSE IN THE COMMITTEE
ROOM WHO WISHES TO EXPRESS THE
SUPPORT POSITION? IF SO, PLEASE
COME FORWARD AND YOU MAY STATE
YOUR NAME AND AFFILIATION. YOUR
SUPPORT. THANKS. MR. CHAIR
MEMBERS ANDREW ANTWI WITH CHAU
YODER, ANTHONY SCHMELZER AND
L®NG HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF
TESLA IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. ALL
RIGHT. WE'LL MOVE TO OPPOSITION.
IS THERE A LEAD OPPOSITION
WITNESS ON THIS BILL? I WASN'T
MADE AWARE OF ONE. THERE'S NOT
SEEN NONE. WE WILL ASK IF
THERE'S ANY OPPOSITION IN THE
ROOM. YOU MAY COME FORWARD
SEEING NONE. WE'LL BRING IT BACK
TO THE COMMITTEE AT THIS TIME.
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS OR
CONCERNS? SENATOR DAWLEY, REAL
QUICK, I SO I HAVE A TOYOTA THAT
HAS LANE SENT RING DEVICE AND I
IT TOOK ME A WHILE TO TURN IT
OFF IN THE MOUNTAINS.
UNFORTUNATELY, IT DOESN'T WORK
THAT WELL WHEN YOU CORNER IT
READS OFF THE WHITE LINE AND
IT'S TRYING TO TURN YOU BACK
INTO THE TRAFFIC. WHEN YOU'RE
TRYING TO GO AROUND THE CORNER.
SO YOU'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT
AFTERMARKET DEVICES IF YOU USE
MANUFACTURER APPROVED ITEMS, OR
YOU HAVE WORKED WITH THE
MANUFACTURER OR THE
MANUFACTURERS APPROVED
AFTERMARKET ENTITIES, THAT'S
FINE. THIS BILL WOULD BE MORE
LIKE, SENATOR, IF YOU USED A
BUNGEE CORD. RIGHT? OKAY THANK
YOU. ANYONE ELSE? SEEING NONE,
WE CAN ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO
MOVE THE BILL. ALL RIGHT.
THERE'S A MOTION BY SENATOR
NEWMAN. IN THE MOTION WOULD BE
Dð PASS TO APPROVE STATIONS.
THIS IS FILE ITEM NUMBER FIVE.
SENATORS CORTEZ. AYE. CORTEZ
AYE. NILO. NILO I ALLEN, I ALLEN
I ARCHULETA I ARCHULETA I BECKER
I BECKER I BLAKE SPEER, BLAKE
SPEER I DOLLY, DOLLY I DODD DODD
I GONZALEZ. LIMÓN HI. LIMÓN I
NEWMAN. NEWMAN I WHEN I WHEN I
PORTANTINO PORTANTINO I CIERTO
SARAH T I UMBERG. 13 ZERO ONE
CALL. ALL RIGHT. DO YOU HAVE 13?
I VOTES I'LL LEAVE THE BILL ON
CALL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK
YOU ALL VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT.
GOING TO. MISS SENATOR STERN IN
THE ROOM. I SEE HIM THERE. ALL
RIGHT. WE'RE MOVING TO FILE ITEM
EIGHT, WHICH IS SB 1509. STERN
AND WE'LL WELCOME SENATOR STERN.
YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND PRESENT
WHENEVER YOU'RE READY, THANK
YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND I WANT TO
APPRECIATE YOUR YOUR DILIGENCE
ON THIS LEGISLATION AND ALL THE
SORT OF BACK AND FORTH THAT
WE'VE HAD BETWEEN COMMITTEE. I
WANT TO, ACCEPT THAT. LET ME
MAKE SURE I GET MY RHETORIC
RIGHT HERE. BUT I WANT TO ACCEPT
THE CHAIR'S RECOMMENDATION TO
AMEND THE BILL. SO ACCEPT THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS TO, TO
ENSURE THAT THIS BILL ONLY
APPLIES TO 55 MILE PER HOUR
ZONES OR LESS. SO IF YOU'RE
FOLLOWING ALONG NOT FREEWAYS,
BUT ANY ANY ROAD OR HIGHWAY
THAT'S 55 AND UNDER, PER
PASSENGER VEHICLES, PER
PASSENGER VEHICLE. SO I CAN GO
BACK TO THAT IN A SECOND IF
MEMBERS HAVE QUESTIONS. BUT,
LOOK, THIS IS THIS IS, A BIGGER
PROBLEM, IN CALIFORNIA EVEN THAN
THAN HOMICIDES RIGHT NOW, MORE
PEOPLE ARE DYING ON OUR STREETS,
EVERY DAY. FROM TRAFFIC RELATED
FATALITIES, THE NUMBERS ARE
ASTOUNDING. SINCE 2020, EVEN
WE'VE SEEN ALMOST A4X SPIKE. SO
ABOUT. SO 1228 PEOPLE DIED FROM
TRAFFIC RELATED DEATHS IN
CALIFORNIA IN 2020, LAST YEAR,
THE DATA IS STILL BEING SHORED
UP, BUT IT'S OVER 4000 PEOPLE
ARE NOT DRIVING WITH OTHER
PEOPLE IN MIND. AND THERE ARE
OTHER TOOLS. I KNOW THIS
COMMITTEE HAS BEEN EXPLORING AND
WORKING ON THAT. I'M VERY
EXCITED ABOUT. AND SOME OF THE
STAKEHOLDERS HERE HAVE HAVE
ELEVATED TRAFFIC CALMING
MEASURES, MORE FUNDING FOR
ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION,
PEDESTRIAN OPPORTUNITIES, BUT
THERE DOES NEED TO BE SOME
PENALTY. THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME
PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING THAT IF
YOU'RE DRIVING OVER 60 MILES AN
HOUR IN A 35 ZONE, LIKE YOU'RE
PUTTING LIFE AT RISK, AND WE'RE
NOT SAYING WE'RE GOING TO TAKE
AWAY YOUR LICENSE, THIS BILL
WOULD ADD TWO POINTS AS OPPOSED
TO THAT, THAT ONE POINT YOU MAY
GET, TO THOSE KINDS OF INCIDENTS
THERE ARE TOO MANY VICTIMS TO
RUN THROUGH, EMILY, SHANE WAS
SOMEONE THAT, YOU KNOW, I GREW
UP WITH IN MY HOMETOWN AND HER
DAD'S HERE TO TELL YOU HER
STORY, RYAN CAPELL WAS, YOU
KNOW, ABOUT TO TAKE MY NIECE TO
PROM, AND THERE'S RYAN CAPELL IS
NO MORE BECAUSE SOMEONE WAS
DRIVING 85 ON A 40 IN THE MIDDLE
OF A SAN FERNANDO VALLEY. THAT
PERSON, UNDER CURRENT LAW, IS
NOT NECESSARILY NOT ONLY NOT
REQUIRED TO GET POINTS ON THEIR
RECORD, THEY'RE NOT EVEN
NECESSARILY A RECKLESS DRIVER.
AND YET THEY'RE DRIVING A DEADLY
WEAPON AND KILLING PEOPLE. TAKE
LÀ, FOR EXAMPLE. WE KNOW THAT
THIS AFFECTS COMMUNITIES OF
COLOR AND LOW INCOME PEOPLE
DISPROPORTIONATELY. SO WE'VE
SEEN IN LA ALONE IN 2023, 336
DEATHS, BUT 179 OF THOSE DEATHS
WERE PEDESTRIANS AND ANOTHER 24
WERE BICYCLISTS. SO PEOPLE WHO
ARE WAITING AT THE BUS STOP,
PEOPLE WHO ARE RIDING ALONG THE
ROAD, EVERYDAY WORKING PEOPLE
WHO DON'T HAVE THE LUXURY OF,
SAY, BEING IN THAT CAR, THEY'RE
THE ONES TRULY AT RISK. I KNOW
THE MEMBERS ON THIS COMMITTEE
HAVE BEEN LEADING ON THESE
ISSUES, AND I THINK THIS IS A
CRUCIAL PIECE OF THE FORMULA, I
WANT TO LASTLY ACKNOWLEDGE MY
CONVERSATIONS AND THE GOOD GIVE
AND TAKE I'VE BEEN HAVING WITH
SOME OF THE OPPOSITION WHO ARE
WORRIED ABOUT WHAT THEIR DRIVERS
ARE DOING WHEN THEY'RE NOT
COMMERCIALLY DRIVING. SO WHETHER
YOU'RE A SCHOOL BUS DRIVER OR A
TRUCK DRIVER OR AN AMBULANCE
DRIVER, THIS BILL, IF YOU WERE
EXTREME SPEEDING AND YOU GOT
POINTS FOR THAT INCIDENT, WOULD
STILL AFFECT YOUR ABILITY TO BE
A COMMERCIAL DRIVER, IT WOULDN'T
AUTOMATICALLY TAKE AWAY YOUR
LICENSE, IN EVERY CASE. BUT
THERE WOULD BE AN IMPACT. AND I
GUESS YOU ALL AS MEMBERS AND WE
HAVE TO WRESTLE WITH THAT AND
SAY WHEN, WHEN FOLKS ARE OFF
DUTY, AND THEY'RE A SCHOOL BUS
DRIVER, DO YOU WANT THEM TO BE
THE ONE DRIVING 61 IN THAT 35,
OR DO YOU WANT THEM TO BE THE
ONE DRIVING, YOU KNOW, AT THOSE
RATES? AND I'M SENSITIVE, I
GUESS, TO THE TO THE OVERALL
WELFARE OF, OF THAT COMMUNITY.
BUT I JUST, I DON'T KNOW, KIND
OF RUN OUT OF, OF SYMPATHY ON
THE SPEEDING. AND MAYBE IT'S
BEING A DAD OR LOSING PEOPLE. I
KNOW. BUT, I THINK IT'S TIME FOR
A CHANGE, I WOULD SAY THAT WE'VE
GOT A PRETTY GOOD FRAMEWORK
HERE, BUT I ALSO WANT TO EXPRESS
OPENNESS TO OTHER DIRECTIONS THE
ORIGINAL ANALYSIS HAD SUGGESTED,
FOR INSTANCE, DROPPING THE CAP
TO SAY, 40 MILES AN HOUR AND
ONLY COVERING STREETS AND ROADS
AND NOT HIGHWAYS. I WAS OPEN TO
THAT, BUT AS IT STANDS RIGHT
NOW, THIS IS 55 AND UNDER, SO NO
FREEWAYS, BUT THOSE, THOSE,
THOSE FASTER HIGHWAYS, LIKE THE
DEADLIEST ONE OF ALL PACIFIC
COAST HIGHWAY ARE STILL IN THIS
BILL. HAPPY TO TAKE QUESTIONS
AND REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR
SUPPORT HERE. HIGHWAY PATROLMEN
ARE COMING IN FOR ME TO, AS
SECOND LEAD SUPPORT, BUT WE'RE
GOING TO LET MICHELLE TAKE THE
MIC HERE AND FOR THEM FOR
AFTERWARDS. THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIRMAN. PLEASE PROCEED. GOOD
AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS MICHELLE
SHANE. I'M HERE TODAY AS A
CONCERNED CITIZEN, A GRIEVING
FATHER AND AN ADVOCATE FOR
CHANGE. YOU SEE, MY YOUNGEST
DAUGHTER, EMILY, WAS TRAGICALLY
KILLED ON PCH IN MALIBU BY A
RECKLESS DRIVER WHO CHOSE TO
PRIORITIZE SPEED OVER SAFETY.
THIS SENSELESS LOSS HAS LEFT AN
UNFORGETTABLE, UNFORGETTABLE,
UNFORGETTABLE MARK ON MY FAMILY,
MY AND MY LIFE. BUT I'M HERE
TODAY NOT JUST TO SHARE MY PAIN,
BUT TO SHED LIGHT ON A PERVASIVE
PROBLEM THAT CLAIMS COUNTLESS
LIVES EVERY YEAR. THE ENDEMIC OF
SPEEDING AND RECKLESS DRIVING
EVERY DAY, INDIVIDUALS MAKE THE
IRRESPONSIBLE CHOICE TO PUT
LIVES AT RISK FOR MERE MOMENTS
OF THRILL. THIS IS NOT THIS IS
NOT JUST UNACCEPTABLE. IT'S A
CRISIS THAT DEMANDS. DEMANDS ARE
URGENT ATTENTION. AS A
FILMMAKER, I'M TRYING TO BRING
AWARENESS TO THE DANGERS OF PCH
AND MALIBU THROUGH MY AWARD
WINNING DOCUMENTARY, 21 MILES OF
MALIBU. BUT THE HEARTBREAKING
TRUTH IS THAT THIS HIGHWAY HAS
CLAIMED 60 LIVES, CAUSED 110
SEVERE INJURIES SINCE EMILY'S
DEATH IN 2010. THIS IS NOT A
STATISTIC. THESE ARE LIVES CUT
SHORT, DREAMS DEFERRED AND
FAMILIES DEVASTATED. THE ROOTS
OF THIS CRISIS RUN DEEP. PCH HAS
BEEN A PLAYGROUND FOR DANGEROUS
DRIVING FOR DECADES, FUELED BY
POPULAR CULTURE, A TROUBLING
DISREGARD FOR HUMAN LIFE. WE SEE
THIS IN THE COUNTLESS CAR
CRASHES CAPTURED ON SOCIAL
MEDIA. THE RECKLESS STUNTS
PERFORMED ON PUBLIC ROADS, THE
AFTERMATH OF BLOCKBUSTER MOVIES
THAT GLAMORIZE SPEED AND
AGGRESSION. AS A SOCIETY, WE
MUST RECKON WITH THE FACT THAT
OUR ACTIONS AND MEDIA HAVE
HELPED TO CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT
THAT ENCOURAGES DEADLY BEHAVIOR.
I URGE YOU, ESTEEMED MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE, TO RECOGNIZE THE
URGENT NEED FOR THE LEGISLATURE
OF BILL SB 1509. THIS BILL WOULD
ESTABLISH MEANINGFUL
CONSEQUENCES FOR RECKLESS
DRIVING AND CONVEYING THAT WE
VALUE HUMAN LIFE OVER MOMENTS VÆ
THRILLS BY SUPPORTING SENATOR
STERN'S BILL, SB 1509, YOU WOULD
HONOR THE MEMORY OF THOSE WE
HAVE LOST AND TAKE A STAND FOR
THE SAFETY OF ALL ROAD USERS. I
KNOW YOU CANNOT UNDO THE PAIN I
FEEL EVERY DAY, BUT BY PASSING
SB 1509, YOU CAN HELP PREVENT
OTHER FAMILIES FROM EXPERIENCING
THE DEVASTATION MINE HAS
ENDURED. YOU CAN ENSURE THAT NO
PARENT HAS TO BURY A CHILD
BECAUSE SOMEONE CHOSE TO DRIVE
RECKLESSLY. YOU CAN MAKE OUR
ROADS SAFER FOR EVERYONE. SO I
IMPLORE YOU, FOR THE SAKE OF ALL
OF US WHO HAVE LOST AND REMAIN,
PLEASE SUPPORT SB 1509. GIVE
THIS BILL THE ATTENTION IT
DESERVES BECAUSE WHEN IT COMES
TO SPEEDING AND RECKLESS
DRIVING, THE COST OF INACTION IS
FAR TOO GREAT. WELL, THANK YOU
FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. WE
APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE, OTHER
WITNESSES WHO WISH TO EXPRESS
THE SUPPORT POSITION. MR. CHAIR
MEMBERS RANDY PERRY THERE AND
READING ASSOCIATES ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
HIGHWAY PATROLMEN AND SUPPORT.
ALL RIGHT. SEEING NO OTHERS
COMING FORWARD, I DON'T SUPPOSE
WE HAVE A LEAD OPPOSITION
WITNESS. WE DO. PLEASE COME
FORWARD, MR. BROAD. WELCOME. YOU
HAVE A COUPLE MINUTES. MR. CHAIR
AND MEMBERS, MATT BROAD HERE ON
BEHALF OF THE TEAMSTERS, IN
RESPECTFUL BUT STRONG
OPPOSITION, I WANT TO LEAD OFF
BY SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE ARE
A UNION OF PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS.
WE ARE SENSITIVE TO ROADWAY
SAFETY. WE'RE SENSITIVE TO, TO
TRAFFIC FATALITY. IT'S SOMETHING
THAT WE TAKE VERY SERIOUSLY. AND
I THINK OUR, OUR RECORD IN
COMMITTEE OVER THE YEARS SHOWS
THAT I THINK THAT THIS IS A BILL
THAT REQUIRES SOME NUANCE AND
THE NUANCE HERE IS THERE ARE
DIFFERENT WAYS TO GET IT
SPEEDING THIS BILL, THE METHOD
IN IT IS TO ASSESS TWO POINTS,
FOR A VIOLATION, SPEEDING 26MPH
ABOVE THE SPEED LIMIT. I HEAR
THERE'S AMENDMENTS THAT THE
AUTHOR PLANS TO TAKE. THE
REALITY IS THAT OTHER TWO POINT
VIOLATIONS UNDER THE VEHICLE
CODE ARE FOR DUIS. THEY'RE FOR
SPEEDING ABOVE 100MPH. AND WE
THINK THAT THOSE ARE CLEARLY
RECKLESS, AND THAT WHEN YOU LOOK
AT THE TWO AND COMPARE THEM,
THEY'RE JUST DIFFERENT LEVELS OF
CULPABILITY. AND WE THINK THAT
THE LAW NEEDS TO SORT OF REFLECT
THAT. YOU KNOW, WE'RE
PARTICULARLY SENSITIVE TO POINTS
ON LICENSES, COMMERCIAL DRIVERS
HAVE A POINTS MAGNITUDE OF 1.5
FOR EVERY POINT. THESE POINTS
ALSO CARRY ON THEIR PERSONAL
LICENSE. YOU GET A POINT ON YOUR
PERSONAL LICENSE, IT'S ON YOUR
COMMERCIAL LICENSE. AND SO WITH
RESPECT TO WHAT SENATOR STERN
SAID, WE DISAGREE THAT THIS
DOESN'T MEAN IT'S THE END OF
SOMEONE'S JOB, BECAUSE
FUNCTIONALLY, IT IS WHAT WE'VE
SEEN WITH EVEN A SINGLE POINT,
PEOPLE HAVE AN INCREASE ON THEIR
INSURANCE PREMIUMS, COMMERCIAL,
COMMERCIAL INSURANCE PREMIUMS.
BEST WAY TO HANDLE THAT IS TO
FIRE THE DRIVER. AND SO, YOU
KNOW, MY COMMITMENT TO SENATOR
STERN WAS TO WORK WITH HIM ON
THIS, THIS ISSUE. WE'RE ALL IN
FAVOR OF TRAFFIC CALMING
DEVICES, WAYS TO SLOW, SLOW,
SPEEDING DOWN. WE JUST THINK
THAT POINTS POTENTIALLY HAVE A
DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACT ON
PEOPLE WHO SPEND THE MOST TIME
ON THE ROAD, AND, AND AGAIN,
WE'RE VERY SENSITIVE TO THEM.
AND SO WITH THAT, WE WOULD
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR A NO VOTE
ON THIS BILL TODAY. THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TESTIMONY. OTHERS IN THE
COMMITTEE ROOM WHO WISH TO COME
FORWARD AND EXPRESS AN
OPPOSITION POSITION. THANK YOU,
MR. CHAIR. COMMITTEE MEMBERS
LOUIS COSTA WITH SMART
TRANSPORTATION DIVISION. AND FOR
THE VERY REASONS THAT MR. BROD
SPOKE, WE HAVE CONCERNS AND WE
ARE IN RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION.
THANKS MARK WICKS WITH THE
STREETS FOR ALL. WE'RE CURRENTLY
NEUTRAL ON THE BILL BUT ACTUALLY
POTENTIALLY SUPPORTIVE WITH THE
AMENDMENTS BUT CURRENTLY
EXPRESSING OUR NEUTRALITY ON THE
CURRENT LANGUAGE. THANKS GOOD
AFTERNOON, CHAIR CORTEZ AND
MEMBERS, BRIAN MIRAMONTEZ WITH
THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE
, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL
EMPLOYEES. WE DO ALIGN A LOT OF
OUR COMMENTS WITH, MR. BROAD,
WITH TEAMSTERS AS WELL, WE ARE
OPPOSED UNLESS AMENDED AND WE DO
APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR'S
WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH US. AND
WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THE
LANGUAGE AND HOPEFULLY GET TO A
NEUTRAL POSITION FOR THE AMENDED
LANGUAGE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. THAT CONCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY, WE'LL BRING IT BACK
TO THE COMMITTEE. NOW, SENATOR
NEWMAN, SHE'S SENATOR. THE
SENATOR IS AHEAD OF SENATOR
NEWMAN. THEN WE'LL COME BACK TO
NEWMAN. ALL RIGHT. COMMERCIAL
DRIVER'S LICENSE. COME WITH A
DIGITAL RESPONSIBILITY, I HAD A
COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE, SO
WE COULD DRIVE OUR FIRE TRUCKS,
.08. FOR MOST PEOPLE, DRIVING
DRUNK IS 0.04 FOR COMMERCIAL
DRIVER'S LICENSE, IF SO, YOU CAN
GET YOUR LICENSE SUSPENDED IF
YOU'RE PULLED OVER AND YOUR
REGULAR CAR FOR 0.04 BEING A
COMMERCIAL LICENSE OR A DRIVER,
HAS WITH IT. I MEAN, THERE'S
TRAINING THAT GOES WITH THAT. SO
YOU'RE A TRAINED DRIVER, YOU
UNDERSTAND THE RULES OF THE
ROAD, AND YOU ALSO UNDERSTAND
THE HAZARDS THAT YOU'RE OUT
THERE DRIVING. I THINK THERE'S
AN ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
WITH THAT TO SET THE EXAMPLE FOR
OTHER PEOPLE. AND WHETHER YOU'RE
IN YOUR CAR OR IN YOUR
COMMERCIAL VEHICLE, IT DOESN'T
MATTER IF YOU'RE GOING 26 MILES
AN HOUR OVER THE SPEED LIMIT
THROUGH A RESIDENTIAL
NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU KNOW DARN WELL
THAT YOU'RE GOING WAY TOO FAST
FOR WHAT'S SAFE. AND I THINK TWO
POINTS ON YOUR, ON YOUR RECORD
FOR, FOR DOING THAT IS A LOUD
AND CLEAR MESSAGE THAT, YOU
SHOULDN'T DO IT IN THE FIRST
PLACE. SO THAT'S THE BEST WAY TO
KEEP THE POINTS OFF OF A RECORD
IS THE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY
THAT PEOPLE TAKE. AND THAT'S
WHAT THIS IS. AND THIS ISN'T
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT PROBABLY
COULD HAVE BEEN DONE YEARS AGO,
BUT PEOPLE HAVE LET IT GO AND
LET IT GO. AND NOW IT IS
RIDICULOUS OUT THERE. WHAT WE
GET TO WITNESS ON A DAILY BASIS,
PEOPLE RACING AROUND TOWN, THEY
NEED MORE RESPONSIBILITY. THEY
NEED TO HAVE MORE CONSEQUENCES
FOR THAT IRRESPONSIBLE DECISION
MAKING. AND THAT'S ALL THIS DOES
. IT DOESN'T HURT PEOPLE THAT
ARE LAW ABIDING CITIZENS. IT
DOESN'T HURT PEOPLE. GOING 5 OR
6 MILES AN HOUR OVER THE SPEED
LIMIT GET PULLED OVER AND GET A
TICKET. THIS IS PEOPLE THAT
KNOWINGLY ARE GOING WAY TOO FAST
FOR THE CONDITIONS IN THE AREA.
