THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC
SAFETY IS BEGINNING. WE ARE IN
ROOM 2200. WE HAD 12 BILLS ON
THE CALENDAR. TWO ARE ON
CONSENT, WHICH IS SB 1430
GLACIER AND SB 1328 BRADFORD AND
SB 1343 BY MIN IS PULLED FROM
TODAY'S AGENDA BY THE AUTHOR.
I'D LIKE TO ASK FOR A ROLL CALL
TO SEE IF WE HAVE QUORUM. WAHAB.
HERE. HOB. HERE. SATO. SATO
HERE. BRADFORD. BRADFORD. HERE.
SKINNER. SKINNER. HERE. WIENER
OKAY, QUORUM HAS BEEN SET, WE'RE
GOING TO ASK FOR THE FIRST
AUTHOR TO COME AND PRESENT. IT
IS SENATOR MIN WITH SB 894. AND
JUST FOR SOME GROUND RULES, AS I
OFTEN GO THROUGH IT, WE ARE
GOING TO HAVE BOTH WITNESSES AT
THAT LECTERN. EVERYONE WILL BE
TIMED FOR TWO MINUTES, BOTH
OPPOSITION AND SUPPORT. AND THEN
FOR THE METOOS WE ASK THAT
EVERYBODY QUICKLY STATE THEIR
NAME, THEIR ORGANIZATION, AND
WHETHER THEY SUPPORT OR OPPOSE,
AND WE LIKE TO MOVE QUICKLY
BECAUSE WE HAVE A NUMBER OF
OTHER, BILLS TO GET THROUGH. SO,
SENATOR MIN, SB 894, PLEASE,
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE, I'M HERE TO
PRESENT SB 894, WHICH WOULD
CREATE A NEW OFFENSE OF SEXUAL
EXPLOITATION BY A MEMBER OF THE
CLERGY OF A RELIGIOUS CLERGY WHO
ENGAGES IN SEXUAL ACTS WITH AN
ADULT CONGREGANT THAT IS UNDER
THEIR RELIGIOUS SUPERVISION OR
HAS A RELATIONSHIP SIMILAR TO
THAT. WE HAVE TAKEN SOME
AMENDMENTS TO NARROW THIS TO
MISDEMEANOR. WE HAVE ALSO
PROPOSED A NUMBER OF SETS OF
AMENDMENTS, WHICH I WILL BE
HAPPY TO DISCUSS, LOOK, THIS IS
A REAL PROBLEM THAT WE KNOW
HAPPENS IN OUR CHURCHES, IN OUR
TEMPLES AND OUR RELIGIOUS
INSTITUTIONS WHERE PREDATORS WHO
ARE SERVING AS RELIGIOUS CLERGY
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT POSITION
OF THE MORAL AND SPIRITUAL
AUTHORITY GRANTED TO THEM BY THE
INSTITUTIONS FOR WHICH THEY WORK
TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF, TO COERCE
AND EXPLOIT PEOPLE UNDER THEIR
CARE, THIS HAPPENS MUCH MORE
OFTEN THAN YOU WOULD THINK. ONE
STUDY FROM THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND
FOUND THAT 67% OF CLERGY PERSONS
RESPONDING CLAIMED TO HAVE KNOWN
A COLLEAGUE WHO ENGAGED IN
SEXUAL MISCONDUCT WITH THE
CONGREGANT. ANOTHER STUDY FOUND
THAT 70% OF SOUTHERN BAPTIST
MINISTERS HAVE KNOWN OF OTHER
MINISTERS WHO HAVE ENGAGED IN
SEXUAL MISCONDUCT WITH A
CONGREGANT, SEVEN AMERICAN
RABBIS HAVE BEEN DISMISSED ON
ACCOUNT OF THIS OF SEXUAL
MISCONDUCT WITH CONGREGANTS, AND
A NUMBER OF BUDDHIST RELIGIOUS
LEADERS HAVE BEEN ACCUSED OF
SEXUAL MISCONDUCT AS WELL. THE
MOST COMPREHENSIVE STUDY TO DATE
FOUND WITH A RANDOM SAMPLE OF
THE US POPULATION, THAT 3.1% OF
WOMEN WHO ATTEND RELIGIOUS
SERVICES AT LEAST MONTHLY,
REPORTED AT SOME TIME DURING
THEIR ADULT LIFE, THEY HAD BEEN
THE OBJECT OF A SEXUAL ADVANCE
BY THE CLERGY, PERSON OR
RELIGIOUS LEADER THAT LED THEIR
CONGREGATION IN, IN THEIR OWN
CONGREGATION. MORE THAN HALF OF
THESE REPORTED SEXUAL ADVANCES
BY RELIGIOUS LEADER WHO IS
MARRIED AS TO SOMEONE ELSE AT
THE TIME, THUS, YOU CAN PUT THIS
IN CONTEXT THAT ON AVERAGE, IN A
US CONGREGATION OF 400 ADULT
MEMBERS, SEVEN WOMEN HAVE BEEN
VICTIMIZED AT SOME POINT IN
THEIR ADULT LIVES. THIS IS A
PROBLEM WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE.
WE ARE HAPPY TO CONSIDER
AMENDMENTS GOING FORWARD. WE'VE
BEEN IN NEGOTIATIONS, BUT HAVE
SOME PHILOSOPHICAL DIFFERENCES.
I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF
DISCUSSION AROUND WHETHER
CONSENT SHOULD BE A DEFENSE TO
THIS OR NOT, AND I'M HAPPY TO
DISCUSS IN MY CLOTHES. THERE ARE
LOTS OF CIRCUMSTANCES IN US AND
CALIFORNIA LAW WHERE WE DON'T
ALLOW CONSENT, AND WE THINK THIS
IS IMPORTANT TO NOT ALLOW
CONSENT IN THIS PARTICULAR
CIRCUMSTANCE BECAUSE OF THE
NATURE OF THE RELATIONSHIP. WHEN
YOU HAVE SOMEONE, AGAIN, WHO IS
THE VOICE OF GOD, WHO MANY
PEOPLE THINK OF AS THE PATHWAY
TO HEAVEN, WHO YOU'VE BEEN TOLD
YOUR ENTIRE LIFE, PROBABLY BY
YOUR FAMILY, IS SOMEONE WHO
SPEAKS ON AND IS THE CONDUIT TO
A HIGHER POWER THAT YOU'RE
SUPPOSED TO CONFESS YOUR SINS
TO, THAT YOU ARE REQUIRED TO
LISTEN TO THIS CREATES A POWER
IMBALANCE OF THE TYPE THAT A US
AND CALIFORNIA LAW HAVE
TYPICALLY DISALLOWED CONSENT AS
A DEFENSE FOR IN OTHER CONTEXTS,
SO I WOULD BE HAPPY TO DISCUSS
THIS BILL FURTHER. I KNOW THAT
WE RECEIVED A NÓ RECOMMENDATION.
I WAS DISAPPOINTED IN THAT,
HAPPY TO DISCUSS SOME OF THE
AMENDMENTS WE'RE CONSIDERING.
BUT WITH THAT, I WANT TO JUST
INTRODUCE MY WITNESSES WHO ARE,
HERMINA DOCTOR HERMINA NEDELCIU
AND DOROTHY SMALL. AND I THINK
YOU GUYS DO YOU WANT THEM AT THE
LECTERN OR DO YOU WANT. YES, THE
LECTERN. AND YOU WILL BE TIMED
FOR TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU.
DOROTHY, THANK YOU. MY NAME IS
DOROTHY SMALL. AND GOOD MORNING.
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. I AM
NOT SAYING THAT I'M GLAD TO BE
HERE. I AM A SURVIVOR OF CLERGY
ABUSE. I WAS 60 YEARS OLD AT THE
TIME WHEN MY PERPETRATOR DECIDED
TO EXPLOIT HIS POSITION OVER ME.
I HAD BEEN IN THERAPY FOR FIVE
YEARS AT THE TIME. WITH CLINICAL
PSYCHOLOGISTS, IT TAKES DECADES,
OFTEN FOR THOSE OF US WHO WERE
ABUSED AS CHILDREN, TO BE ABLE
TO EVEN COME TO GRASPS, TO GRASP
WITH THAT ABUSE. AND I WAS
WORKING AS A NURSE. I'M A
REGISTERED NURSE. I WORKED IN
NURSING FOR 40 YEARS, HALF OF IT
AS A LICENSED PRACTICAL NURSE. I
KNOW THAT IN RELATIONS WITH MY
PATIENTS, I HAD THE POSITION OF
POWER OVER MY PATIENT, AND MY
JOB WAS TO PROTECT ALL OF THEM
BECAUSE ALL PATIENTS ARE
VULNERABLE WHEN WE ARE ILL OR IN
ANY LIFE CIRCUMSTANCES. MANY OF
US WHO HAVE A FAITH ASSOCIATION
OFTEN WILL TURN TO THE CHURCH.
AT THE TIME WHEN MY PREDATOR
CAME, I WAS THE MOST VULNERABLE,
HAVING SUSTAINED QUITE A BIT OF
ABUSE AS A CHILD THAT FOLLOWED
ME THROUGHOUT MY LIFE BECAUSE I
LEARNED HOW TO LIVE IN ABUSE AND
NOT TO SPEAK UP TO IT. SURVIVAL
MEANT DEALING WITH IT. AND SO I
WAS IN THERAPY TO TRY TO LET GO
OF AN ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIP, AND
I WAS GOING TO CHURCH, AND I
WASN'T SEEKING COUNSEL FROM THIS
PRIEST. I WAS A MINISTRY. I SANG
IN THE CHOIR, AND I WAS A
CANTOR, AND I WAS SEEKING TO
HEAL MYSELF THROUGH GOD AND NOT
THROUGH A MAN THAT I COULD
CHANGE AND HAVE HIM BE THE DAD I
NEVER HAD. AND IN WALKED THE
PRIEST, AND HE SAW AND HE LIKED,
AND HE PURSUED ME FROM THE
BEGINNING, AND I KNEW SOMETHING
WAS WRONG AND I FOUGHT IT. I
REPORTED HIM, THEY WENT AHEAD
AND PULLED HIM OUT FOR A WEEK.
THEY LET HIM COME BACK. AND THE
PURSUIT, INTENSE IFIED. AND I
TRIED TO PROTECT HIM LIKE I
TRIED TO PROTECT ALL MY ABUSERS.
I THOUGHT, HE'S THE PRIEST. HE'S
MORE IMPORTANT THAN I AM, AND I.
HE HE TRIED TO ESTABLISH A
RELATIONSHIP OF TRUST WITH ME. I
OPENED UP TO HIM AND REVEALED
WHAT HAPPENED TO ME AS A CHILD.
HE STEPPED IN THERE, THANK YOU,
AND OPENED THAT UP. SO THAT'S
IT? YEAH. TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU
. CHAIR. WAHAB. SENATORS, MY
NAME IS DOCTOR HERMINA NEDELCIU.
I'M AN ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN AND A
NEUROSCIENTIST AT SCRIPPS
RESEARCH IN SAN DIEGO. I STUDY
THE NEUROBIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF
ABNORMAL BEHAVIORS RELEVANT TO
HUMAN PSYCHOPATHOLOGY. I'M
SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MYSELF AND
NOT MY INSTITUTION OR EMPLOYER.
CLERGY ABUSE AND SEXUAL
EXPLOITATION OF ADULTS IS AN
ABNORMAL PREDATORY BEHAVIOR. 90
TO 95% OF VICTIMS OF CLERGY
SEXUAL ABUSE ARE ADULT FEMALE
CONGREGANTS. CLERGY ABUSE IS
ABOUT POWER AND CONTROL. WHEN
THERE'S A PERSONAL OR FAMILY
PROBLEM, 25% OF PEOPLE OF FAITH
TURN TO THEIR PASTOR OR PRIEST
FIRST BEFORE A THERAPIST, ABOUT
5 TO 20% OF CLERGY OF ALL
CHRISTIAN GROUPS HAVE MISUSED
THEIR POSITION OF AUTHORITY AND
TRUST TO SEXUALLY ABUSE THEIR
ADULT CONGREGANTS, MOSTLY WOMEN,
UNDER THE GUISE OF PROVIDING
SPIRITUAL COUNSEL. THIS SMALL
YET SIGNIFICANT PERCENTAGE USES
THEIR POSITION OF ULTIMATE
AUTHORITY, TOGETHER WITH
GROOMING, AS TACTICS TO
GRADUALLY BREAK DOWN THE VICTIMS
BOUNDARIES IN ORDER TO SEXUALLY
EXPLOIT THEM. I'M A SURVIVOR OF
A DULL CLERGY SEXUAL ABUSE AT
THE HANDS OF A GREEK ORTHODOX
PRIEST WHO REMAINS IN MINISTRY
TODAY IN SAN DIEGO, SERVING THE
GREEK ORTHODOX CHURCH. AND
BISHOPS OF SAN FRANCISCO ARE
AWARE OF THIS ABUSE WHEN IT
COMES TO CLERGY. THESE ABUSERS
HAVE AN ADDED ADVANTAGE BECAUSE
FOR PEOPLE OF FAITH, CLERGY
REPRESENT GOD'S MESSENGER ON
EARTH. FOR THEM, THERE'S AN
AUTOMATIC TRUST. THE POWER
DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN CLERGY AND
A CONGREGANT IS IMMENSE AND
LARGER THAN ANY OTHER HUMAN TO
HUMAN RELATION. IT'S A FALSE
EQUIVALENCY TO COMPARE THE
CLERGY CONGREGATE RELATIONAL
INTERACTION TO ANY OTHER SECULAR
RELATIONS, SUCH AS ATTORNEY,
CLIENT, THERAPIST, CLIENT, ETC.
THE EXISTING LAW DOES NOT
ADEQUATELY COVER NON-CONSENSUAL
SEXUAL ACTS OR CONTACT WITH AN
ADULT CONGREGANT. BECAUSE
BECAUSE OF THE GROOMING
BEHAVIOR, A CONGREGANT WILL NOT
IMMEDIATELY REALIZE THAT THE
PERCEIVED GOD'S MESSENGER ON
EARTH IS ACTUALLY SEXUALLY
ASSAULTING AND RAPING THEM. I
ASK YOU TO PLEASE VOTE YES ON
THIS BILL TO STOP THE VIOLENCE
AGAINST WOMEN'S BODIES, THOSE
WHO ARE SILENCED AND ABUSED BY
CHURCH ADMINISTRATIONS. THANK
YOU. IF WE CAN HAVE INDIVIDUALS
THAT WANT TO SUPPORT THIS BILL,
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, YOUR
ORGANIZATION AND THAT YOU
SUPPORT. CATHERINE ARCHER. I AM
A SURVIVOR OF ABUSE BY A GREEK
ORTHODOX PRIEST. SUPPORT THANK
YOU. BèC. ON BEHALF OF THE DIANA
GARLAND SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WORK AT
BAYLOR UNIVERSITY, STRONGLY
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. BONNIE ROWE,
ON BEHALF OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING
LEGAL NETWORK. FREEDOM AND
FASHION. HOPE OF SURVIVORS,
MENNONITE ABUSE PREVENTION AND
THE MANY VICTIM SURVIVORS OF
ADULT CLERGY SEXUAL ABUSE WHO
COULD NOT ATTEND TODAY BUT HAVE
SUBMITTED SUPPORT LETTERS AND
ARE WATCHING THIS LIVE STREAM OF
THIS HEARING, STRONGLY SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE LEAD
OPPOSITION? YOU WILL HAVE TWO
MINUTES. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING. MY NAME IS LESLIE
CALDWELL. HOUSTON. I'M WITH THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION AND WE OPPOSE THIS
BILL UNLESS AMENDED. I GREW UP
IN A CHURCH THAT WE LATER FOUND
OUT TO BE A NEST OF SEXUAL
PREDATORS IN PRIEST'S GARB. FOUR
OF MY FAMILY MEMBERS WERE
AFFECTED. SO I KNOW THE ANGUISH.
I KNOW THE ANGUISH WELL THAT
COMES WITH SEXUAL EXPLOITATION
BY THE CLERGY. HOWEVER, WE
RESPECTFULLY URGE YOUR NO VOTE
ON THIS BILL AS IT IS NOT THE
ANSWER TO THE PROBLEMS IT SEEKS
TO ADDRESS. THIS BILL MAKES IT A
CRIME FOR A MEMBER OF THE CLERGY
IN A POSITION OF TRUST OR
AUTHORITY OVER AN ADULT
PARISHIONER, EVEN IF THE SEXUAL
CONDUCT IS CONSENSUAL. THIS TYPE
OF CONTACT IS DEFINITELY
INADVISABLE. BUT THIS LAW WOULD
BE A RADICAL DEPARTURE FROM
EXISTING LAW. THIS IS A MASSIVE
GOVERNMENT OVERREACH AND AN
OVERREACH THAT IS UNPRECEDENTED.
AND I HATE THAT WORD BECAUSE
IT'S USED ALL THE TIME, BUT
UNPRECEDENTED IN EXISTING LAW.
THIS PROPOSED LAW IS NOT
NECESSARY TO PREVENT
NON-CONSENSUAL SEXUAL CONDUCT
BETWEEN A MEMBER OF THE CLERGY
AND AN ADULT PARISHIONER,
BECAUSE EXISTING LAW ALREADY
CRIMINALIZES SUCH NON-CONSENSUAL
SEXUAL CONDUCT, REGARDLESS OF
THEIR RELATIONSHIP. FURTHER, THE
PROPOSED LAW IS OVERBROAD AND
LIKELY VOID VOID FOR VAGUENESS.
FOR INSTANCE, THIS BILL DOES NOT
DEFINE WHAT IT MEANS FOR A
MEMBER OF THE CLERGY TO BE IN A
POSITION OF TRUST OVER AN ADULT
CONGREGANT. THIS COULD APPLY
BROADLY TO CONSENSUAL
RELATIONSHIPS, WHERE THERE IS NO
FRAUD, NO MANIPULATION, AND NO
UNDERLYING EXPLOITATION. ALSO,
TO TAKE AWAY THE DEFENSE OF
CONSENT IS A RADICAL STEP. WHILE
THERE ARE VERY NARROW
CIRCUMSTANCES THAT THE DEFENSE
OF CONSENT WOULD NOT BE APPLIED,
WHAT WE HAVE IN THIS BILL IS NOT
ONE OF THEM AND SHOULD NOT BE.
WE HAVE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH THE
AUTHOR'S OFFICE AND HAVE
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS THAT COULD
CURE THE ISSUES. WE'VE
IDENTIFIED IN THIS BILL. THESE
AMENDMENTS THUS FAR HAVE NOT
BEEN TAKEN. WE HOPE TO HAVE
FURTHER DISCUSSIONS, BUT AT THIS
TIME, WE URGE YOUR NO THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE
ANOTHER ONE. AND PLEASE STATE
YOUR NAME. AND IF YOU HAVE TWO
MINUTES, YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES.
THANK YOU. HI. GOOD MORNING,
CHAIR AND MEMBERS. MY NAME IS
RACHEL BHAGWAT. I'M WITH ACLU
CALIFORNIA ACTION, WE ARE IN
RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION TO THIS
BILL. WE WANT TO ALIGN OUR
COMMENTS WITH THE PREVIOUS
WITNESS AND STATE THAT WE FEAR
THAT SB 894 COULD BE USED TO
CRIMINALIZE CONSENSUAL SEXUAL
CONDUCT. THE LANGUAGE AS WRITTEN
IS OVERLY BROAD AND UNNECESSARY,
GIVEN EXISTING LAWS THAT ALREADY
PROTECT AGAINST SITUATIONS OF
NON-CONSENSUAL SEX. PENAL CODE
SECTION 240 3.4 SEXUAL BATTERY
CARRIES A TERME OF 1 TO 4 YEARS.