THEY'RE IN. AND, AND I THINK
IT'S A GOOD, A GOOD ATTEMPT AT
FINALLY, FINALLY REELING THIS IN
PEOPLE ARE TIRED OF WATCHING
THEIR FRIENDS DIE. I KNOW I AM,
AND THAT'S WHY I'M GOING TO BE
SUPPORTING THIS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, SENATOR SARAH SEN.
NEWMAN I JUST WANT TO SAY I
BLAME THE FAST AND FURIOUS
MOVIES FOR ALL OF THIS, BUT I
ACTUALLY DO WANT. I'M KIDDING.
HENRY. SORRY. SO I BLAME I DO I
DO HAVE SOME CONCERN, AS
EXPRESSED BY MR. BROAD AND
OTHERS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE
TRANSFERRING THE POINT OR, YOU
KNOW, AS THE POINT. IT APPLIES.
IT COULD JEOPARDIZE SOMEBODYS
EMPLOYMENT. AND, YOU KNOW, I
WANT TO ASK THE AUTHOR, I KNOW
YOU'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS, BUT, YOU
KNOW, HOW DO YOU YOU KNOW, HOW
DO YOU THINK ABOUT THIS? AND TO
WHAT EXTENT SHOULD WE MAKE SOME
ACCOMMODATION? THAT DOES SEEM
LIKE A RATHER SEVERE DE FACTO
RESULT, YOU KNOW, FOR TWO
POINTS, I WOULD SAY, FIRST AND
I, SOMEONE CAN CORRECT ME IF
I'M, IF I'M WRONG. BUT I DO
BELIEVE YOU GET AN APPEAL, ON
THAT THAT THAT INSTANCE. SO
THERE CAN BE MITIGATING
CIRCUMSTANCES AND IT DOESN'T.
WHEN I WAS SAYING EARLIER, IT'S
NOT AN AUTOMATIC END OF YOUR
JOB. THERE ARE CERTAIN, YOU
KNOW, YOU CAN YOU CAN GO APPEAL
THE POINTS. YOU CAN'T MASK A
POINT LIKE A REGULAR DRIVER CAN,
BUT YOU CAN APPEAL THE
UNDERLYING VIOLATION. SO IF FOR
SOME, YOU KNOW, THEY GOT YOUR
SPEED WRONG, IF THEY, IF YOU
KNOW THERE'S A MITIGATING
CIRCUMSTANCE, I THINK THOSE
STILL APPLY. SO WE'RE NOT
EXEMPTING ANY OF THOSE SORT OF
ADDITIONAL RECOURSE THAT
COMMERCIAL DRIVERS WOULD HAVE,
WE CAN'T WE I HAD THOUGHT OF
SHOULD WE EXEMPT CLASS C
COMMERCIAL DRIVERS IN GENERAL
FROM THIS, BUT NO, NO, IT'S I
MEAN, TO CLEAR, YOU KNOW, THE
SCENARIO THAT'S DESCRIBED IS
SOMEBODY DRIVING 26 MILES ABOVE
THE SPEED LIMIT IN THEIR
PERSONAL VEHICLE, HAVING IT GO
ON THEIR CLASS C LICENSE AND
EFFECTIVELY LOSING THEIR ABILITY
TO MAKE A LIVING. RIGHT. AND,
YOU KNOW, HAVE YOU HAVE YOU
CONSIDERED MAYBE, THE ABILITY TO
NEGOTIATE DOWN FROM 2 TO 1 IN
SOME SCENARIO? YEAH. OR LOOKING
AT THE MULTIPLIER, I, I DON'T
KNOW, WE HAVE WE'VE JUST STARTED
TO DIG INTO THE DETAILS. THEY
HAD ALSO MENTIONED CHANGING THE
LIMIT AND NOT MAKING IT 26 AND
BUMPING THAT NUMBER UP HIGHER, I
DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THAT
PERFECT NUMBER IS. WE WERE
BASING THIS ON HOW CURRENT LAWS
APPLIED, SO WE JUST PULLED THAT
OFF THE SHELF SO WE COULD WE
COULD LOOK AT BUMPING IT UP. WE
COULD LOOK AT AGAIN NOT DOING
HIGHWAYS AND JUST DIRT ROADS AND
STREETS. RIGHT. 40 MILES AN HOUR
AND UNDER. RIGHT. BUT AGAIN I'M
OPEN. BUT YOUR YOUR POINT IS
IT'S ABOUT THIS VERY SPECIFIC
SORT OF SECONDARY CONSEQUENCE.
CORRECT THROUGH THE CHAIR.
THAT'S CORRECT. I THINK, YOU
KNOW, IT'S IT PHILOSOPHICALLY
COMES DOWN TO POINTS AS A
DETERRENCE AS WELL, IS A IS A
BIG ISSUE FOR US, YOU KNOW, I
WISH THERE WERE A WAY TO JUST
SORT OF EASILY EXEMPT COMMERCIAL
DRIVERS, MY UNDERSTANDING IS
THERE IS NOT POTENTIALLY BECAUSE
THE FEDERAL DOT GUIDELINES
ABOUT, YOU KNOW, HOW IT CARRIES
OVER BETWEEN THE LICENSES. AND,
YOU KNOW, I THINK AS A PRECEDENT
TO SENATOR SENATOR'S POINT, WE
DON'T WE DO AGREE THAT
COMMERCIAL DRIVERS SHOULD BE
HELD TO A HIGHER STANDARD, WHEN
WE TALK ABOUT POINTS IN GENERAL,
WHAT'S OF GREAT CONCERN TO US IS
THAT, IS THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE
YOU MASK ONE EVEN ON A PERSONAL
VEHICLE, NOT ON A COMMERCIAL
LICENSE. YOU'RE LEFT OVER WITH A
POINT THAT'S AN INSURANCE
PREMIUM. WE'RE JUST NOT
CONVINCED THAT THAT'S AN
EFFECTIVE DETERRENT ON SPEEDING
IN THE FIRST PLACE, WHICH IS WHY
WE PREFER STUFF LIKE TRAFFIC
CALMING. INSTEAD, THE AMENDMENT
THAT WE HAD OFFERED TO SENATOR,
SENATOR STERN AND HIS STAFF WAS,
INSTEAD OF DOING 26MPH, WE BUMP
IT UP TO 50MPH. SO IF YOU'RE IF
YOU'RE SPEEDING 55, 50MPH MORE
IN A 25 ZONE, LET ME FINISH,
PLEASE. YOU'RE FREE TO DISAGREE
WITH ME, SENATOR. THAT YOU WOULD
STILL BE MOVING THE BALL FORWARD
RIGHT? BECAUSE RIGHT NOW,
RECKLESS SPEEDING IS 100MPH OR
HIGHER. AND SO YOU WOULD CATCH
SOMEONE WHO WAS SPEEDING, 75, IN
A 25 ZONE. WE WOULD AGREE.
THAT'S RECKLESS. SENATOR STERN
SAID PICK A NUMBER. WE PICKED A
NUMBER. WE'RE OPEN TO DISCUSSING
THE NUMBER. THE REALITY IS RIGHT
NOW, 26MPH ABOVE THE SPEED LIMIT
DOES NOT FEEL LIKE A TWO POINT
VIOLATION TO US. IT DOESN'T FEEL
AKIN TO DUI OR SPEEDING 100MPH
OVER THE SPEED LIMIT. I THINK
REASONABLE PEOPLE CAN HAVE
REASONABLE DISAGREEMENTS ABOUT
THAT, BUT THAT'S OUR POSITION.
AND AGAIN, WE'RE VERY SENSITIVE
TO THIS BECAUSE WE CAN'T JUST
GET OUT OF IT BECAUSE WE'RE A
COMMERCIAL DRIVER. PEOPLE MAKE
MISTAKES, AND WE DON'T THINK
THAT IF, GOD FORBID, SOMEONE
MAKES A MISTAKE, THAT THAT
SHOULD BE THE END OF THEIR JOB.
AND SO THAT'S THE POSITION WE
HAVE. AND WHY WE ARE HERE TODAY.
SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THIS
APPLIES TO NON HIGHWAYS RIGHT.
SO RIGHT RIGHT. IT'S 55 BELOW
5526 MILES. SO SORRY WHAT HE WAS
SAYING IF I MAY MR. CHAIR JUST
TO HE WAS SAYING IF, IF YOU WERE
IN A. SO RIGHT NOW THE BILL
APPLIES IF YOU'RE DRIVING ON A
ROAD THAT'S 55MPH UNDER WHAT MR.
BROAD WAS OFFERING WAS SAYING,
OKAY, IF YOU'RE IN A 35 AND
YOU'RE DRIVING 86 MILES AN HOUR
OR OVER, THEN THAT WOULD
QUALIFY. TO RECAP, THAT'S WHERE
SENATOR ALLEN ALMOST LOST HIS
MIND. OKAY. YEAH. DID WE GET IT?
SO AND YOU MAY HAVE SOMETHING TO
SAY. SO YOU KNOW, I'M GOING TO
SUPPORT THE BILL. BUT I DO THINK
THERE IS THERE IS MERIT IN
CONSIDERING HOW TO ARTICULATE A
STANDARD SO THAT IT IS BOTH
CLEAR AND REASONABLE AS IT
RELATES TO THE PROSPECTIVE
CONSEQUENCES. AND, YOU KNOW,
MAYBE IT'S A MULTIPLE AS OPPOSED
TO A, YOU KNOW, A, YOU KNOW, A,
A FIXED NUMBER ABOVE. BUT
BECAUSE I WILL SAY, I MEAN TO
THE EARLIER, YOU KNOW,
EVERYBODY'S MADE THE POINT IN
RESIDENTIAL AREAS. IT'S CRAZY.
RIGHT. HOW HOW AND IT'S NOT
SPEED SO MUCH. IT'S SPEED
DIFFERENTIAL. AND YOU KNOW,
RELATIVE TO THE, THE ENVIRONMENT
. SO YOU KNOW I THIS IS A VERY
NARROW EXAMPLE RIGHT? I MEAN,
YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW THERE AREN'T
THAT MANY CLASS C DRIVERS. BUT
BUT I THINK IT'S WORTH TRYING TO
CONSIDER HOW TO HOW TO MEET THAT
CONCERN. SO THANK YOU MR.
NEWMAN. WE'LL GO TO SENATOR
PORTANTINO NEXT. AND THEN
SENATOR ALLEN, MR. CHAIR,
SENATOR, THERE'S COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS AND THEN YOU'RE
PROPOSING ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS.
IF YOU COULD WALK ME THROUGH
WHAT THE COMMITTEE IS ACTUALLY
ASKING YOU TO DO VERSUS WHAT
YOU'RE THEN GOING TO DO
SUBSEQUENT TO THAT. SO I
UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT THE PLAN
IS. I TAKE A SHOT AGAIN, OR DO
YOU WANT TO? YES. GO AHEAD. AND
YOU IN YOUR OPENING. YOU WENT
OVER THOSE. YEAH. BUT, BUT THEN
YOU ALSO REFERENCED ADDITIONAL
AMENDMENTS. THAT'S WHAT I'M
TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. IS THERE
MORE PROPOSED THAN WHAT THE
COMMITTEE IS? I THINK HE'S
REFERRING TO WORKING ON
ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS GOING
FORWARD, SENATOR. BUT BUT DO
THEY BUT ARE THERE SPECIFIC
PROPOSALS I GUESS IS WHAT I'M
TRYING TO GET AT THERE ARE
AMENDMENTS YOU WILL BE TAKING
TODAY, CORRECT? YES, AND, AND,
YOU KNOW, THE AMENDMENT THAT
SHOULD HAVE BEEN DISTRIBUTED
HERE IS ON A HIGHWAY WITH A
POSTED SPEED LIMIT FOR PASSENGER
VEHICLES OF 55MPH OR LESS. A
CONVICTION WOULD, CONVICTION FOR
26MPH OR MORE IN THAT ZONE WOULD
LEAD TO A TWO POINT VIOLATION ON
THE DMV SIDE. NO LET ME JUST LET
ME JUST SAY, SENATOR, I DON'T
WANT TO TAKE YOU HAVE THE FLOOR,
BUT LET ME JUST SAY THAT THE
COMMITTEE, INITIALLY VÆ, I WOULD
SAY IT'S FAIR TO SAY HAD AN
AVERSION TO TRYING TO DEAL WITH
THIS PROBLEM THROUGH THE DMV
POINT SYSTEM, AND TOOK, VERY
SERIOUSLY THE OPPOSITION'S POINT
OF VIEW ON THAT, BUT WE WORK
WITH SENATOR STERN, WITH THE
AUTHOR ON TRYING TO NAVIGATE
THIS ISSUE BY, YOU KNOW, WORKING
ON THE SPEED LIMIT AND THERE
OBVIOUSLY, AS YOU HEARD, THERE'S
BEEN SOME DISCUSSION AROUND
THAT. THE TWO SIDES DIDN'T COME
TOGETHER ON THAT, BUT THAT GOING
FORWARD ON THE BILL, THERE WOULD
BE OPPORTUNITY FOR HIM TO
CONTINUE TO TRY TO NAVIGATE THIS
ISSUE, INCLUDING, YOU KNOW, THE
COMMERCIAL LICENSE IMPLICATIONS.
SO THOSE NEED TO BE TAKEN
SERIOUSLY. THE BILL, I THINK,
PROBABLY NEEDS TO BE NARROWED.
GOING FORWARD, BUT WE GOT IT IN
THE SHAPE WE COULD GET IT IN
HERE IN FIRST COMMITTEE. ALL
RIGHT. SO SUBSEQUENT TO THAT,
YOU'RE COMMITTING TO WORK WITH
FOLKS. YOU'RE NOT PROPOSING
ANYTHING SPECIFIC ON TOP OF WHAT
THE COMMITTEE HAS ASKED FOR.
NOTHING SPECIFIC AT THIS MOMENT.
A VERY, VERY OPEN OKAY. TO THE
FOR INSTANCE, THE ORIGINAL
COMMITTEE IDEA OR SOME OF THE
OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN
FLOATED HERE. AND I OBVIOUSLY, I
WISH I CHECKED WITH MY STAFF AND
WE DIDN'T REALLY GET ANY
FEEDBACK FROM EITHER THE
AUTHOR'S OFFICE OR THE
OPPOSITION PRIOR TO THIS MEETING
. SO, APOLOGIES, YOU KNOW,
APOLOGIES. YEAH. SO AT LEAST WE
BOTH GET TO. THAT'S WHY I, I
SHAME I SHAME BOTH SIDES BECAUSE
NO ONE, YOU KNOW, IT'S A WASH.
AND SO I DO SHARE CONCERNS
OBVIOUSLY. YOU KNOW, I RIDE MY
BIKE EVERY DAY AND I'M OUT, OUT
THERE AND I'VE HAD CONSTITUENTS
WHO'VE HAD A FAMILY MEMBER
WHO'VE LOST THEIR LIFE IN
RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. AND
SO, YOU KNOW, I SHARE THE DESIRE
TO TRY TO MAKE THINGS SAFER. I
ALSO SHARE THE CONCERNS ABOUT
IMPACT ON WORKING PEOPLE AND
REALLY, REALLY WANT YOU TO WORK
MUCH MORE COLLABORATIVELY ON
TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO LAND
THIS AND HIT THE SWEET SPOT
HERE, BECAUSE IT'S THERE ARE A
LOT OF IMPLICATIONS. AND SO, I'M
GOING TO SUPPORT IT TODAY, BUT I
WANT TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS WITH
THIS DOWN THE ROAD. AND I ALSO
WANT TO OBVIOUSLY I WANT YOU
GUYS TO COME TALK AS WELL. SO I
WANT TO HEAR AND I'M HAPPY TO
EVEN SIT ON A CONVERSATION
BETWEEN THE TWO DIFFERENT SIDES
TO SEE WHAT WE CAN DO TO TRY TO
FIGURE THIS OUT, BECAUSE THE
CONCERNS ARE LEGITIMATE ON BOTH
SIDES. WE WANT SAFER STREETS,
BUT WE DON'T WANT TO PUT PEOPLE
OUT OF WORK AT THE SAME TIME. SO
HAPPY TO COMMIT TO THAT, TO WORK
WITH YOU AND WORK WITH
OPPOSITION. SIT DOWN. THANK YOU.
SENATOR ALLEN, WELL, LET ME
FIRST BY START BY APOLOGIZING TO
THE WITNESS FOR MY REACTION. I
GUESS IT WAS VERY VISCERAL,
THOUGH, AND I 50 MILES AN HOUR
JUST SEEMED SO OUT OF WHACK TO
ME. AND, I MEAN, IF YOU'D SAID
SOMETHING LIKE 30 OR 35, I DON'T
KNOW, I WOULD REACT. IT THAT
WAY. BUT, MAN, I, YOU KNOW, I
GUESS I JUST WANT TO STRONGLY
SUPPORT THE BILL, YOU KNOW,
ENCOURAGE YOU TO WORK WITH THE
OPPOSITION BECAUSE I, YOU KNOW,
I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
DIFFERENT THINGS. IT ALMOST
SEEMS AS THOUGH THE ISSUE HERE
MORE HAS TO DO WITH THE
UTILIZATION OF THE POINT SYSTEM
AS IT IMPACTS YOUR, YOUR
MEMBERS. AND WHAT HENRY'S TRYING
TO GET AT IS WHAT SENATOR
STEARNS TRYING TO GET AT IS THE
IS THE REAL EPIDEMIC OF DEATHS
ON HIGHWAYS LIKE THE PCH AND
RESIDENTIAL AREAS. I STRONGLY
ENCOURAGE YOU NOT TO, TO, TO
MOVE DOWN FROM 55 MILES AN HOUR.
WE WANT TO HAVE THE PCH INCLUDED
, I MEAN, THE SITUATION THERE IS
SO UNTENABLE AS IT IS ON
HIGHWAYS UP AND DOWN THE STATE.
I APPRECIATE SENATOR SATO'S
COMMENTS. WE ALL KNOW HOW MANY
OF OUR COMMUNITIES HAVE BEEN
JUST DEVASTATED BY THE IMPACTS
OF, RECKLESS SPEEDING. AND HOW
MANY DEATHS HAVE HAVE COME FROM
THAT? THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING
TO ADDRESS HERE. SO I REALLY DO
HOPE YOU'RE ABLE TO DO WORK
TOGETHER AND FIGURE OUT SOME OF
THESE ISSUES, THAT THAT
PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS HAVE, BUT I
ALSO JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT PEDESTRIAN
SAFETY AND, YOU KNOW, HUMAN
SAFETY IS, IS AT THE HEART OF
ALL DISCUSSIONS THAT HAPPEN, YOU
KNOW, MOVING FORWARD TODAY. SO
IT'S IN THAT SPIRIT, I'D LOVE TO
MOVE THE BILL. AND I JUST WANT
TO APPLAUD YOU FOR YOUR YOUR
WORK ON THIS AND JUST ASK YOU
NOT TO, YOU KNOW, TO MAKE SURE
THIS REMAINS ROBUST. I MEAN,
HOWEVER, THAT ENFORCEMENT
MECHANISM, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER
YOU LAND ON, YOU KNOW, MAYBE YOU
CAN WORK ON SOME FLEXIBILITY ON
THE MILES PER HOUR, MAYBE,
MAYBE, MAYBE THERE'S A DIFFERENT
MECHANISM FOR, FOR, YOU KNOW,
FOR ENFORCEMENT. I DON'T KNOW
WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. YOU'RE
DEEP IN THE WEEDS ON THIS.
YOU'RE GOING TO ENGAGE IN
CONVERSATIONS WITH THE COMMITTEE
AND FOLKS FROM THE TEAMSTERS.
BUT BUT BUT WE KNOW THAT THE
STATUS QUO IS NEEDS TO BE
CHANGED. THERE IS A THERE IS A
TRULY AN EPIDEMIC OF DEATH ON,
ON OUR STREETS, IN OUR HIGHWAYS,
WE ALL HAVE EXPERIENCED MEMORIAL
SERVICES AND CEREMONIES IN OUR
OWN DISTRICTS, OUR COLLEAGUE,
SENATOR NEWMAN JUST GAVE AN
ABSOLUTELY TRAGIC ADJOURN IN
MEMORY JUST LAST WEEK OF A WHOLE
FAMILY WIPED OUT BY SOMEONE'S
CAREENING DOWN THE STREET IN HIS
DISTRICT. THEY WERE JUST WAITING
FOR THE BUS TO GO TO THE ZOO OR
SOMETHING. LIKE THAT, YOU KNOW.
YEAH. SENATOR WIENER. YEAH SO IS
THAT WHAT IT SAID? OKAY I DON'T
KNOW. I GUESS IT WAS SENATOR
WIENER IN SAN FRANCISCO, BUT I
APOLOGIZE. BUT ANYWAY, SO I JUST
WANT TO. I STRONGLY SUPPORT THE
BILL, AND I HOPE WE'RE ABLE TO
GET SOMETHING REALLY MEANINGFUL
TO THE LEGISLATURE THIS YEAR ON
THIS TOPIC. SENATOR ARCHULETA IS
NEXT, FOLLOWED BY SENATOR DODD.
YEAH I AGREE THAT, THIS IS SO
STRONG IN IN BRINGING IT FORWARD
THAT, OUR SAFETY FOR OUR
CHILDREN AND, AND OUR
COMMUNITIES AND, I THINK MOST OF
US DON'T HAVE SPEED LIMITS THAT
ARE 50 MILES AN HOUR WITHIN OUR
SMALL TOWNS AND SO ON. BUT
WHATEVER IT IS, THAT'S SOMETHING
THAT YOU'LL HAVE TO WORK OUT. MY
CONCERN IS THAT, WE GOT TO FIND
A HAPPY MEDIUM FOR THE
TEAMSTERS, THE MEN AND WOMEN WHO
DRIVE THESE THESE TRUCKS THAT
THEY THEY SUPPLY. Ã WHEREWITHAL
FOR THEIR FAMILIES TO LIVE AND
SO ON. AND I UNDERSTAND THE
POINT SYSTEM. IF SOMETHING
HAPPENS TO THE POINTS, CAN MOVE
UP TO AS MUCH AS THREE AND A
HALF POINTS. IS THAT CORRECT?
BECAUSE THERE'S A CALCULATION TO
THAT. WOULD YOU ANSWER THAT.
YEAH. SORRY. THAT'S THAT'S A
MATH MISTAKE. IT'S 1.5 I MADE A
MISTAKE IN THE LETTER. IF YOU
GET TWO POINTS IT'S WORTH THREE
POINTS. NOT 3.5. BUT THERE IS
THE MAG, THE MAGNIFIER THERE
THAT EVEN IF IT'S ON YOUR
PERSONAL LICENSE, YOU GET IN
YOUR PERSONAL TIME, IT IMPACTS
YOUR COMMERCIAL LICENSE. WELL, I
THINK WE'VE GOT TO GO AHEAD AND
GET EVERYONE WHO DRIVES CARS. MY
CHILDREN, YOUR CHILDREN,
EVERYONE THAT WE'VE GOT, WE HEAR
THE TRAGEDIES ALL THE TIME AND
WE'VE GOT TO SLOW DOWN. THAT'S
THE BOTTOM LINE AND WE'VE GOT TO
BE SAFER. AND IF ANYBODY'S GOING
TO TAKE THE LEAD, I WOULD
IMAGINE THE PROFESSIONAL
DRIVERS, THE TEAMSTERS, LET'S
GET THEM ON BOARD WITH US, THAT
THEY CAN PARTICIPATE AND WE CAN
ALL PARTICIPATE TO SAVE LIVES.
AND, YOU KNOW, I'M HOPING THAT
THE BILL MOVES ALONG SO WE CAN
REALLY FINE TUNE IT. SO THERE
ISN'T A PUNITIVE ACTION AGAINST
OUR TEAMSTERS AND PROFESSIONAL
DRIVERS, BUT AN AWARENESS THAT
THEY'VE GOT TO BE A PARTICIPANT,
A PARTNER TO KEEP OUR ROADS SAFE
AS WELL. SO I'M HOPING YOU CAN
CONTINUE WORKING WITH THAT. BOTH
OF YOU AND AS MY COLLEAGUES
POINT OUT, THERE IS A NEED TO
SLOW DOWN. AND THIS MIGHT BE THE
FIRST STEP, BUT I WILL TELL YOU
THIS THAT IF WE DON'T TAKE
ACTION AND BRING EVERYONE ON
BOARD, THERE WILL BE TRAGEDIES
AGAIN AND AGAIN. SO PLEASE
CONVEY TO THE TEAMSTERS THAT
WE'RE TRYING TO HELP AND, AND,
AND I DON'T THINK THEY SHOULD BE
ADDRESSED AS THE VICTIM OR NOT
OR THE OR THE, THE, THE CRIMINAL
IN SOME CASES. BUT TO BE A
PARTNER, BECAUSE I KNOW THEY
HAVE FAMILIES, AS ALL OF US DO.
SO I LOOK TO TEAMSTERS TO TAKE
THE LEAD AND THANK YOU. I WILL
GO AHEAD AND LOOK FOR THE
FORWARD MOTION DOWN THE ROAD AND
THAT YOU'RE WORKING TOGETHER.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. SENATOR.
SENATOR DODD, IF, YOU COULD
DEFER FOR JUST A MOMENT, SENATOR
ALLEN, I JUST WANT TO FOLLOW UP
HIS COMMENT. JUST ONE LITTLE
FOLLOW UP. I KNOW THAT SENATOR
NEWMAN WAS KIND OF SAID HE WAS
JOKING ABOUT THE FAST AND
FURIOUS, THE TRUTH IS, THERE'S
EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THAT IT
ACTUALLY IS A BIG PART OF THE
PROBLEM, THAT THIS GLAMORIZATION
OF SPEED ON MEDIA AND, YOU KNOW,
MR. SHANE HAS DONE A LOT OF WORK
ON THIS SPACE AND WE'RE HAPPY TO
SHARE IT WITH FOLKS. ALL RIGHT.
SENATOR DODD. YEAH. YOU KNOW,
IT'S HARD TO FIND FAULT WITH
WHAT ANYBODY HAS SAID HERE. THAT
WAS A COUNTY SUPERVISOR FOR 15
YEARS WHEN WE HAD SERIOUS
PROBLEMS LIKE THIS. WE GOT
ENFORCEMENT AND WE GOT
ENFORCEMENT OUT OF THE ROAD.
CHP, DEPUTY SHERIFFS, CITY
POLICE. THAT'S HOW THE STUFF IS
HANDLED. THE MORE ENFORCEMENT
YOU HAVE, THE LESS ACCIDENTS.
THERE'S ABSOLUTELY, EVIDENCE
THAT THAT SHOWS THAT. AND I
GUESS, YOU KNOW, EVEN IN, IN
NAPA COUNTY MOST RECENTLY, THEY
HAD A NUMBER OF DEATHS AT THE, I
DON'T KNOW, 116 AND 29. AND SO
NOW THEY'VE GOT SPEED CAMERAS
THERE AND THEY'RE PUTTING SPEED
CAMERAS, YOU KNOW, AT A NUMBER
OF PLACES. I'M NOT A BIG FAN,
BUT THOSE ARE THE THINGS YOU
KIND OF DO. AND SO I GUESS MY
CONCERN IS I'M GOING TO SUPPORT
THE BILL TODAY BECAUSE I WANT TO
LET YOU, YOU KNOW, SEE IF YOU
CAN RUN WITH THIS. I RESERVE THE
RIGHT TO NOT SUPPORT IT AT THE
NEXT TIME, NEXT TIME I SEE IT.
BUT I JUST THINK IF EVERY TIME
THERE IS A PROBLEM IN A SPECIFIC
AREA, WE'RE CHANGING THE DRIVING
CODE. THESE PEOPLE THAT ARE
DOING THIS DON'T GIVE A RIP HOW
MANY POINTS THEY HAVE. AND I
THINK THE TICKET THEMSELVES, IN
INCREASING, YOU KNOW, FOR THE
MULTIPLE, YOU KNOW, TICKETS MAY
BE ANOTHER WAY OUT, BUT,
ENFORCEMENT WORKS. THANK YOU,
SENATOR DODD. SENATOR LIMÓN,
THANK YOU. THIS HAS BEEN A
ROBUST CONVERSATION, AND I THINK
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT STICKS
OUT TO ME IS HOW MUCH WE ARE
DEALING WITH TWO COMPELLING
ISSUES. ONE, THE ISSUE OF
SAFETY. AND YOU'VE HEARD, I
THINK, FROM A LOT OF MEMBERS IN
A VERY BIPARTISAN WAY, THAT
SAFETY IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND
HIGHWAYS HAS BECOME AN ISSUE
THAT IS RISING TO THIS LEVEL OF
DISCUSSION ON A BILL LIKE YOURS.
BUT I THINK THAT ONE OF THE
PAUSES CERTAINLY IS SOME OF WHAT
THE OPPOSITION HAS RAISED IN
TERMS OF TRYING TO FIGURE OUT
HOW WE ACHIEVE THE OUTCOME OF
SAFETY THROUGH A MECHANISM
THAT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING TO
MAYBE MYSELF, MAYBE NO ONE ELSE
ON HERE IN TERMS OF WHETHER THE
POINT SYSTEM ALONE IS GOING TO
BE THE DETERRENT. ENOUGH OF A
DETERRENT TO INCREASE SAFETY.
THE POINT SYSTEM RIGHT NOW ISN'T
DETERRING ENOUGH OF THE BEHAVIOR
WE NEED. SO WE ARE GRAPPLING, I
THINK, WITH, YOU KNOW, WANTING
AN OUTCOME, BUT UNDERSTANDING
THAT WE HAVE TO CHANGE CERTAIN
BEHAVIORS TO REACH THE OUTCOME.
I AM SUPPORTING. I AM GOING TO
BE SUPPORTING THE BILL TODAY,
BUT I ALSO I DON'T JUST WANT TO
ASK, YOU KNOW, THE OPPOSITION
AND THE SUPPORT TO NECESSARILY
KIND OF COME TO THE TABLE AND
FIGURE IT OUT. I ACTUALLY WANT
TO ASK THE OPPOSITION IF THERE
ARE WAYS THAT WE CAN ACHIEVE
THIS OUTCOME. I MEAN, WE ARE
REALLY SEEING THIS. YOU HAVE A
LOT OF LEGISLATORS HERE WHO ARE
SAYING WE CAN GO BACK TO OUR
DISTRICT AND POINT ON ISSUES
WHERE PEOPLE ARE DRIVING WAY TOO
FAST AND IT IS CAUSING DEATHS
THAT WE ARE ALL CONCERNED ABOUT.
SO IF WE'RE NOT, YOU KNOW,
GETTING IT EXACTLY RIGHT, THEN
WHAT IS THE RIGHT SOLUTION?
BECAUSE MY CONCERN IS THAT WE
CANNOT CONTINUE TO SEE SOME OF
THIS WITHOUT SOME FIXES, UNLESS,
YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO
ULTIMATELY HAVE TO SAY WE'RE
GOING TO PICK A SIDE AND WE
DON'T, YOU KNOW, REALLY
NECESSARILY WANT TO DO THAT
BECAUSE WE THINK THERE'S VALID
ARGUMENTS TO WHAT YOU'VE RAISED,
AS OPPOSED TO LIKE, WELL, WHAT'S
THE FIX? WE NEED PEOPLE TO DRIVE
, YOU KNOW, NOT AS FAST IN OUR
NEIGHBORHOODS AND HIGHWAYS. SO
HOW DO WE GRAPPLE THAT? SO I
THINK THAT THAT'S JUST, YOU
KNOW, WHAT I'M SHARING IN MY
REASONS. IT IS THE FIRST
COMMITTEE. SO I AM HOPEFUL THAT
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS, YOU
KNOW, A WORK IN PROGRESS. BUT I
DO WANT TO JUST HIGHLIGHT HOW
MANY PEOPLE HAVE TALKED ABOUT
THE SAFETY ISSUE AND HOW THAT IS
GOING TO BE A VERY COMPELLING
ISSUE AS THIS BILL MOVES FORWARD
AND US WANTING TO SEE SOME TYPE
OF SOLUTION. GREAT. THANK YOU,
AGAIN, YOU KNOW, THE AUTHORS
WORK HARD, AS HAVE HAS THE
OPPOSITION IN TERMS OF
COMMUNICATING WITH THE COMMITTEE
STAFF ITSELF. I JUST WANT TO GET
THAT ON THE RECORD. I KNOW
SENATOR PORTINO PROBABLY
ACCURATELY DESCRIBED THAT, AS
BIG, ESPECIALLY AS BIG AS THIS
COMMITTEE IS IN TERMS OF
COMPOSITION. NOT EVERYBODY GOT A
COMMUNICATION OR A CALL. AND
THERE WAS A LOT OF THIS IN THIS
PARTICULAR CASE WAS MOVING, LATE
IN TERMS OF ACTUALLY GETTING
SOME LANGUAGE THAT WE FELT WAS
WORTH BRINGING TO THE COMMITTEE,
FRANKLY. BUT AS I SAID EARLIER,
AND I THINK WE'VE HEARD IT FROM
MANY COLLEAGUES HERE, SENATOR
STERN, MANY OF YOUR COLLEAGUES
AND MINE THAT, THERE'S A DESIRE
TO KEEP SUPPORTING THE GENERAL
DIRECTION YOU'RE GOING. BUT A
NEED TO NARROW THE BILL AND A
NEED TO ADDRESS THE COMMERCIAL
DRIVER ISSUE, WHICH WOULD AT
SOME LEVEL BE AN UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCE, I THINK, OF THE
GENERAL INTENTION THAT YOU HAD,
ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU TALKED TO ME
OF TRYING TO GET TO THE, THE
REAL OUTLAWS WHO, ARE RECKLESS
AND ARE NOT DRIVING FOR A
LIVING, BUT ARE, ARE OUT THERE,
PUTTING PEOPLE'S LIVES IN
JEOPARDY EVERY DAY. SO THAT'S
WHAT GOT ME TO COME TO A SUPPORT
POSITION AND A SUPPORT
RECOMMENDATION TO THIS COMMITTEE
GOING FORWARD. BUT, I KNOW YOU
HAVE A BIG BILL PACKAGE. THIS
ONE'S GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME. I
THINK, FOR YOU TO WORK ON GOING
FORWARD, TO TRY TO ADDRESS
CONCERNS. AND I WOULD SAY THERE
ARE SEVERAL OF US THAT I'VE
HEARD HERE TODAY THAT ARE
IMPLIED OR EXPRESSLY SAY IT
WOULD BE TOUGH TO SUPPORT THE
BILL LATER IN THE EXACT
CONDITION IT'S IN RIGHT NOW. SO
WITH THAT, YOU DO HAVE, OF
COURSE, MY SUPPORT TODAY, AS YOU
KNOW, AND WE'LL GIVE YOU AN
OPPORTUNITY TO CLOSE. AND I
THINK YOU'VE SAID ENOUGH TIMES
THAT YOU ACCEPT THE AMENDMENTS.
BUT IF YOU COULD SAY THAT ONE
MORE TIME IN YOUR CLOTHES, THAT
WOULD MAKE EVERYBODY HAPPY UP
HERE. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR,
YES, I AM COMMITTED NOT ONLY TO
ACCEPTING THESE AMENDMENTS HERE
TODAY, BUT WORKING DIRECTLY WITH
THE OPPOSITION AND NOT JUST THE
SORT OF OPEN ENDED WE'LL SIT
DOWN AND TALK ABOUT IT AGAIN.
BUT I THINK THIS HAS BEEN AN
ILLUMINATING HEARING, AND I
REALLY APPRECIATE THE MEMBERS
DIGGING IN, THE MECHANICS OF
THIS KNOTS PROCESS, THIS POINT
SYSTEM AT DMV IS SORT OF NEW TO
A LOT OF PEOPLE, AND IT YOU
KNOW, WHEN I FIRST APPROACHED
THIS BILL, I WAS LOOKING AT, AT
CRIMINAL JUSTICE PENALTIES,
RIGHT AT LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW,
CAN WE CAN WE STRENGTHEN
RECKLESS DRIVING AND IN CASES
OF, OF INVOLUNTARY OR VOLUNTARY
MANSLAUGHTER, WE'VE ENDED UP
HERE IN, IN SORT OF WORLD OF DMV
AND POINTS. AND THE REASON I WAS
COMPELLED TO DO THAT IS REALLY
WHAT THE ANALYSIS SAYS. THE
DETERRENT EFFECT MAY NOT BE
ENOUGH, BUT BUT THE MOST RECENT
REPORT FROM DMV FOUND THAT THE
PROBATION HEARINGS THAT CAN BE
TRIGGERED THROUGH THAT, THAT
SECOND POINT RESULTED IN A 15%
REDUCTION IN CRASH RISK THAT
THERE'S SOMETHING I MEAN, THE
PROSPECT OF POTENTIALLY LOSING
YOUR LICENSE. AND JUST TO BE
CLEAR, YOU HAVE TO DO THIS TWICE
UNDER THIS BILL TO LOSE YOUR
LICENSE. SO IT WOULDN'T IT
WOULDN'T BE ONCE. SO YOU'D HAVE
TO DO THIS TWICE. FOR ANY NORMAL
DRIVER, BUT THAT, THAT INTERFACE
WITH DMV AS UNCOMFORTABLE AS IT
IS, IT PEOPLE HATE DMV. THEY
ESPECIALLY HATE IT IF THEY'RE
GOING IN THERE FOR SPEEDING AND
THE HOPE IS THAT WITHOUT HAVING
THE HAMMER OF, YOU KNOW, JAIL
TIME OR CRIMINAL PENALTIES, THAT
WE DO NEED THAT TO STRENGTHEN
THAT DETERRENT EFFECT. I'D LIKE
TO SEE MORE THAN A 15% REDUCTION
IN CRASH RISK. I THINK WE CAN DO
BETTER. AND WE'RE GOING TO BE
WORKING WITH THE DMV TO SEE IF
WE CAN REALLY AMP UP ON OUR OUR
EXISTING WORK. BUT YEAH, WE'VE
GOT TO DO SOMETHING. I JUST, I
THAT'S WHY I'M BRINGING YOU ALL
A TOUGH BILL AND WRESTLING WITH
THIS BECAUSE I JUST, I DO NOT
FEEL LIKE WE CAN SIT TIGHT. SO,
YOU HAVE MY COMMITMENT TO
WORKING WITH THE OPPOSITION,
LOOKING AT THE MECHANICS ON
EITHER THE KNOTS PROGRAM, THE
ACTUAL LIMIT ESTABLISHED BY THE
COMMITTEE. AND I WILL MOSTLY
COMMIT TO YOU, MR. CHAIR, THAT
WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET AWAY FROM
THIS COMMITTEE. WE'RE GOING TO
STAY VERY CLOSE TO YOU AND YOUR
STAFF. I DO APPRECIATE THE LONG
HOURS YOU PUT INTO THIS. SO I'LL
WRAP IT UP AND JUST ASK FOR YOUR
AYE VOTE. ALL RIGHT, IS THERE A
MOTION? THE MOTION WOULD BE, Dð
PASS, AS AMENDED TO
APPROPRIATIONS. I MOVE TO
SENATOR ALLEN DID MOVE IT, AND
WE'LL CALL THE ROLL CALL. THIS
IS FILE ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.
SENATORS CORTEZ, I CORTEZ I NILO
HILO I ALLEN ALLEN I ARCHULETA I
ARCHULETA I BECKER BLAKE SPEAR
BLAKE SPEAR I DALLY DODD DODD I
GONZALEZ. LIMÓN LIMÓN I NEWMAN.
NEWMAN I WHEN PORTANTINO HI
PORTANTINO I SATO I SERRATA I
UMBERG. TEN ZERO ON CALL. ALL
RIGHT. DOES TEN I VOTES NO
OPPOSITION VOTES WILL KEEP THE
BILL ON CALL. AND I DO WANT TO
TAKE A POINT OF PRIVILEGE AND
JUST ACKNOWLEDGE BOTH WITNESSES.
BUT ALSO PARTICULARLY WANT TO
ACKNOWLEDGE THE SUPPORT WITNESS
TODAY FOR, THE MISSION YOU'RE
ON. THOSE OF US I HAVE, FOR
YOUNG ADULT CHILDREN AT THIS
POINT AND THERE'S NOT A NIGHT I
SLEEP WITH BOTH EYES OPEN AND I
CAN'T PUT MYSELF IN YOUR
POSITION. I DON'T THINK MOST OF
US CAN. BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY,
SYMPATHIZE AND APPRECIATE YOUR
COURAGE IN, TRYING TO MOVE
SOLUTIONS FORWARD TO MAKE LIFE
SAFER FOR OUR CHILDREN AND OUR
GRANDCHILDREN. THANK YOU. 2575,
SENATOR DODD, IT'S YOUR TURN. IF
YOU'RE READY. SB 904.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND
MEMBERS, TODAY I'M PRESENTING SB
904, A MEASURE THAT UPDATES THE
ENABLING LEGISLATION OF THE
SONOMA-MARIN AREA RAIL TRANSIT
DISTRICT, OR SMART TRAIN, TO
REMOVE OBSOLETE. REFERENCES
RAISING TO RAISE BIDDING
AMOUNTS, THRESHOLDS AND
AUTHORIZE SMART SPECIAL TAXES TO
BE IMPOSED BY A VOTER
INITIATIVE. THE SMART TRAIN IS
AN INCREDIBLE EXAMPLE OF
MULTIMODAL AND
MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL PROJECT. IT
ADVANCES MANY OF OUR STATE'S TOP
GOALS, INCREASED RAIL AND
BICYCLE USE, TRANSIT ORIENTED
DEVELOPMENT AND COLLABORATION BY
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AT A REGIONAL
SCALE. SINCE COMING INTO SERVICE
JUST OVER SIX YEARS, SMART HAS
OVERCOME WILDFIRES, FLOODS AND A
GLOBAL PANDEMIC THAT DEVASTATED
ALL OF PUBLIC TRANSIT. DESPITE
THOSE OBSTACLES, THEY KEEP
CHUGGING ALONG AND AT THE END OF
2023, BECAME THE FIRST TRANSIT
SYSTEM IN THE BAY AREA TO
RECOVER THEIR PRE PANDEMIC
RIDERSHIP NUMBERS. THIS BILL
ALSO EMPOWERS THE VOTERS OF THIS
SPECIAL DISTRICT FOR THE FIRST
TIME TO PURSUE THEIR OWN BALLOT
MEASURES THROUGH A VOTER
INITIATIVE, A VOTER APPROVED
QUALIFIED INITIATIVE PROCESS HAS
THE POTENTIAL TO PROVIDE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO ENHANCE COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT AND HELP INFORM AND
AFFIRM THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN
EXPENDITURE PLAN, PROVIDING
GREATER ACCOUNTABILITY AND
DIRECTION FOR HOW BEST TO
DEDICATE FUTURE RESOURCES TO
OPERATE THE SMART SYSTEM. AS THE
BILL ANALYSIS NOTES, SMART WAS
RECENTLY DESIGNATED BY THE
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION
AS PART OF THE CAPITAL CORRIDOR
NETWORK AND THE STATE RAIL PLAN
PROJECTS THAT IT MAY 1ST DAY
CONNECT WITH AMTRAK SERVICES IN
SOLANO COUNTY, FURTHER
STRENGTHENING OUR STATE'S RAIL
TRANSIT SYSTEM. THIS TRAIN IS A
MODEL FOR HOW WE DO TRANSIT,
RIGHT? I HAVE HERE WITH ME TODAY
EDDIE CUMMINGS, WHO'S THE GM OF
SMART, AND MATT BROAD,
REPRESENTS THE CALIFORNIA
TEAMSTERS TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF
THE BILL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
SENATOR DODD WITNESSES. IF
YOU'RE READY, PLEASE PROCEED.