PENAL CODE SECTION 261 RAPE IS A
FELONY OFFENSE CARRYING A TERME
OF 3 TO 8 YEARS, EXCEPT IN
SITUATIONS WHERE SEXUAL ACTS ARE
COMMITTED UNDER THE GUISE OF
PROVIDING PROFESSIONAL
DIAGNOSIS, COUNSELING OR
TREATMENT, AND WHERE THE VICTIM
COULD NOT HAVE REASONABLY
MANIFESTED CONSENT. SEXUAL
CONDUCT BETWEEN TWO CONSENTING
ADULTS SHOULD NOT BE PENALIZED.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE
ANY OTHER OPPOSITION WITNESSES?
ME TWOS. SEEING NONE, I'LL TURN
IT BACK TO COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
SEEING NO CONVERSATION. SENATOR,
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? YES SO
AS OUR WITNESSES HAVE DESCRIBED
THE PROBLEM OF RELIGIOUS CLERGY
MEMBERS USING THEIR POSITIONS TO
COERCE OR EXPLOIT CONGREGATION
MEMBERS INTO SEX IS A REAL ISSUE
. AND WHILE WE DON'T HAVE ALL
THE PRECISE DATA ON THIS, I
RECITED SOME STATISTICS THAT I
THINK MAKE CLEAR THAT THIS
HAPPENS FAR MORE OFTEN THAN THAN
WE REALIZE, AND THAT IT SHOULD,
AND I KNOW THAT THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS HAD RAISED QUESTIONS
ABOUT THE BILL BEING OVERBROAD
AND VAGUE, AND I APPRECIATE THE
COMMENTS FROM OPPOSITION. I JUST
WANT TO POINT OUT THAT WE HAD
REPEATEDLY TRIED TO NARROW THE
SCOPE OF THIS BILL. WE OFFERED
SEVERAL SETS OF AMENDMENTS,
INCLUDING AMENDMENTS THAT
SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THE
CONCERNS RAISED IN THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS, WHICH STATES THAT IN
ON PAGE SIX OF THE ANALYSIS, IT
STATES, FOR EXAMPLE, IN
DELAWARE'S SEXUAL EXPLOITATION
LAW, THE FOLLOWING DEFINITION OF
WITHOUT CONSENT REQUIRES THAT
THE SEXUAL CONTENT CONTACT BE
COMMITTED, QUOTE, UNDER THE
GUISE OF PROVIDING END QUOTE
COUNSELING OR TREATMENT, AND THE
VICTIM'S REASONABLE BELIEF THAT
THE ACT WAS FOR APPROPRIATE
COUNSEL OR TREATMENT SUCH THAT
RESISTANCE BY THE VICTIM COULD
NOT REASONABLY HAVE BEEN
MANIFESTED. FACTORS THAT SB 894
LACKS. IN RESPONSE TO THIS
CRITICISM, MY STAFF SPECIFICALLY
DRAFTED LANGUAGE MODELED ON THE
DELAWARE STATUTE, WHICH I'M
HAPPY TO PASS IN FRONT OF YOU.
DO WE HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF THEM
RIGHT NOW, HEATHER, DID YOU PASS
THAT? NO. I'M SORRY, I HAVE
COPIES, BUT YOU CAN TAKE A LOOK.
I THINK WE SENT COPIES TO YOU
PRIOR TO THIS, AND I'M HAPPY TO
SEND THESE AROUND HERE. COULD I
HAVE THESE PASSED OUT? THANK YOU
. THESE ARE TWO SETS RIGHT HERE.
THANK YOU. SAID AND SO WE
SPECIFICALLY DRAFTED LANGUAGE
ADDRESSING THIS POINT THAT
SPECIFICALLY SAID ONE, THAT IT'S
A REASONABLE BELIEF BY THE
VICTIM. AND TWO, RESISTANCE BY
THE VICTIM COULD NOT REASONABLY
HAVE MANIFESTED. IN FACT, WE
ADOPTED THE DELAWARE LANGUAGE
VERBATIM. AT THAT POINT, THE
COMMITTEE TOLD US THAT THIS WAS
NOT GOOD ENOUGH AND THAT THE
BILL WAS STILL OVERBROAD AND
VAGUE. WE TRIED ANOTHER
APPROACH, WHICH WAS ALSO IN
FRONT OF YOU THEN AS A LAST
MINUTE HAIL MARY APPROACH, WHICH
WOULD HAVE NARROWED THE SCOPE OF
THIS BILL EXTENSIVELY BY
LIMITING IT TO THOSE IN
RELIGIOUS RELATIONSHIPS WHERE
PENITENTIAL COMMUNICATION, SUCH
AS CONFESSION TO A PRIEST, WERE
REGULARLY SHARED BY THE
CONGREGANT. IN BOTH OF THESE
INSTANCES, WE EXPLICITLY STATED
THAT TERMINATION OF THE
COUNSELING RELATIONSHIP OR
TERMINATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP
IN WHICH PENITENTIAL
COMMUNICATIONS WERE BEING
OFFERED WOULD BE A DEFENSE, AN
ABSOLUTE DEFENSE TO ANY CRIME.
WE ALSO, AS THE AMENDMENTS
NARROWED THIS TO MISDEMEANOR. BY
THE WAY, I'LL JUST NOTE THAT
THIS ENTIRE PROVISION AND SET OF
PROVISIONS IS MODELED OFF AN
IDENTICAL SET OF PROVISIONS IN
THE BNP CODE FOR
PSYCHOTHERAPISTS WHO HAVE SEXUAL
RELATIONS WITH THEIR PATIENTS.
AND SO WE HAVE TRIED TO BEND
OVER BACKWARDS TO TRY TO AMEND
THIS BILL TO ADDRESS THE
CONCERNS RAISED IN THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS AND THE ONE AMENDMENT
THAT WE'VE REPEATEDLY BEEN
OFFERED IS THE ONLY AMENDMENT
THAT WOULD SAVE THIS BILL WAS TO
REMOVE THE STATEMENT THAT
CONSENT COULD BE A DEFENSE. AND
I WILL RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE
WITH THE DEFENSE WITNESSES HERE
OR THE OPPOSITION WITNESSES. I
DON'T THINK THAT CONSENT SHOULD
BE ALLOWED TO BE A DEFENSE IN
ALL INSTANCES. NOW, I UNDERSTAND
THERE ARE CONCERNS WHEN YOU HAVE
THE LINE THAT CONSENT SHOULD NOT
BE A DEFENSE, THAT IT MIGHT BE
OVERBROAD, THAT YOU MIGHT BE
APPLYING IT TO TRULY CONSENSUAL
RELATIONSHIPS. AND I'LL JUST SAY
WE TRIED TO ADDRESS THOSE. WE
WILL CONTINUE TO TRY TO ADDRESS
THOSE. SHOULD THIS GET OUT OF
COMMITTEE TODAY. BUT WE WERE
NEVER GIVEN ANY LANGUAGE THAT
MIGHT FIX THE SCOPE OF THIS
BILL. WE REPEATEDLY TOLD CONSENT
HAD TO BE ALLOWED AS A DEFENSE.
AND I'LL JUST SUBMIT TO YOU THAT
I DISAGREE WITH THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS AND WITH THE DEFENSE,
BECAUSE IT PRESUMES THAT THE
VICTIM HERE IS IN A POSITION TO
GIVE CONSENT AND I'LL JUST SAY
THAT WHEN YOU HAVE THIS IS NOT
JUST A SITUATION WHERE WE'VE ALL
SEEN IT, WHERE A MAN IS
PRESSURING A WOMAN TO TRY TO
HAVE SEX WITH THEM. THIS IS A
SITUATION WHERE YOU HAVE A
RELIGIOUS LEADER, SOMEONE WHO IS
SEEN AS THE VOICE OF GOD, THE
MESSENGER FROM A HIGHER POWER,
WHO OFTEN IN THE CASES OF
GROOMING, WHICH WE SEE A LOT OF
YOU HAVE A CHILD TOLD FROM A
VERY YOUNG AGE, THIS IS THE
PERSON YOU HAVE TO RESPECT AND
LISTEN TO, AND YOU HAVE ALL OF
THE RELIGIOUS TRAPPINGS OF A
POWERFUL RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION
BEHIND THAT PERSON, AND VIEWING
THEM WITH MORAL AND SPIRITUAL
AUTHORITY. AND I WOULD JUST
SUBMIT TO YOU, I BELIEVE THAT
SITUATION IS FUNDAMENTALLY ONE
WHERE CONSENT IS NOT POSSIBLE.
WE'VE AGAIN OFFERED LANGUAGE
WHERE YOU COULD TERMINATE THE
RELATIONSHIPS THAT WE THINK ARE
PROBLEMATIC, WHERE YOU'RE
CONFESSING YOUR SINS. SIMPLE.
YOU JUST STOP BEING IN A
SITUATION WHERE THAT PERSON
CONFESSES THEIR SINS TO YOU.
ALTERNATIVELY, WE'VE OFFERED
LANGUAGE WHERE IT WOULD BE IN
COUNSELING RELATIONSHIP, WHERE
THE MANIFESTATION OF REASONABLE
ASSENT, SENATOR, CAN YOU WRAP IT
UP? I WOULD HAVE A LIMIT, NO,
BUT WE ALSO HAVE BEEN LIKE
TIMING PEOPLE. I'D LIKE TO JUST
FINISH AND JUST EXPRESS BECAUSE
I FOUND THIS PROCESS VERY
FRUSTRATING. I'LL JUST BE
HONEST, BECAUSE, MADAM CHAIR,
YOU REPEATEDLY TOLD ME THAT
STAFF WOULD, SUBMIT TO
REASONABLE AMENDMENTS. I ASKED
YOU REPEATEDLY. I TOLD YOU
CONSENT WAS THE MAIN ISSUE. WE
WOULD GIVE ON ANYTHING ELSE
OTHER THAN THE CONSENT PIECE.
AND YOU TOLD US THAT STAFF WOULD
WORK WITH US. STAFF NEVER
OFFERED US ANY AMENDMENTS OTHER
THAN THE CONSENT PIECE AND
ELIMINATING THE CONSENT PIECE.
AND SO I'D JUST LIKE TO FINISH,
BECAUSE I THINK WE HAVE A RIGHT
FOR THIS TO BE HEARD. WE HAVE
VICTIMS IN THE ROOM THAT I KNOW
ARE VERY INVESTED IN THIS BILL.
AND I'LL JUST POINT OUT, THERE
ARE A NUMBER OF INSTANCES WHERE
CONSENT IS NOT ALLOWED AS A
DEFENSE, WE DON'T ALLOW CONSENT
TO BE USED AS A DEFENSE FOR
ADULTS WHO HAVE SEX WITH A
MINOR. WE DON'T ALLOW CONSENT TO
BE USED AS A DEFENSE FOR SOMEONE
WHO HAS SEX WITH AN EXCESSIVELY
INEBRIATED PERSON. WE DON'T
ALLOW CONSENT TO BE USED AS A
DEFENSE FOR POLICE OFFICERS WHO
HAVE SEX WITH PEOPLE IN THEIR
CUSTODY. WE DON'T ALLOW CONSENT
TO BE USED AS A DEFENSE FOR
HEALTH FACILITY EMPLOYEES WHO
HAVE SEX WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE IN
THEIR CARE. WE DON'T ALLOW
CONSENT TO BE USED AS A DEFENSE
FOR LAWYERS IN CERTAIN TYPES OF
REPRESENTATION WHO HAVE SEX WITH
THEIR CLIENTS. WE DON'T ALLOW
CONSENT TO BE USED AS A DEFENSE
FOR PAROLE OFFICERS WHO HAVE SEX
WITH THE PAROLEES THAT THEY ARE
OVERSEEING. WE DON'T ALLOW
CONSENT TO BE USED AS A DEFENSE
FOR CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS WHO
HAVE SEX WITH THEIR INMATES. YOU
MAY HAVE SEEN THAT THE FEDERAL
PRISON IN DUBLIN INFAMOUSLY
DUBBED THE RAPE CLUB BECAUSE OF
ALL THE SEX THAT TOOK PLACE
BETWEEN THE PRISON GUARDS AND
THEIR INMATES, WAS CLOSED DOWN
THIS WEEK AND MANY OF THE PRISON
GUARDS WHO WERE CHARGED WITH
THIS TRIED TO USE CONSENT AS A
DEFENSE. AND WE DON'T ALLOW
CONSENT TO BE USED AS A DEFENSE
BETWEEN A PSYCHOTHERAPIST AND
THEIR PATIENT, WHICH IS THE
SPECIFIC STATUTORY EXAMPLE.
WE'RE MODELING THIS BILL AFTER.
AND THE REASON WE DON'T ALLOW
CONSENT TO BE USED IN THESE
INSTANCES IS BECAUSE THERE'S A
FUNDAMENTAL POWER IMBALANCE THAT
MAKES TRUE CONSENT IMPOSSIBLE.
AND I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU THAT
THAT SAME POWER IMBALANCE EXISTS
IN RELIGIOUS CLERGY. AND SO I
UNDERSTAND WE WANT TO NARROW THE
SCOPE OF THIS BILL. WE DON'T
WANT TO CAPTURE TRULY CONSENSUAL
RELATIONS BETWEEN TWO CONSENTING
ADULTS. BUT I WILL JUST NOTE,
WE'VE TRIED TO NARROW THIS BILL
AND THE TWO ITERATIONS IN FRONT
OF YOU. I THINK, WOULD DO THAT.
AND I THINK IT WOULD PROBABLY BE
NARROW, OVERLY NARROW IN THE
VIEWS OF PROBABLY MANY IN THIS
ROOM. BUT WE HAVE TRIED TO AMEND
THIS BILL. WE HAVE NOT BEEN
OFFERED ANY LANGUAGE TO TRY TO
SAVE THIS BILL, OTHER THAN
REMOVING THE CONSENT PIECE. AND
I WOULD JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, THIS
BILL WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION
BY A JANE DOE IN ORANGE COUNTY
WHO, FROM A YOUNG AGE WAS PART
OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IN ORANGE
AND WAS GROOMED BY HER PRIEST
AND WAS ALWAYS TOLD THAT THIS IS
SOMEONE YOU HAVE TO LOOK UP TO
AND RESPECT. YOU HAVE TO LISTEN
TO THEM. AND WHEN SHE TURNED 18,
THIS PARTICULAR PRIEST PREYED ON
HER. THIS PRIEST HAD BEEN GUILTY
OF DOING THE SAME THING IN OTHER
CONTEXTS, HAD BEEN TRANSFERRED A
NUMBER OF TIMES, AND THIS PERSON
IS STILL, I BELIEVE, A PRIEST
TODAY, THIS IS NOT A SITUATION
OF CONSENT WHEN YOU HAVE THAT
TYPE OF POWER AND BALANCE. AND
SO ALL I'LL JUST SAY IS TO
CLOSE, THIS IS ABOUT PROTECTING
WOMEN AND CHILDREN WHO ARE
VULNERABLE. THAT THAT IS WHAT
THIS BILL IS ABOUT. WE ARE
TRYING TO OFFER A SOLUTION.
WE'RE HAPPY TO WORK WITH YOU ALL
AND TO WORK, SHOULD IT GET TO
THE NEXT COMMITTEE WITH
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE TO TRY TO
ADDRESS THIS. BUT I THAT'S ALL I
CAN SAY TO YOU. AND I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR AYE
VOTE. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A
MOTION? THE BILL WILL BE HELD IN
COMMITTEE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
WE'LL SEE IF THERE'S A MOTION
FROM BRADFORD OR WIENER. THANK
YOU, THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT,
NEXT WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO
SB 989. OH, NO, WE DON'T HAVE
HER. SHE'S HERE. WILL YOU BE
ONLY PRESENTING FOR JONES OR
JONES WILL BE ATTENDING AS WELL.
YOU GOT AN ETA ON HIM? STILL
WANT TO GET
.
SHE SET US DOWN. APPARENTLY.
ALL RIGHT, FOLKS, WE ARE GOING
TO MOVE ON TO SB 1011 BY SENATOR
JONES, WHO ALSO HAS, SENATOR
BLAKE SPEAR. THEY WILL BE
PRESENTING THIS BILL. I ALSO
JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT FOR ANY
STAFF IN, IN THIS, ROOM AS WELL
AS ANYBODY WATCHING, PLEASE
BRING YOUR SENATORS UP FORWARD.
WE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THEIR
BILLS IN A TIMELY FASHION, SB
1011. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
AND MEMBERS, IT IS AN HONOR TO
BE WITH YOU THIS MORNING, WITH
MY COAUTHOR, CATHERINE BLAKE
SPEAR. WE ARE PRESENTING SENATE
BILL 1011, WHICH DOES THREE
THINGS TO HELP CLEAN UP
CALIFORNIA AND PROTECT PUBLIC
HEALTH AND SAFETY. FIRST, THIS
BILL PROHIBITS ENCAMPMENTS NEAR
SENSITIVE AREAS SUCH AS SCHOOLS,
MAJOR TRANSIT STOPS, AND OPEN
SPACES. REGARDLESS OF SHELTER
SPACING ON THE STREETS AND
SIDEWALKS. WHEN SHELTER SPACE IS
AVAILABLE. THIS WILL HELP US
PROTECT OUR MOST VULNERABLE
POPULATIONS CHILDREN, SENIORS,
AND FAMILIES. IN ADDITION, IT
WILL ENSURE THAT CALIFORNIANS
CAN TRAVEL SAFELY AND SECURELY
USING THE MODES OF
TRANSPORTATION FUNDED BY THEIR
TAX DOLLARS. SECOND, THIS BILL
REQUIRES A 72 HOUR WARNING
PERIOD BEFORE AN ENCAMPMENT CAN
OCCUR AND ENCAMPMENT SWEEP CAN
OCCUR. THIS WILL GIVE
INDIVIDUALS AND ENCAMPMENTS A
CHANCE TO FIND ALTERNATIVE
LIVING ARRANGEMENTS, AND
HOPEFULLY ENCOURAGE THEM TO
ACCEPT SERVICES BEFORE THE
ENCAMPMENT IS CLEARED. THIRD,
THE BILL REQUIRES ENFORCEMENT
OFFICERS OR AGENCIES TO PROVIDE
INFORMATION ABOUT SLEEPING
ALTERNATIVES, SERVICES AND
SHELTERS IN THE AREA WHEN
CONDUCTING THE ENCAMPMENT SWEEP.
THIS WILL HELP CONNECT HOMELESS
INDIVIDUALS TO DESPERATELY
NEEDED SERVICES AS WE
COMPASSIONATELY CLEAR
ENCAMPMENTS. CALIFORNIA HAS
SPENT $24 BILLION IN THE PAST
FIVE YEARS ON HOMELESSNESS. AND
WHAT DO WE HAVE TO SHOW FOR IT?
ENCAMPMENTS LINING NEARLY EVERY
BLOCK AND CHILDREN BEING EXPOSED
TO OPEN DRUG USE AND DANGEROUS
SITUATIONS. OUR STATE HAS OVER
180,000 HOMELESS INDIVIDUALS.
CALIFORNIA ONLY REPRESENTS 12%
OF THE US POPULATION, YET IT
HOLDS 30% OF THE NATION'S
HOMELESS POPULATION. OUR CURRENT
APPROACH TO HOMELESSNESS IS
FAILING, AND CALIFORNIANS ARE
FRANKLY JUST TIRED OF IT. WE
NEED TO TRY SOMETHING NEW.