YOU'LL HAVE A COUPLE MINUTES
EACH IN WHATEVER ORDER YOU
PREFER. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON, CHAIR CORTEZ AND
MEMBERS. I'M EDDIE CUMMINS, THE
SONOMA-MARIN AREA RAIL TRANSIT
DISTRICT GENERAL MANAGER, AND
I'M SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF
SENATE BILL 904. THIS BILL
UPDATES THE PROCUREMENT BIDDING
THRESHOLDS FOR SUPPLIES,
MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT, WHICH
HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED SINCE 2003,
LONG BEFORE SMART BECAME AN
OPERATING RAILROAD. IT ALSO
CREATES FLEXIBILITY FOR THE
SITING OF NEW STATIONS AND
UNDERSERVED AREAS OF NORTH
SONOMA COUNTY, AND REMOVES
OBSOLETE REFERENCES TO THE NORTH
COAST RAIL AUTHORITY, WHICH NO
LONGER EXISTS. FINALLY, THE BILL
AUTHORIZES THE SMART BOARD TO
PLACE A QUALIFIED VOTER
INITIATIVE ON THE BALLOT. IN
2008, VOTERS IN SONOMA AND MARIN
COUNTY APPROVED A QUARTER CENT
SALES TAX, KNOWN AS MEASURE C¯,
PROVIDING ROUGHLY $50 MILLION
ANNUALLY TO BUILD, OPERATE AND
MAINTAIN THE SMART SYSTEM. THIS
MEASURE EXPIRES IN 2028. SMART
HAS OPERATED SINCE 2017, AND
CURRENTLY SMART HAS THE HIGHEST
RIDERSHIP RECOVERY RATE IN THE
BAY AREA AND IS ONE OF ONLY A
FEW TRANSIT AGENCIES IN THE
COUNTRY WHO HAVE A HIGHER
RIDERSHIP RATE THAN PRE-PANDEMIC
. THE AVERAGE TRIP LENGTH ON
SMART IS 22 MILES, AND
APPROXIMATELY 25% OF SMART
RIDERS ARE SENIOR AND YOUTH WHO
UTILIZE THE SYSTEM TO GET TO AND
FROM SCHOOLS. RIDERSHIP. AMONG
THIS DEMOGRAPHIC IS EXPECTED TO
INCREASE SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE
COMING MONTHS, AS THE SMART
BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECENTLY
APPROVED A FREE FARE PILOT
PROGRAM FOR BOTH SENIORS AND
YOUTH. SMART HAS LEVERAGED OVER
$500 MILLION IN STATE, FEDERAL
AND LOCAL GRANTS TO EXPAND THE
SYSTEM. NEEDLESS TO SAY, IT IS
CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TO RENEW
THE MEASURE TO PROTECT THE
COMMUNITY'S INVESTMENT AND
SUSTAIN OPERATIONS. SUSTAINED
OPERATIONS WILL HELP ADDRESS
CLIMATE CHANGE MODE, SHIFT
TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND MOBILITY
OPTIONS, ESPECIALLY FOR
UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES IN THE
REGION. SMART WANTS TO BE
ACCOUNTABLE AND INCLUSIVE AS
POSSIBLE BASED ON COMMUNITY
FEEDBACK. LOCAL VOTERS REQUEST
THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROTECT THEIR
INVESTMENT. THE LANGUAGE IN
SENATE BILL 904 IS INTENDED TO
RESPOND TO THAT REQUEST BY
ALLOWING THE CITIZENS INITIATIVE
PROCESS TO RUN ITS INDEPENDENT
COURSE, WITH SMART PLACING IT ON
THE BALLOT SHOULD IT OBTAIN THE
QUALIFIED SIGNATURES. SMART
WOULD NOT GATHER OR PAY FOR
SIGNATURES, BUT ACT AS AN ENTITY
TO PLACE THE ITEM ON THE BALLOT
FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION BY
VOTERS. FOR THESE REASONS, I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR AYE
VOTE, MR. CHAIR AND MEMBERS MATT
BROUGHT HERE ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA TEAMSTERS. GOOD TO BE
BACK WITH YOU AFTER SUCH A SHORT
BREAK. I'LL JUST MAKE MY
COMMENTS QUICK. WE'RE IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF THIS BILL. WE
REPRESENT THE WORKERS. IT'S
SMART. OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW,
GROWTH OF THE SYSTEM IS IN OUR
MEMBERS INTEREST, BUT ALSO IN
THE COMMUNITIES INTEREST. AND WE
THINK THIS BILL GIVES SORT OF
THE NEEDED FLEXIBILITY ON THE
PROCUREMENT ADJUSTMENTS AS WELL
AS THE BALLOT MEASURE. AND WITH
THAT, WE'D ASK FOR YOUR I VOTE
THANK YOU. THANK YOU TO BOTH THE
WITNESSES, OTHER SUPPORT
WITNESSES WHO WISH TO EXPRESS,
THEIR SUPPORT POSITION. CHRIS
LEE OF POLITICO GROUP HERE ON
BEHALF OF THE SONOMA COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY,
REGIONAL CLIMATE PROTECTION
AUTHORITY IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
TREATING WARD WALLER ON BEHALF
OF TRANSFORM AND SUPPORT. STEVE
ROBERTS, RAIL PASSENGER
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. I KNOW WE
HAVE OPPOSITION ON THE BILL. IS
THERE A PRIMARY OPPOSITION
WITNESS, WE DID NOT HAVE ONE
CONFIRMED. WE DO NOT SEE ANYONE
COMING FORWARD TO TAKE THAT ROLE
. IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO
WISHES TO EXPRESS AN OPPOSITION
POSITION, NAME, AFFILIATION AND
OPPOSITION? SEEING NONE, WE'LL
COME BACK TO THE COMMITTEE AT
THIS TIME. ANY COMMENTS?
CONCERNS BY THE COMMITTEE MOVE
THE BILL. THE BILL. ALL RIGHT.
THERE'S A MOTION BY SENATOR
ARCHULETA, AND THE MOTION IS Dð
PASS TO ELECTIONS. ELECTIONS
COMMITTEE. IS THAT CORRECT? ALL
RIGHT. DO PASS TO ELECTIONS
COMMITTEE WOULD BE THE MOTION.
BUT BEFORE WE TAKE UP THAT
MOTION, WE'LL GIVE THE AUTHOR AN
OPPORTUNITY TO CLOSE
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR I
VOTE. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL CALL THE
ROLL CALL, PLEASE. THIS IS FILE
ITEM NUMBER TEN. SENATORS CORTEZ
A CORTEZ. AYE, NILO. NO. YELLOW.
NO. ALLEN, I ALLEN, I ARCHULETA
I ARCHULETA I BECKER.
BREAKSPEAR. BREAKSPEAR. I DALLY
DODD I DODD I GONZALEZ LIMÓN
NEWMAN. NEWMAN I WHEN PORTANTINO
I PORTANTINO I CIERTO CIERTO NO
UMBERG. TO 7 TO 2 ONE. ALL
RIGHT. THAT BILL IS AT CURRENTLY
AT 7 TO 2. WE'LL LEAVE IT ON
CALL. THANK YOU I DON'T SEE
THANK YOU TO THE WITNESSES. I
DON'T THINK, SENATOR GONZALEZ
HAS ARRIVED, TO PRESENT. YOU
WOULD OTHERWISE BE NEXT. SO
WE'RE GOING TO PASS GO TO
SENATOR ARCHULETA. OKAY SORRY.
THIS WOULD BE FILE ITEM 14, SB
1081. ARCHULETA. OKAY WELL, SHE
JUST WALKED IN. DO YOU WANT TO
DEFER? SENATOR? THAT'S YOUR
CALL. YOU'RE AT SENATOR. OKAY.
ONLY BECAUSE OUR WITNESSES ARE
SITTING DOWN. WE'RE READY TO GO.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR,
AND, OF COURSE, SENATOR, FOR
ALLOWING ME TO JUMP IN YOUR SPOT
HERE FOR JUST A MOMENT, LADIES
AND GENTLEMEN, I WOULD LIKE TO
THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO
PRESENT MY BILL, MR. CHAIR,
THANK YOU FOR WORKING WITH ME
AND THE COMMITTEE AND EVERYONE
ELSE TODAY, I'M PRESENTING
SENATE BILL 1081, WHICH WILL
ESTABLISH OPTIONAL DRIVER'S
LICENSE LEGISLATION IN
CALIFORNIA. IN DOING SO,
CALIFORNIA WILL JOIN OVER 40
OTHER STATES AND TERRITORIES
THAT UTILIZE THE DMV TO
EFFECTIVELY ENSURE THAT
RESIDENTS COMPLY WITH THE
FEDERAL SELECTIVE SERVICE
REQUIREMENTS. SPECIFICALLY,
SENATE BILL 1081 WOULD ALLOW A
PERSON THAT IS REQUIRED TO BE
REGISTERED UNDER THE FEDERAL
MILITARY SERVICE SELECTIVE
SERVICE ACT AND WHO WILL SUBMIT
AN APPLICATION FOR A DRIVER'S
LICENSE, IDENTIFICATION CARD, OR
RENEWAL THROUGH THE DMV TO BE
DEEMED TO HAVE, CONSIDERED TO BE
A REGISTRANT. AND WITH THE
UNITED STATES SELECTIVE SERVICE
SYSTEM. HOWEVER AN INDIVIDUAL
WHO DOES NOT WISH TO BE ENROLLED
WITH THE SELECTIVE SERVICE WILL
BE GIVEN THE CHOICE TO OPT OUT
OF THE REGISTRATION. SENATE BILL
1081 WOULD ADDITIONALLY PROHIBIT
THE DMV FROM MAKING OR
DISTRIBUTING A LIST OF THOSE
PERSONS WHO DID NOT CONSENT TO
REGISTER. VERY, VERY IMPORTANT
IN ADDITION TO THE LEGAL
REQUIREMENT THAT MOST ALL MALES
REGISTERED MEN WHO FAIL TO
REGISTER WITH THE SELECTIVE
SERVICE CUT THEMSELVES OFF FROM
FUTURE BENEFITS AND
OPPORTUNITIES. JOB OPPORTUNITIES
HERE IN CALIFORNIA AND ACROSS
THE NATION, WORKING FOR THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. IF THEY DO
NOT REGISTER BY THE AGE OF 26,
MEN PERMANENTLY BECOME
INELIGIBLE FOR ALL FEDERAL JOBS,
AS WELL AS FEDERAL JOB TRAINING
PROGRAMS, INCLUDING THOSE FUNDED
BY WORKFORCE INNOVATION AND
OPPORTUNITY ACT'S FAILURE TO
REGISTER MAY ADDITIONALLY CAUSE
DELAYS IN CITIZENSHIP
APPLICATIONS FOR IMMIGRANTS WHO
HAVE NOT REGISTERED. IMMIGRANT
MEN WHO DO NOT REGISTER BY THE
AGE OF 26 MUST WAIT UNTIL
THEY'RE 32 TO PROCEED WITH
NATURALIZATION AND THE PROCESS
TO OBTAIN CITIZENSHIP UNLESS
THEY ARE UNABLE, UNLESS THEY ARE
ABLE TO PRESENT SWORN
DECLARATIONS THAT FAILING TO
REGISTER FOR SELECTIVE SERVICES
WAS NOT DUE TO WILLFULLY
AVOIDING THE REQUIREMENT.
NOTABLY BOTH HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES AND SENATE
VERSIONS OF THE DREAM ACT ALSO
CONDITION ELIGIBILITY ON
REGISTRATION WITH THE SELECTIVE
SERVICE. CALIFORNIA CURRENTLY
HAS ONE OF THE NATION'S LOWEST
RATES OF ELIGIBLE RESIDENTS, WHO
HAVE SIGNED UP FOR THE SELECTIVE
SERVICE AS OF OCTOBER. OCTOBER
23, OCTOBER 2023, THE SELECTIVE
SERVICE SYSTEM ESTIMATES THAT
ONLY 74.6% OF ELIGIBLE
CALIFORNIANS HAVE REGISTERED. IN
CONTRAST WITH OTHER LARGER
STATES INCLUDING NEW YORK,
TEXAS, AND FLORIDA, THAT HAVE
IMPLEMENTED THE DRIVER'S
ENROLLMENT SYSTEM THAT WE'RE
SEEKING TODAY. SEE ENROLLMENT
RATES AS HIGH AS 90% WHEN PEOPLE
CHOOSE NOT TO SIGN UP FOR THE
SELECTIVE SERVICE, THEY OFTEN DO
SO WITHOUT BEING AWARE THAT OF
THE OF THE POTENTIAL RISK OF
FUTURE EMPLOYMENT. AND IT, IT
FALLS INTO THE CATEGORY IN MANY
CASES OF NOT EVEN REALIZING THAT
THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO REGISTER.
SO THE DMV HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO
HELP EVERYONE ALONG. IN DOING
THIS, CALIFORNIA MUST TAKE
ACTION TO ENSURE THAT OUR
RESIDENTS DO NOT
DISPROPORTIONATELY MAKE
THEMSELVES INELIGIBLE FOR JOBS
AND BENEFITS BECAUSE OF THE
INABILITY TO ENROLL PEOPLE
THROUGH THE DMV SYSTEM. AND WITH
ME TODAY WHO CAME IN FROM
WASHINGTON, DC, WE DON'T OFTEN
HAVE, WITNESSES THAT FLY IN FROM
ONE END OF THE COUNTRY TO THE
OTHER. IT IS SO VERY IMPORTANT,
AND WE ALL AGREE THEY SHOULD BE
HERE WITH ME TODAY TO TESTIFY IS
THE ACTING DIRECTOR OF SELECTIVE
SERVICE, JOEL VANDENBERG.
ADDITIONALLY, WE HAVE DEPUTY
ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR FOR
LEGISLATIVE AND
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS JACOB
DANIELS HERE FOR TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE. AND I RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR YOUR AYE VOTE. THANK
YOU. GENTLEMEN. IT'S THE FIRST
TIME I'VE BEEN ACROSS THE TABLE
FROM THE SELECTIVE SERVICE SINCE
JUNE 4TH, 1974, SO I'M EAGER TO
HEAR FROM YOU, AS I'M SURE I'M
SURE EVERYONE IS. SO YOU MAY
PROCEED IN WHATEVER ORDER YOU
LIKE. I'LL HAVE A COUPLE OF
MINUTES EACH. THANK YOU. GREAT.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR CORTEZ,
VICE CHAIR NILO, AND MEMBERS OF
THE SENATE TRANSPORTATION
COMMITTEE. THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO TESTIFY IN
SUPPORT OF SB 1081. MY NAME IS
JOEL SPANGENBERG. I'M A VETERAN
OF THE UNITED STATES NAVY AND A
SENIOR APPOINTEE OF THE BIDEN
ADMINISTRATION, ALSO SERVING AS
THE ACTING DIRECTOR OF THE
SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM. THE
SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM IS AN
INDEPENDENT FEDERAL AGENCY THAT
MAINTAINS A SYSTEM THAT, WHEN
AUTHORIZED BY THE PRESIDENT AND
CONGRESS, RAPIDLY PROVIDES
PERSONNEL TO THE MILITARY DURING
A NATIONAL EMERGENCY IN A FAIR
AND EQUITABLE MANNER, WHILE ALSO
MANAGING AN ALTERNATIVE SERVICE
PROGRAM FOR CONSCIENTIOUS
OBJECTORS. FEDERAL LAW REQUIRES
THAT VIRTUALLY ALL MEN REGISTER
WITH THE SELECTIVE SERVICE
SYSTEM WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THEIR
18TH BIRTHDAY. MEN CAN NO LONGER
REGISTER WHEN THEY TURN 26 YEARS
OF AGE. BASED ON OUR MOST RECENT
ANNUAL DATA, JUST UNDER 75% OF
CALIFORNIA'S MEN FROM 18 TO 25
YEARS OF AGE REGISTERED AS
REQUIRED BY LAW. THIS BEING
SAID, ABOUT A QUARTER OF
CALIFORNIA'S MEN IN THIS AGE
RANGE ARE AT RISK OF MISSING OUT
ON IMPORTANT BENEFITS THAT COULD
HELP THEM IN LIFE. MEN WHO FAIL
TO REGISTER WITH THE SELECTIVE
SERVICE SYSTEM BECOME INELIGIBLE
FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYMENT,
INCLUDING WITH THE US POSTAL
SERVICE. FOR CONTEXT, IN
CALIFORNIA, THERE ARE. THERE ARE
OVER 180,000 FEDERAL JOBS THAT
REQUIRE REGISTRATION. THOSE WHO
FAIL TO REGISTER ARE ALSO
INELIGIBLE FOR FEDERALLY FUNDED
JOB TRAINING, WHICH IS
ADMINISTERED BY SEVERAL
ORGANIZATIONS THROUGHOUT THE
STATE. IMMIGRANTS WHO FAIL TO
REGISTER MAY FACE UP TO A FIVE
YEAR DELAY IN OBTAINING US
CITIZENSHIP. BOTH VERSIONS OF
THE DREAM ACT, AS WE HEARD ABOUT
EARLIER, PENDING IN THE US HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE
SENATE CONDITION PROGRAM.
ELIGIBILITY ON REGISTRATION WITH
SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM.
FURTHERMORE FOR MANY STATES
REQUIRE MEN TO BE REGISTERED TO
REMAIN ELIGIBLE FOR GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYMENT AS WELL AS TO RECEIVE
STATE BASED STUDENT AID, MEN
FROM CALIFORNIA COULD BE AT A
DISADVANTAGE IF THEY EVER MOVE
OUT OF STATE. THE SELECTIVE
SERVICE SYSTEM WANTS TO HELP
ENSURE THAT MEN REGISTER. IT IS
NOT ONLY THE LAW, BUT IT HELPS
PROTECT THEIR FUTURE. THAT IS
WHY WE ARE GRATEFUL THAT SENATOR
ARCHULETA INTRODUCED SB 1081,
WHICH PROVIDES AN OPTION THROUGH
THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
MOTOR VEHICLES FOR REGISTRATION
WITH THE SELECTIVE SERVICE
SYSTEM. WE ENDORSE LEGISLATION
LIKE SB 1081 AS IT SUPPORTS
MAKING THE REGISTRATION PROCESS
EASIER. 45 STATES AND
TERRITORIES HAVE SIMILAR LAWS
LINKING DMV APPLICATIONS WITH
REGISTRATION. IN THOSE STATES,
REGISTRATION RATES INCREASED,
PROTECTING THEIR RESIDENTS
ACCESS TO VALUABLE BENEFITS. THE
SB 1081 IS SIGNED INTO LAW,
PUTTING THIS PROVEN APPROACH
INTO ACTION. WE ANTICIPATE WE
ANTICIPATE SIMILAR RESULTS IN
CALIFORNIA. IN SUMMARY, THE
SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM
SUPPORTS THIS BILL. IT WILL MAKE
IT EASIER FOR CALIFORNIA'S YOUNG
MEN TO REGISTER AND PROTECT
THEIR ELIGIBILITY FOR GOVERNMENT
BENEFITS THAT WILL HELP THEM
ACHIEVE THEIR GOALS IN LIFE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND
CONSIDERATION, CHAIR CORTEZ AT
YOUR DISCRETION, I'M HAPPY TO
TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, WE WILL GIVE THE
COMMITTEE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR
THAT MOMENTARILY. ARE THERE ANY
OTHER SUPPORT WITNESSES IN THE
ROOM WHO WISH TO COME FORWARD,
SEEING NONE, ARE THERE
OPPOSITION WITNESSES IN THE ROOM
, YES. ARE YOU A LEAD OPPOSITION
WITNESS? YES. PLEASE. COME ON.
FORWARD. YOU FLEW IN FROM FAIR
OAKS. ORPHALI NGUYEN. SHE'S A
PASTOR, 26 MINUTES. THANK YOU
FOR BEING HERE. AND PLEASE
INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND YOU'LL
HAVE A COUPLE MINUTES. THANK YOU
. HOW LONG DO I HAVE UP? TWO
MINUTES. MINUTES? ONLY TWO. OH,
SHE'S THE ONLY ONE. SO I
APOLOGIZE. I'VE BEEN CORRECTED.
YOU ARE THE ONLY OPPOSITION
WITNESS OF THE FULL FOUR
MINUTES. THANK YOU, SENATOR
CORTEZ AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO SENATE
BILL 1081. I'M KEVIN INSCOE,
DIRECTOR OF THE FRIENDS
COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATION OF
CALIFORNIA, AN ADVOCACY GROUP
FOUNDED BY QUAKERS IN 1952. AS
YOU MAY KNOW, QUAKERS HAVE A
TESTIMONY OF PEACE AND
NONVIOLENCE. TODAY, I JOIN WITH
MY COLLEAGUES FROM IMMIGRANT
RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES
ORGANIZATIONS, PEACE AND JUSTICE
CENTERS, FAITH BASED GROUPS, AND
WITH HUNDREDS OF INDIVIDUALS,
INCLUDING VETERANS AND YOUNG
PEOPLE WHO HAVE REGISTERED THEIR
OPPOSITION. AND WE ASK YOU TO
VOTE NO ON SENATE BILL 1081.
UNDER THIS BILL, A YOUNG PERSON
AS YOUNG AS 16 YEARS OLD WOULD
BE ASKED TO MAKE THE DECISION TO
REGISTER FOR THE FEDERAL
SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM. THE
DRAFT, WHEN THEY SIGN TO APPLY
FOR A CALIFORNIA DRIVER'S
LICENSE. THESE TWO FUNCTIONS ARE
COMPLETELY UNRELATED. THE
PURPOSE OF LICENSING DRIVERS IS
ROAD SAFETY. THE DMV ALREADY HAS
AN ENORMOUS RESPONSIBILITY, AND
CALIFORNIA SHOULD NOT BE USING
OUR LIMITED STATE RESOURCES TO
ENFORCE THE MILITARY SELECTIVE
SERVICE ACT. THE SELECTIVE
SERVICE SYSTEM IS CURRENTLY
ALREADY RECEIVING INFORMATION
ABOUT PEOPLE WHO APPLY FOR A
DRIVER'S LICENSE IN CALIFORNIA
AND CALIFORNIA, WHICH IT CAN AND
DOES USE TO DO ITS OWN OUTREACH.
FEDERAL LAW SHOULD BE ENFORCED
BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AT
FEDERAL EXPENSE. THE BILL
PROPOSES THAT THOSE WHO DO NOT
ACCEPT THE AUTOMATIC
REGISTRATION MAY PROCEED TO SIGN
THE DRIVER'S LICENSE FORM AND
CHECK A DON'T REGISTER BOX ON
THE APPLICATION. HOWEVER,
CHECKING SUCH A BOX COULD BE
CONSIDERED SELF-INCRIMINATION
BECAUSE IT IS ACTUALLY THE
KNOWING AND WILLFUL NON
REGISTRATION THAT IS THE GROUNDS
FOR CIVIL SANCTIONS THAT WERE
DESCRIBED AND FEDERAL
PROSECUTION IN SB 1081 PURPORTS
TO RESTRICT ACCESS TO RECORDS OF
THOSE WHO OPT OUT, BUT THIS
PROVISION COULD BE EASILY
OVERRIDDEN BY A FEDERAL SUBPOENA
FOR EVIDENCE OF KNOWING AND
WILLFUL NON REGISTRATION. MANY
PEOPLE HAVE SINCERE RELIGIOUS
OBJECTIONS TO REGISTERING FOR
THE DRAFT. THIS BILL WOULD FORCE
THEM TO VIOLATE THEIR CONSCIENCE
OR SIGN A CONFESSION OF A CRIME
TO GET A DRIVER'S LICENSE. MANY
OTHERS WOULD BE CONFUSED AND NOT
KNOW WHAT TO DO. OTHERS MIGHT
UNTHINKINGLY SIGN WITHOUT THE
OPPORTUNITY TO CONSIDER WHAT
THIS DECISION MEANS TO THEM. OR
THEY MIGHT CLICK A BOX THAT
WOULD ACTUALLY SHOW WILLFUL
NON-REGISTRATION AND THEREFORE
MAKE THEM SELVES MORE LIKELY TO
HAVE SANCTIONS. UNDOCUMENTED
IMMIGRANTS IN PARTICULAR, HAVE
CONCERNS ABOUT SHARING SENSITIVE
PERSONAL INFORMATION WITH THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND THAT'S
WHY YOU'LL SEE OPPOSITION FROM
THE LEADING IMMIGRANT RIGHTS
GROUPS IN CALIFORNIA. THIS COULD
PRESENT FUTURE PROBLEMS FOR THEM
IF THEY CHECK THAT THEY ARE
DECLINING TO REGISTER. AND THERE
IS ALSO AN ISSUE WITH THE
SELECTIVE SERVICE, WHICH SAYS
THAT THOSE WHO ARE REQUIRED TO
REGISTER ARE THOSE THAT HAVE
MALE LISTED ON THEIR BIRTH
CERTIFICATE, AND THAT DOES NOT
TRACK WITH THE WAY GENDER IS
DEFINED FOR A CALIFORNIA'S
DRIVER'S LICENSE. IT'S A FEW
YEARS AGO WHEN MY SON WAS STILL
IN HIGH SCHOOL, I HELPED HIM
APPLY FOR FINANCIAL AID THROUGH
THE FAFSA FORM, WHICH REQUIRED
SELECTIVE SERVICE REGISTRATION.
WE WERE SURPRISED BY THIS, AND
HE NEEDED TIME TO RESEARCH HIS
OPTIONS TO MAKE A DECISION WITH
THOUGHTFULNESS. BUT THAT'S
CHANGED NOW BECAUSE YOUNG PEOPLE
NO LONGER HAVE TO REGISTER IN
ORDER TO APPLY FOR AND RECEIVE
FEDERAL FINANCIAL AID. AND THE
NEW FAFSA FORM NO LONGER CARRIES
THE SELECTIVE SERVICE
REGISTRATION INFORMATION. AND IN
2021, THE CALIFORNIA STATE
LEGISLATURE ITSELF, YOUR
COLLEAGUES TOOK AWAY THE
REQUIREMENT OF REGISTRATION IN
ORDER TO RECEIVE CAL GRANTS.
LET'S NOT GO BACKWARD, AS THERE
IS AN ARGUMENT THAT OTHER STATES
DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS IN SOME
WAY. THERE ARE ALSO STATES THAT
ARE SIMILAR TO US, INCLUDING NEW
JERSEY, OREGON, PENNSYLVANIA,
AND MASSACHUSETTS. AND IN ANY
CASE, CALIFORNIA HAS NEVER BEEN
AFRAID TO STAND OUT AMONG THE
STATES FOR OUR EXTRA PROTECTIONS
FOR PRIVACY, EQUITY AND
IMMIGRANT RIGHTS. AGAIN, WHY
WOULD WE GO BACKWARDS? WE'LL
HAVE TO WRAP UP. LET'S INFLATION
LIKE THIS WILL PUT UNNECESSARY
PRESSURE ON YOUNG PEOPLE AT A
TIME WHEN THEY JUST WANT TO
BECOME LICENSED DRIVERS. FOR
MANY REASONS. WE ASK YOU
RESPECTFULLY TO VOTE NO ON SB
1081. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. IS
THERE ANYONE HERE IN THE
COMMITTEE ROOM WHO WISHES TO
EXPRESS OPPOSITION? PLEASE COME
FORWARD AND NAME, AFFILIATION
AND OPPOSITION. YES. GOOD
AFTERNOON, DALE RICHTER. I'M
HERE ON MY OWN BEHALF. I AM A
VETERAN OF THE VIETNAM WAR THAT
WAS DRAFTED INTO THE WAR IN
APRIL OF 1968. SO I EXPERIENCED
ALL THE PERSONAL TURMOIL AND Þ,
SUFFERED THE CONSEQUENCES OF
THAT WHOLE EXPERIENCE WITH THAT
VIETNAM WAR UNDER THIS SYSTEM.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. HELLO,
CHLOE STACK WITH THE CALIFORNIA
IMMIGRANT POLICY CENTER HERE IN
OPPOSITION. ALL RIGHT. THANK
YOU. LET'S SEE NO ONE ELSE COME
FORWARD. THAT WOULD CONCLUDE OUR
TESTIMONY AT THIS POINT. WE'LL
BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE
FOR QUESTIONS, CONCERNS,
COMMENTS. SENATOR BLAKESPEAR,
YES. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THE
FOLKS WHO FLEW IN FROM
WASHINGTON, DC AND ALSO DROVE IN
, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR
TESTIMONY. I RECOGNIZE AND THANK
THE AUTHOR FOR HIS EFFORTS HERE.
I'M GOING TO BE VOTING NO ON
THIS. AND AS I MENTIONED TO YOU,
I'D LIKE TO EXPLAIN WHY THAT IS.
SO I AM, PER PERSUADED BY THE
FACT THAT I THINK THAT THIS IS
COMPLETELY UNRELATED TO WHAT THE
CALIFORNIA DMV SHOULD BE DOING,
AND SO REGISTERING FOR THE DRAFT
IS A FEDERAL OBLIGATION, AS WAS
STATED. AND I THINK THAT THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE
RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT. WE ARE
FACING THIS BUDGET DEFICIT, THAT
WE SPEND MANY HOURS DISCUSSING
HOW WE CAN REDUCE COSTS. SO THE
IDEA OF ASKING THE DMV TO DO
MORE, I, I KNOW IT'S BEEN
SUGGESTED THAT IT WOULD BE A
NEGLIGIBLE COST, BUT I, I FIND
THAT, TO STRAIN CREDULITY
BECAUSE ALMOST EVERYTHING WE ASK
THE DMV TO DO COSTS A LOT OF
MONEY, AND THEY ARE ALREADY,
DEALING WITH A LOT OF DIFFICULTY
EVEN DOING THE BASIC FUNCTIONS.
SO I UNDERSTAND THAT THE
SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM IS
WORKING ON FEDERAL LEGISLATION
THAT WOULD REMOVE THE
REQUIREMENT TO AFFIRMATIVELY
REGISTER AT ALL. SO I THINK
THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS TO GET
AT THIS GOAL. AND I JUST DON'T
SEE IT AS THE DMV'S
RESPONSIBILITY TO MANAGE THIS.
SO FOR THOSE REASONS, I'LL BE
VOTING NO TO NO TODAY. THANK YOU
. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, SENATOR
BLAKESPEAR. ANYONE ELSE WISHING
TO COMMENT OR ASK QUESTIONS,
YES. SENATOR BECKER. I JUST HAD
A QUESTION, REGARDING THE
WITNESSES CONCERN, THE WITNESS
IS CONCERNED THAT, YOU AND I
SPOKE TO. AND YOU SAID THAT
SOMEONE COULD, OPT OUT BECAUSE
THEY COULD ALSO REGISTER ANOTHER
WAY, RIGHT? THEY DON'T HAVE TO
DO IT HERE. BUT THE OPPOSITION
WAS RAISING CONCERN THAT THAT
WOULD ACTUALLY, BY OPTING OUT,
WOULD BE A WILLFUL DISREGARDING
OF THE LAW. DO YOU DO YOU
DISAGREE WITH THAT? I DO
DISAGREE WITH THAT. YES. AND
AGAIN, IF I MAY, MR. MAYOR, I
MEAN, THE CHAIR. MAY I ANSWER?
YOU CAN. OKAY AGAIN, THE BILL IS
SIMPLY TO ALLOW, A PATHWAY TO
ADHERE TO THE LAW, WHICH WE ALL
AGREE IS ON THE BOOKS. AND MAYBE
ONE DAY IT WON'T BE ON THE
BOOKS, BUT IT'S ON THE BOOKS NOW
. AND WE'VE HEARD FROM OUR
EXPERTS THAT IT IT ALLOWS THE
MEN WHO WISH TO OBTAIN THE PATH
TO CITIZENSHIP DOWN THE ROAD.
THEY'LL BE WITHIN THE LAW. THOSE
WHO WANT BENEFITS WILL BE WITHIN
THE LAW. THOSE WHO SEEK A JOB IN
THE FUTURE WITHIN THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT WILL BE WITHIN THE
LAW. AND AGAIN, IF THEY DON'T
WISH TO OPT OUT OR IF THEY WISH
TO OPT OUT, THEY CAN. AND AGAIN,
THE QUESTION IS, WHAT IS YOUR
NAME? WHAT IS YOUR ADDRESS? WHAT
IS YOUR DATE OF BIRTH? DIDN'T
ASK FOR YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY
NUMBER. DIDN'T ASK FOR YOUR
BLOOD TYPE? DIDN'T ASK ANYTHING.
JUST THOSE THREE QUESTIONS.
PERIOD. AND IN REFERENCE TO THE
COST, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS
GOING TO AUGMENT SOME OF THE
COSTS HERE FOR THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, IN DOING THIS. SO
DMV WILL BE ABLE TO RECEIVE THE
FUNDING TO DO THAT AS WELL. AND
IT IS NOTHING THAT WE'VE NOT
DONE FOR YEARS AND YEARS PAST,
I'M I'M PROUD AS A VETERAN, YOU
ALL KNOW, I SERVED WITH THE 82ND
AIRBORNE, AND I AM A COMBAT
VETERAN, AND I'M PROUD TO
PRESENT THIS FOR THE NGUYEN, THE
MEN WHO ARE SERVING THIS COUNTRY
AS MY TWO SONS ARE RIGHT NOW. SO
I THINK THAT IT JUST OPENS UP A
DOOR THAT PUTS EVERYBODY BACK IN
CHECK. AND AGAIN, IT IS
SOMETHING THAT WE ALL CAN BE
PROUD OF, THAT CALIFORNIA IS
JOINING THE OTHER 40 STATES IN
HELPING THESE YOUNG MEN TO
ADHERE TO THE LAW. SO I THINK
IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO GO
AHEAD AND GO FORWARD WITH THIS.
AND, AGAIN, I IF THERE'S ANY
FURTHER QUESTIONS, OF COURSE, WE
HAVE THE EXPERTS HERE, BUT BUT I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR AYE
VOTE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. SENATOR, I DO HAVE A
QUESTION AND I'LL COME BACK TO
YOU IN CASE YOU WANT TO CLOSE.
BEYOND THAT REQUEST, THE
QUESTION I HAVE IS, IS MY
UNDERSTANDING HERE FROM THE
COMMITTEE WORK THAT, REGARDLESS
OF WHAT HAPPENS AT THIS DMV
STAGE IN TERMS OF REGISTRATION,
IF YOU WILL, THAT, THAT THINGS
LIKE CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTION, TO
AN ACTUAL DRAFT OR CONSCRIPTION
IS ARE STILL AVAILABLE. CAN YOU
JUST SPEND MAYBE A MINUTE JUST
EXPLAINING WHAT WHAT, WHAT
HAPPENS NEXT IN TERMS OF DUE
PROCESS? OKAY. GREAT QUESTION.
SO IN TIMES LIKE RIGHT NOW WHEN
WE'RE NOT AT WAR AND IN
PEACETIME, OUR AGENCY ACTUALLY
SERVES AS AN ADVOCATE AT THE
FEDERAL LEVEL TO TAKE CONCERNS
ABOUT THE CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTOR
COMMUNITY. SO WE ACTIVELY DO
REACH OUT TO PEACE CHURCHES AND
OTHER CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTOR
ORGANIZATIONS, AND WE DO PAY
ATTENTION TO WHAT THEY HAVE TO
SAY, ANOTHER THING WE ALSO DO,
BECAUSE WE ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE
IT BUILT INTO REGISTRATION,
THAT'S NOT PART OF CONSCIENTIOUS
OBJECTORS, THAT IS NOT PART OF
REGISTRATION. THAT ONLY COMES IF
WE WERE IN A SITUATION WHERE WE
HAD TO RETURN TO CONSCRIPTION.
BUT WHAT WE DO IN PEACE TIME IS
WE BUILD THE INFRASTRUCTURE SO
WE CAN HANDLE THAT VERY
RESPONSIBLY. WE TAKE THIS AS A
VERY SERIOUS PART OF OUR
MISSION. SO WHAT WE DO IN PEACE
TIME IS WE WORK TO MAKE SURE WE
HAVE OUR LOCAL AND DISTRICT
APPEAL BOARDS FULLY STAFFED WITH
VOLUNTEERS WHO ARE TRAINED TO
HEAR CLAIMS FROM CONSCIENTIOUS
OBJECTORS NATIONWIDE. AND THESE
ARE PEOPLE APPOINTED FROM THEIR
COMMUNITIES. SO WE LIKE I SAID,
WE TAKE IT SERIOUSLY THAT THEY
KNOW WHAT TO DO AND THEY KNOW
HOW TO HEAR. CONSCIENTIOUS
OBJECTOR CLAIMS, ALSO ANOTHER
THING THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T
KNOW ABOUT IS WE DO WORK WITH
FEDERAL AGENCIES AND WE ALSO
WORK WITH STATES AND
TERRITORIES. FOR EXAMPLE, TO
MAKE SURE THAT IF WE EVER DID
HAVE A RETURN TO CONSCRIPTION,
WE WOULD HAVE OPPORTUNITIES
AVAILABLE FOR CONSCIENTIOUS
OBJECTORS TO GO AND DO WORK IN
THE NATIONAL INTEREST. SO WE
HAVE THESE SYSTEMS THAT WE DO
SPEND A LOT OF TIME BUILDING
NOW, AND IF WE EVER DID HAVE
CONSCRIPTION, WE WOULD ACTUALLY,
WORK TO PROTECT THEIR VIEWS AND
THEY WOULD HAVE A CHANCE IF THEY
WERE SELECTED THROUGH A LOTTERY
TO PRESENT THEIR CLAIM TO BE
HEARD BEFORE ONE OF THE LOCAL
BOARDS. THANK YOU FOR WALKING US
THROUGH THAT. THE OTHER CONCERN
THAT I HAVE, WHICH IS HOPEFULLY
NOT, VAGUE, IS, CONCERN MAYBE
ABOUT THE SELECTIVE SERVICE
BEING OVERRELIANT ON, YOU KNOW,
THE AUTOMATIC REGISTRATION
THROUGH THE DMV, FOR EXAMPLE,
WE'RE SEEING MORE AND MORE YOUNG
PEOPLE FOREGO GETTING A DRIVER'S
LICENSE IN THE FIRST PLACE. AND
A YOU KNOW, THERE COULD BE SOME
CONCERN OVER A FALSE SENSE OF
SECURITY THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO
WORRY ABOUT THAT. AND I KNOW YOU
DO HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT IT. AND I
KNOW THERE'S SEVERE
CONSEQUENCES, ESPECIALLY IF WE
RETURN TO CONSCRIPT CONSCRIPTION
FOR, YOU KNOW, SOMEONE WHO
DIDN'T GET THEIR DRIVER'S
LICENSE AT 16, 17, 18, YOU KNOW,
MOVE LIVES SOMEPLACE IN AN URBAN
COMMUNITY LIKE NEW YORK OR
DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES, WHERE
THEY'RE USING, YOU KNOW, THE
SUBWAY OR ALTERNATIVE
TRANSPORTATION TO THEY DON'T
NEED A MOTOR VEHICLE LICENSE,
HOW ARE THOSE FOLKS GOING TO BE
TREATED WHEN THEY COME WALKING
IN LATE, IS THAT A COURT MARTIAL
OR IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT
DURING VIETNAM, THAT WAS A THAT
WAS SERIOUS BUSINESS. AND I JUST
WANT TO KNOW HOW YOU'RE GOING TO
TREAT IT GOING FORWARD. OKAY SO
ONE THING WE ARE VERY CONCERNED
WITH IS HELPING TO MAKE SURE
PEOPLE REGISTER. AND WE ALSO DO
TAKE STEPS TO HELP FIND WAYS TO
GET THEM TO REGISTER. SO WE HAVE
FOUND THAT THIS SORT OF
LEGISLATION, WHICH WE CALL
DRIVER'S LICENSE LEGISLATION, IS
OUR MOST EFFECTIVE MEANS OF
HELPING MEN REGISTER. AND THAT'S
WHY 45 STATES AND TERRITORIES DO
IT. BUT WE'RE NOT DONE THERE. WE
DO WORK TO HAVE A ROBUST
OUTREACH CAMPAIGN TO REACH OUT
TO INFLUENCERS LIKE COACHES,
PARENTS, TEACHERS, SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATORS SO THEY'RE AWARE
AND AS YOU MAY KNOW, IF YOU IF
YOU SEE A LOT OF YOUNG PEOPLE
TODAY, THEY'RE VERY MUCH IN
THEIR PHONES AND ON SOCIAL
MEDIA. WE ALSO WORK THROUGH
DIFFERENT APPS TO HELP REMIND
THEM TO REGISTER THAT WAY. SO
THIS ISN'T ALL WE DO, BUT IT'S
LIKE WE ARE TRYING MULTIPLE
MEANS. SO WE FULFILL THE LAW AT
THE FEDERAL LEVEL TO HELP REMIND
YOUNG MEN TO REGISTER. BUT WE DO
KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, IF WE LOOK
AT OUR STATISTICS, SOMETHING
LIKE 63% OF REGISTRATIONS DO
COME THROUGH THINGS LIKE
DRIVER'S LICENSE LEGISLATION.
AND THAT HAS BEEN FOUND TO BE
VERY SUCCESSFUL. AND WE DO SEE
BIG UPLIFTS IN REGISTRATION. BUT
THAT'S A GOOD POINT. PEOPLE MAY
NOT DRIVE AS MUCH AND THEY MAY
TRY TO TAKE ALTERNATIVE
TRANSPORTATION. BUT LIKE I SAID,
WE DO FIND OTHER WAYS TO HELP
MAKE SURE THAT THEY CAN REGISTER
IN A TIME OF CONSCRIPTION. THAT
WOULD BE A DIFFERENT SITUATION.
AND YOU KNOW, THAT DOES GET US
INTO MORE SERIOUS TERRITORY WITH
HAVING TO REFER PEOPLE TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. SO I
WOULD HAVE TO CONTACT THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL IN THAT CASE,
IF PEOPLE ARE POTENTIALLY
VIOLATING THE MILITARY SELECTIVE
SERVICE ACT. SO THAT WOULD GO
DOWN A DIFFERENT ROAD. BUT MY
WHOLE POSITION HERE IS LET'S DO
OUR DUE DILIGENCE NOW TO TAKE
CARE OF PEOPLE TO HELP THEM
REGISTER AND HELP THEM FULFILL
THE LAW. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE
LEANING FORWARD TO TRY TO WORK
WITH AS MANY STATES AND
TERRITORIES AS WE CAN. I
APPRECIATE YOUR RESPONSE. I
MEAN, CLEARLY, ON THE ONE HAND,
THE AUTOMATIC REGISTRATION WOULD
AVOID PENALTIES FOR A LOT OF
PEOPLE OR ALLOW THEM TO AVOID,
BEING SORT OF ASLEEP AT THE
WHEEL, NO PUN INTENDED, AND
GETTING, GETTING THEMSELVES IN
TROUBLE. ON THE OTHER HAND, AN
OVERRELIANCE ON IT SEEMS TO ME
TO BE PROBLEMATIC AS WELL. SO
HOPEFULLY THAT'S GOING TO BE
THOUGHT THROUGH. AND I AM
SUPPORTING THE BILL, AND I
APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR'S WORK ON
IT. AND I KNOW YOU ASKED FOR AN
AYE VOTE IF YOU'D LIKE TO, TO
CLOSE ANY. WELL, AGAIN, MR.
CHAIR AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS, I
THANK YOU SO VERY, VERY MUCH FOR
HELPING THE YOUNG MEN HERE IN
CALIFORNIA TO GET AN OPPORTUNITY
TO GET REGISTERED AND BE
COMPLIANT WITH THE LAW. AND WITH
THAT, I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
YOUR I VOTE ALL RIGHT. IS THERE
A MOTION? SO MOVED. ALL RIGHT.
THE BILL IS MOVED BY SENATOR
NEWMAN. AND WE'LL CALL THE ROLL.
THIS IS THIS IS FILE ITEM NUMBER
14 SB 1081. THE MOTION IS DUE
PASS. AND WE REFER TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
SENATOR CORTESE Ã ORTEZ AYE
NILA ALAN ARCHULETA. AYE.
ARCHULETA AYE. BECKER. BECKER.
AYE. BLAKE. SPEER. NO BLAKE.
SPEER. NO. DALLI. NO. DALLI. NO.
DODD DODD. AYE. GONZALEZ. NEWMAN
NEWMAN. NEWMAN. AYE. WHEN
PORTANTINO. PORTANTINO. AYE.
SATO SERRATO. AYE. UMBERG. 72.
ON CALL. ALL RIGHT. THE BILL HAS
70 VOTES. TWO IN OPPOSITION AND
WILL LEAVE IT ON CALL FOR THE
ABSENT MEMBERS. THANK YOU ALL
FOR BEING HERE. THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO
BACKTRACK, ON OUR FILE ORDER
HERE TO SENATOR GONZALES AS. I'M
HERE. I'M HERE FROM GONZALES IS
NOT HERE. I HAVE A BILL THAT I
COULD DO. SENATOR BLAKESPEAR,
COME ON UP. I'M SORRY. I THOUGHT
SENATOR GONZALES WAS HERE, AND
MAYBE SHE LEFT AGAIN. OR MAYBE.
I IMAGINE THAT, BUT, SENATOR
BLAKESPEAR, IF YOU'RE PREPARED.
TÍNH. I THINK YOU CAN HEAR YOU
ON SP 1098, WHICH, FOR THOSE
FOLLOWING WOULD BE PHÐ FILE ITEM
16. THANK YOU. READY? PLEASE
PROCEED IF YOU'RE READY. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, CHAIR AND
COLLEAGUES, I AM PLEASED TO BE
PRESENTING SB 1098, WHICH
RESPONDS TO THE URGENT NEED FOR
COORDINATED PLANNING AND
IMPROVED SERVICES ALONG THE
COASTAL RAIL CORRIDOR IN
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. RAIL
SERVICES ARE AN IMPORTANT PART
OF THE STATE'S MULTIMODAL
TRANSPORTATION ECOSYSTEM. AN
INCREASED COMMITMENT TO
EXPANDING TRAIN AND TRANSIT
TRIPS IS CENTRAL TO MEETING OUR
STATE'S CLIMATE GOALS. IN
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, THE LOS
ANGELES, SAN DIEGO, SAN LUIS
OBISPO OR LOW SAND RAIL CORRIDOR
RUNS 351 MILES AND CONNECTS SIX
COUNTIES THAT ACCOUNT FOR NEARLY
45% OF THE STATEWIDE POPULATION.