CITIES ACROSS THE STATE,
INCLUDING SACRAMENTO, LOS
ANGELES AND SAN DIEGO, ARE
TAKING ACTION TO PROTECT
SENSITIVE COMMUNITY AREAS FROM
ENCAMPMENTS. IN FACT, THIS
PROPOSED LAW IS MODELED AFTER A
MEASURE PASSED LAST JUNE BY THE
CITY OF SAN DIEGO THAT HAS FOUND
EXTRA ORDINARY SUCCESS,
ACCORDING TO THE DOWNTOWN SAN
DIEGO PARTNERSHIP MONTHLY
CENSUS, THE NUMBER OF HOMELESS
INDIVIDUALS IN DOWNTOWN SAN
DIEGO HAS BEEN REDUCED BY OVER
60% FROM MAY 2023 TO THIS MARCH.
WE SIMPLY CANNOT CONTINUE
ALLOWING PEOPLE TO CAMP AT OUR
TRANSIT STOPS OR IN FRONT OF OUR
SCHOOLS. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEALTH
AND PUBLIC SAFETY CRISIS. IT IS
INHUMANE AND UNHEALTHY FOR OUR
STATE TO CONTINUE LOOKING THE
OTHER WAY. WHEN HOMELESS
INDIVIDUALS AND FAMILIES ARE
LIVING AND BUILDING HOUSING
STRUCTURES ON SIDEWALKS AND
STREETS, IT IS ALSO UNFAIR AND
OFTEN DANGEROUS FOR THE
NEIGHBORS, FAMILIES AND CHILDREN
IN THESE SENSITIVE AREAS. OUR
MEASURE, ALONG WITH OTHER
LEGISLATION COMBATING THE
HOMELESS EPIDEMIC, WILL
HOPEFULLY WORK TOGETHER TO HELP
END PUBLIC CAMPING IN THESE
AREAS, WHILE ALSO
COMPASSIONATELY HELPING HOMELESS
INDIVIDUALS GET TREATMENT FOR
THE MENTAL AND OR PHYSICAL
HEALTH NEEDS AND FINDING A MORE
APPROPRIATE PLACE TO STAY.
FINALLY, LET ME EMPHASIZE OUR
GOAL IS TO NOT CRIMINALIZE
HOMELESSNESS, BUT RATHER TO
PROTECT THE PUBLIC AND HELP LIFT
HOMELESS INDIVIDUALS UP AND OFF
THE STREETS THROUGH THEIR
COMPASSION APPROACH. EVERY
CALIFORNIAN DESERVES A PATH OFF
THE STREETS, AND SB 1011 WILL
MAKE THAT HAPPEN. THAT'S WHY
WELL OVER 1000 CALIFORNIANS HAVE
SIGNED OUR PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF SB 1011. WE HAVE A STRONG
COALITION OF SUPPORTERS AND
BIPARTISAN COAUTHORS, AND I URGE
YOU TO JOIN YOUR CONSTITUENTS
TODAY IN SUPPORTING SB 1011,
PRESENTING WITH ME THIS MORNING,
AS I SAID, IS SENATOR CATHERINE
BREAKSPEAR. AND THEN ALSO
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT WILL BE
MAYOR JOHN FRANKLIN FROM THE
CITY OF VISTA. AND BRETT BOWMAN,
A FORMERLY HOMELESS INDIVIDUAL
AND ADVOCATE. I WILL NOW TURN IT
OVER TO SENATOR BREAKSPEAR.
THANK YOU. WELL, THANK YOU,
SENATOR JONES, AND THANK YOU TO
THE CHAIR AND COMMITTEE FOR
ALLOWING ME TO PRESENT WITH MY
COLLEAGUE, SENATOR JONES TODAY
ON THIS IMPORTANT BILL. I AM A
COAUTHOR OF SB 1011 BECAUSE,
SIMPLY STATED, WE NEED TO DO
BETTER TO SERVE OUR NEIGHBORS
WHO ARE UNHOUSED AND WE DESERVE
TO HAVE OUR PUBLIC SPACES,
PARKS, SIDEWALKS, TRAILS
AVAILABLE FOR THE PUBLIC USE.
UNFORTUNATELY, EVERY MONTH IN
THIS STATE STREET, HOMELESSNESS
GROWS. WE SEE THIS IN OUR
COMMUNITIES EVERY SINGLE DAY.
POOR SOULS WHO ARE SLEEPING
OUTSIDE IN THE RAIN, WRAPPED IN
MAKESHIFT CARDBOARD. SOME WITH
BLANKETS, OTHERS WITHOUT CLEARLY
SUFFERING WITHIN THE SHADOWS OF
THE CALIFORNIA STATE CAPITOL.
HERE IN THE STATE THAT HAS THE
FIFTH LARGEST ECONOMY IN THE
ENTIRE WORLD, THERE ARE
ENCAMPMENTS ON CITY STREETS AND
IN OUR PARKS. A LACK OF
FACILITIES FOR PERSONAL HYGIENE,
NO PLACE TO USE THE BATHROOM,
SMALL FIRES AND AN EVER
EXPANDING FOOTPRINT OF STUFF AND
TRASH INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF
WAY THAT PREVENTS THE PUBLIC
FROM EVEN USING THE SPACE. WE
NEED MORE HOUSING, FULL STOP,
WITHOUT EXCEPTION. TO SOLVE THIS
CRISIS, WE NEED MENTAL HEALTH
AND DRUG AND ALCOHOL TREATMENT,
BEDS FULL STOP, WITHOUT
EXCEPTION. WE KNOW THIS. WE
CONTINUALLY SAY THIS AGAIN AND
AGAIN. AND MEANWHILE, WHILE WE
ARE WAITING FOR THIS TO HAPPEN,
WE DO NOTHING TO ADDRESS THE
URGENT, CATASTROPHIC
HUMANITARIAN CRISIS THAT IS
GROWING EVERY SINGLE MONTH ON
OUR STREETS. WE NEED TO
COMMUNICATE TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
WHAT TOOLS THEY HAVE. WE NEED TO
SET A STANDARD AT THE STATE
LEVEL. WE NEED TO FIGHT TO DO
BETTER BY PEOPLE, BY WORKING AT
BOTH ENDS OF THE PROBLEM.
COLLECTIVELY, WE HAVE TO BE
CLEAR, CLEAR EYED HERE, THAT BY
ALLOWING OUR PUBLIC SPACES TO
BECOME SLEEPING SPACES, WE ARE
TOLERATING THIS. WE ARE ALLOWING
IT TO HAPPEN AND WE ARE ALLOWING
IT TO GROW. EVERY MONTH, THE
AUTHOR AND I AND OUR WITNESSES
WHO ARE HERE TODAY, ARE NOT
ALONE IN SAYING THAT THIS IS AN
URGENT PROBLEM. 70% OF
CALIFORNIA RESIDENTS IDENTIFY
GROWING STREET HOMELESSNESS AS
THE TOP STATE PROBLEM. LOOKING
AT THE CONDITIONS OF OUR PUBLIC
STREETS IN VIDEOS OF OAKLAND OR
VENICE BEACH OR COUNTLESS OTHER
COMMUNITIES THROUGHOUT
CALIFORNIA, IT IS TRULY AND
DEEPLY HORRIFYING HOW PEOPLE ARE
LIVING AND WHAT WE ARE
TOLERATING WHENEVER I PERSONALLY
WALK BY SOMEONE WHO IS SUFFERING
OUTSIDE, I FEEL THAT TWIN
SENSATION OF COMPASSION FOR THE
SUFFERING OF A FELLOW HUMAN AND
ALSO ANGER AND HELPLESSNESS
ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE ARE
LETTING THIS HAPPEN. THE INTENT
OF THIS BILL IS ONE PART OF A
PACKAGE OF SOLUTIONS. THE BILL
SAYS THAT PEOPLE CANNOT CAMP
WITHIN 500FT OF SCHOOLS IN OPEN
SPACES, AND AT TRANSIT STOPS AT
ANY TIME. AND WHEN SHELTER BEDS
ARE AVAILABLE, THEY CANNOT CAMP
ON SIDEWALKS. BOTH THE AUTHOR
AND I COME FROM THE COUNTY OF
SAN DIEGO, AND THIS BILL IS
MODELED AFTER THE SUCCESSFUL
PROGRAM THAT THE CITY OF SAN
DIEGO HAS ENACTED, AND THAT TOOK
EFFECT LAST JULY. SAN DIEGO'S
UNSAFE CAMPING ORDINANCE HAS HAD
RIPPLE EFFECTS THAT BENEFIT
EVERYONE. IT HAS BROADENED AND
SHARPENED THE CONVERSATION AND
THE DISCUSSION OF HOMELESSNESS
AND ITS SOLUTIONS. AND IT HAS
CREATED FORWARD PROGRESS. WHERE
BEFORE THERE WAS INERTIA, WHEN
IT WENT INTO EFFECT, THERE WERE
MORE THAN 2100 SAN DIEGO
RESIDENTS LIVING ON THE DOWNTOWN
STREETS. THERE HAS BEEN A 60%
DECLINE IN THIS STREET.
HOMELESSNESS ON THE DOWNTOWN
STREETS. THE CITY HAS MORE
SOMETHING MORE BROAD THAN THIS
BILL. IT'S CALLED THE
COMPREHENSIVE SHELTER STRATEGY,
AND ALL PARTS OF IT ARE
IMPORTANT. IT DESIGNATES SAFE
CAMPING SITES, AND IT ALSO AIMS
TO INCREASE HOUSING AND
SUPPORTIVE SERVICES FOR THE
HOMELESS. THIS INCLUDES A FOCUS
ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF SINGLE
ROOM OCCUPANCY ROOMS, SHELTERS,
PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING AND
PURSUING SHELTERS AND TEMPORARY
HOUSING IN A VARIETY OF
DIFFERENT WAYS. THE REALITY IS,
IF PEOPLE ARE GOING TO ARE NOT
GOING TO BE LIVING OUTSIDE IN
THESE CONDITIONS, THEY NEED TO
BE LIVING INSIDE. AND LAWS LIKE
THIS ONE, THIS BILL WILL HELP
CREATE THE MOMENTUM THAT'S
NECESSARY TO PUSH ALL LEVELS OF
SOCIETY TO CREATE THOSE INSIDE
LIVING PLACES. WE ALL DESERVE TO
HAVE CLEAN SPACES IN PUBLIC THAT
ARE SAFE AND INVITING. WE ALSO
DESERVE TO HAVE OPEN SPACES THAT
PROTECT NATURE AND DO NOT CREATE
A FLOW OF HUMAN AND ANIMAL WASTE
AND TRASH AND DEBRIS INTO OUR
WATERWAYS. THE RESIDENTS OF
CALIFORNIA ARE NEIGHBORS,
DESERVE BETTER. THEY DESERVE TO
LIVE INSIDE. SB 1011 IS A
RESPONSIBLE AND HUMANE APPROACH,
AND I URGE YOUR AYE VOTE. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, IF THE FIRST
WITNESS WILL APPROACH THE
LECTERN, YOU WILL HAVE TWO
MINUTES. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. SENATORS, MY NAME IS BRETT
BOWMAN. I USED TO BE HOMELESS
AND STRUGGLED WITH THE METH
ADDICTION ALL MY LIFE.
BELONGINGS FIT IN A SHOPPING
CART. I WASN'T BORN INTO
HOMELESSNESS, BUT IT CAME FOR
ME. I USED DRUGS TO NUMB MYSELF
FROM THE PAIN AND ANGER OF A
CATASTROPHIC LIFE EVENT. I LOST
MY SON, AND INSTEAD OF SEEKING
COUNSELING FOR MY MENTAL HEALTH,
I RESORTED TO THE STREETS.
THAT'S HOW I BECAME HOMELESS.
LAST YEAR. I STOOD WITH SENATOR
JONES AS HE INTRODUCED A BILL
WHICH CALLED FOR COMPASSIONATE
CLEARING HOMELESS ENCAMPMENTS. I
WAS SAD TO SEE THE BILL'S
REJECTION IN THE CAPITOL. THE
PEOPLE ELECTED TO THIS BUILDING
ARE SUPPOSED TO HELP SOLVE THE
PROBLEMS, NOT STALL THEM. I AM
STANDING WITH SENATOR JONES
AGAIN THIS YEAR, AS WE ONCE
AGAIN ADDRESSED THIS ISSUE WITH
AN IMPROVED BILL. I AM EXTREMELY
PLEASED TO SEE A BIPARTISAN
GROUP OF LAWMAKERS TACKLING THIS
VERY REAL CRISIS, AS IT SHOULD
BE. THIS IS NOT A DEMOCRATIC OR
REPUBLICAN PROBLEM, BUT A
CALIFORNIA ISSUE. IF YOU CARE
ABOUT WHAT IS HAPPENING IN
CALIFORNIA, I URGE ALL MEMBERS
OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE
LEGISLATURE TO JOIN SENATOR
JONES AND THESE LAWMAKERS. LET'S
GET THIS BILL PASSED AND SIGNED
INTO LAW. DRIVE DOWN THE STREETS
, WALK DOWN THE ROAD. MY STORY
IS NOT ALONE NOR UNIQUE. AND
CALIFORNIA NEEDS TO STEP UP AND
TACKLE THIS ISSUE. SENATE BILL
1011 IS AN IMPORTANT STEP, AND I
GUARANTEE IF IT WAS AS EASY FOR
ME TO BE AS COMFORTABLE AS IT IS
FOR MOST PEOPLE OUT THERE TODAY,
I MIGHT STILL BE OUT THERE OR I
MIGHT BE DEAD. TOGETHER, WE CAN
MAKE A REAL DIFFERENCE. THANK
YOU, THANK YOU. WE'LL GO TO THE
NEXT WITNESS IN SUPPORT. YOU
WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. MY NAME IS JOHN
FRANKLIN. I'M THE MAYOR OF THE
CITY OF VISTA, CALIFORNIA, WITH
A POPULATION OF 103,000. I WANT
TO THANK SENATOR JONES AND
SENATOR BLAKESBURG FOR INVITING
ME TO SPEAK TODAY. AND FIRST, I
WANT TO READ A COUPLE OF
STATEMENTS FROM TEACHERS AND
PARENTS AND STUDENTS OF LOCAL
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS IN MY CITY.
IN RECENT MONTHS, THE IMMEDIATE
COMMUNITY SURROUNDING OUR SCHOOL
HAS WITNESSED A NOTICEABLE
INCREASE IN HOMELESSNESS. WITH
THIS RISE, THERE'S BEEN AN
ALARMING ESCALATION IN DRUG USE
IN PUBLIC SPACES. ACCUMULATION
OF TRASH, INCIDENTS OF CRIME.
PERHAPS THE MOST DISTRESSING ARE
THE FREQUENT OCCURRENCES OF
INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR,
INCLUDING DRUG CONSUMPTION AND
PUBLIC USE OF PROFANITY,
THREATENING BEHAVIOR AND SPEECH,
PUBLIC NUDITY, DEFECATION AND
URINATION. ON THE PUBLIC
SIDEWALKS. OFTEN, THE PRESENCE
OF YOUNG CHILDREN WHO ARE
WALKING TO AND FROM SCHOOL. FROM
A PARENT, THIS MORNING, A
HOMELESS MAN BECAME AGGRESSIVE
AND HOSTILE TOWARD ME, SIMPLY
BECAUSE HE WAS ASKED TO LEAVE
THE AREA THAT CHILDREN WERE
WALKING TO SCHOOL. THE PERSON
REFUSED TO LEAVE WHEN LAW
ENFORCEMENT WAS CALLED TO REMOVE
THEM, AND ALL OF THE YOUNG
KINDERGARTNERS WATCHED. THIS IS
NOT SOMETHING THAT
KINDERGARTNERS OR ANY STUDENT
SHOULD BE EXPERIENCING ON THEIR
WAY TO SCHOOL FROM A STUDENT
WHILE WALKING TO SCHOOL. IT
MAKES ME FEEL VERY UNSAFE TO
HAVE THEM WALK BY AND SIT ON THE
SIDEWALK, AND EVEN AT ONE OF THE
EXITS TO OUR SCHOOLS. IT MAKES
ME FEEL ANXIOUS. I DON'T
UNDERSTAND WHY THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT WON'T HELP US FROM
ANOTHER STUDENT. I FEEL NERVOUS
SOMETIMES WHEN I WALK TO SCHOOL
AND USUALLY TRY TO WALK WITH
OTHER PEOPLE BECAUSE THE
HOMELESS SCARE ME. I DON'T THINK
IT'S RIGHT THAT I SHOULD FEEL
NERVOUS WHEN ALL I WANT TO DO IS
GO TO SCHOOL. FROM A PARENT, THE
BEHAVIOR OF THESE HOMELESS
INDIVIDUALS IS NOT ONLY VULGAR,
BUT IT IS HARASSING. ALSO
UNSANITARY. THEIR LIVING
CONDITIONS OFTEN RESULT IN
UNSANITARY UNCLEANLINESS, WHICH
POSES A SERIOUS HEALTH RISK FOR
THE CHILDREN. IN OUR COMMUNITY.
AND FINALLY, FROM THE PORTRAIT,
ONE OF OUR SCHOOLS EVERY MORNING
I HAVE TO CLEAN, PEE AND POOP
OFF OF THE ENTRANCE. ONE TIME, A
HOMELESS MAN SMEARED HIS POOP
ALL OVER THE EMERGENCY DOOR. WE
NEED BETTER TOOLS IN OUR CITIES
TO ADDRESS THESE PROBLEMS.
PLEASE VOTE FOR THIS MODEST
IMPROVEMENT IN OUR ABILITIES TO
CLEAR INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE
ILLEGALLY HABITATING AND
THREATENING THE SAFETY OF OUR
SCHOOLS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
HAVING ME. THANK YOU, CAN WE
HAVE MEETINGS IN SUPPORT? PLEASE
STATE YOUR NAME, YOUR
ORGANIZATION, AND THAT YOU
SUPPORT ETHAN NAGLER ON BEHALF
OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, IN
SUPPORT ANYBODY ELSE? SEEING
NONE, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO
LEAD OPPOSITION IN LEAD.
OPPOSITION WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES
TO SPEAK. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME
AND WHY YOU OPPOSE BRANDON
GREEN, WESTERN CENTER. WE OPPOSE
THIS BILL BECAUSE IT'S INHUMANE
AND WILL RESULT IN THE
DISAPPEARANCE AND EXCLUSION OF
UNHOUSED PEOPLE. THERE'S NO
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN UNHOUSED
PEOPLE AND THE PUBLIC. THERE ARE
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. WE'VE
SEEN THAT IT'S INEFFECTIVE IN LÀ
AND THE PEOPLE IN SAN DIEGO WERE
NOT HOUSED. THEY WERE DISPLACED.
THERE'S A DIFFERENCE. THIS
RELIES ON DISPROVEN TROPES ABOUT
THE DANGEROUSNESS OF UNHOUSED
PEOPLE. IT'S NOT FISCALLY SOUND.
IT COSTS LESS TO PROVIDE FOR
PEOPLE EXPERIENCING
HOUSELESSNESS WITH A STIPEND,
WHICH HAS BEEN SHOWN TO BE
STABILIZING, THAN TO EXPAND THE
CRIMINAL LEGAL INFRASTRUCTURE
AND FURTHER TARGET THE
DISENFRANCHIZED. THIS WOULD
FURTHER ENTRENCH PEOPLE WITHIN
THE CRIMINAL LEGAL SYSTEM AND
SADDLE THEM WITH DEBT THAT THEY
CAN'T PAY. APPROXIMATELY 70% OF
PEOPLE EXPERIENCING
HOUSELESSNESS HAVE ALREADY BEEN
SYSTEMS INVOLVED, AND IT'S
ANTI-BLACK BLACK PEOPLE AND
PEOPLE OF COLOR ARE
OVERREPRESENTED IN THE UNHOUSED
POPULATION AND THE CRIMINAL
LEGAL SYSTEM. AND THIS BILL
WOULD EXACERBATE BOTH. WE KNOW
THAT THE SOLUTIONS TO
HOUSELESSNESS IS MORE, HOMES AND
MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THIS
BILL DOES NEITHER AND PASSES THE
BUCK TO UNHOUSED PEOPLE INSTEAD
OF THE GOVERNMENT, WHICH IS
ACTUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
PROBLEM. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER LEAD
OPPOSITION?
YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. HELLO. MY
NAME IS DEZ MARTINEZ FROM FRESNO
COUNTY. I HAD THE HONOR TO BE A
PART OF UCSF VÌ CALIFORNIA STATE
STUDY. THE LARGEST
REPRESENTATIVE STUDY OF
HOMELESSNESS IN THE UNITED
STATES SINCE THE MID 1990S. A
FEW FACTS FROM THE STUDY ARE.
THERE ARE ONLY 24 UNITS FOR
EVERY 100 EXTREMELY LOW INCOME
HOUSEHOLDS IN CALIFORNIA, 1 IN 8
LOST HOUSING DUE TO LOSS OF
INCOME OR RENT INCREASE. NEARLY
HALF OF CALIFORNIA UNHOUSED ARE
50 PLUS AND BECAME UNHOUSED FOR
THE FIRST TIME OF THEIR LIVES.
THE MENTAL ABUSE THAT I ENDURED
ON THE STREETS PUSHED ME TO
CREATE ADVOCACY PAGE HOMELESS IN
FRESNO TO VISUALLY SHOW OTHERS
WHAT WE GO THROUGH, THE LACK OF
RESOURCES, AND TO SHOW THE WORLD
ABOUT WHAT UNHOUSED PEOPLE IN
THIS STATE FACE ON A DAILY
BASIS. I HAVE WITNESSED AND
ENDURED LAW ENFORCEMENT OVER THE
YEARS, SEARCHING, SEIZING, AND
DESTROYING OUR PROPERTY AND OUR
LIVES. I HAVE WITNESSED AND
ENDURED BRUTAL PUNISHMENTS ON
US, ESPECIALLY THE ONES THAT
SUFFER WITH PHYSICAL
DISABILITIES PUNISHED BECAUSE WE
DON'T MOVE FAST ENOUGH. SO
EVERYTHING IS TAKEN FROM US. OUR
BLANKETS, OUR FOOD, CLOTHING,
MEDICINE, TENT, TARPS, EVEN OUR
DOG FOOD. ANYTHING THAT WOULD
HELP US SURVIVE THE NEXT DAY.
SINCE LAST SUMMER, MANY
DISPLACEMENTS HAVE BEEN DONE
UNDER FRESNO SENSITIVE USE
ORDINANCE. THIS IS THE SAME AS
SB 1011. IT HAS MOVED US FROM
THE MIDDLE OF THE CITY TO THE
ALLEYS TO THE DUMPSTERS OF THE
CITY. WE HAVE BEEN RUN OUT OF
OUR OWN CITY LIMITS DUE TO THIS
ORDINANCE, BECAUSE IT BASICALLY
PREVENTS US FROM BEING ANYWHERE.
WE ARE PUSHING TO RURAL AREAS
WHERE IT'S EXTREMELY DANGEROUS
AND WE HAVE NO ACCESS TO WATER,
FOOD, OR ANY TYPES OF RESOURCES
THAT MIGHT EVEN HELP US OUT OF
HOMELESSNESS. SB 1011 WILL
ULTIMATELY DESTROY MANY LIVES BY
PUSHING PEOPLE FURTHER AWAY FROM
SERVICES. SB 1011 WILL CAUSE
MORE INDIVIDUALS TO CONTEMPLATE
SUICIDE BECAUSE THEY ARE TIRED
OF TRYING AND LOSING HOPE. I CAN
URGE YOU TODAY NOT TO PASS THIS,
BUT I'M BEGGING YOU, PLEASE GIVE
US HOPE BACK AND SAY NO TO SB
1011. WE ARE DYING TRYING TO
SURVIVE OUT HERE. THANK YOU. CAN
I HAVE ME TOS IN OPPOSITION?
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, YOUR
ORGANIZATION AND THAT YOU OPPOSE
MARK STIVERS. THANK YOU. SORRY.
TAKE TWO. MARK STIVERS WITH THE
CALIFORNIA HOUSING PARTNERSHIP
IN OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. RACHEL
BHAGWAT, ACLU CALIFORNIA ACTION
IN OPPOSITION. THANK YOU.
BETHLEHEM, ESTÁ, WITH THE ELLA
BAKER CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS
AND RESPECTFUL POSITION. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. LUKE CASILLA
WITH THE COALITION ON
HOMELESSNESS IN SAN FRANCISCO
AND FIRM OPPOSITION. I'M NIKKI
JONES WITH THE SACRAMENTO
REGIONAL COALITION TO END
HOMELESSNESS AND THE SACRAMENTO
ORGANIZING COMMITTEE IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, MADAM CHAIR, AND
MEMBERS, GREGORY KRAMER ON
BEHALF OF DISABILITY RIGHTS
CALIFORNIA, IN OPPOSITION. AND
I'VE BEEN AUTHORIZED TO CONVEY
OPPOSITION FOR ADDITIONAL GROUPS
, THE HOUSING IS A HUMAN RIGHT.
ORANGE COUNTY, ORANGE COUNTY
EQUITY COALITION, THE SAN
CLEMENTE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
COALITION, HELPING HAND UPS, THE
CALIFORNIA COALITION FOR HOUSING
AND SURVIVOR JUSTICE SANTA CRUZ
YIMBY, SANTA ROSA, YIMBY SLOCUM,
URBAN ENVIRONMENTALIST AND GROW
THE RICHMOND. THANK YOU. MALCOLM
HARRIS, POWER BUILDING DIRECTOR
WITH THE RESIDENTS UNITED
NETWORK OF HOUSING CALIFORNIA
AND STRONG OPPOSITION, DYLAN
VERNER, CHRIS FROM OAKLAND IN
OPPOSITION, JARED JOHNSON FROM
SACRAMENTO IN OPPOSITION.
MICHIAKI VASHISHTA, INNER CITY
LAW CENTER FIRM OPPOSITION.
SAMUEL CHOY WITH ALLIANCE SAN
DIEGO IN STRONG OPPOSITION.
AARON SHERMAN, ASSOCIATE
DIRECTOR AT ALLIANCE SAN DIEGO,
STRONGLY OPPOSED. MICHELLE
PARISET WITH PUBLIC ADVOCATES IN
OPPOSITION. LAUREN REBROVICH
WITH HOUSING CALIFORNIA. AND I'M
ALSO HERE ON BEHALF OF NOHO HOME
ALLIANCE, THE CHILDREN'S
PARTNERSHIP COMMUNITY WORKS
YIMBY ACTION VENTURA COUNTY
YIMBY STREETS FOR PEOPLE, SOUTH
SIDE FORWARD PROGRESS, NOE
VALLEY, SOUTH BAY, YIMBY AND
NAPA SOLANO FOR EVERYONE IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. NATASHA
MINSKER SMART. JUSTICE
CALIFORNIA AND THE SAN FRANCISCO
PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE IN
OPPOSITION. GOOD MORNING. LUIS
BROWN JUNIOR WITH THE
CORPORATION FOR SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING IN OPPOSITION. I'D ALSO
LIKE TO STATE THE OPPOSITION OF
THE FOLLOWING ORGANIZATIONS, THE
NATIONAL ALLIANCE INTO
HOMELESSNESS, CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION, THE
PEOPLE CONCERNED, GLIDE CENTER
FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE, TAPESTRY,
UNITARIAN UNIVERSALIST
CONGREGATION, WELCOME, NEIGHBORS
HOME INITIATIVE, EAST BAY,
YIMBY, NORTHERN NEIGHBORS,
MOUNTAIN VIEW, YIMBY PENINSULA
FOR EVERYONE IN SAN FRANCISCO,
YIMBY. LESS LIGHT, SACRAMENTO
VALLEY TENANTS ASSOCIATION AND
FIRM AND STRONG OPPOSITION.
KEITH MCHENRY. ALL 50 FOOD NOT
BOMBS GROUPS IN THE STATE ARE IN
STRONG OPPOSITION. THE
CALIFORNIA UNION OF THE HOMELESS
IS IN STRONG OPPOSITION, SANTA
CRUZ, HOMELESS UNION IS IN
STRONG OPPOSITION. THANK YOU.
NORMA ROSCOE, ELLA BAKER CENTER
FOR HUMAN RIGHTS IN STRONG
OPPOSITION. LESLEY CALDWELL,
HOUSTON FOR THE CALIFORNIA
PUBLIC DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION IN
OPPOSITION. MICHELLE PEREZ VERA,
INSTITUTE OF JUSTICE IN STRONG
OPPOSITION. DANICA ADAMO
REGISTERING STRONG OPPOSITION ON
BEHALF OF INITIATE JUSTICE ROOT
AND REBOUND LA DEFENSA.
CALIFORNIANS FOR SAFETY AND
JUSTICE AND PACIFIC JUVENILE
DEFENDER CENTER. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MARK WARNER, SANTA
CRUZ FREE GUIDE IN OPPOSITION.
I'M ALSO A 20 YEAR HOMELESS VET.
LARA CHATHAM, SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
MENTAL HEALTH ADVISORY BOARD
MEMBER. STRONG OPPOSITION ON
JOHN DREBINGER WITH THE
STEINBERG INSTITUTE IN
OPPOSITION. ALICIA BENAVIDES ON
BEHALF OF DRUG POLICY ALLIANCE
AND LANCER BOYS AND MEN OF COLOR
AND STRONG OPPOSITION. JOYCE
CAMP RESOLUTION IN SACRAMENTO
HOMELESS UNION STRONGLY OPPOSE.
SHARON JONES WITH THE CAMP
RESOLUTION AND STRONGLY OPPOSE.
ROXANA GONZALEZ AND ASIA JUSTICE
ACTION AND STRONG OPPOSITION.
HENRY ORTIZ WITH ALL OF US IN
SACRAMENTO AND COMMUNITY HEALERS
IN OPPOSITION. HI, I'M CRYSTAL
POTTER WITH FRESNO HOMELESS
UNION AND OUR OPPOSITION. ROBERT
COPELAND, CONCERNED CITIZENS,
STRONG OPPOSITION. MY NAME IS
TARA MURPHY. I'M WITH CAMP
RESOLUTION AND THE HOMELESS
UNION AND STRONG OPPOSITION. MY
NAME IS SUSAN ALCOCK. I AM FROM
CAMP RESOLUTION AND I OPPOSE
FROM THIS. MY NAME IS DANIELLE
WELD. I'M FROM CAMP RESOLUTION
AND I'M STRONG. OPPOSE. HEAD ON.
I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF LEGAL
SERVICES FOR PRISONERS WITH
CHILDREN AND STRONG OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU. MELISSA MOORE. ALL OF
US ARE NONE. OAKLAND AND STRONG
OPPOSITION. ALL RIGHT. THANK
YOU. THAT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE DONE
WITH THE OPPOSITION, I'LL BRING
THE CONVERSATION BACK TO MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE. COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. SENATOR SKINNER. THOSE
OF YOU WHO READ THE NEW YORK
TIMES MAY HAVE WOKEN UP THIS
MORNING TO, A FEATURE IN THE
TIMES BY A MAN NAMED MARK
HORVATH WHO WAS HOMELESS FOR
EIGHT YEARS. AND THE FEATURE IS
HE TURNED OUT HE ENDED UP DOING
A, A SET OF YOUTUBE VIDEOS WHERE
HE HAS FOR THE LAST, FOR MANY
YEARS NOW BEEN INTERVIEWING
PEOPLE WHO LIVE ON OUR STREETS
AND WHO ARE UNHOUSED, AND IT'S
FASCINATING. BASICALLY, IT'S IT
COMES DOWN TO THAT ANYONE IN
THIS ROOM AND ANY OF US SITTING
ON THIS DAIS, IT'S THERE, BUT
FOR FORTUNE. AND WE COULD BECOME
THAT UNHOUSED PERSON AT ANY
CIRCUMSTANCE BECAUSE. CAUSE,
COST OF HOUSING AND THE LACK OF
SAFETY NET, YES. OUR RESIDENTS
DO NOT WANT TO SEE ENCAMPMENTS
TOTALLY APPRECIATE THAT. BUT I
CANNOT SUPPORT A STATEWIDE BILL
THAT DOES THIS. YOU HAVE
DESCRIBED THE SUCCESS OF SAN
DIEGO. THERE ARE OBVIOUSLY SOME
PEOPLE THAT DEBATE WHETHER THAT
WAS A SUCCESS OR JUST A
DISPLACEMENT OF PEOPLE. WHAT
HAVE YOU. BUT WHAT IT
DEMONSTRATES IS THAT ANY CITY
THAT WANTS TO DO THIS CAN DO
THIS. SO IF A COMMUNITY WANTS TO
DO THIS, THEY CAN PURSUE IT. BUT
FOR US TO PUT IT IN LAW, IT IT'S
KIND OF LIKE TRYING TO MAKE A
PROBLEM INVISIBLE VERSUS
ADDRESSING THE CORE OF THE
PROBLEM. NOW WHEN WE SAY, LOOK,
PEOPLE DON'T, DON'T WANT TO SEE
THESE ENCAMPMENTS. AND THE STATE
IS BEING BLIND TO THIS. WE HAVE
PROVIDED FUNDING FOR ENCAMPMENT,
YOU KNOW, CLEANUPS, ENCAMPMENT
RESOLUTIONS. WE HAVE DONE THE
STATE. YOU KNOW, THIS IS ONE OF
THESE DEBATES. WHOSE PROBLEM IS
IT REALLY? IS IT THE STATE'S
PROBLEM OR IS IT THE LOCALITIES
PROBLEM? I THINK ALL
CALIFORNIANS WILL SAY, DON'T
NECESSARILY ARGUE, BUT IF WE
LOOK AT THE SOURCE, WHICH IS THE
FACT THAT WE HAVE A LACK OF
HOUSING SUPPLY AND A LACK OF
HOUSING SUPPLY DRIVES UP PRICES.
SO THUS WE HAVE NOT AFFORDABLE
HOUSING AND WE HAVE NOT PROVIDED
ENOUGH SUBSIDY FOR AFFORDABLE
HOUSING. AND WHEN I GET IN, WHEN
YOU GET INTO THE SUBSIDY ISSUE,
WHERE DOES THE SUBSIDY COME
FROM? IT'S ALWAYS HISTORICALLY
BEEN VERY LITTLE OF SUBSIDY FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING HAS REALLY
BEEN GOVERNMENT. IT'S BEEN
PRIVATE SECTOR AND IT'S BEEN
PRIVATE SECTOR BY BY ALLOWING
PRIVATE SECTOR TO BUILD MARKET
RATE. AND THEN HAVING BY GIVING
THEM MORE ABILITY TO DO MORE
MARKET RATE, THEN EITHER THE
REQUIREMENT TO DO SOME NUMBER OF
THOSE UNITS AFFORDABLE OR TO PAY
INTO A FUND. BUT IF WE LOOK OVER
50 YEARS NOW, 50 YEARS MINIMUM
CALIFORNIA LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
HAVE SUPPRESSED THE SUPPLY OF
HOUSING. IF WE SUPPRESS THE
SUPPLY OF SOMETHING SO NEEDED AS
HOUSING FOR 50 YEARS, WE ARE
GOING TO HAVE THE PROBLEM WE
HAVE TODAY, WHICH IS WHAT WE
HAVE TODAY. AND IT WAS NOT THE
STATE THAT SAID LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS MAKE YOUR CRAZY
ZONING OR SAY NO TO HOUSING. IT
WAS THESE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND
THE STATE HAS NOW BEGUN TO TRY
TO REVERSE THAT. BUT THE LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS HAVE A
RESPONSIBILITY HERE ALSO, SO I
AM NOT COMFORTABLE WITH PASSING
A STATE LAW THAT, IN EFFECT, A
LOCAL COMMUNITY COULD DO ON ITS
OWN, BUT THAT ALSO BASICALLY
TRIES TO JUST TO CRIMINALIZE THE
PEOPLE WHO ARE UNFORTUNATE. ONLY
THE IN A SITUATION IN MANY, MOST
CASES, BECAUSE HOUSING HAS
BECOME UNAFFORDABLE. THANK YOU,
SENATOR SATO. I AGREE WITH MY
COLLEAGUE, ABOUT HOUSING BEING
UNAFFORDABLE AND THE PROCESS IN
WHICH IT WE GOT SO FAR BEHIND IN
CALIFORNIA, IN TRYING TO SUPPLY
HOUSING AND, BEEN ABLE TO WATCH
FIRSTHAND AS CITIES REACT TO NOT
HAVING THE ABILITY TO PUT IN THE
INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S NEEDED TO
SUPPORT HOUSING AND THE LACK OF
INVESTMENT AND THE INTRODUCTION
OF A LOT OF PROCESSES,
INCLUDING, YOU KNOW, THE, THE
CEQA PROCESSES AND THINGS LIKE
THAT, ALL OF OUR ENVIRONMENTAL,
PROCESSES THAT WE GO THROUGH
AND, AND RIGHTFULLY SO. HOWEVER
THOSE HAVE BECOME HUGE BARRIERS
BECAUSE OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM,
SUPPORTS ANYBODY DOING THAT. AND
SO IF WE ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE
THOSE ADJUSTMENT CGRTS OVER THE
PAST 30, 40 YEARS, WHEN WE SEE
WHAT THE PROBLEM IS AND INSTEAD
THROW BAND-AID SOLUTIONS AT ALL
OF THE DIFFERENT AREAS, WE'RE
NOT WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO
HAVE THAT ISSUE. BUT BEYOND THAT
ISSUE, THERE ARE THERE ARE
DIFFERENT, CATEGORIES OF PEOPLE
THAT HAVE BEEN IMMERSED IN
HOMELESSNESS, SOME OF THEM ARE
MENTALLY ILL AND, AND THEY NEED
HELP. THEY ARE NOT MAKING
DECISIONS THAT THEY WOULD
PROBABLY ORDINARILY MAKE. AND
THEY CAN'T ORGANIZE THEIR LIVES
IN A MANNER THAT WILL HELP THEM,
GET OUT OF THE SITUATION THEY'RE
IN. AND ALSO MANAGE THE MONEY
THAT THEY DO GET, WHETHER IT'S A
STATE SUBSIDY OR FROM SOMEWHERE
ELSE. I'VE KNOWN HOMELESS PEOPLE
THAT ACTUALLY OWN HOMES. THEY
OWN HOMES. THEY LIVED ON THE
STREET WEARING BAGS, LITERALLY
WITH A SHOPPING CART. WHEN THEY
HAD A HOUSE. BUT WHEN YOU WENT
TO THEIR HOUSE, THERE'S GLASS
SPRINKLED ALL OVER THE DRIVEWAY.
WHY? BECAUSE THIS PERSON WAS
MENTALLY ILL AND DID NOT GET
HELP. SHE HAD LOTS OF MONEY, BUT
SHE WAS VERY UNORGANIZED IN HER
LIFE AND THOSE ARE PEOPLE THAT
WE NEED TO REACH OUT AND HELP.
WE HAD A SLEW OF PEOPLE THAT
CAME FORWARD TO TELL US ABOUT
WHAT WE SHOULDN'T BE DOING.