HOWEVER THE REALITIES OF CLIMATE
CHANGE, SEA LEVEL RISE AND
EXTREME WEATHER EVENTS CONTINUE
TO THREATEN RAIL SERVICES AND
THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
COASTLINE. WE CAN NO LONGER
CONTINUE TO PLAN AND OPERATE, AS
WE HAVE THE RAIL CORRIDOR THAT
SUPPORTS THE PACIFIC SURFLINER
METROLINK COASTER AND FREIGHT
SERVICE HAS BEEN CLOSED FIVE
TIMES IN THE LAST THREE YEARS.
FOR MANY MONTHS AT A TIME, DUE
TO UNSTABLE HILLSIDES AND
EROSION ALONG THE TRACKS. THAT
MEANS SERVICE DISRUPTIONS FOR
MORE THAN HALF OF THE LAST 500
DAYS. THIS EXISTING RAIL
CORRIDOR THAT SERVES NEARLY HALF
THE STATE'S POPULATION IS
EXISTING. IT IS HISTORIC. IT HAS
ALREADY RECEIVED BILLIONS IN
STATE, FEDERAL AND PRIVATE
INVESTMENT OVER MANY DECADES. WE
SHOULD NOT ALLOW IT TO
DETERIORATE AND TO FALL INTO
DISREPAIR UNDER OUR WATCH. WE
KNOW WHAT IS AT STAKE. NOW IS
THE TIME TO ACT AND POSITION THE
CORRIDOR FOR LONG TERME SUCCESS.
SB 1098 BEGINS TO DO THAT BY
BRINGING TOGETHER STATE AND
LOCAL ACTION UNDER A COMMON GOAL
AND VISION. WHAT THIS BILL DOES
FIRST IS IT DIRECTS THE STATE'S
TRANSPORTATION, AN ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
AGENCIES TO IDENTIFY NEEDED
IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ALONG THE
CORRIDOR AND REPORT THAT BACK TO
THE LEGISLATURE. THIS
REQUIREMENT FOR STATE EXECUTIVE
BRANCH PRIORITIZATION IS BASED
ON A REQUEST THAT WAS MADE BY
LOCAL AGENCIES FOR GREATER STATE
LEADERSHIP. THE LOCAL AGENCIES
WILL ALSO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS
TO THE LEGISLATURE ON HOW BEST
TO SUPPORT RAIL AND RESILIENCY
PLANNING IN THE CORRIDOR. WE
NEED TO HEAR THE LATEST IN
PLANNING SEA DATA AND THE BEST
AVAILABLE SCIENCE FROM EXPERTS
AT THE STATE TRANSPORTATION
AGENCY AND THE COASTAL
COMMISSION, SECOND, THERE ARE
MANY LOCAL PARTNERS WITH AN
IMPORTANT VOICE IN THE FUTURE OF
THE COASTAL RAIL CORRIDOR.
THAT'S WHY WE'RE FORMING A
WORKING GROUP WITH A DIVERSE
REPRESENTATION FROM TRANSIT
PARTNERS, PLANNING AGENCIES AND
COMMUNITY, ENVIRONMENTAL AND
LABOR ORGANIZATIONS, AMONG
OTHERS, TO MAKE LOCALLY
IDENTIFIED RECOMMENDATIONS THAT
RESULT IN IMPROVED SERVICE
PERFORMANCE, RELIABILITY AND
RIDERSHIP. AND LASTLY, WE'RE
ADDING NEW REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS TO THE LEGISLATURE
AND TASKING THE TRANSPORTATION
SECRETARY TO PROVIDE THE
GUIDANCE, RECOMMENDATIONS AND TO
ENSURE COORDINATION THAT IS
NEEDED BETWEEN LOCAL TRANSIT
AGENCIES. THE COST OF INACTION
COULDN'T BE CLEARER. TRACK
CLOSURES, SHORT TERME EMERGENCY
REPAIRS AND SERVICE DISRUPTIONS
CANNOT BE A NORMAL PART OF
PASSENGER RAIL SERVICE IN
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. LOCAL
COMMUNITIES ARE RELYING ON US AT
THE STATE LEVEL AND WE CAN GET
THIS RIGHT BY WORKING TOGETHER
TO PROTECT THE SHORELINE AND
ENSURE THAT RAIL SERVICE ALONG
THE CORRIDOR IS SUCCESSFUL. SB
1098 IS THE FIRST STEP AND LAYS
THE FOUNDATION FOR REVITALIZING
RAIL IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA.
WITH ME TODAY, I HAVE STEVE
ROBERTS, PRESIDENT OF THE RAIL
PASSENGER ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA AND NEVADA CHAIR. IS
IT OKAY IF MY FIRST WITNESS OR
MY WITNESS SPEAKS? THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, SENATOR BLAKE SPEAR
AND IF YOU'RE READY, YOU MAY
PROCEED. YOU HAVE A COUPLE
MINUTES, THANK YOU, CHAIR AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS, FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS YOU. MY
NAME IS STEVE ROBERTS, AND I'M
PRESIDENT OF THE ALL VOLUNTEER
RAIL PASSENGER ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA AND NEVADA. SINCE ITS
FOUNDING IN 1978, RAIL PAC HAS
TAKEN A KEEN INTEREST IN
LEVERAGING THE FULL POTENTIAL OF
THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA'S RAIL
NETWORK, INCLUDING THE SAN LUIS
OBISPO, LOS ANGELES, SAN DIEGO
CORRIDOR, TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY
OF LIFE FOR SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIANS. AS A FOCUS STEP
TOWARDS THE GOAL OF A HIGH
FREQUENCY, HIGH PERFORMANCE RAIL
NETWORK THROUGHOUT SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA, RAIL PASSENGER
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA AND
NEVADA SUPPORTS SB 1098 AND
RECOMMENDS THE LEGISLATION MOVE
FORWARD. THERE'S URGENCY FOR
REVISIONS TO THE NETWORK
GOVERNANCE AND ACCELERATED
ACTIONS. THE IMPORTANCE OF
CALIFORNIA'S CLEAN AIR, CLEAN
AIR ACT AND, GREENHOUSE GAS
GOALS, POST-COVID CHANGES IN
TRAVEL PATTERNS AND GEOLOGIC
EARTH MOVEMENTS PRESENT A CLEAR
CHALLENGE TO THE RAIL NETWORK
AND ITS TRADITIONAL PRODUCT MIX
RAIL PAC IS CONCERNED THAT THE
CURRENT MARKET POSITIONING,
OPERATING BOUNDARIES AND PROJECT
DELIVERIES STRUCTURE IS SIMPLY
NOT UP TO THE TASK. THE CURRENT
SITUATION IS UNIQUE TO
CALIFORNIA, RESULTS IN A HYPER
LOCAL INFLUENCE ON RAIL, MAKING,
RAIL INVESTMENTS AND THEIR
IMPACTS WITHOUT A COUNTERVAILING
ANALYSIS OF REGIONAL BENEFIT,
THIS RAIL PAC FEELS THAT
CALTRANS NEEDS TO PROVIDE THE
LEADERSHIP AND PARTICIPATING IN
IN A BROADER PERSPECTIVE,
PROVIDING SUPPORT AND GUIDANCE
FOR LOCAL STAKEHOLDERS. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
YOUR TESTIMONY, I'M GOING TO
TURN THE GAVEL OVER TO SENATOR
NEWMAN TEMPORARILY BECAUSE THE
CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR WILL BE OUT
FOR A FEW MINUTES AND, WE'LL
JUST, DO THAT AT THIS TIME.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YEAH. SO
SHE KNOWS. OKAY APOLOGIES. I
HAVE ALWAYS ASPIRED TO BE THE
CHAIR OF THIS COMMITTEE. THIS IS
AWESOME, SO PLEASE PROCEED. OKAY
WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW IS GOING TO
METOOS FOR THOSE. LET'S DO THAT.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER WITNESSES
HERE IN THE HERE IN THE HEARING
ROOM WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN
SUPPORT OF THE MEASURE. PLEASE
STATE YOUR NAME, YOUR
ORGANIZATION, YOUR POSITION.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN AND
MEMBERS. MOYAMOYA, ON BEHALF OF
THE ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION
AUTHORITY, WE'RE A LITTLE BIT OF
A TWEENER. WE DON'T HAVE A
POSITION ON THE BILL, BUT AS,
REPRESENTING THE COUNTY THAT HAS
EXPERIENCED, THE BREACHES, THE
CHALLENGES OVER THE LAST YEAR
AND RESULTED IN SIGNIFICANT,
CLOSURES ALONG THE RAIL LINE. WE
ARE VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THE
AUTHOR. SHE HAS SPENT ENORMOUS
AMOUNTS OF ENERGY AND TIME
FOCUSED ON THIS ISSUE, AND WE'VE
WORKED WITH HER ON THIS BILL SO
FAR. WE LOOK FORWARD TO
CONTINUING TO WORK WITH HER
AGAIN. WE DON'T HAVE A POSITION,
BUT WE ARE VERY, VERY GRATEFUL
FOR ALL THE WORK. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MISS TAUBE. NEXT,
PLEASE. GOOD EVENING. KIRK
BLACKBURN HERE ON BEHALF OF THE
SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERNMENTS. SANDAG. SANDAG.
ALSO DOESN'T HAVE A CURRENTLY
HAVE A FORMAL POSITION ON THE
BILL, BUT I REALLY WANTED TO
EXPRESS OUR APPRECIATION TO THE
SENATOR FOR HER LEADERSHIP AND
ADVANCING A LONG TERME PLANNING
FOR RESILIENCY OF THE SAN RAIL
CORRIDOR IS A VITAL LIFELINE FOR
THE SAN DIEGO REGION, AS IT
SERVES AS THE ONLY CONNECTION
BETWEEN IT AND THE REST OF THE
STATE AND THE NATION. SAN DIEGO
SANDAG HAS BEEN PARTNERING WITH
THE STATE TO INVEST IN THIS IN
THE SAN DIEGO SEGMENT OF THE
CORRIDOR TO STABILIZE THE BLUFFS
ALONG THE TRACKS AND ULTIMATELY
MOVE THE TRUCKS, TRUCKS OFF THE
BLUFFS AND SANDAG LOOKS FORWARD
TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH ITS LOW
SAND PARTNERS TO DEVELOP A
SHARED VISION OF THE CORRIDOR
AND WANT TO THANK THE SENATOR
AGAIN. THANK YOU. NEXT, PLEASE.
DAVID MARTINEZ, ON BEHALF OF
STREETS FOR ALL, WITH A POSITION
OF SUPPORT, IF AMENDED, TO
INCLUDE CALIFORNIA HIGH SPEED
RAIL. THANK YOU. NEXT, PLEASE,
MR. CHAIRMAN. MEMBERS,
CONGRATULATIONS ON CHAIRING.
THANK YOU, ANDREW ANTHONY, ON
BEHALF OF THE SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL
AUTHORITY, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS
METROLINK, WE ARE ALSO A
TWEENER. BUT WE'RE SUPPORTIVE
AND WE'RE ACTUALLY GRATEFUL FOR
THE LEVEL OF COORDINATION THAT
THIS BILL HAS BROUGHT. AND THE
SENATOR'S EFFORTS GO BEYOND
COORDINATION. AND THE DETAILS IN
THE BILL, THE CONVERSATIONS ARE
HAPPENING UP AND DOWN THE
CORRIDOR, WHICH PROBABLY
OTHERWISE WOULDN'T. AND SO WE'RE
GRATEFUL FOR THAT, AS THIS IS A
BREAD AND BUTTER QUARTER FOR
METROLINK. SO THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, YOU HAVE THE RECORD TODAY
FOR THE MOST TWEENERS. IS THERE
ANYBODY HERE IN THE COMMITTEE
ROOM WOULD LIKE TO TESTIFY IN
OPPOSITION TO THE MEASURE?
SEEING NONE. LET'S COME BACK TO
THE DAIS. MEMBERS, ANY QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS FOR THE WITNESS OR
FOR THE SENATOR? I'VE GOT A
MOTION, SENATOR ARCHULETA, THANK
YOU, SENATOR, FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD. OF COURSE, BEING
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, THAT YOU,
WE BOTH ARE. AND WE KNOW THAT
WHETHER IT'S TRAFFIC OR WHETHER
IT'S FREIGHT. BUT I LIKE TO
POINT OUT THAT THIS BILL GIVES
US A REPORT SO WE CAN SEE HOW
AND WE CAN PREVENT, SUSPENDING
OF THAT, RAIL LINE FIVE TIMES IN
FIVE YEARS. THERE'S TOO MANY.
FIVE TIMES IN A LIFETIME IS TOO
MANY, BECAUSE OF THE FACT THE
FREIGHT AND ALSO THE MILITARY
THAT USES IT AS WELL. AND AS YOU
KNOW, THAT THESE EMERGENCIES,
CLOSURES THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE
CAN BE PREVENTED IF WE ARE BEING
PROACTIVE OF. SO I AM, 100% WITH
YOU AND I WILL MOVE THE BILL AT
THE APPROPRIATE TIME. I
APPRECIATE I THINK WE HAD A
MOTION FROM SENATOR. OH, I'M
SORRY. ANYBODY ELSE WITH
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FOR
SENATOR BLAKE'S FERRY? SENATOR
BLAZER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE?
YES. THANK YOU. THIS BILL IS
REALLY IMPORTANT TO LAY THE
FOUNDATION WE NEED FOR FUTURE
SUCCESS. AND I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR VOTE. THANK YOU. PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. WE HAVE A MOTION
FROM SENATOR SERRANO. THIS IS
FILE ITEM NUMBER 16, SB 1098.
THE MOTION IS DUE PASSED AND WE
REFER TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. SENATOR CORTEZ,
NILO ALLEN. ALLEN. AYE
ARCHULETA. Ã. ARCHULETA. AYE.
BECKER. BLAKE. SPEER I BLAKE.
SPEER I DALLY DODD. GONZALEZ
GONZALEZ I LIMÓN NEWMAN. I
NEWMAN. I NGUYEN PORTANTINO.
PORTANTINO I SATO. SERRATO I
UMBER. THANK YOU THAT BILL HAS
7070. WE WILL LEAVE THAT ON
CALL. AND WHAT'S NEXT? NÓ 934,
SENATOR GONZALEZ WITH SB 934.
YOU MAY PROCEED WHEN READY.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND
MEMBERS, I'M HERE TO PRESENT SB
934, WHICH WILL COORDINATE THE
INFRASTRUCTURE BUILDOUT NEEDED
TO TRANSITION CALIFORNIA'S
FREIGHT SECTOR TO ZERO EMISSION
TECHNOLOGIES, ESPECIALLY FOR
MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY VEHICLES.
WHETHER CHARGING OR REFUELING
INFRASTRUCTURE. THE BARRIER WAS
IDENTIFIED IN THE CALIFORNIA
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
RECENTLY PUBLISHED CLEAN FREIGHT
CORRIDOR ASSESSMENT, WHICH
RECOMMENDED THAT THE CREATION OF
A STATE LEVEL ENTITY TO TAKE
LEAD ON INFRASTRUCTURE NETWORK
DEVELOPMENT, COORDINATION OF
VARIOUS STAKEHOLDERS AND
AGENCIES AMONG MANY OTHER
THINGS, AND IT BUILDS THE BILL
BUILDS OFF OF THIS
RECOMMENDATION BY CREATING A
CENTRAL DELIVERY TEAM FOR
FREIGHT ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE
INFRASTRUCTURE AT THE CEC AND
CTC, TESTIFYING IN SUPPORT OF
THE BILL TODAY, I HAVE MEGAN
MICKELBERG REPRESENTING
CALSTART. I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
AN AYE VOTE. TWO MINUTES. THANK
YOU, GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. MEGAN MICKELBERG HERE
ON BEHALF OF CALSTART, A GLOBAL
NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION DEDICATED
TO THE ADVANCEMENT OF THE ZERO
EMISSION VEHICLE AND
INFRASTRUCTURE TECHNOLOGIES. WE
WANT TO THANK SENATOR GONZALEZ
FOR HER CONTINUED LEADERSHIP
WHEN IT COMES TO ZERO EMISSION
VEHICLES, ESPECIALLY IN THE
MEDIUM AND HEAVY DUTY SPACE. AS
YOU ALL KNOW, SHORT AND LONG TUM
PLANNING FOR ZEV INFRASTRUCTURE
IS ESSENTIAL FOR CALIFORNIA TO
MEET ITS CLIMATE GOALS, AND ZEV
DEPLOYMENT GOALS. THE CREATION
OF THE ZERO EMISSION FREIGHT
CENTRAL DELIVERY TEAM WOULD
ENCOURAGE GREATER COORDINATION
AMONG STATE AGENCIES AND RESULT
IN BEST PRACTICES AND
RECOMMENDATIONS TO EXPEDITE
INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT TO
ENSURE THE STATE CAN MEET THE
NEEDS OF MEDIUM AND HEAVY DUTY
ZEV FLEETS. SB 934 ALSO ENSURES
THAT THERE WILL BE A COORDINATED
WORKFORCE, WHICH WILL BE
NECESSARY FOR LONG TUM
SUSTAINABILITY OF ZEV
INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE FREIGHT
INDUSTRY MORE BROADLY. FOR THESE
REASONS, CALSTART ALSO ASKED FOR
YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU. ARE
THERE ANY OTHER. WITNESSES HERE
IN THE COMMITTEE HEARING WHO
WOULD LIKE TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT
OF THE MEASURE? IF SO, PLEASE
COME FORWARD, STATE YOUR NAME,
YOUR ORGANIZATION, AND YOUR
POSITION. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR
MEMBERS BERNIE SIMMONS KRIEGER
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
TRUCKING ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT,
THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY ANY
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION TO THE
MEASURE? SEEING NONE. LET'S COME
BACK TO THE DAIS. YES, I'VE GOT
A MOTION FROM SENATOR ARCHULETA,
MEMBERS, ANY QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FOR SENATOR GONZALEZ OR
HER WITNESS? IF I MAY, YOU MAY
THANK LETTER. IF I MAY READ A
COMMENT, BECAUSE I STUDIED YOUR
BILL AND I APPRECIATE WHAT
YOU'RE DOING. AND AS YOU KNOW,
I'M THE CHAIR OF THE SELECT
COMMITTEE ON HYDROGEN AND
ENERGY. I'M ALWAYS PUSHING FOR
INVESTMENTS IN OUR ZERO
EMISSIONS INFRASTRUCTURE. I
THINK THE DELIVERY TEAM CREATED
IN THIS BILL WILL ENSURE
INVESTMENTS IN ZERO EMISSIONS
INFRASTRUCTURE ARE TIMELY, AND
BEING INSTALLED IN THE BEST
LOCATIONS. AND FOR THESE REASONS
THAT I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE
BILL. AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO
BE A COAUTHOR AND NEVER FORGET
OUR HYDROGEN THAT'S IN THAT
REALM AS WELL. THANK YOU INDEED,
THE MOST ABUNDANT ELEMENT, ANY
OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
THE COMMITTEE, NO. SEEING NONE.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? I HAD
NO IDEA THAT SENATOR ARCHULETA
WAS SO ENTHUSED ABOUT HYDROGEN.
I'M JUST KIDDING. BUT, MR. CHAIR
, I JUST RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN
AYE VOTE. AND I THANK MEGAN FOR
BEING HERE AS WELL. AND HER
TESTIMONY. THANK YOU. VERY GOOD,
MADAM CONSULTANT, PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. THIS IS FINAL ITEM
NUMBER 12, SB 934. THE MOTION IS
DUE PASSED AND WE REFER TO THE
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY, UTILITIES
AND COMMUNICATIONS. SENATOR
CORTEZ, SENATOR NILO ALLEN. AYE.
ALLEN. AYE. ARCHULETA. AYE.
ARCHULETA. AYE. BECKER BLAKE.
SPEAR. SHAKESPEARE. AYE. DALLY.
DODD GONZALEZ. GONZALEZ. AYE.
LIMON NEWMAN. NEWMAN. AYE.
NGUYEN. PORTANTINO PORTANTINO.
AYE. SATO. SERRATO NØ. UMBERG 6
TO 3 ON THAT BILL HAS SIX VOTES
FOR THREE AGAINST. WE'LL LEAVE
IT ON CALL. WHAT IS NEXT? I
THINK SENATOR ALLEN, IT'S THE
LAST BILL. ALL RIGHT, SENATOR
ALLEN, I BELIEVE YOU'RE NEXT
WITH THE SB 1297.
WELCOME TO YOUR WITNESSES. YOU
MAY PROCEED WHEN YOU ARE READY.
WELL, THANK YOU, MR. INTERIM
CHAIR. THANK YOU, MEMBERS, THIS
IS A Ã BILL RELATING TO SOME OF
THE SAME ISSUES THAT CAME UP IN
THE DISCUSSION OVER SENATOR
STERN'S BILL. THOUGH IT'S A
DIFFERENT BILL. AND, DIFFERENT
REMEDY, LET ME LET ME JUST START
BY ACCEPTING THE COMMITTEE'S
AMENDMENTS, I WANT TO THANK THE
CHAIR AND THE COMMITTEE STAFF,
ESPECIALLY MR. CHEN, FOR WORKING
CLOSELY WITH MY OFFICE ON THIS
BILL, YOU KNOW, MANY OF, YOU
KNOW, THE WIDE OPEN AND WINDING
PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY. IT'S ONE
OF THE MOST FAMOUS AND
PICTURESQUE ROADWAYS IN THE
WORLD. IT DRAWS MILLIONS OF
VISITORS TO THE SMALL BEACH CITY
OF MALIBU EVERY YEAR. BUT EVERY
COUPLE OF MONTHS, LITERALLY
EVERY COUPLE OF MONTHS, AND
SOMETIMES MORE FREQUENTLY THAN
THAT, THE COMMUNITY IS
DEVASTATED BY YET ANOTHER FATAL,
TRAFFIC ACCIDENT WITH ALL SORTS
OF SERIOUS CRASHES AND
NEAR-MISSES INTERSPERSED IN
BETWEEN, ONE OF THE MORE RECENT
NIGHTS OF TRAGEDY IN OUR
COMMUNITY HAPPENED ON OCTOBER
17TH, 2023, WHEN A YOUNG MAN
SPEEDING AT 104MPH ON PCH IN
MALIBU LOST CONTROL OF HIS
VEHICLE AND HE KILLED FOUR OTHER
YOUNG PEPPERDINE UNIVERSITY
STUDENTS WHO WERE STANDING ON
THE ROAD OF THE BY THE SIDE OF
THE HIGHWAY, THE WILD THING IS,
SINCE MICHELLE'S DAUGHTER EMILY
WAS KILLED BACK IN 2010, ONE OF
OUR STUDENTS, WHEN I WAS ON THE
SCHOOL BOARD IN SANTA MONICA,
MALIBU, SINCE THEN, 60 PEOPLE
HAVE BEEN KILLED JUST IN THIS
ONE TOWN ALONE ON THIS ONE ROAD.
AND THE CRAZY THING IS, WE HAVE
HAD TO UPDATE THIS. THESE
TALKING POINTS. WE'VE HAD TO
INCREASE THE NUMBERS SEVERAL
TIMES, AS WE HAVE, SENT IN
VARIOUS DOCUMENTS RELATING TO
THIS BILL, THE AUTHOR'S
STATEMENT, THE FACT SHEET,
BECAUSE, MOST RECENTLY, THE
PEDESTRIAN WAS STRUCK BY A
VEHICLE ON ON MARCH 29TH, 2023
CRASH DATA FROM LA COUNTY
SHERIFF REPORTS 127 PROPERTY
DAMAGE COLLISIONS. 983 INJURY
COLLISIONS, SEVEN DEATHS THAT
YEAR AND A PRIMARY FACTOR IN
EVERY ONE OF THESE INCIDENTS
WAS, HIGH VEHICLE SPEED. SO THE
WHOLE CITY OF MALIBU HAS ABOUT
10,000 PEOPLE. AND YET IT'S IN
THE TOP 25, SMALL CITIES IN THE
COUNTRY WITH REGARDS TO WORST
CRASH FATALITY RATES IN THE
COUNTRY, WITH FATALITY RATES FOR
CRASHES. SO, AMONG 100 SIMILARLY
SIZED CALIFORNIA CITIES IN 2021,
THE OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY
RANKED MALIBU NUMBER ONE IN
TOTAL INJURIES AND FATALITIES.
NUMBER ONE IN PEDESTRIAN
INJURIES AND FATALITIES. NUMBER
ONE IN SPEED RELATED INJURIES
AND FATALITIES, NUMBER ONE IN
MOTORCYCLE INJURIES AND
FATALITIES. AND THIRD, IN
BICYCLE INJURIES AND FATALITIES
IN THE STATE. NHTSA, THE
NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRANSPORTATION
SAFETY ADMINISTRATION REPORTS
THAT IN 2022 ALONE, TRAFFIC
ACCIDENTS KILLED OVER 4400
CALIFORNIANS, ACCORDING TO OUR
NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY
BOARD, SPEEDING IS A FACTOR IN A
THIRD OF ALL TRAFFIC FATALITIES.
THE FASTER A CAR IS TRAVELING,
THE GREATER THE RISK OF SERIOUS
INJURY OR DEATH. A PEDESTRIAN
STRUCK BY A VEHICLE TRAVELING
ONLY 40 MILES AN HOUR HAS AN 80%
CHANCE OF DEATH. NOW, ONE PROVEN
WAY OF SLOWING FOLKS DOWN IS
AUTOMATIC SPEED CAMERA
ENFORCEMENT. THE NTSB, THE
CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL, THE
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION,
THEY'VE ALL RECOMMENDED USING
SPEED SAFETY CAMERAS TO ENFORCE
SPEED LIMITS. AND SPEED CAMERAS
ARE EVEN AN AUTHORIZED
EXPENDITURE UNDER THE FEDERAL
INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT AND
JOBS ACT. OUR FHA, THE FEDERAL
HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION DATA
SHOWS SPEED CAMERAS REDUCE
CRASHES ON URBAN STREETS BY 54,
AND NTSB REVIEW OF SPEED CAMERA
PROGRAMS AROUND THE WORLD FOUND
CAMERAS TO BE AN EFFECTIVE TOOL
IN REDUCING FATAL COLLISIONS, SO
THIS BILL, AS AMENDED, WILL
CREATE A SPEED CAMERA PILOT
PROGRAM FOR PCH IN MALIBU. JUST
THIS ONE ROAD IN ONE CITY
MODELED SIGNIFICANTLY ON THE
BILL THAT WE ALL PASSED LAST
YEAR. ASSEMBLY MEMBER FRIEDMAN'S
LEGISLATION, THE AMENDMENTS YOU
SEE IN FRONT OF YOU MAY LOOK
SIGNIFICANT, BUT THEY COPY MOST
OF THE LANGUAGE FROM LAST YEAR'S
LEGISLATION. THEY WERE DONE WITH
THAT SPIRIT FROM THE COMMITTEE.
THE AMENDS INCLUDE SOME PRIVACY
AND EQUITY AND REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS, AS LAST YEAR'S
LEGISLATION, THE SAME ONES AS
LAST YEAR'S LEGISLATION. THERE
ARE TWO SPECIFIC CHANGES FOR THE
CITY OF MALIBU. FIRST, THE CITY.
SO IT GOES FURTHER FOR THE CITY
OF MALIBU. THEY HAVE TO POST,
SPEED FEEDBACK SIGNS AT EACH
CAMERA LOCATION. AND THESE ARE
THE SIGNS THAT SHOW DRIVERS
THEIR SPEED AS THEY APPROACH,
SECOND, THE CITY HAS TO MAINTAIN
ITS EXISTING CONTRACTING WITH
CHP AND THE LA SHERIFFS FOR
PATROLS, AND THE CITY HAS AGREED
TO DO THAT. SO MEMBERS, IT WAS A
JUST A DEVASTATING, TIME FOR US
IN THE MALIBU COMMUNITY GOING
THROUGH YET ANOTHER SERIES OF
FATALITIES, THIS MOMENT WHERE
THESE FOUR WONDERFUL YOUNG WOMEN
WERE MOWED DOWN, I THINK BECAME
A REALLY IMPORTANT INFLECTION
POINT, WE KNOW THAT THIS BILL,
CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN
PREVENTING MORE UNNECESSARY
DEATHS ALONG THE PACIFIC COAST
HIGHWAY IN MALIBU. REDUCING
SPEED IS IMPERATIVE TO SAVING
LIVES AND SPEED. SAFETY CAMERAS
MAKE THIS POSSIBLE. AND SO HERE
TODAY, I HAVE A TWO GENTLEMEN
WHO ARE BONDED TOGETHER AS NONE
OF US EVER HOPED TO BE. THEY'RE
BOTH FATHERS OF, WHO'S LOST
THEIR GIRLS. ON THE PCH. SO WE
HAVE FIRST BARRY STEWART, FATHER
OF PAYTON STEWART, ONE OF THE
PEPPERDINE UNIVERSITY STUDENTS
KILLED LAST YEAR. MICHAEL.
SHANE. MICHELLE. SHANE. WHO YOU
HEARD FROM EARLIER, WHOSE
DAUGHTER EMILY WAS KILLED IN
2020 AND 2010 ON THE PCH. HE'S
ALSO THE PRODUCER OF THE
POWERFUL DOCUMENTARY 21 MILES IN
MALIBU. AND LET'S START WITH
YOU, MR. STEWART. OKAY. GOOD
AFTERNOON, CHAIR, AND MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE. THANKS FOR
LETTING ME TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF
SB 1297. AS SENATOR ALLEN SAID,
I'M VERY STEWART. MY DAUGHTER
PAYTON WAS ONE OF THE FOUR
PEPPERDINE STUDENTS KILLED ON
PCH. MALIBU, THEIR PHOTOS ARE IN
FRONT OF ME. PAYTON'S I THINK
THIS ONE. YEAH. NO THAT'S NOT
HER. SHE'S HERE. DAZZLIN, ASHER
AND ED NEVE, THEY WERE ALL VERY
GOOD FRIENDS, SORORITY MATES,
ALL HAD A BRIGHT FUTURE AHEAD OF
THEM. THIS IS A NEEDLESS
TRAGEDY. IT'S LEFT ME, PEYTON'S
MOTHER, OUR YOUNGER DAUGHTER
WITH UNSPEAKABLE AND PERMANENT
HOLE IN OUR LIVES. THE SAME IS
TRUE OF HER THREE CLASSMATES AND
THEIR FAMILIES. THESE YOUNG
WOMEN WERE STANDING ON THE
SIDEWALK IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA.
I STRESS RESIDENTIAL ON PCH
MALIBU, WHERE A 22 YEAR OLD
MALIBU RESIDENT DRIVING 104
MILES AN HOUR IN HIS MOM'S BMW
M5 MOWED THEM DOWN. THE SPEED
LIMIT THERE IS 45, WHICH ITSELF
IS UNSAFE. THE LA SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT TELLS ME THAT SPEEDS
OVER 60 MILES AN HOUR IN THIS
RESIDENTIAL AREA ARE COMMONPLACE
. SOME PEOPLE DRIVE OVER 100
MILES AN HOUR IN THAT
RESIDENTIAL AREA EVERY WEEK, AS
WAS TOLD TO ME BY CAPTAIN SEE2
OF THE LA SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT.
SO GUESS WHAT HAPPENS? 60 PEOPLE
HAVE BEEN KILLED IN PCH MALIBU
SINCE 2010. MOST OF THEM IN A
ROUGHLY TWO MILE STRETCH,
INCLUDING THE SO-CALLED DEAD
MAN'S CURVE, WHERE MY WHERE MY
DAUGHTER DIED. SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT STATS INDICATE
EXCESSIVE SPEEDS. THE PRIMARY
CAUSE OF THESE DEATHS AND
INJURIES SINCE PAYTON DIED, I'VE
ATTENDED MEETINGS WITH CALTRANS
AND CITY OF MALIBU, ELECTED
OFFICIALS WHO TOLD ME SAFETY IS
OUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY. BY
ENABLING ELECTRONIC SPEED
ENFORCEMENT AND PROVIDING
SAFEGUARDS AGAINST ITS MISUSE,
THIS BILL INDISPUTABLY SUPPORTS
GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSIBILITY TO
SAFEGUARD LAW ABIDING MOTORISTS,
CYCLISTS AND PEDESTRIANS IN
OTHER JURISDICTIONS. THESE
SYSTEMS HAVE BEEN PROVEN
EFFECTIVE, EFFICIENT AND
IMPARTIAL. THEY WORK AROUND THE
CLOCK. THEY'RE INEXPENSIVE, THEY
DON'T DISCRIMINATE. THEY TARGET
ALL THE DRIVERS EXCEEDING THE
LIMIT BY A PRESET AMOUNT, AND
THEY DON'T TICKET ALL THE OTHER
DRIVERS. THEY CHANGED BEHAVIOR
ONCE DRIVERS KNOW THEY'LL BE
AUTOMATICALLY FINED FOR
SPEEDING, THEY SLOW DOWN. SOME
SAY THAT ELECTRONIC ENFORCEMENT
WILL COST LAW ENFORCEMENT JOBS.
THAT CONCERN IS UNFOUNDED.
AGAIN, THE LA SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT MALIBU HAS FUNDING TO
HIRE MORE DEPUTIES, BUT THEY
CAN'T GET ENOUGH CANDIDATES. IN
L.A. COUNTY, DEPUTIES ARE
RETIRING FASTER THAN THEY CAN BE
REPLACED. ELECTRONIC ENFORCEMENT
WOULD FREE SCARCE PERSONNEL TO
HANDLE OTHER OFFENSES. THE ONES
THAT REQUIRE ACTUAL LIVE
DEPUTIES. THIS BILL IS
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATORS
OPPORTUNITY TO SAVE LIVES
WITHOUT HARMING ANYONE, AND
WITHOUT CURBING THE FREEDOM OF
ANY LAW ABIDING CALIFORNIA FANS.
I IMPLORE YOU TO SUPPORT THIS
BILL SO FUTURE FAMILIES AVOID
THE AGONY MY FAMILY, MICHELLE'S
FAMILY, AND 58 OTHER FAMILIES OF
PEOPLE KILLED ON PCH MALIBU HAVE
EXPERIENCED SINCE 2010. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK THE COMMITTEE
TO MOVE FORWARD. SB 1297. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU BOTH FOR BEING
HERE, I, AGAIN, YEAH. I'M SORRY.
Þ APOLOGIZE. YOU KNOW, NO
PROBLEM. SORRY THANK YOU AGAIN,
I'M HERE TODAY TO SHARE MY
HEARTBREAKING STORY OF LOSS,
GRIEF AND DEVASTATION CAUSED BY
RECKLESS DRIVING. MY NAME IS
MICHELLE SHANE. I'M A RESIDENT
OF MALIBU, A FATHER OF THREE
CHILDREN, A FILM MAKER. 14 YEARS
AGO, MY BELOVED DAUGHTER EMILY
WAS CRUELLY TAKEN AWAY FROM US
IN A SENSELESS TRAFFIC VIOLENCE
INCIDENTS CAUSED BY A SPEEDING
DRIVER ON PCH. EMILY WAS JUST 13
YEARS OLD, FULL OF LIFE AND
PROMISE WHEN SHE WAS CUT SHORT.
THE PAIN AND DEVASTATION
FOLLOWED. HER DEATH WAS
IMMEASURABLE. OUR FAMILY, HER
SCHOOL, HER COMMUNITY WERE ALL
DEEPLY AFFECTED BY HER LOSS. ONE
OF EMILY'S FRIENDS, WHO WAS JUST
13 AT THE TIME, STRUGGLED WITH
GUILT AND GRIEF FOR YEARS,
FOREVER MARKED BY THIS LOSS OF
HER BEST FRIEND. NO ONE SHOULD
HAVE TO EXPERIENCE THE TRAUMA OF
LOSING A CHILD OR A FRIEND TO
RECKLESS DRIVE. THIS IS NOT AN
ACCIDENT. IT WAS A DELIBERATE
CHOICE BY A RECKLESS DRIVER WHO
PRIORITIZED SPEEDING OVER HUMAN
LIFE. HIS CALLOUS DISREGARD FOR
THE LAW AND HUMAN LIFE RESULTS
IN THE LOSS OF AN INNOCENT YOUNG
GIRL, LEAVING A VOID THAT WILL
NEVER BE FILLED. SINCE EMILY'S
TRAGIC DEATH IN 2010, THERE HAVE
BEEN 172 FATAL FATALITIES,
SEVERE INJURIES TO PASSENGERS
AND DRIVERS, PEDESTRIANS ALONG
PCH IN MALIBU, WITH SPEEDING AS
THE PRIMARY FACTOR IN NEARLY
EVERY CASE, THE CHP HAS ISSUED
727 SPEEDING CITATIONS ALONG PCH
IN MALIBU IN THE LAST THREE
MONTHS, HIGHLIGHTING THE URGENCY
OF THE MATTER. FROM APRIL 2010
TO NOW, 60 PEOPLE HAVE DIED IN
MALIBU ALONE DUE TO RECKLESS
DRIVING, WHILE EFFORTS HAVE BEEN
MADE TO IMPROVE SAFETY ALONG PCH
OVER THE YEAR, MORE NEEDS TO BE
DONE. THAT'S WHY I FIRMLY
SUPPORT SENATOR ALAN'S BILL, SB
1297, WHICH PROPOSES
ESTABLISHING A PILOT PROGRAM FOR
AUTOMATED SPEED ENFORCEMENT
ALONG PORTIONS OF PCH. SUCH
SYSTEMS HAVE BEEN PROVEN
EFFECTIVE IN REDUCING SPEEDING,
RESULTING IN FEWER COLLISIONS
AND SAVING LIVES. I URGE YOU,
ESTEEMED MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE, TO RECOGNIZE THE
URGENT NEED FOR THIS
LEGISLATION. LOOK AT THE DATA
HERE. THE STORIES DO WHAT IS
RIGHT TO PROTECT THE LIVES OF
OUR MOST VULNERABLE CITIZENS
CITIZENS, THE TIME FOR ACTION IS
NOW. I RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO
SUPPORT SB 1297. TOGETHER WE CAN
MAKE OUR ROADS SAFER, SAVE LIVES
, AND YOU'LL NEVER HAVE TO WALK
IN EITHER BARRY OR MY SHOES.
THANK YOU AGAIN. THANK YOU BOTH
FOR BEING HERE. AND, UNDER
EMOTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES, TO SAY
THE LEAST. ARE THERE OTHERS IN
THE COMMITTEE ROOM WHO WISH TO
EXPRESS THE SUPPORT POSITION,
NAME, AFFILIATION, AND SUPPORT?
PLEASE GOOD AFTERNOON, SENATORS,
I'M DOUG STEWART, MAYOR PRO TEM,
CITY OF MALIBU. WE FULLY SUPPORT
THIS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON. STEVE MCCLEARY, CITY
OF MALIBU CITY MANAGER. AND
AGAIN, THE CITY OF MALIBU
STRONGLY URGES YOUR SUPPORT OF
THIS BILL. WE APPRECIATE YOUR
CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU. HI,
EVERYONE. TRACY ROSENBERG WITH
OAKLAND PRIVACY, WE ARE TWEENERS
ON THIS BILL. NO OPPOSITION TO
THE BILL. WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE
THE STATEMENT THAT AB 645 WAS
NEGOTIATED WITH A NUMBER OF
ADVOCATES FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS.
I BELIEVE I BELIEVE IT WAS OVER
THREE DIFFERENT LEGISLATIVE
SESSIONS. WE'RE NOT TAKING
TESTIMONY FROM AT THIS POINT,
JUST NAME, AFFILIATION AND
POSITION. WELL, WE ARE TWEENERS,
SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO EXPRESS
THE CONCERN THAT THE LEGISLATIVE
NEGOTIATIONS WERE AMPLE AND
LENGTHY AND THAT WE DON'T WANT
TO SEE THIS BILL BECOME THE
FIRST OF MANY CHANGES TO THAT
AGREEMENT. THANK YOU. THE PROPER
PROCESS IS TO LET US KNOW YOU
WANT TO SPEAK AS AN OPPOSITION
WITNESS. SO THAT THE COMMITTEE
KNOWS THAT'S HAPPENING. IS THERE
ANYONE ELSE WHO WISHES TO
TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION? I'M
SORRY. IN SUPPORT. I DON'T
BELIEVE WE HAVE A LEAD
OPPOSITION WITNESS, DO WE? THEN
I WILL CALL ANYONE, ANY
WITNESSES WHO WISH TO EXPRESS AN
OPPOSITION POSITION, NAME,
AFFILIATION AND OPPOSITION AT
THIS TIME, SEEING NONE, WE'LL
COME BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. COMMENTS.
QUESTIONS. SENATOR NEWMAN. SO,
GLAD IT'S WORTH THE BILL, I
REALLY I JUST WANT TO SAY. I'M
ALWAYS JUST AMAZED THAT PEOPLE
WHO HAVE EXPERIENCED SUCH LOSS
CAN TURN THAT LOSS INTO ADVOCACY
. Kò. AND WE THANK YOU FOR IT.
I'M GLAD TO SUPPORT IT. IT'S
VERY BRAVE. ALL RIGHT. THANK
YOU, SENATOR NEWMAN, SENATOR
SEYARTO AND SENATOR NHIÀU, IN
THAT ORDER. THANK YOU, QUESTION
FOR THE AUTHOR OF THE PREVIOUS,
STUDIES THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE
DONE IS WHAT ARE THE RESULTS
FROM THAT WHICH THEY WERE
SUPPOSED TO BE ANOTHER PILOT
PROJECT FOR THIS. OH, YOU MEAN
FROM THE FRIEDMAN BILL, RIGHT. I
JUST PASSED LAST YEAR. SO WE'RE
WE'RE HAVING IT. IT'S UNDERWAY.
OKAY SO I'M HOPING THAT, YOU
KNOW, WHEN THIS PASSES, THAT IT
WILL GET DONE QUICKLY. SO THAT
WE CAN START TO GATHER THE
INFORMATION THAT WE NEED, I
GENERALLY, SHY AWAY FROM THE BIG
BROTHER APPROACH TO THESE TYPE
OF THINGS, BUT ON THIS
PARTICULAR STRETCH OF MALIBU,
THE PCH THROUGH MALIBU, IN
ADDITION TO THE SPEEDING
PROBLEMS, THERE'S ALSO SOME
DESIGN PROBLEMS AND, ISSUES WITH
WHERE PEDESTRIANS CAN WALK
BECAUSE A LOT OF PEDESTRIANS
WALKING THROUGH THERE. I USED TO
WORK AT 70 ONES. THE PEDESTRIANS
THAT WALK THROUGH THERE HAVE
NOWHERE TO WALK. THAT'S RIGHT.
AND SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE
BEEN OUT PARTYING AND THINGS
LIKE THAT. BUT, THERE IS AN
EXTRAORDINARY AMOUNT OF CARS,
AND HORRENDOUS CRASHES. AND
YOU'VE SEEN SOME OF THEM,
THEY'RE HIGHLIGHTED. THEY'RE
THEY'RE, THEY'RE THESE $230,000
VEHICLES, THAT ARE FLYING DOWN
THE ROAD AND, AND, YOU KNOW,
VERY IRRESPONSIBLE. BUT WHEN WE
CATCH THESE PEOPLE, WE NEED TO
DO SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE
CATCH THEM SPEEDING AT 110 MILES
AN HOUR, WE ACTUALLY HAVE TO DO
SOMETHING WITH THEM. AND THAT'S
ONE OF THE FAILINGS OF US IS WE
KIND OF WANT TO CATCH PEOPLE,
BUT THEN WE DON'T DO ANYTHING.
THEY'RE NOT BEING DETERRED BY
GETTING CAUGHT, GOING 100 MILES
AN HOUR. THEY GOT THE MONEY TO
PAY FOR IT. IF THEY'RE DRIVING
THOSE KIND OF VEHICLES, SO, YOU
KNOW, I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS
BILL TODAY JUST BECAUSE IT IS
MALIBU AND IT IS A SPECIFIC AREA
THAT HAS HAD A LOT OF PROBLEMS,
AND SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE.
AND AND BUT I WANT TO SEE THE
RESULTS OF THIS. I WOULD LIKE I
WOULD LIKE THE LEGISLATURE TO
GET A REPORT ON HOW THIS HAS
BEEN EFFECTIVE, SO THAT WE CAN
TELL OTHER PEOPLE IN OTHER
AREAS, BECAUSE THIS ISN'T
SOMETHING THAT I WANT ON EVERY
FREEWAY AND EVERY ROAD OF
CALIFORNIA. IT'S JUST THIS
PARTICULAR, ESPECIALLY THIS
PARTICULAR STRETCH. IT'S BRUTAL.
AND I THINK PEOPLE ARE SICK AND
TIRED OF NOT ONLY WATCHING IT
HAPPEN, BUT NOTHING HAPPENING
AFTER IT HAPPENS. YEAH. SO THANK
YOU. AND THERE IS A REPORT BACK,
REQUIREMENT IN THE BILL WHERE
THE CITY WOULD HAVE TO REPORT
BACK. ALL RIGHT. SENATOR NEIL.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. WHEN IT
COMES TO TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT,
ESPECIALLY THE WAY THINGS ARE
NOW, I'M ALL FOR THE BIG BROTHER
APPROACH. MY CONCERN ABOUT THIS
BILL IS IT'S NOT ENOUGH OF A
HAMMER. NOW I CAN'T IMAGINE
WALKING IN YOUR SHOES. I'VE GOT
FIVE KIDS, SIX GRANDKIDS. IF
SOMETHING LIKE THAT HAPPENED TO
ANY OF THEM, IT WOULD DESTROY MY
LIFE. I'M QUITE SURE. AND WE
NEED REAL CONSEQUENCES TO PEOPLE
THAT ARE VIOLATING TRAFFIC LAWS,
AS I SAID, ESPECIALLY NOW. AND
IT'S NOT JUST SPEEDING, IT'S
WHAT I SEE WHICH IS UP HERE. I'M
NOT DOWN IN MALIBU, BUT I SEE
RECKLESS LANE CHANGES. I SEE IT
BECAUSE IT'S BECOME ALMOST
HABITUAL FOR PEOPLE TO HUG BACK
BUMPERS. THESE DAYS, IT'S NOT A
MAJORITY OF PEOPLE. IT IS A
MINORITY, BUT IT'S A MINORITY.