WELL, WHAT THE HELL SHOULD WE BE
DOING? BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'RE
NOT DOING ANYTHING. AND THIS IS
JUST A STEP TO MAKING PEOPLE
START DOING SOMETHING TO TRY TO
GET THE ONES THAT WANT TO GO
DOWN A PATH TO GET HELP, SOME
HELP. NOW THE OTHER PART OF THIS
IS, THE UTILIZATION OF OUR
PUBLIC SPACES. WHEN A PUBLIC
SPACE BECOMES A HOMELESS
ENCAMPMENT ENCAMPMENT, IT IS NO
LONGER A PUBLIC SPACE. IT IS A
Ã AREA THAT USED TO BE A PUBLIC
SPACE THAT HAS BEEN TAKEN OVER.
AND THAT AREA SHOULD BE
AVAILABLE ALL TO EVERYBODY,
INCLUDING PEOPLE WHO ARE
HOMELESS THAT WANT TO COME AND
ENJOY A ENJOY THAT, THAT PUBLIC
SPACE AND THEN MOVE ON. WE HAVE
A LOT OF CBOS OUT THERE,
COMMUNITY BASED ORGANIZATIONS
THAT WE HAVE ENTRUSTED WITH A
LOT OF MONEY TO TRY TO HELP WITH
THIS PROBLEM. AND THE RESULT?
THE END RESULT IS, IS THAT WE
HAVE 40,000 MORE HOMELESS PEOPLE
THAN WE DID WHEN WE WHEN WE
REALLY STARTED TRYING TO MAKE AN
IMPACT ON THIS YEARS AGO. SO
WE'RE NOT DOING THERE'S THINGS
THAT WE ARE NOT DOING RIGHT, AND
WE NEED TO START DOING SOMETHING
TO TRY TO FUNNEL PEOPLE INTO
PROGRAMS THAT WILL ACTUALLY HELP
THEM GET OUT OF THE SITUATION
THEY'RE IN, NOT JUST ENABLE THEM
TO CONTINUE THAT UNTIL THEY DIE,
WHICH WILL BE A LOT SOONER THAN
YOU OR I. THAT IS INHUMANE.
EATING OUT OF A GARBAGE CAN IS
INHUMANE. SLEEPING OUT IN A
SLEEPING BAG, SOAKING WET OUT ON
A SIDEWALK IS INHUMANE. WHILE WE
WALK BY OR DRIVE BY. I APPLAUD
MY COLLEAGUES FOR STEPPING UP,
WORKING WITH SOMETHING THAT
THEY'VE SEEN WORK BEFORE, AND
TRYING TO MAKE MAKE SOMETHING
HAPPEN THAT WILL, MAYBE, WILL.
WE'LL SEE IF THIS IF THIS HELPS
MAKE A DENT, IF THIS STARTS
HELPING PEOPLE. BECAUSE SO FAR I
HAVEN'T SEEN A WHOLE LOT THAT IS
HELPING PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THIS
SITUATION. AND I REALLY WANT TO
SEE THAT IMPROVE. SO TODAY I
WILL BE SUPPORTING YOUR BILL. IN
FACT, I'M GOING TO MAKE THE
MOTION, FOR IT, AND AGAIN, I
APPRECIATE WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE
DONE TO PUT INTO THIS BILL, TO,
TO ACTUALLY TRY TO HELP PEOPLE,
AND, AND I'M SURE A LOT OF OTHER
PEOPLE APPRECIATE IT, WHETHER
THEY KNOW IT OR NOT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, YOU KNOW, BOTH OF MY
COLLEAGUES HAVE SPOKEN ON THIS
MATTER, AND I KNOW I'VE SPOKEN
TO THE AUTHOR DIRECTLY ABOUT
THIS MATTER, I PERSONALLY JUST
WANT TO SAY, AND I OFTEN TRY NOT
TO SPEAK ON A LOT OF THE TOPICS
THAT COME UP, BECAUSE THEN OUR
MEETINGS WOULD BE VERY, VERY
LONG, BUT I DO WANT TO HIGHLIGHT
THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS
PARTICULAR ISSUE. I UNDERSTAND
WHAT THE AUTHORS ARE TRYING TO
DO, IN THE SENSE THAT YOU KNOW,
YOU WANT YOUR KIDS TO BE ABLE TO
PLAY IN PARKS WITHOUT ANY
CONCERN ABOUT, YOU KNOW, JUST A
RANDOM STRANGER OR AN INDIVIDUAL
WITH A MENTAL HEALTH CONDITION
OR, OR, SUBSTANCE ABUSE OR
ANYTHING LIKE THAT, THAT MOST
PEOPLE ATTRIBUTE TO
HOMELESSNESS. BUT THE REALITY IS
THAT OUR HOMELESS POPULATION IS
NOT HOMELESS BECAUSE OF THE FACT
THAT THEY NECESSARILY HAVE, AN
ISSUE. BUT AND I'M GOING TO
REFERENCE THIS BECAUSE I THINK
THAT DATA IS VERY IMPORTANT IN
ALAMEDA COUNTY, ONE OF THE
COUNTIES THAT I REPRESENT. WE
HAD A POINT IN TIME COUNT. I'M
NOT GOING TO REFERENCE THE
LATEST ONE BECAUSE THOSE NUMBERS
HAVE NOT COME OUT YET, BUT THE
ONE FROM 2022 CAME OUT AND IT
SAID WHAT MIGHT HAVE PREVENTED
HOMELESSNESS? 49% SAID RENT
ASSISTANCE. RIGHT. AND IF YOU
REALLY THINK ABOUT IT, THE
MAJORITY OF US ARE 1 OR 2
PAYCHECKS AWAY FROM NOT BEING
ABLE TO AFFORD OUR RENT. WE HAVE
SKYROCKETING UTILITIES COSTS,
SKYROCKETING INFLATION. WE HAVE
HAVE A SIGNIFICANT CONCERN WITH
THE COST OF PRETTY MUCH ANYTHING
AND EVERYTHING, INCLUDING
GROCERIES. RIGHT. AND RENTS KEEP
GOING UP AT A LEVEL THAT IS NOT
SUSTAINABLE, I KNOW WITH MANY OF
MY COLLEAGUES, I HAVE TALKED
ABOUT THIS A NUMBER OF TIMES.
TIMES THAT, YOU KNOW, YES, WE
HAVE IN THE STATE A STATE
CEILING OF RENT CONTROL AT
ROUGHLY 10. BUT IF YOU TAKE A
LOOK AT IT, OUR FASTEST GROWING
HOMELESS POPULATION IS SENIORS,
RIGHT? AND THEY ARE ON A FIXED
INCOME. THEY LET'S SAY THEY ARE
ON SOCIAL SECURITY AND THE
AVERAGE SENIOR DOES NOT HAVE A
PENSION, DOES NOT HAVE THESE
BENEFITS. AND I REALLY WANT TO
HIGHLIGHT THAT AND STRESS THAT
BECAUSE THEY RELY ON SOCIAL
SECURITY AND SOCIAL SECURITY
DOES NOT GO UP YEAR OVER YEAR
OVER YEAR OVER YEAR AT 5, 3. YOU
KNOW, 10% IS UNHEARD OF,
INCLUDING OUR UNION MEMBERS THAT
ARE WORKING AND ABLE TO VÀ, YOU
KNOW, INCREASE THEIR FUNDS. THEY
DO NOT, INCLUDING OUR POLICE
FORCE, DO NOT GET A 5% INCREASE
IN THEIR PAY YEAR OVER YEAR. AND
I REALLY WANT TO PUT THAT INTO
CONTEXT, RIGHT. SO IF THE
AVERAGE PERSON IS GETTING $1,200
ON THEIR SOCIAL SECURITY $2,000
AND ALL OF IT GOES TO RENT, AND
LET'S BE HONEST, RENTS, EVEN IN
SACRAMENTO FOR STUDIO HERE IN
MIDTOWN, IT'S NEARLY ABOUT
$2,000, RIGHT. AND IF YOU'RE
TALKING ABOUT STARTER HOMES, THE
AVERAGE HOME COST IN CALIFORNIA
IS OVER $700,000. AND WE ARE
COMPETING WITH CORPORATIONS
INVESTMENTS FROM OUT OF STATE
AND MUCH MORE. WE CANNOT HOUSE
PEOPLE, AND I KNOW THAT THE
CONVERSATION AT THE STATE LEVEL
HAS BEEN DEVELOPMENT,
DEVELOPMENT, DEVELOPMENT,
STREAMLINED, STREAMLINED,
STREAMLINE. AND YES, THAT IS ONE
PART OF THE EQUATION, BUT IT'S
NOT THE ONLY ONE IN ALAMEDA
COUNTY, WE HAVE 9747 UNSHELTERED
INDIVIDUALS. AND AT THE SAME
TIME, WE HAVE NEARLY 30,000
VACANT UNITS IN THE SAME COUNTY.
WE CAN HOUSE PEOPLE THREE TIMES
OVER. AND THE IMPORTANCE IS
ACTUALLY TO KEEP PEOPLE HOUSED.
AND WE HAVE NOT BEEN DOING THAT.
WE HAVE A SIGNIFICANT GROUP OF
INDIVIDUALS THAT COME INTO THIS
BUILDING EVERY SINGLE DAY TO
ADVOCATE FOR THE INTEREST OF
PROPERTY OWNERS, AND I FULLY
UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT FULLY, YOU
KNOW, AGREE WITH, YOU KNOW, AN
ASSET BEING AN INVESTMENT TO
SOME DEGREE. HOWEVER, WE HAVE TO
PRIORITIZE THE SOCIAL GOOD OF
OUR ENTIRE COMMUNITY AND JUST
BECAUSE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE
UNHOUSED MAKE PEOPLE
UNCOMFORTABLE DOES NOT MEAN THAT
IT SHOULD BE CRIMINALIZED. AND
THIS BILL DOES THAT. THE
PENALTIES WILL JUST BE ADDED TO
THEIR ALREADY DIFFICULT
SITUATION OF PAYING FOR THINGS.
RIGHT. AND I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT TO TALK TO OUR KIDS
AND SO FORTH AS TO THE NEED FOR
COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE. IT IS NOT
JUST THE WEALTHY AND THE HOME
OWNERS THAT MAKE UP THAT
COMMUNITY. IT IS OUR UNHOUSED
POPULATIONS. IT IS THE FACT THAT
IN MY CITY, THERE WAS AN
INDIVIDUAL THAT WAS JUST A
NORMAL HIGH SCHOOL KID THAT
PLAYED FOOTBALL. THEIR FAMILY
WAS VERY, YOU KNOW, INVOLVED IN
TAKING CARE OF THEM. AND SO
FORTH. GOT INTO A CAR ACCIDENT
AND HAD TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY,
SOMETHING THAT CAN HAPPEN TO
LITERALLY ANY ONE OF US AND
THEIR FAMILY COULD NOT KEEP UP
TAKING CARE OF THEM BECAUSE IT
TOOK AWAY FROM THE REST OF THEIR
FAMILY MEMBERS. IT TOOK AWAY
FROM THEIR JOB. IT TOOK AWAY
FROM THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE. THAT
INDIVIDUAL ENDED UP ON THE
STREETS AND CAN'T NECESSARILY
COMMUNICATE OR ANYTHING, AND
THAT PERSON DESERVES ALL THE
SERVICES THAT WE AS A SOCIETY
CAN PROVIDE THEM. AND YET WE FOR
SOME REASON, STILL CAN'T EVEN DO
THAT. SO WE'RE NOT WINNING ON
EITHER SIDE. WE ARE NOT
PROVIDING ENOUGH SERVICES FOR
PEOPLE. AND YET AT THE SAME
TIME, WE ARE NOT PREVENTING, YOU
KNOW, HOMELESSNESS AND MUCH MORE
. AND FOR PERSONAL POINT OF
PRIVILEGE, I'M GOING TO SHARE.
MY FAMILY HOME WAS FORECLOSED
UPON DURING THE GREAT RECESSION,
AND IT IS VERY UNCOMFORTABLE TO
KIND OF GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS.
AND AT THE SAME TIME, WHEN YOU
ARE DEALING WITH THAT AND YOU'RE
SEEING THAT AGAIN, WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT DIFFERENT
GOVERNMENTS AND WHAT THEIR ROLE
IS. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
BAILED OUT THE BANKS WITH A CASH
INFUSION. IF YOU GUYS REMEMBER
THAT. AND THE BANKS ALSO KEPT
THE ASSETS THAT THEY TOOK FROM
MILLIONS OF AMERICANS AND RESOLD
IT, MAKING QUITE SOME DOUGH
RIGHT THERE. AND SO I REALLY
WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT WE HAVE
NOT SOLVED THE HOMELESSNESS
CRISIS. WE HAVE NOT SOLVED THE
HOUSING CRISIS. WE HAVE NOT DONE
ANY OF THE THINGS THAT NEED TO
HAPPEN WITH THAT. I PERSONALLY
WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS. AND
I'VE HAD THE CONVERSATIONS WITH
BOTH AUTHORS AND AS WELL AS
OTHER MEMBERS WHO HAVE BEEN
COAUTHORS. THIS IS AN INCREDIBLY
IMPORTANT ISSUE, HOWEVER, I
DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS THE
APPROPRIATE WAY TO ENGAGE ON
THIS PARTICULAR MATTER. AND I
HAVE THE UTMOST RESPECT FOR
TACKLING THIS ISSUE. AND
HOPEFULLY WE CAN FIND SOMETHING
THAT WORKS FOR ALL OF US. AND I
THANK YOU GUYS FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD. I KNOW THAT YOU GUYS
ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO WORK ON
THIS, AND WE HOPE THAT WE CAN
WORK TOGETHER ON THIS AND I
BELIEVE WE HAVE A MOTION I WILL
ALLOW YOU GUYS TO CLOSE. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE
THAT, MADAM CHAIR. I WANT TO
FIRST OF ALL, THANK THE
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT OF THE
BILL. I SENT EVERYBODY AND IT'S
ONLINE NOW, A VIDEO TESTIMONY
FROM DOCTOR DREW, WHO IS VERY
ENGAGED ON THIS ISSUE, WANTED TO
BE HERE THIS MORNING BUT WASN'T
ABLE TO MAKE IT HAPPEN IN HIS
SCHEDULE. BUT DID PROVIDE THAT
VIDEO TESTIMONY FOR THE
COMMITTEE AND FOR THE PUBLIC. I
WANT TO THANK, MR. BOWMAN FOR
BEING HERE AGAIN, BECAUSE HE'S
VERY COMMITTED TO THIS ISSUE AS
A SURVIVOR OF HOMELESSNESS. I
HOPE IT WILL TAKE HIS COMMENTS
TO HEART. I THINK ONE OF THE
THINGS THAT HE SHARED THIS
MORNING THAT SHOULD BE VERY
IMPACTFUL ON ALL OF US IS THAT
IT TOOK MULTIPLE CONTACTS FROM
AGENCIES, EVEN LAW ENFORCEMENT
AND SOCIAL SERVICES, WHEN HE WAS
LIVING THROUGH HOMELESSNESS. IF
HE HADN'T BEEN MOTIVATED BY
THOSE CONSTANT TOUCHES, FROM THE
AUTHORITIES, HE WOULD NOT HAVE
GOTTEN HIMSELF OFF THE STREET.
AND I THINK THAT THAT'S A VERY
IMPORTANT ASPECT OF THIS. BILL,
I WANT TO THANK MAYOR FRANKLIN
FOR COMING OUT AND TALKING
SPECIFICALLY TO HIS, ISSUE IN
HIS CITY, WHICH SO MANY CITIES
ACROSS THE STATE SHARE IN
REGARDS TO THE COMMENTS
REGARDING WHY DO WE NEED A
STATEWIDE POLICY ON THIS? I
THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO
CONSIDER A COUPLE OF THINGS. I
THINK, NUMBER ONE, IT
DEMONSTRATES THAT THIS
LEGISLATURE IS SERIOUS ABOUT
DEALING WITH THE HOMELESS ISSUE
IN CALIFORNIA. NHÀ. IT SHOWS
THAT THE STATE IS SUPPORTING OUR
CITY GOVERNMENTS AND SENDS A
MESSAGE TO THE CONSTITUENTS THAT
THE LEGISLATURE IS FULLY
INVOLVED AND ENGAGED IN THE
ISSUE. SECOND, A STATEWIDE
MEASURE THAT IS CONFIDENTIAL,
CONFIDENTIALLY, I'M SORRY,
CONFIDENTLY CONSTITUTIONAL WILL
PROVIDE GUIDANCE AND SUPPORT TO
THE CITIES WHO MAY BE UNSURE OF
HOW TO PROCEED WITH THEIR
ENCAMPMENT ISSUES. AND FINALLY,
A STATEWIDE MEASURE WOULD LIFT
FROM THE BOTTOM, BROADENING THE
HOMELESS DISCUSSION AND
GENERATING MOMENTUM NECESSARY TO
PUSH ALL LEVELS TO MAKE IN
SOCIETY TO MAKE CHANGE. I ALSO
WANT TO THANK THE WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION. THERE'S DOZENS AND
DOZENS OF PEOPLE THAT MADE THE
TRIP AND THE TREK TO THE CAPITOL
THIS MORNING, WHICH IS, FOR MOST
OF CALIFORNIA, IS NOT AN EASY
THING TO DO. IT'S NOT EASY TO
GET TO SACRAMENTO. IT'S NOT EASY
TO GET INTO THIS BUILDING, SO
IT'S NOT EASY TO GET UP THE
ELEVATORS. FORTUNATELY, THERE'S
ONLY ONE FLOOR. THEY HAD TO GO
UP. FORTUNATELY, THEY'RE NOT
GOING UP TO THE HIGHER, HIGHER
OFFICES, BUT I UNDERSTAND THE
COMMITMENT IT TAKES. AND THE
SERIOUSNESS OF THIS ISSUE IS TO
THOSE FOLKS THAT MADE THAT
COMMITMENT TO BE HERE AND, YOU
KNOW, OVERWHELMING. ONE OF THE
THINGS I HEAR ON THIS PARTICULAR
BILL IS THIS IS NOT A THIS IS
NOT THE SOLUTION. AND I'VE SAID
FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, THIS IS
NOT THE SOLUTION. AND I DON'T
THINK THAT CALIFORNIA IS SO FAR
DOWN THE LINE ON HOMELESSNESS
THAT THERE ISN'T ONE SOLUTION
THAT'S GOING TO FIX IT, BUT
THERE'S 120 LEGISLATORS. WE HAVE
TWO LEGISLATORS THIS MORNING,
COAUTHORING THIS BILL THAT
LEAVES 118 OTHER LEGISLATORS TO
COME UP WITH GOOD IDEAS AS WELL.
AND I WOULD WELCOME THAT
DISCUSSION THAT ALL 120 OF US
COME TO THE TABLE WITH ONE IDEA
THAT MOVES THE NEEDLE IN A
POSITIVE DIRECTION. ON
HOMELESSNESS IN CALIFORNIA. THE,
AND ONE THING JUST IN TO CLOSE
MY CLOSE AND THEN I'LL LET,
SENATOR BLAKE SPEAR HAVE THE
LAST WORD IS, YOU KNOW, ONE OF
THE THINGS THAT THE OPPOSITION
HAS SAID CONTINUOUSLY IS THAT
THIS IS INHUMANE, AND IT
CRIMINALIZES HOMELESSNESS. THAT
IS ABSOLUTELY 100% NOT THE GOAL
OF THIS BILL OR THIS ISSUE. THE
GOAL OF THIS BILL IS TO HUMANELY
HELP PEOPLE LIFT THEMSELVES OFF
THE STREET. AND SOMETIMES IT
TAKES A TOUCH FROM THE SOCIAL
SERVICE AGENCIES, SOMETIMES IT
TAKES A TOUCH FROM LAW
ENFORCEMENT. BUT I CAN TELL YOU
THAT I HAVE LAW ENFORCEMENT
OFFICERS IN MY FAMILY, AND I'VE
DONE RIDE ALONGS WITH THEM AND
SEEN THE PROFESSIONALISM OF OUR
LAW ENFORCEMENT IN CALIFORNIA.
THE COMPASSIONATE, CARING OF OUR
LAW ENFORCEMENT IN CALIFORNIA.
THEY WANT TO HELP THESE PEOPLE,
TOO, AND THEY NEED THE TOOLS TO
DO IT. AND I KNOW THAT THE FOLKS
THAT WORK IN OUR SOCIAL SERVICES
DEPARTMENT IN OUR COUNTIES ALSO
WANT TO BE HELPFUL AND HAVE A
COMPASSIONATE ABILITY TO
POSITIVELY ENGAGE THE HOMELESS
COMMUNITY AND HAVE A POSITIVE
IMPACT. SO, MEMBERS, THANK YOU
VERY MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS. I
HOPE THAT, WE CAN CONVINCE YOU
TO VOTE AYE ON THIS BILL. I DO
APPRECIATE THE DIALOG AND I LOOK
FORWARD TO CONTINUING WORKING ON
THIS ISSUE. I'LL TURN IT OVER TO
SENATOR BLAKE SPEAR. THANK YOU.
WELL, THANK YOU. I JUST I FIRST
WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO MADAM
CHAIR FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND ALSO
TO SENATOR SKINNER FOR YOUR
COMMENTS. AND SENATOR SATO, AS
WELL AS THE WITNESSES WHO CAME,
MAYOR FRANKLIN, WHO CAME FROM
VISTA THIS MORNING ON A FLIGHT
AND ALSO THE OTHER PRIMARY
WITNESS, AS WELL AS ALL THE
PEOPLE WHO CAME IN OPPOSITION TO
SPEAK AGAINST THIS, AND
ESPECIALLY TO MAYOR JONES BEHIND
ME FOR BRINGING THIS OR SORRY TO
SENATOR JONES BEHIND ME FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD, BECAUSE
WHAT I REALLY, TRULY WANT TO SEE
IS ALL OF US FOLKS OUT ON THIS
PROBLEM. AND I THINK TO SENATOR
SKINNER'S POINT ABOUT LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS HAVING SUPPRESSED
HOUSING OVER MANY DECADES, THAT
WHAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT AND TO
ME IS SO CLEAR, IS THAT ALL OF
THE LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT WHO ARE
RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS ARE ALL
SAYING THAT THE OTHER LEVEL
NEEDS TO DO MORE. AND WHAT IT
MEANS IS THAT NO ONE'S OWNING
THE PROBLEM, THAT THE CITIES ARE
POINTING AT THE COUNTY SAYING
THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO PROVIDE FOR
HOMELESS SERVICES, AND COUNTIES
ARE SAYING WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH
MONEY AND WE DON'T DO LAND USE.
AND THEN THE STATE IS SAYING,
HEY, WE'RE PROVIDING A LOT OF
GRANTS AND A LOT OF MONEY. AND
THE REALITY IS THAT I WANT TO
WORK ON THIS PROBLEM. I SEE THIS
AS A TOP STATE PROBLEM. I WANT
TO SEE ENERGY FROM MY COLLEAGUES
ON IT. AND IN ORDER TO DO THAT,
AS WAS MENTIONED, WE HAVE 120
LEGISLATORS AND HAVING WHERE IS
OUR HOMELESSNESS SUBCOMMITTEE?
WHERE WHERE IS THE HOMELESSNESS
ADVOCATE? WHERE ARE THE BILLS ON
HOMELESSNESS? THERE ARE
LITERALLY ALMOST NONE. THIS IS
ONE OF THE VERY FEW. AND WE HAVE
A PROBLEM WITH ENCAMPMENTS, AND
WE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH PEOPLE
NOT HAVING A PLACE TO GO. AND SO
WE NEED TO BE TALKING SERIOUSLY
ABOUT PUBLIC HOUSING. WE NEED TO
BE TALKING ABOUT CITIES HAVING
AN OBLIGATION AROUND
HOMELESSNESS. RIGHT NOW, THERE
IS NONE. CITIES HAVE AN
OBLIGATION AROUND ZONING FOR
HOUSING, BUT NOT AROUND HOMELESS
HOMELESSNESS AND THEIR
OBLIGATIONS THERE. WE'RE NOT
TALKING SERIOUSLY ABOUT RENTAL
SUBSIDIES AS MADAM CHAIR SAID,
IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S MOST
EFFECTIVE. OUR SENIORS ARE THE
ONES FALLING INTO HOMELESSNESS
THE MOST, AS SHE SAID. AND THE
REALITY IS THIS IS GETTING WORSE
AND WORSE AND WORSE EVERY YEAR.
AS WE CONTINUE TO SAY, WELL,
WE'RE TRYING TO PROVIDE MORE
SUPPLY SIDE APPROACH OF BUILDING
MORE HOUSING, AND THAT IS JUST
NOT GOING TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM.
AND MEANWHILE, WE HAVE THIS
BURGEONING ONGOING HUMANITARIAN
CRISIS. SO I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR
FROM THE OPPOSITION, COME AND
TALK TO MY OFFICE, REACH OUT TO
MY STAFF ABOUT THINGS THAT YOU
THINK WE CAN DO, BECAUSE I AM
INTERESTED IN WHAT WE CAN DO IN
THIS STATE. AND NOT SAYING IT'S
JUST ABOUT MONEY. IT'S NOT JUST
ABOUT MONEY. IT'S ABOUT A
VARIETY OF POLICY THINGS AND
APPROACHES TO LAND USE. AND IT'S
ABOUT MONEY. BUT WE NEED TO BE
HAVING THOSE CONVERSATIONS. AND
I DO NOT PERCEIVE THAT WE'RE
HAVING THEM AT THE LEGISLATIVE
LEVEL. AND I THINK WE NEED TO BE
HAVING THEM. SO THERE'S URGENCY
HERE. I URGE YOUR AYE VOTE,
BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING WE CAN
DO. I RECOGNIZE THAT THAT'S
MAYBE NOT LIKELY TODAY, BUT I
THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT
WE SEE THIS AS ONE STEP IN THE
FUTURE, TOWARD THE FUTURE, THAT
HOPEFULLY WE CAN ACTUALLY START
TO SEE PROGRESS HERE. THANK YOU
AGAIN, MADAM CHAIR, FOR ALLOWING
SUCH A FULSOME DISCUSSION OF
THIS. AND WITH THAT, I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR I
VOTE. THANK YOU. I DO WANT TO
HIGHLIGHT THAT YOU GUYS HAVE
BEEN NOTHING BUT GRACIOUS IN
WORKING ON THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE.
SO THANK YOU FOR THAT, WE HAVE A
MOTION BY SENATOR SARDO. CAN WE
CALL ROLL? MOTION IS TO PASS TO
APPROPRIATIONS. WAHAB. NO.
WAHAB. NO. SATO. SATO AYE.
BRADFORD. SKINNER. SKINNER. NØ.
WIENER THE BILLS ON CALL. THANK
YOU, SENATOR. SENATOR ASHBY,
THANK YOU FOR WAITING, SENATOR
ASHBY WILL BE PRESENTING SB 989.
I WILL ALSO ASK OUR SERGEANTS TO
START CALLING OTHER MEMBERS.
THANK YOU. SENATOR ASHBY,
WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. ALL RIGHT
. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, I'D
LIKE TO START BY. I'D LIKE TO
START BY ACCEPTING THE
COMMITTEE'S AMENDMENTS. AND,
MADAM CHAIR, THANKING YOUR STAFF
FOR ONCE AGAIN HELPING US
APPRECIATE IT. THEY WERE GREAT,
DILIGENT AND VERY HELPFUL.
TODAY, I AM PROUD TO PRESENT SB
989, WHICH WE CALL THE DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE DEATHS ACT. SB 989
ENHANCES INVESTIGATION PROTOCOLS
SURROUNDING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
RELATED DEATHS BY EMPOWERING
INVESTIGATORS WITH EVIDENCE
BASED DETECTION METHODS TO
IDENTIFY POTENTIALLY SUSPICIOUS
CASES. THIS BILL GIVES CORONERS
THE AUTHORITY TO INQUIRE INTO
DEATHS THEY DEEM SUSPICIOUS, AND
EXPANDS RIGHTS TO IMMEDIATE
FAMILY MEMBERS TO OBTAIN
INFORMATION ABOUT THEIR DECEASED
LOVED ONES. NEARLY A THIRD OF
FEMALE HOMICIDE VICTIMS ARE
KILLED BY AN INTIMATE PARTNER.
ADDITIONALLY EXPERTS ESTIMATE
THAT AROUND 1200 HIDDEN
HOMICIDES OCCUR ANNUALLY, OFTEN
DISGUISED AS STAGED CRIME
SCENES. CRIME SCENE STAGING
CREATES SIGNIFICANT CHALLENGES
FOR INVESTIGATORS, LEADING TO
INACCURATE DEATH CLASSIFICATIONS
OFTEN DEEMED AS SUICIDES OR
ACCIDENTS. RATHER CHURCH HAS
IDENTIFIED TEN EVIDENCE BASED
FACTORS THAT WARRANT THOROUGH
INVESTIGATIONS INTO SUSPICIOUS
DEATHS. THEY'RE LISTED ON PAGE
SIX OF YOUR ANALYSIS. AND IN THE
INTEREST OF TIME TODAY, I WILL
NOT READ THROUGH THEM. SB 989
ADDS THESE FACTORS INTO
INVESTIGATION PROTOCOLS,
REQUIRING LAW ENFORCEMENT TO
CONSIDER THEM BEFORE DETERMINING
A CAUSE OF DEATH. THIS BILL
EQUIPS INVESTIGATORS, CORONERS,
AND IMPORTANTLY, FAMILIES WITH
THE NECESSARY TOOLS AND
DETECTION MEASURES TO IDENTIFY
SUSPICIOUS CASES. INSTEAD OF
RULING THESE DEATHS AS SUICIDE
WITHOUT FURTHER INVESTIGATION,
989 ENSURES THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT
CONDUCT MORE THOROUGH
INVESTIGATIONS INTO SUSPICIOUS
DEATHS INVOLVING DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE AND ESTABLISH A VOICE
FOR FAMILIES WHO HAVE LONG BEEN
SILENCED. MADAM CHAIR, I HAVE
TWO SUPPORT WITNESSES WITH ME
TODAY. CASEY GWINN, WHO IS THE
PRESIDENT AT THE ALLIANCE FOR
HOPE INTERNATIONAL, AND I HAVE,
SACRAMENTO FIRE CAPTAIN JOE
HUNTER. THANK YOU. YOU WILL HAVE
TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU. SENATOR
ASHBY. AND THANK YOU TO THE
CHAIR AND THE COMMITTEE. MY NAME
IS CASEY GWINN. I'M THE
PRESIDENT OF ALLIANCE FOR HOPE
INTERNATIONAL, AND I'M HONORED
TO BE HERE TODAY REPRESENTING
OUR CEO, GAIL STRACK. THE
TRAINING INSTITUTE ON
STRANGULATION PREVENTION, AND
LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF LAW
ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, MEDICAL
PROFESSIONALS, FORENSIC
EXAMINERS AND OTHERS WHO WORK ON
THESE TYPES OF CASES BOTH IN
CALIFORNIA AND ACROSS THE
COUNTRY. SB 989 WILL BE THE
FIRST BILL IN THE COUNTRY TO
ADDRESS SUSPICIOUS DEATH CASES
WHERE THERE IS A PRIOR HISTORY
OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE THAT HAS
NOT BEEN ADEQUATELY INVESTIGATED
OR DOCUMENTED. SENATOR ASHBY'S
AUTHORSHIP OF THIS BILL WAS.
SENATOR RUBIO FOR US IS A
GROUNDBREAKING, HISTORIC MOMENT
IN OUR EFFORT TO RAISE AWARENESS
ABOUT SUSPICIOUS DEATH CASES. AS
SENATOR ASHBY TOUCHED ON, THE
BILL BASICALLY HAS A SET OF
FINDINGS, AND IT HAS FOUR KEY
ELEMENTS AS TO THE FINDINGS.
FIRST, THE FINDINGS ARE ALL
EVIDENCE BASED RESEARCH. NOTHING
IN THOSE LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS IS
NOT BACKED UP BY PUBLISHED
RESEARCH ON THE KINDS OF CASES
THAT THAT ARE BEING MISSED AT
TIMES BY INVESTIGATORS WHO RUSH
TO A CONCLUSION THAT A CASE IS
AN ACCIDENT, ACCIDENTAL DEATH,
OR A SUICIDAL DEATH, WHEN IN
FACT IT MAY BE SOMETHING VERY
DIFFERENT. SECOND, THE BILL ADDS
FAMILY MEMBERS TO THOSE WHO HAVE
ACCESS TO RECORDS FROM A MEDICAL
EXAMINER OR A CORONER. RIGHT
NOW, ONLY AN HEIR, A LEGAL HEIR,
HAS ACCESS TO THOSE RECORDS. AND
IN THE CASES OF DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE HOMICIDE, THE LEGAL
HEIR MAY ACTUALLY BE THE KILLER.
WE BELIEVE FAMILY MEMBERS SHOULD
HAVE THE SAME ACCESS TO RECORDS.
THIRD, THE BILL ADDS A PARENT
SUICIDE OR ACCIDENTAL DEATH
WHERE THERE IS AN IDENTIFIABLE
HISTORY OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE TO
BECOME A SUSPICIOUS DEATH FOR
THE PURPOSE OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS
AND CORONERS CONSIDERING WHETHER
AN AUTOPSY SHOULD BE DONE IN
THAT PARTICULAR CASE, MUCH LIKE
OTHER SUSPICIOUS DEATHS ARE
ACTUALLY NAMED IN THE STATUTE.
BUT CASES WITH A HISTORY OF
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE HAVE NEVER
BEEN NAMED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. WE URGE YOUR SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. NEXT WITNESS. YOU'LL
HAVE TWO MINUTES AS WELL, GOOD
MORNING, AND THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. THANK YOU. SENATOR ASHBY.
YOU'RE AMAZING. MY NAME IS
JOSEPH HUNTER, AND I AM A
CAPTAIN WITH THE SACRAMENTO CITY
FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR OVER 17
YEARS. IN 2023 ALONE, THERE WERE
MORE THAN 3553 CALLS FOR SERVICE
SURROUNDING VIOLENT CRIME WITH
RELATIONSHIP TO DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE. THAT'S NEARLY TEN
CALLS PER DAY FOR SERVICE IN
THIS CITY ALONE. I CAN TELL YOU
THAT A BILL, SIMPLY PUT, LIKE SB
989, ENHANCES THE PROTOCOL FOR
INVESTIGATING SUSPICIOUS DEATHS
WITH A HISTORY OF DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE. SIMPLY PUT, IT NEEDS
TO HAPPEN. IT'S POWERFUL. IT CAN
SAVE LIVES, AND IT CAN BRING
JUSTICE TO VICTIMS. I CAN TELL
YOU THIS, THAT AND ALL THIS
TIME, I NEVER THOUGHT I WOULD BE
ON THIS SIDE OF THE PODIUM.
PODIUM SPEAKING TO YOU NOW. AND
I CAN SAY ON OCTOBER 6TH, 2011,
AT 847 IN THE MORNING, WHEN MY
SISTER WAS THE VICTIM OF
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, IT CHANGED MY
LIFE AND EVERYTHING IN IT
FOREVER. FOR A BILL LIKE SB 989
WOULD HAVE CHANGED HER LIFE.
JOANNA HUNTER WOULD STILL BE
HERE WITH SOMETHING LIKE THIS IN
PLAY. THIS BILL WILL BRING
JUSTICE TO JOANNA HUNTER AND SO
MANY OTHER VICTIMS LIKE HER.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S
IMPACTFUL, IT'S MEANINGFUL, AND
IT CAN CHANGE THE WAY WE HANDLE
THINGS AND VICTIMS. ALL I WANT
TO LEAVE YOU WITH IS IT WAS ONCE
SAID THAT FOR EVIL TO PREVAIL,
ALL THAT IS REQUIRED IS FOR GOOD
PEOPLE TO DO NOTHING. LET'S DO
SOMETHING ABOUT THIS. THANK YOU,
THANK YOU. CAN WE MOVE ON TO
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? PLEASE
STATE YOUR NAME, YOUR ORG AND
THAT YOU SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
FAITH WHITMORE FROM THE
SACRAMENTO REGIONAL FAMILY
JUSTICE CENTER IN STRONG SUPPORT
. KRISTEN SCHLUSSEL, DEPUTY
DISTRICT ATTORNEY AT SACRAMENTO
COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE ON BEHALF OF CALIFORNIA
DISTRICT CALIFORNIA DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S ASSOCIATION IN
SUPPORT. JOYCE BLUE WITH THE
SACRAMENTO REGIONAL FAMILY
JUSTICE CENTER IN SUPPORT AND ON
BEHALF OF VOICES SURVIVORS OF
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE NETWORK
THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA IN SUPPORT
. THANK YOU. I'M PATRICIA HUNTER
, I'M STRONGLY IN SUPPORT OF
THIS. IN HONOR OF MY DAUGHTER,
JOANNA, I WANT TO MAKE THIS
PERSONAL. I'LL TRY TO DO IT
QUICKLY. ON OCTOBER 7TH, 2011, I
WAS PREPARING TO TEACH MY FIRST
CLASS OF ELD STUDENTS WHEN THE
OFFICE CALLED AND SAID, SOMEONE
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, YOUR
OREGON THAT YOU SUPPORT. SORRY.
YEAH, WE'RE ONLY AT ME. TWO'S
I'M SORRY, PATRICIA HUNTER, I, I
RECOGNIZED THE NAME OF THE
PERSON ON. I'M SORRY. SORRY. AND
I KNOW YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO
SHARE, BUT WE'RE TRYING TO STICK
TO THIS, NAME ORGANIZATION AND
THAT YOU SUPPORT, I'M A CLIENT
OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER, SO
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO LET YOU
SHARE YOUR. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. AND, STRONGLY SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. PEGGY DELGADO FOR
BRIDGE NETWORK, A SURVIVOR OF
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. THANK YOU.
KARINA POWERS, CHAIR OF THE RHNA
CALIFORNIA. I STRONGLY SUPPORT.
YVETTE CORCORAN AND SURVIVOR OF
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, I STRONGLY
SUPPORT. THANK YOU, MOVING ON TO
LEAD OPPOSITION WITNESSES, LEAD
OPPOSITION WILL HAVE TWO
MINUTES. SEEING NONE. WE'LL MOVE
ON TO ME. TWO OPPOSITION THÀNH
SEEING NONE. WE WILL MOVE TO
COMMITTEE MEMBERS, SENATOR
SALADO MOVES THE BILL. WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSE, SENATOR? YEAH.
THIS BILL AT ITS HEART IS ABOUT
WHO GETS TO SPEAK FOR YOU WHEN
YOU'RE GONE. AND YOU HEARD FROM
FAMILY MEMBERS AND YOU HEARD
FROM ADVOCATES, AND THERE IS A
NEED TO EXPAND WHO CAN SPEAK UP
ON YOUR BEHALF IF YOU DIE IN A
SUSPICIOUS MANNER TO YOUR
FAMILY. I URGE AN AYE VOTE, AND
I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK
YOU. THE BILL IS MOVED BY
SENATOR SERRANO. CAN WE CALL A
ROLL CALL? MOTION IS DO PASS, AS
AMENDED TO JUDICIAL COMMITTEE.
WAHAB. AYE. AYE. SATO. SATO AYE.
BRADFORD. SKINNER. WIENER. THAT
BILLS ON CALL. THANK YOU, THANK
YOU, SENATOR BECKER. WILL BE
PRESENTING SB 1133. SENATOR,
WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. THANK YOU
. THANK YOU. CHAIR. AND MEMBERS,
HERE TO PRESENT SB 1133, THE
REASONABLE RECONSIDERATION ACT,
A BILL THAT TAKES A COMMON SENSE
APPROACH TO IMPROVING THE
PRETRIAL SYSTEM HERE IN
CALIFORNIA. I'D LIKE TO START BY
THANKING YOU, CHAIR AND THE
COMMITTEE STAFF, FOR THEIR WORK
ON THIS BILL. I WILL BE
ACCEPTING, TECHNICAL AMENDS,
PROPOSED BY THE COMMITTEE THIS
MORNING WHEN A PERSON APPEARS
BEFORE THE COURT FOR THE FIRST
TIME, A JUDGE TYPICALLY SETS
THEIR BAIL AMOUNT IN A MATTER OF
MINUTES OR EVEN SECONDS, AND
WITHOUT MUCH INFORMATION IN
FRONT OF THEM TO INFORM THAT
DECISION. OAN. AS A RESULT,
THERE ARE MANY CIRCUMSTANCES
THAT CAN ARISE AFTER THAT
INITIAL HEARING TO JUSTIFY A
MODIFICATION OF THE INITIAL BAIL
AMOUNT. BUT IT'S NOT ALWAYS EASY
TO GET BACK INTO COURT TO ARGUE,
TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. CURRENT LAW
ALLOWS FOR AUTOMATIC REVIEW OF A
BAIL DETERMINATION IF A PERSON
IS STILL IN CUSTODY FIVE DAYS
AFTER THE INITIAL BAIL AMOUNT
WAS SET AT THAT POINT, IT'S
OFTEN TOO LATE TO AVOID SOME OF
THE PRIMARY HARMS OF PRETRIAL
INCARCERATION, SUCH AS LOSS OF
EMPLOYMENT, LOSS OF HOUSING, OR
EVEN CUSTODY OF CHILDREN.
CURRENT LAW DOES NOT CODIFY.
ADDITIONALLY, DOES NOT CODIFY
THE STANDARD THAT JUDGES MUST
FOLLOW WHEN REVIEWING INITIAL
AMOUNTS OF BAIL SET AT THESE
AUTOMATIC REVIEW HEARINGS, NOR
DOES IT DEFINE QUOTE UNQUOTE
GOOD CAUSE FOR SETTING
SUBSEQUENT HEARING. AND AS A
RESULT, JUDGES TAKE DRASTICALLY
DIFFERENT APPROACHES ACROSS THE
STATE, FINALLY, AT A PERSON'S
ARRAIGNMENT, A JUDGE HAS THE
OPTION TO ORDER SOMEONE BE
RELEASED PENDING TRIAL IF THEY
AGREE TO ABIDE BY CERTAIN
CONDITIONS. WITH EVER INCREASING
CASE PROCESSING TIMES, IT'S
IMPORTANT THAT JUDGES ARE
REGULARLY REEVALUATING WHETHER
RESTRICTED PRETRIAL CONDITIONS
ARE ACTUALLY NECESSARY TO
ADDRESS THE PERCEIVED RISKS.
THIS BILL 11-3 THREE, ADDRESSES
THESE ISSUES BY STRENGTHENING
EXISTING LAW GOVERNING AUTOMATIC
BAIL REVIEW HEARINGS. CLEARLY
ONE. SECONDLY, CLEARLY DEFINING
GOOD CAUSE FOR REVIEWING BAIL AT
LATER HEARINGS. AND THIRDLY,
CREATING AN AUTOMATIC REVIEW
PERIOD FOR NON-MONETARY PRETRIAL
CONDITIONS, AGAIN, THIS IS ALL
THIS BILL REALLY IS ALL ALSO
ABOUT, PRESERVING JUDICIAL
DISCRETION. THERE'S NOTHING IN
THIS BILL THAT REMOVES JUDICIAL
DISCRETION AT ALL. REVISITING
BAIL IS A CRITICAL OPPORTUNITY
TO REDUCE THE RISKS OF DETAINING
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE NOT A RISK
TO THE PUBLIC, WHO BUT WHO
SIMPLY CANNOT AFFORD THAT MONEY,
WITH ME TODAY, MY PRIMARY
WITNESS, MICHELLE PARIS, THE
PROGRAM DIRECTOR FROM VERA
INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE. THANK YOU
. YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES. THANK
YOU. CHAIR AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS
. YES. OKAY, GREAT, MY NAME IS
MICHELLE PARIS. I'M THE DIRECTOR
OF VERA CALIFORNIA, A LOCAL
INITIATIVE OF THE VERA INSTITUTE
OF JUSTICE. VERA HAS BEEN
WORKING ON PRETRIAL POLICY
ACROSS THE COUNTRY FOR THE LAST
60 YEARS. WITH A FOCUS ON
DELIVERING BOTH SAFETY AND
JUSTICE. I'M HERE TODAY IN
STRONG SUPPORT OF SB 1133. THIS
BILL IS STRAIGHTFORWARD. IT
WOULD IMPROVE OPPORTUNITIES FOR
REVIEW OF PRETRIAL DECISIONS. IT
CLARIFIES EXISTING PROCEDURES,
AS SENATOR BECKER SAID, FOR BAIL
REVIEW IN APPROPRIATE
CIRCUMSTANCES AND IT ENSURES
THAT THROUGHOUT THE COURT
PROCESS, THERE ARE REVIEWS OF
PRETRIAL CONDITIONS LIKE
ELECTRONIC MONITORING. WHILE THE
PROPOSED CHANGES ARE MODEST,
THEY'RE ALSO IMPORTANT. A WELL
INFORMED BAIL DECISION IS A
MATTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY. JUST 24
HOURS OF JAIL INCARCERATION
INCREASES A PERSON'S RISK OF
BEING REARRESTED BECAUSE THEY
CAN LOSE THEIR JOB, THEIR HOME,
THEIR COMMUNITY TIES, RISKING
NOT ONLY THEIR LIFE BUT ALSO
THEIR FAMILIES. ONEROUS PRETRIAL
CONDITIONS LIKE ELECTRONIC
MONITORING CAN DO THE SAME,
MAKING OUR COMMUNITIES LESS SAFE
. YET ACROSS CALIFORNIA, JUDGES
OFTEN MAKE THESE DETERMINATIONS,
AS SENATOR BECKER SAID, IN
MINUTES OR EVEN SECONDS, WITH
LIMITED AND INSUFFICIENT
INFORMATION. ONCE A COURT SETS
BAIL AND IMPOSES PRETRIAL
CONDITIONS, THOSE DECISIONS ARE
NOT OFTEN REVISITED. EVEN WHEN
THERE'S IMPORTANT INFORMATION,
LIKE SOMEONE GETTING INTO A
TREATMENT PROGRAM, OBTAINING
STABLE HOUSING, OR GETTING A
PLEA OFFER TO A LESSER CHARGE.
IN THE CASE OF PRETRIAL
CONDITIONS, THERE IS NO SET
PROCESS FOR REVIEW. THIS IS
ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT FOR
CONDITIONS LIKE ELECTRONIC
MONITORING, WHICH IS
SKYROCKETING IN MANY CALIFORNIA
COUNTIES DESPITE ITS LIMITED
EFFECTIVENESS AND WELL
DOCUMENTED POTENTIAL FOR
UNINTENDED HARM. BY ENSURING
APPROPRIATE CHANCES FOR JUDGES
TO REVISIT PRETRIAL DECISIONS,
SB 1133 WILL BRING NECESSARY
CLARITY. CONSISTENCY AND
FAIRNESS TO THE PRETRIAL
PROCESS, ALL WHILE MAINTAINING
THE PUBLIC SAFETY EVERY
CALIFORNIAN DESERVES. THANK YOU
TO THE COMMITTEE STAFF FOR THEIR
HELP IN REFINING THE LANGUAGE
BEFORE YOU, AND I RESPECTFULLY
ASK THAT YOU VOTE AYE ON THIS
BILL. THANK YOU. IS THIS YOUR
ONLY WITNESS? YES. OKAY. CAN WE
GET THE METOOS IN LINE, NAME?
ORG. YOU GUYS KNOW HOW I LIKE TO
DO THIS? LESLIE CALDWELL,
HOUSTON FOR THE CALIFORNIA
PUBLIC DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION IN
SUPPORT DANICA. RADAMEL FOR
INITIATE JUSTICE LAW, DEFENSE
AND CALIFORNIANS FOR SAFETY AND
JUSTICE AND SUPPORT. RACHEL
BOGERT WITH ACLU CALIFORNIA
ACTION AND SUPPORT. BETHLEHEM,
ESTÁ WITH THE ELLA BAKER CENTER
FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. NORMA OROZCO WITH THE
ELLA BAKER CENTER FOR HUMAN
RIGHTS IN SUPPORT. NATASHA
MINSKER SMART JUSTICE CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC DEFENDERS
AND SUPPORT. HENRY ORTIZ, ALL OF
US IN SACRAMENTO IN SUPPORT.
HEAD ON OUT HERE ON BEHALF OF
LEGAL SERVICES FOR PRISONERS
WITH CHILDREN AND STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. ROXANA
GONZALEZ, INITIATE JUSTICE
ACTION. STRONG SUPPORT. MELISSA
MOORE. ALL OF US ARE NONE.
OAKLAND AND STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. WE'LL MOVE ON TO LEAD
OPPOSITION WITNESSES. GOOD
MORNING. MY NAME IS JEFF
CLAYTON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF
THE AMERICAN BAIL COALITION.
NOTED OPPOSITION. BUT REALLY THE
ISSUE IN CALIFORNIA IS A LACK OF
CONSISTENCY IN TERMS OF PRETRIAL
DUE PROCESS. REVIEWS FROM BAIL
AS YOU CAN'T AFFORD. WE CONCEDE
THAT THERE IS A PROBLEM IN
CALIFORNIA WITH THIS AND HAVE
CONCEDED THAT FOR NUMEROUS
YEARS. THREE YEARS AGO, THE
CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT ISSUED
THE HUMPHREY DECISION, AND IN
IT, JUSTICE CUELLAR SAYS THERE'S
A LACK OF COMPREHENSIVE
PROCEDURES FOR BAIL REVIEWS IN
CALIFORNIA. BUT HE ALSO NOTES
THAT THEY WOULD BE GLAD TO
DECIDE THOSE PROCEDURES. BUT
IT'S UP TO YOU ALL TO COME UP
WITH THOSE PROCEDURES. AND SO WE
THINK A CODIFICATION OF THE
HUMPHREY DECISION, A REASONED
APPROACH, WOULD BE A BETTER
APPROACH TO SOLVE THE PROBLEMS
HERE. WE WORRY THAT GIVEN THE
STATUS OF LOS ANGELES AND OTHER
COURT SYSTEMS, THAT IMPOSING
ADDITIONAL HEARINGS WITHOUT
GETTING TO THE HEART OF THE
HUMPHREY ISSUE IS GOING TO STALL
FOLKS IN JAIL UNNECESSARILY. SO
WE WOULD HOPE THAT THE SPONSOR
IN THIS COMMITTEE WOULD
ENCOURAGE THE SYSTEM, THE
COURTS, THE PROSECUTORS AND THE
DEFENDERS TO CODIFY HUMPHREY
ONCE AND FOR ALL AND SOLVE THIS
PROBLEM. UNFORTUNATELY WE DON'T
THINK THIS BILL DOES THAT. WE
THINK IT'S A SECOND HEARING TO
LOOK AT WHETHER WE COMPLIED IN
THE FIRST INSTANCE. SO THANK YOU
FOR YOUR TIME. WE WISH YOU A
GOOD DAY. THANK YOU. I
APPRECIATE THAT, DO WE HAVE ANY
OTHER LEAD OPPOSITION WITNESSES
SEEING NONE, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE
ON TO ME. TWO IN OPPOSITION. IF
WE HAVE ME TO STATE YOUR NAME,
YOUR ORG, AND THAT YOU OPPOSE.
YEAH. MADAM CHAIR CARL LONDON,
ON BEHALF OF THE GOLDEN STATE
BAIL AGENTS ASSOCIATION, ALSO IN
OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL. THANK
YOU. DAVID QUINTANA WITH THE
CALIFORNIA BAIL AGENTS
ASSOCIATION IN OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
JACKIE ONIS ON BEHALF OF BAIL
HOTLINE. BAIL BONDS AND
FINANCIAL CASUALTY AND SURETY IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. KRISTEN
SCHLUSSEL, DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY, SACRAMENTO COUNTY, ON
BEHALF OF CALIFORNIA DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION. IN
OPPOSITION, UNLESS AMENDED.
THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY
ELSE SEEING NONE BRINGING THE
CONVERSATION BACK TO COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. COMMITTEE MEMBERS?
SENATOR SERRATO, DO YOU HAVE
ANY? YEAH MEMBER. VICE CHAIR.
YEAH, JUST A COUPLE OF COMMENTS
ON THIS ONE, MY CONCERN WITH THE
BILL, FRANKLY, IS THE LOAD THAT
IT'S GOING TO AUTOMATICALLY, PUT
ON THE COURT SYSTEM THAT IS
ALREADY DROWNING IN OTHER
MANDATES FROM THE LEGISLATURE
FOR, FOR RESENTENCING, CARE
COURT, ETC. THE HUMPHREY
DECISION, IF, IF THAT COULD BE
IMPLEMENTED, IT ALREADY, PUTS
ADDITIONAL LOAD ON THE, THE, THE
COURT SYSTEM. SO ESSENTIALLY
WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS WE'RE WE'RE
CREATING AUTOMATIC, HEARINGS,
ADDITIONAL HEARINGS THAT WE
DON'T HAVE COURT SPACE, WE DON'T
HAVE JUDGES, AND WE DON'T HAVE
THE PERSONNEL TO PROCESS AN AND
SO UNTIL WE'RE ABLE TO DO THOSE
THINGS, ARE YOU GOING TO BE
ASKING FOR A BUDGET, A BUDGET
REQUEST TO BE ABLE TO FUND ALL
THOSE THINGS BECAUSE WE NEED THE
INFRASTRUCTURE TO PUT ALL THESE,
THESE GREAT IDEAS INTO, REAL
USE. AND RIGHT NOW, WE DON'T
HAVE IT, AND I DON'T SEE IT ON
THE HORIZON, AND I DON'T SEE ANY
ANYBODY FIGHTING TO ENSURE THAT
WE HAVE A COURT SYSTEM THAT CAN
HANDLE ALL OF THIS, SO, IS THERE
IS THERE A BUDGET REQUEST ON THE
HORIZON FOR YOU TO SUPPORT IT,
THE ADDITIONAL, INFRASTRUCTURE
COURT INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDED TO
MAKE THIS EVEN FEASIBLE? CHAIR.
YES THANK YOU, FIRST OF ALL,
I'LL MAKE THREE POINTS. MAYBE MY
WITNESS CAN BRIEFLY COMMENT,
NUMBER ONE, I HEAR YOU ABOUT THE
COURTS, THE GENERAL BURDEN ON
THE COURTS, NUMBER TWO, WE
BELIEVE THIS DOES NOT IMPOSE
ADDITIONAL BURDENS. AND I'LL
EXPLAIN WHY THE FIRST PART IS
REALLY MOVING THE FIVE DAY TO
THREE DAY. SO WE ALREADY HAVE
THE FIVE DAYS. SO JUST MOVING
IT, TO THE THREE DAY. THE SECOND
IS REALLY CLARIFYING SOME OF THE
STANDARDS. THE THIRD PART IS
ADDITIONAL HEARING RATE. THIS IS
SORT OF THE 60 DAYS REVIEW. THE
NON, THE YOU KNOW, ADDITIONAL
THINGS LIKE ELECTRONIC
MONITORING, THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT WE SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED IT
TO HAVE THAT PART OF OTHER THERE
ARE OTHER, OTHER REASONS PEOPLE
HAVE TO REAPPEAR. SO IT'S THE
IDEA IS IT HAPPENS IN THAT 60
DAYS, BUT IT'S ALIGNED WITH
OTHER TIMES THAT ARE ALREADY
REAPPEARING. CAN I HAVE MY
WITNESS, ANSWER VERY BRIEFLY ON
THAT. YES, YES. I WOULD JUST
REITERATE THAT TWO OUT OF THE
THREE HEARINGS ARE ONES THAT
ALREADY EXIST. SO WITH RESPECT
TO THE HUMPHREY DECISION, WE'RE
JUST CLARIFYING THE EVIDENTIARY
STANDARD THAT JUDGES SHOULD BE
USING CONSISTENTLY ACROSS THE
STATE. THOSE HEARINGS ARE
ALREADY HAPPENING. THOSE THAT
EVIDENTIARY STANDARD IS THE LAW
OF THE LAND. WE'RE JUST PUTTING
THAT INTO THE LAW. SO THERE ARE
SMALL TWEAKS FOR TWO HEARINGS
THAT ARE ALREADY HAPPENING. AND
THE THIRD HEARING, AS SENATOR
BECKER SAID, WE BELIEVE THE
COURTS ACTUALLY DO HAVE THE
INFRASTRUCTURE TO ABSORB THESE
HEARINGS INTO REGULAR COURT
DATES. THIS IS NOT A FULL BLOWN
TRIAL. THIS IS SIMPLY
RECONSIDERING SIMPLE CONDITIONS
THAT WERE IMPOSED. WE'VE TALKED
TO PRACTITIONERS AROUND THE
STATE. I'VE PERSONALLY GONE TO
WATCH COURT IN MULTIPLE PLACES,
INCLUDING THE COURTS THAT ARE
RECOVERING FROM BACKLOGS AND THE
PRACTITIONERS IN THOSE STATES.
PRETRIAL SERVICES BELIEVE THAT
THESE TYPES OF HEARINGS CAN BE
AND CONSIDERATION CAN ACTUALLY
BE ABSORBED INTO COURT DATES. WE
ALSO KNOW THAT THE NUMBER OF
CRIMINAL CASES HAS BEEN
DECREASING OVER THE YEARS, AND
THAT WE THINK THAT WITH THE
EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE, WITH
THE HEARINGS THAT ARE ALREADY
HAPPENING, AND NOW A LOT OF
COURTS ACTUALLY BEING IN A
DECENT PLACE, RECOVERING FROM
SOME OF THE BACKLOGS THAT WE
THINK THAT THIS CAN BE ABSORBED
INTO THE INFRASTRUCTURE WITHOUT
ANY ADDITIONAL RESOURCES.
INTERESTING. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE?
YEAH, AGAIN, I THINK WE COVERED
A COUPLE OF THE BIG ISSUES, AND
I'M HAPPY TO KEEP WORKING WITH
THE OPPOSITION, GOING FORWARD, I
BELIEVE WE CAN WORK WITH THEM.
AND I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN
AYE VOTE. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE
A MOTION? DO YOU HAVE A MOTION?
ALL RIGHT, WE DON'T HAVE A
MOTION. WE WILL WAIT FOR OTHER
MEMBERS, I WANT TO MAKE IT VERY
CLEAR TO MEMBERS IN THE PUBLIC.
AS CHAIR, I CANNOT MAKE A
MOTION. SO I HAVE TO RELY ON
COMMITTEE MEMBERS WHO ARE AT
OTHER COMMITTEES. SO THANK YOU,
AND WE'LL LET YOU KNOW HOW IT
GOES. OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK
YOU, WE NEXT HAVE SENATOR
GLAZIER, BUT BECAUSE, SENATOR
SMALLWOOD CUEVAS WAS HERE FIRST,
I'M GOING TO TAKE HER, IF YOU
DON'T MIND.
YEAH. THANK YOU SO MUCH, MADAM
CHAIR. AND WE'RE GOING TO MOVE
THROUGH THIS ITEM QUICKLY, AND
THANK YOU. COLLEAGUE. COLLEAGUE
FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT
SB 1484. AND I WANT TO SAY A
SPECIAL THANKS TO YOUR STAFF FOR
THEIR DETAILED ANALYSIS ON THIS
BILL. AND I ALSO WANT TO THANK
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, ROB BONTA,
WHO IS SPONSORING THIS BILL, AS
WELL AS HIS STAFF FOR ALL OF
THEIR HARD WORK. IN 2018, THE
LEGISLATURE PASSED SB 439,
AUTHORED BY THEN SENATOR HOLLY
MITCHELL. THIS BILL, INTENDED TO
PROTECT CALIFORNIA'S CHILDREN BY
COMPLETELY LIMITING THE JUVENILE
COURT'S JURISDICTION IN CASES
INVOLVING YOUTH UNDER THE AGE OF
12. WHILE THE INTENT OF THE BILL
WAS TO ENTIRELY PREVENT YOUTH
UNDER THE AGE OF 12 FROM CONTACT
WITH THE COURT SYSTEM,
UNINTENTIONAL OMISSIONS IN THE
WELFARE AND INSTITUTIONS CODE
HAVE LEFT THESE CHILDREN
VULNERABLE TO EXPEDITED AND
INFORMAL PROCEDURES, ADJUDICATE
YOUTH CHARGED FOR NONVIOLENT
CRIMES. THIS UNINTENTIONAL
OMISSION HAS CREATED CONFUSION
REGARDING THE MINIMUM AGE LIMITS
OF YOUTH, WHO MAY BE SUBJECT TO
SUCH INFORMAL AND EXPEDITED
PROCESSES. THIS BILL WOULD
CLARIFY THAT THE AGE
RESTRICTIONS ENACTED IN SB 439
ALSO APPLY, EVEN IN THE CONTEXT
OF INFORMAL AND EXPEDITED
PROCEEDINGS. IN OTHER WORDS,
CHILDREN UNDER 12. WE DO NOT
WANT TO NORMALIZE THE PROCESS OF
THEM BEING IN A COURT SYSTEM,
PARTICULARLY WHEN THEY ARE FACED
WITH NONVIOLENT INFRACTIONS. SO
THESE INFORMAL AND EXPEDITED
PROCEEDINGS LOOK DIFFERENT
THROUGHOUT THE STATE. BUT IN
SOME COUNTIES, YOUTH MAY BE
REFERRED TO INFORMAL TRAFFIC
COURTS OR PROCEEDINGS BEFORE
JUVENILE HEARING OFFICERS, AND
IN THESE PROCEEDINGS, YOUTH MAY
NOT HAVE A PUBLIC DEFENDER
PRESENT OR AN ATTORNEY PRESENT,
AND THEY MAY FACE SIGNIFICANT
FINES AND PENALTIES FROM THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE'S REVIEW OF THE 2022
RACIAL AND IDENTITY PROFILING
ACT. DATA IDENTIFIED MORE THAN
1600 TRAFFIC STOPS STATEWIDE
INVOLVING YOUTH UNDER THE AGE OF
12. THAT LED TO A CITATION.
THESE YOUTH WERE CITED FOR SUCH
CONDUCT AS SEATBELT CITATIONS,
BIKE RELATED CITATIONS,
PEDESTRIAN CITATIONS. SOME OF
THESE CITATIONS HAVE RESULTED IN
YOUTH UNDER 12 BEING REFERRED TO
INFORMAL PROCEEDINGS, AS THE
LEGISLATURE HAS ALREADY AGREED
THAT CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF
12 DO NOT BELONG IN OUR COURTS.
SB 1484 IS A COMMONSENSE
CLARIFICATION THAT CHILDREN
UNDER THE AGE OF 12 MUST BE
PROTECTED FROM NEGATIVE IMPACTS
OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM.
INVOLVEMENT EVEN IN INFORMAL AND
EXPEDITED PROCEEDINGS. JOINING
ME TODAY ARE JUSTIN ROSA, DEPUTY
LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR FOR
ATTORNEY ROB BONTA, AND DAMON
BROWN, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL. I'M SO SORRY.
YOU HAVE THREE WITNESSES. TWO.
OKAY YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
GOOD MORNING, MADAM CHAIR. MR.
VICE CHAIR, I APPRECIATE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS SB 1484
WITH YOU ON BEHALF OF THE
SPONSOR, ATTORNEY GENERAL ROB
BONTA. WE ALSO WOULD LIKE TO
THANK THE COMMITTEE COUNSEL FOR
THE DETAILED BILL ANALYSIS AND
APPLAUD SENATOR SMALLWOOD CUEVAS
FOR HER AUTHORSHIP OF SB 1484.
TO ADD TO THE AUTHOR'S
PRESENTATION, THE BUREAU OF
CHILDREN'S JUSTICE WAS FORMED
WITHIN THE CIVIL RIGHTS
ENFORCEMENT SECTION AT THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
IN 2015 TO SAFEGUARD EQUAL
OPPORTUNITIES SO THAT EVERY
CHILD IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
CAN MEET THEIR FULL POTENTIAL.
THE BUREAU OF CHILDREN JUSTICE
INVESTIGATIVE WORK ADDRESSES
SYSTEMIC ISSUES THAT IMPACT
CHILDREN AND YOUTH ACROSS THE
STATE, FOCUSING ON REMEDYING
PATTERNS OR PRACTICES OF
DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES,
POLICIES OR PROCEDURES, AS NOTED
IN THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS HAS
COME TO OUR ATTENTION AND
MONITORING IMPLEMENTATION OF SB
439 THAT SOME MINORS UNDER THE
AGE OF 12 CONTINUE TO BE
ADJUDICATED THROUGH INFORMAL
COURTS OR TRIBUNALS AND OTHER
EXPEDITED PROGRAMS, TYPICALLY
WITHOUT COUNSEL. SB 1484 IS AN
IMPORTANT BILL TO CLOSE THE GAPS
IN OTHER WELFARE AND
INSTITUTIONS CODE SECTIONS THAT
CLEARLY FALL WITHIN THE SCOPE OF
SB 439 CHAPTERED. IN 2018, THAT
LEGISLATION WAS INTENDED TO
APPLY TO ALL CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE
THE YOUTH UNDER 12 WERE SUBJECT
TO COURT PROCESSES AS SET FORTH
THROUGH THE WELFARE AND
INSTITUTIONS CODE, WITH ME
TODAY, I HAVE SPECIAL ASSISTANT
ATTORNEY GENERAL DAMON BROWN,
WHO ADVISES THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
ON CIVIL RIGHTS MATTERS. IF
THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, WE
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR AYE
VOTE ON BEHALF OF THESE
CHILDREN, ACROSS THE STATE THAT
REQUIRE AN AGE APPROPRIATE
APPROACH, ESPECIALLY FOR
NONVIOLENT INFRACTIONS PER
EXISTING STATUTE. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, WE'RE
GOING TO MOVE ON TO WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT ME TWOS. DANICA DANIEL,
ON BEHALF OF ROOT AND REBOUND IN
STRONG SUPPORT. RACHEL BHAGWAT
ON SUPPORTIVE OR ON BEHALF OF
ACLU CALIFORNIA. ACTION IN
SUPPORT. ALICIA BENAVIDES ON
BEHALF OF ALLIANCE FOR BOYS. MEN
OF COLOR IN SUPPORT. BETHLEHEM,
ESTÁ ON BEHALF OF THE ELLA BAKER
CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS. IN
STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
ANTHONY MICHAEL, OUT HERE ON
BEHALF OF LEGAL SERVICES FOR
PRISONERS WITH CHILDREN IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. HENRY ORTIZ,
ON BEHALF OF ALL OF US IN THE
SACRAMENTO CHAPTER AND IN
SUPPORT. ALYSSA MORA. ALL OF US
ARE NONE. OAKLAND IN SUPPORT.
ROXANA GONZALEZ, INITIATE
JUSTICE ACTION. STRONG SUPPORT.
LESLIE CALDWELL, HOUSTON,
CALIFORNIA. PUBLIC DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. MOVING ON TO OPPOSITION
WITNESSES, SEEING NONE. ME TOO.
AND OPPO SEEING NONE. WE'LL MOVE
BACK TO COMMITTEE. NO COMMENTS.
ALL RIGHT, SENATOR, WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSE? I JUST WANT TO
THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND Ã THANK
SPECIAL THANKS TO WITNESSES AND
TECHNICAL SUPPORT TODAY. AND
WITH THAT, I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR I VOTE. THANK YOU. DO
WE HAVE A MOTION, WE WILL WAIT
FOR OTHER MEMBERS TO COME TO
MAKE A MOTION AND WE'LL LET YOU
KNOW. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO
MUCH, MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU.
COLLEAGUE WE ARE GOING TO MOVE
ON TO ANY OTHER. OKAY. LET'S DO
CONSENT, SENATOR, WOULD YOU LIKE
TO MAKE A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A
MOTION THAT WE CONSENT. CALENDAR
SO A MOTION HAS BEEN MADE BY
SENATOR SARDO TO MOVE THE
CONSENT CALENDAR. CAN WE CALL
ROLL? WAHAB, I HOB I SATO. SATO
I BRADFORD. SKINNER. WIENER THAT
BILLS ON CALL OR THOSE BILLS ARE
ON CALL. CAN WE MAKE SURE OTHER
SENATORS ARE IN THE ROOM,
PLEASE? THANK YOU. ALL IN
.
YES THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. THAT'S A
WONDERFUL IDEA. THANK YOU.
SENATOR SINCE WE HAVE TO WAIT
FOR SB 1317, I WILL BE
PRESENTING MY OWN BILL
.
WELCOME, SENATOR WAHAB. AND,
SENATOR, WE'RE GOING TO BE
YOU'RE GOING TO BE PRESENTING
YOUR BILL, SB 1317. ALL RIGHT.
YOU MAY PROCEED WHENEVER YOU'RE
READY. THANK YOU. COLLEAGUES AND
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, I WANT TO
THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR THEIR
WORK ON THIS BILL AND WILL BE
ACCEPTING THEIR AMENDMENTS. SB
1317 EXTENDS FOR FIVE YEARS. THE
SUNSET DATE FOR SEEKING COURT
ORDERS TO ADMINISTER INVOLUNTARY
PSYCHIATRIC MEDICATION TO THOSE
WITH SEVERE MENTAL HEALTH
DISORDERS WHO ARE DETAINED IN
COUNTY JAILS. PENAL CODE SECTION
2603 CURRENTLY AUTHORIZES
PSYCHIATRISTS IN COUNTY JAILS TO
OBTAIN AN INVOLUNTARY MEDICATION
ORDER FOR PERSONS IN CUSTODY WHO
ARE A DANGER TO THEMSELVES AND
OR OTHERS, ARE SUFFERING FROM
GRAVE DISABILITIES AND UNABLE TO
GIVE CONSENT. PREVIOUS
LEGISLATION EXTENDED THE SUNSET
DATE TO JANUARY 1ST, 2025 BY
EXTENDING THE SUNSET DATE AN
ADDITIONAL FIVE YEARS. THIS BILL
WOULD ENSURE COUNTIES CONTINUE
TO HAVE APPROPRIATE TOOLS TO
ADDRESS THE MENTAL HEALTH
TREATMENT NEEDS OF THE MOST
VULNERABLE INDIVIDUALS IN COUNTY
JAILS, IN A HUMANE MANNER. SB
1317 WOULD ALSO REQUIRE COUNTIES
THAT ELECT TO USE THIS AUTHORITY
TO SUBMIT SPECIFIC REPORTING
INFORMATION. TESTIFYING TODAY IS
KARA SANDBERG, DEPUTY COUNSEL.
COUNSEL COUNTY COUNSEL, OF THE
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA. THANK
YOU. YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, CHAIR WAHAB. AND
HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE SENATE
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE. MY NAME
IS KARA SANDBERG. I'M A DEPUTY
COUNTY COUNSEL AND A MEMBER OF
THE JAIL REFORM AND CUSTODY
OPERATIONS TEAM. IN THE OFFICE
OF THE COUNTY COUNSEL, COUNTY OF
SANTA CLARA. I'M HERE TODAY TO
SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY OF
SANTA CLARA, THE SPONSOR OF
SENATOR WAHHAB'S SB 1370. THANK
YOU, SENATOR WAHAB, FOR YOUR
LEADERSHIP ON THIS MATTER. SO IN
2022, THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
BEGAN USING THE AUTHORITY
GRANTED UNDER PENAL CODE SECTION
2603 TO SEEK INVOLUNTARY
MEDICATION ORDERS FOR PERSONS
INCARCERATED IN OUR JAILS THAT
ARE SUFFERING FROM ACUTE
PSYCHIATRIC NEEDS. IN EXTREME
CIRCUMSTANCES, WE RELY ON THE
AUTHORITY GRANTED UNDER SECTION
2603 TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATE
MENTAL HEALTH CARE TO
INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS. WE
TAKE A COLLABORATIVE APPROACH TO
CARE FOR PATIENTS. IN THIS
CONTEXT, OUR CUSTODY HEALTH
PSYCHIATRIST AND PSYCHOLOGIST
ARE DEEPLY COMMITTED TO SERVING
PERSONS INCARCERATED IN OUR
JAILS WITH EXCELLENT CARE. THE
COUNTY COUNSEL'S OFFICE ACTIVELY
ENGAGES WITH OUR PUBLIC
DEFENDERS OFFICE THROUGHOUT THE
SECTION 2603 PETITION PROCESS,
AND WE HAVE A SHARED GOAL OF
ENSURING APPROPRIATE AND
NECESSARY MENTAL HEALTH CARE TO
SUPPORT AND STABILIZE OUR
PATIENTS. WE EXERCISE CARE
BEFORE USING THE AUTHORITY
GRANTED UNDER SECTION 2603. THE
ADMINISTRATION OF AN INVOLUNTARY
MEDICATION IS CONSIDERED AN
INTERVENTION OF LAST RESORT, BUT
IT IS NECESSARY IN INSTANCES
WHEN A PERSON IS EXPERIENCING AN
ACUTE CRISIS. IS DECOMPENSATING,
AND IS UNABLE TO GRANT CONSENT
FOR THEIR OWN CARE. ABSENT
LEGISLATIVE ACTION, THE
AUTHORITY FOR COUNTIES TO SEEK A
COURT ORDER TO ADMINISTER
NECESSARY STABILIZING MEDICATION
WILL LAPSE ON JANUARY FIRST,
2025. THIS WOULD LEAVE COUNTIES
WITHOUT A CRITICAL TOOL TO
ADDRESS THE CONSIDERABLE MENTAL
HEALTH NEEDS OF COUNTY JAIL
POPULATIONS. I NOTE THAT THIS
MEASURE RETAINS THE IMPORTANT
PROCEDURAL PROTECTIONS EMBODIED
IN EXISTING LAW, WHICH REQUIRE
US TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE TO THE
COURT THAT IS AUTHORIZED THE
INVOLUNTARY MEDICATION ORDER
EVERY 60 DAYS. PENAL CODE
SECTION 2603 OFFERS AN OPTION TO
STABILIZE A PERSON IN THE
COUNTY'S CARE WHO'S EXPERIENCING
A SEVERE MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS
AND IS AT RISK OF DETERIORATION,
VICTIMIZATION, OR CAUSING HARM
TO THEMSELVES OR OTHERS. YOU CAN
WRAP UP. I APPRECIATE WE THANK
YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO
PRESENT SB 1317 AND ENCOURAGE
YOUR MOST POSITIVE CONSIDERATION
. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OUR NEXT
SPEAKER, OR NEXT WITNESS, I
SHOULD SAY IS RANDALL HAGER,
LEGISLATIVE ADVOCATE,
PSYCHIATRIC PHYSICIANS ALLIANCE
OF CALIFORNIA. SIR, YOU HAVE TWO
MINUTES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU TO THE
AUTHOR. I WAS PART OF THE
ORIGINAL GROUP, CALIFORNIA
PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION, THAT
BROUGHT THIS LEGISLATION. THE
REASON WE DID THIS IS ONE OF OUR
PSYCHIATRISTS WAS KIND OF A
CIRCUIT WRITER. AND SOME OF THE
SMALLER JAILS IN NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA, HE WAS ON FACULTY AT
UC DAVIS IN THE FORENSIC
PSYCHIATRY PROGRAM. AND BECAUSE
THERE IS SOMETHING LIKE 100,000
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE TREATED FOR
MENTAL ILLNESS IN OUR JAILS
EVERY YEAR, HE POINTED OUT A
REALLY IMPORTANT PROBLEM. THE
FACT WAS THAT IF YOU WERE
ADJUDICATED AND YOU WERE SERVING
YOUR TIME, YOU COULD GET ACCESS
TO THE PROCEDURE AND GET
MEDICATION. IF YOU'RE IMPRISONED
, SAME THING IF YOU'RE IN THE
COMMUNITY, SAME THING. AND SO
WHAT WE DISCOVERED IS THAT THERE
WAS THIS GAP IN TREATMENT. AND
BECAUSE OF THAT, PEOPLE WITH
DISORDERS LIKE SCHIZOPHRENIA
WERE NOT ABLE TO GAIN ACCESS TO
MEDICATIONS. BECAUSE OF THAT,
THEY WERE A DANGER TO
THEMSELVES, A DANGER TO OTHERS.
THEY OFTEN DISRUPTED AND
ATTACKED STAFF IN THE CONDUCT OF
THEIR DUTIES. AND SO THIS
LEGISLATION HAS BEEN USED
THROUGHOUT THE STATE WHERE IT'S
BEEN USED. IT DOES WORK. IT DOES
ALLOW ACCESS TO MEDICATIONS. AND
ON BEHALF OF THE PSYCHIATRIC
PHYSICIANS ALLIANCE, WE URGE
YOUR SUPPORT FOR THIS. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. AT THIS TIME, WE'LL
TAKE MEWTWO'S IN SUPPORT OF, SB
1317. SO JUST STATE YOUR NAME,
THE ORGANIZATION YOU'RE FROM,
AND YOUR SUPPORT FOR THE BILL.
YES, SIR. BRANDON EPP, ON BEHALF
OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT IN SUPPORT.
JOHN DREBINGER WITH THE
STEINBERG INSTITUTE IN SUPPORT.
CLIFTON WILSON, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA STATE ASSOCIATION OF
PSYCHIATRISTS IN SUPPORT. THANK
YOU, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYBODY
IN OPPOSITION THAT WOULD SPEAK
WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AS A LEAD
WITNESS IN OPPOSITION? IF NOT,
IS THERE ANYBODY THAT JUST WANTS
TO COME UP AND STATE THEIR
OPPOSITION? NOT WE'LL BRING IT
BACK TO THE DAIS. YOU CAN CLOSE.
THANK YOU. I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR AN AYE VOTE. I KNOW. YES.
AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, I
CANNOT DO A MOTION BECAUSE I'M
THE CHAIR RIGHT NOW, AND SHE
CAN'T DO THE MOTION BECAUSE HER
BILL. SO YOU WILL ALL BE ABLE TO
WAIT IN SUSPENSE UNTIL OTHERS
ARRIVE AND THEN WE'LL BE ABLE TO
TAKE THESE UP IN THE MEANWHILE,
OTHER SENATORS THAT WISH TO HAVE
THEIR BILLS HEARD, WE JUST NEED
GLAZIER AND MAKE HASTE THROUGH
THE HALLWAYS TO GET HERE. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU
.
YEAH SO, FOLKS, WE'RE GOING TO
RECESS FOR ABOUT 20 MINUTES.
WE'LL BE BACK AT 11. I THINK YOU
GUYS KNOW HOW MUCH I LOVE TO
MAKE SURE