ENOUGH THAT IT IS WHOLLY
NOTICEABLE. AND OBVIOUSLY
DANGEROUS. AND I JUST I DID NOT
SUPPORT ASSEMBLYWOMAN FRIEDMAN'S
BILL LAST YEAR BECAUSE IT'S NOT
ENOUGH OF A CONSEQUENCE. ONCE
THEY SPEED, THEY GET A PICTURE
SENT TO THEM AND THEY GET A
TICKET AND NO POINTS. AND I
DON'T THINK THAT'S ENOUGH OF A
CONSEQUENCE. NOW, YOU INDICATED
THE NUMBER OF, TICKETS THAT HAVE
BEEN ISSUED IN THE LAST FEW
MONTHS, AND I GOT TO THINK, MY
GOSH, OUR CAMERAS GOING TO MAKE
A DIFFERENCE WITH, BLATANT
BEHAVIOR LIKE THAT. THEY'RE
STOPPED. THEY'RE GIVEN A TICKET.
THE HIGHWAY PATROL WRITES THE
TICKET TO THEM, THE ALTERNATIVE
IS THEY GET A PICTURE IN THE
MAIL AND THE TICKET IN NO
POINTS. I'M JUST VERY DOUBTFUL
THAT THAT THAT'S GOING TO BE
EFFECTIVE. WE NEED IN AREAS LIKE
THAT, WE NEED OVERWHELMING
ENFORCEMENT ON THE ROAD AND IN
AREAS LIKE I OBSERVED HERE ON
HIGHWAY 50, WE NEED JUST PLAIN
MORE ENFORCEMENT ON THE ROAD. WE
HAVE VACANCIES IN THE HIGHWAY
PATROL. THE GOVERNOR HAS HAS
TAKEN A NUMBER OF THEM AWAY FOR
CRIME ENFORCEMENT. THAT HAS
NOTHING TO DO WITH THEIR PRIMARY
MISSION. WE NEED MORE
ENFORCEMENT ON THE ROADS. THIS
IS JUST A PICTURE IN THE MAIL.
PAY A FINE. NO CONSEQUENCE TO
YOUR DRIVING RECORD. IN FACT.
AND FOR THAT REASON, I JUST
CAN'T SUPPORT IT. BUT I
ABSOLUTELY SUPPORT, AS I SAID,
THE BIG BROTHER APPROACH REAL
HAMMER ON VIOLATIONS, WHICH IS
WHY I COAUTHORED SENATOR STERN'S
BILL. THANK YOU. SENATOR.
SENATOR BOXER YES, THANK YOU,
FIRST, I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE
THE, THE COURAGE AND THE
WILLINGNESS TO TAKE YOUR
PERSONAL TRAGEDY INTO A PUBLIC
FORUM AND RELIVE IT. AND FOR THE
BENEFIT OF LAWMAKERS WHO CAN
MAKE CHANGES. I JUST REALLY WANT
TO RECOGNIZE THAT, BECAUSE IT'S
A TESTAMENT TO BOTH OF YOU
PERSONALLY WILLING TO DO THAT,
AND I WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR
FOR THIS BILL. I THINK THIS IS
EXACTLY THE RIGHT BILL FOR THIS,
YOU KNOW, SPEED CAMERAS THAT
SEND TICKETS IS CLOSE TO $500.
AND THOSE, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU
ADD THE FINES AND THE VARIOUS
THINGS, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT IS
REAL MONEY FOR PEOPLE. AND IT
NEEDS TO BE HAPPENING ROUTINELY.
IT NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING THAT IS
A CONSEQUENCE THAT, THAT PEOPLE
EXPECT ON THIS ROAD. BECAUSE
CLEARLY WE HAVE A MAJOR PROBLEM
AND, AND I THINK IT'S WORTH
NOTING SOME OF THE, THE
REALITIES THAT MALIBU DOES NOT
HAVE ITS OWN POLICE DEPARTMENT,
SO IT CAN'T HAVE MORE PATROL
OFFICERS ON ITS OWN. THEY'VE
OFFERED TO PAY CHP FOR
ADDITIONAL PATROLS, BUT CHP IS
SHORT STAFFED, CAN'T SUPPLY THE
NUMBER THAT ARE NEEDED. LA
POLICE HAS ALSO SAID THAT THEY
ARE TOO SHORT STAFFED TO ADD
THESE ADDITIONAL PATROLS, AND SO
I REALLY APPLAUD THE AUTHOR FOR
DOING THIS. I FULLY SUPPORT IT.
AND, AND I THINK IT'S NEEDED
HERE AND LIKELY OTHER PLACES AS
WELL. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
ANYONE ELSE IN TERMS OF
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. ALL RIGHT.
SEEING NONE. SENATOR ALLEN,
THANKS FOR WORKING. SO CLOSELY
WITH THE COMMITTEE STAFF ON THIS
BILL, I KNOW WHEN WE FIRST
DISCUSSED IT, PERHAPS THERE WAS
A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENT
APPROACH, JUST A BROAD APPROACH
TO, SORT OF BLEND THE BILL WITH
THE PILOT PROGRAM FROM LAST YEAR
AND VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE,
THE INSTANT FOCUS ON WHAT I
THINK A FEW PEOPLE HAVE TALKED
ABOUT AND WHAT I THINK YOU
REALLY WANTED TO GET DONE WAS
JUST TO ZOOM IN, LITERALLY WITH
IMPLEMENTATION ON PCH. AND, GET
THAT DONE AND NOT HAVE TO BE
DISTRACTED BY SOME OF THE ISSUES
THAT ARE VERY LEGITIMATE. I
THINK IN, IN BROADER URBAN
AREAS. AND DIFFERING URBAN AREAS
IN CALIFORNIA, WHETHER THAT BE
EQUITY OR SOME OF THE ISSUES WE
HEARD EARLIER ABOUT WHO THE
FOLKS ARE THAT ARE, THAT ARE
DRIVING, THAT ARE GOING TO GET
IMPACTED ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
SO BY, BY FOCUSING THE BILL THE
WAY YOU DID AND WORKING WITH THE
COMMITTEE STAFF HERE TO GET THAT
DONE, I DO THINK IT'S AN
EXTREMELY APPROPRIATE BILL, AND
I'M NOT SURE AS LENGTHY AS THE
PILOT PERIOD IS THAT IT WOULDN'T
BE WISE TO COME BACK AT SOME
POINT, EVEN SOONER. AND,
ASSUMING THIS BILL GETS SIGNED
INTO LAW AFTER A COUPLE OF YEARS
OF RESULTS AND JUST REMOVE ANY
KIND OF SUNSETTING ON THE BILL
AND JUST MAKE IT MAKE IT
PERMANENT, BUT THAT SAID, AGAIN,
I CERTAINLY SUPPORT THE BILL, I
WASN'T HERE AT THE BEGINNING OF
YOUR, PRESENTATION AT THE FIRST
COUPLE OF MINUTES OF IT, AND BUT
I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE TAKING THE
AMENDMENTS. YES YES. YEAH. WE,
AS AS REQUESTED BY THE COMMITTEE
. AND WITH THAT, YOU'RE WELCOME
TO CLOSE. YEAH, I APPRECIATE THE
DISCUSSION VERY MUCH. AND I, I,
FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU, SENATOR
NEWMAN, FOR YOUR COMMENTS. WE
SIT NEXT TO EACH OTHER AND WE,
HE'S GOT A LITTLE GIRL, AND I
HAVE ONE COMING, ACTUALLY NEXT
MONTH. AND WE WERE JUST
REFLECTING ON, THIS THE
DEVASTATION AND TRAGEDY AND
COURAGE IT TAKES TO COME UP AND,
DEVOTE YOURSELF TO ADVOCACY TO
MAKE, YOU KNOW, TO TRY TO, TO,
TO TRY YOUR BEST TO, TO, YOU
KNOW, MAKE IT SO THAT YOUR, YOUR
LITTLE GIRL, YOUR LITTLE GIRL'S
LOSS IS NOT, ENTIRELY IN VAIN.
SO THAT'S THAT'S A I JUST WANT
TO I WANT TO REITERATE
EVERYONE'S, THANKS AND GRATITUDE
TO THESE TWO DADS HERE WHO ARE
STEPPING UP TO ADVOCATE FOR
THEIR, THEIR KIDS. I DON'T
DISAGREE WITH YOU, SENATOR NEIL
OR OR SENATOR SARDO, YOU KNOW, I
THINK PART OF WHY I WAS SUCH A
STRONG SUPPORTER OF SENATOR
STERN'S BILL AS WELL. I THINK WE
DO NEED, STRONGER ENFORCEMENT,
AS YOU KNOW, AND AS WAS
DISCUSSED BY THE WIENER, HERE,
THE FRIEDMAN BILL WAS HEAVILY
NEGOTIATED AND, THERE WAS AT
TIMES CONVERSATION ABOUT HEAVIER
ENFORCEMENT, AND IT WAS REJECTED
ALONG THE WAY. YOU KNOW, SO
WE'RE TRYING OUR BEST TO FIT
WITHIN. AND AS IT WAS, THIS BILL
WAS SCALED BACK, YOU KNOW, QUITE
A BIT FROM HOW IT WAS ORIGINALLY
PROPOSED. WE WANTED TO COVER
SOME MORE CITIES. WE REALLY DID
DECIDE TO, YOU KNOW, WORKING
WITH THE CHAIR TO FOCUS IN ON,
ON THE MALIBU PCH SITUATION, WE
CERTAINLY HAD A CHALLENGE WITH
GETTING WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT,
YOU KNOW, THE LOCAL SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT IS I THINK IT'S 70%
STAFFING, THEY'RE ALREADY
WORKING OVER TIME, 6 OR 7 DAYS A
WEEK, WE NOW HAVE BROUGHT THIS
THIS INCIDENT, ACTUALLY, FINALLY
SHOOK A NUMBER OF, THE
BUREAUCRACY LOOSE ENOUGH TO GET
CHP NOW BACK ONTO THE PCH. IT
WAS NOT THERE PREVIOUSLY. SO
THERE HAVE BEEN THERE HAVE BEEN
SOME SOME SOME PROGRESS MADE IN
THAT, BUT BUT BUT CERTAINLY WE,
WE NEED TO DO MORE IN TERMS OF
ENFORCEMENT. I'D LOVE TO TALK TO
YOU MORE ABOUT IT. YOU KNOW, YOU
DO. YOU BRING UP THE POINT ABOUT
THE FACT THAT IN SOME CASES AND
SOME OF THESE VERY SAME
INCIDENCES, YOU'VE HAD SOME VERY
WEALTHY PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN
DRIVING, YOU KNOW, BEEN BEEN
DRIVING VERY EXPENSIVE CARS. AND
THERE IS A QUESTION ABOUT THE
EXTENT TO WHICH FINES MAKE A
DIFFERENCE, A $500 FINE IS VERY
HIGH FOR MOST PEOPLE, AND YET
THERE IS A PORTION OF THE
POPULATION. CERTAINLY SOME OF
THESE GUYS HAVE, SOME OF THE
FOLKS WHO WERE IN QUESTION HERE,
FOR WHOM IT MAYBE ISN'T ENOUGH
OF A DISINCENTIVE, WE ACTUALLY
WERE LOOKING AFTER THIS AT, YOU
KNOW, TRYING TO DO A BILL THAT
WOULD CORRECT FOR THAT OR
ADDRESS THAT. AND THAT'S A
CHALLENGE. I MEAN, JUDICIAL
COUNCIL HAD ISSUES. YOU KNOW,
IT'S OBVIOUSLY REALLY EXPENSIVE
TO IMPLEMENT, THERE WAS A PILOT
PROGRAM THAT WAS DONE BACK IN
THE 90S THAT, YOU KNOW, RELATING
TO THIS THAT APPARENTLY DIDN'T
SHOW MAJOR CHANGE IN DRIVER
BEHAVIOR, YOU KNOW, I WILL SAY,
YOU KNOW, I KNOW THEY DO. I
THINK THEY DO THIS IN FINLAND
WHERE, YOU KNOW, YOUR INCOME IF
YOU IF YOU, YOU LITERALLY PAY A
FINE BASED ON, ON YOUR ON YOUR,
ON YOUR INCOME SO THAT YOU KNOW
THAT IT WILL CREATE MORE OF A
DISINCENTIVE. SO, YOU KNOW, FOR
MOST PEOPLE, $500 IS ENOUGH.
MAYBE FOR THIS GUY, IT SHOULD
HAVE BEEN SEVERAL THOUSAND OR
EVEN MORE. AND, YOU KNOW, I
WOULD LOVE TO SEE US BE ABLE TO
DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IT, YOU
KNOW, LOTS OF CHALLENGES
ASSOCIATED. BUT IF MEMBERS OF
THIS COMMITTEE AND OTHERS WANT
TO DO SOME WORK IN THIS SPACE,
I'M CERTAINLY OPEN TO THOSE
CONVERSATIONS. AND BUT AS I SAY,
THERE ARE SOME PILOT PROGRAMS
THAT SHOWED MIXED RESULTS FROM
THE 90S, BUT HAPPY TO REOPEN
THAT CONVERSATION AND ENGAGE
WITH ALL OF YOU ON THIS, BECAUSE
WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WAYS
TO REALLY MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS
GOING TO BE EFFECTIVE. WE KNOW
THIS IS A TOOL, YOU KNOW, IT'S
BEEN THERE'S ALREADY LEGISLATION
IN PLACE UNDER THE FRIEDMAN
BILL. WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO
NEATLY EXPAND THE FRIEDMAN
SCHEME TO MALIBU UNDER THIS BILL
AND DO IT IN A WAY THAT MET
SUPPORT FROM EVERYBODY. SO I
KNOW THAT'S GOING TO BE HELPFUL.
I KNOW THAT SENATOR STERN'S BILL
IS GOING TO BE HELPFUL, AND BUT
WE ALL KNOW WE I KNOW THAT THE
CHP, ENFORCEMENT IS GOING TO BE
HELPFUL. THERE'S A BROADER
CONVERSATION IN THE CITY OF
MALIBU RIGHT NOW ABOUT REDESIGN,
BECAUSE SENATOR SARDO IS
ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. THIS WAS A
ROAD THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, BUILT
AS A STATE HIGHWAY BACK AT A
TIME WHEN THERE WERE FAR FEWER
PEOPLE LIVING THERE. NOW, MALIBU
HAS BECOME AN IMPORTANT TOURIST
CITY WITH LITERALLY, YOU KNOW,
MILLIONS OF PEOPLE TRAVELING
OVER THERE, YOU KNOW, UP AND
DOWN THAT ROAD ENJOYING THE
SCENERY. THERE'S AN IMPORTANT
UNIVERSITY THERE, IT'S BECOME,
YOU KNOW, A REAL IT'S A PLACE
WHERE EVERYONE FROM LA COMES TO
GO TO THE BEACH, SO THE ROAD IS
JUST NOT PREPARED TO HANDLE THE,
ITS CURRENT USE. AND THAT IS
ANOTHER REASON WHY THERE'S ALL
THIS DEATH AND DESTRUCTION
THERE. SO THERE'S A SERIES OF
REDESIGN, CHALLENGES THAT NEED
TO BE ADDRESSED THERE AS WELL.
BUT WE DO KNOW THAT THIS BILL IS
GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE, YOU
KNOW, EVEN IF IT DOESN'T GO FAR
ENOUGH. AND I JUST APPRECIATE
EVERYONE'S RECOGNITION OF, OF,
OF THE IMPORTANCE OF WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO DO HERE WITH BOTH OF
THESE BILLS AS, AS PRESENTED AND
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN AYE
VOTE. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A
MOTION? I'LL MOVE. I SO MOVE THE
BILL. I HEARD SENATOR BLAKESPEAR
FIRST, SO SHE'S GOT THE MOTION,
AND THE MOTION IS Dð PASS, AS
AMENDED, TO APPROPRIATIONS AS.
FILE ITEM NUMBER 17, SB 1297.
SENATORS CORTEZ. AYE AYE. NILO.
HILO. NO. ALLEN ALLEN. AYE.
ARCHULETA. Ã. ARCHULETA. AYE.
BECKER BECKER. AYE. BLAKE. SPEER
A. BLAKE. SPEER. AYE. DALI DALI.
AYE. DODD. DODD. AYE. GONZALEZ
GONZALEZ. AYE. LIMÓN. LIMÓN.
AYE. NEWMAN NEWMAN. AYE. WHEN I.
WHEN I PORTANTINO. PORTANTINO.
AYE. SATO SATO. AYE. UMBERG.
AYE. UMBERG. AYE 14 TO 1. ALL
RIGHT. THAT THAT BILL IS OUT ON
A 14 TO 1 VOTE. WE'RE NOW GOING
TO LIFT THE CALL, WHERE DO YOU
WANT TO START? WITH THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. ALL RIGHT. THE
ASSISTANT WILL, CALL THE ABSENT
MEMBERS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR
AT THIS TIME. CONSENT CALENDAR?
CALENDAR. WE HAVE THE CHAIR AND
VICE CHAIR VOTING AYE. SENATORS
GONZALEZ. GONZALEZ AYE. UMBERG.
AYE. UMBERG. AYE 15 ZERO. ALL
RIGHT. CONSENT IS OUT ON 15 TO 0
VOTE. AND NOW LIFT THE CALL ON
ABSENT MEMBERS, STARTING WITH
FILE ITEM TWO, FILE ITEM NUMBER
TWO, SB 1191193. CHAIR VOTING
AYE. VICE CHAIR VOTING NO.
SENATORS BECKER. SORRY. WHICH
ONE WAS THIS? ITEM TWO. AYE.
BECKER. AYE. DALLI GONZALEZ.
GONZALEZ. AYE UMBERG. AYE.
UMBERG. AYE. 11 TO 3. OUT THE
BILL IS OUT ON 11 TO 3. VOTE. ON
TWO. THREE. SIX. EIGHT. NINE.
TEN. 11. OKAY. THIS IS FILE ITEM
NUMBER THREE SB 127. CHAIR
VOTING AYE. SENATORS NILO. I'M
SORRY, WHAT BILL IS THAT? 1271.
THIS IS FILE NUMBER THREE.
THREE. AND ALSO 1271. YES. OKAY
OKAY, SB 1271. SENATORS. NILO
DALLI. GONZALEZ. GONZALEZ I
UMBERG I UMBERG I 13 ZERO PASS.
ALL RIGHT. THAT BILL IS OUT ON
THE 13 TO 0 VOTE. THIS IS FILE
ITEM NUMBER FIVE SB 1313. ASHBY
CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR VOTING AYE.
SENATORS GONZALEZ. GONZALEZ I
UMBERG I UMBERG I 15 ZERO. PASS
ALL RIGHT. THE BILL IS OUT ON A
15 TO 0 VOTE. THIS IS FILE ITEM
NUMBER EIGHT SB 1509. SENATOR
STERN, CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR
VOTING AYE. SENATOR. BECKER.
DALLI. DALLI NØ. GONZALEZ.
GONZALEZ. AYE. WHEN UMBERG. AYE.
UMBERG. AYE. 12 TO 1 PASS. THE
BILL IS ON A 12 TO 1 VOTE. FILE
ITEM NUMBER TEN SB 904 DODD
CHAIR VOTING AYE. VICE CHAIR
VOTING NO. SENATORS. BECKER
BECKER. AYE. DOLLY. DOLLY. NØ.
GONZALEZ GONZALEZ. AYE. LIMÓN.
LIMÓN. AYE. WHEN NO. WHEN. NO.
UMBERG. UMBERG. AYE 11 TO 4. OUT
THE BILL IS OUT ON 11 TO 4. VOTE
THIS FILE ITEM NUMBER 12, SB
NINE THREE FOR GONZALEZ.
SENATORS CORTEZ. AYE ORTEZ AYE.
NILO BECKER. AYE. BECKER. AYE.
DALLI. DODD AYE. DODD. AYE.
LIMÓN AYE. LIMÓN. AYE. WHEN
UMBERG. UMBERG. AYE. 11 TO 1.
THE BILL IS OUT ON 11 TO 1 VOTE.
FILE ITEM NUMBER 14, SB 1081.
ARCHULETA. CHAIR VOTING AYE.
SENATOR. NILO AYE. NILO AYE.
ALLEN ALLEN. AYE. GONZALEZ.
GONZALEZ AYE. LIMON. WHEN I WHEN
I UMBERG. AYE. UMBERG. AYE SIGN
THEM ALL UP. 12 TO 2 OUT. THE
BILL IS OUT 12 TO 2. FILE ITEM
NUMBER 16. SB 1098 BLAKE SPEAR.
SENATORS CORTEZ. AYE. ORTEZ. Â.
AYE. NILO AYE. NILO AYE. BECKER.
BECKER AYE. DALLI. DODD. AYE.
DODD AYE. LEMON. LEMON. AYE.
WHEN I. WHEN I UMBERG. AYE
UMBERG. AYE 14 ZERO 14 ZERO. THE
BILL IS OUT OF ORDER. I BELIEVE,
I BELIEVE THAT'S IT. ALL RIGHT.
ONE SECOND. WE NEED TO. GO.
WHICH ONE'S UP? SEVEN, YEAH. SO
15 ONE. 15. SEVEN. ITEM 13 ONE.
13. 14. WHICH IS THE RULE ON.
AND YOU GO LEFT. 13. YOU DIDN'T
SPEAK UP 13.
ALL RIGHT. THE ROLL IS, GOOD, I
WANT. TO DO TWO QUICK THANK
YOUS. THANK YOU. JUST, I GUESS,
SENATOR NEWMAN MIGHT BE ON HIS
WAY TO HIS NEXT MEETING, BUT
THANK HIM FOR FILLING IN WHEN
THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR WERE
OUT, VERY BRIEFLY, BUT FOR
PRESIDING. WE APPRECIATE HIS
HELP. AND TO EVERYONE WHO
PARTICIPATED TODAY, INCLUDING
AUTHORS AND WITNESSES, BUT
PARTICULARLY THE COMMITTEE STAFF
ON TRANSPORTATION AND COMMITTEE
STAFF, CONSULTANTS, FOR DOING
SUCH A TREMENDOUS JOB AS
EVERYBODY HEARD, WORKING THROUGH
AMENDMENTS WITH AUTHORS AND
GETTING THIS AGENDA READY FOR US
TO TAKE ACTION TODAY. WITH THAT,
WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANKS.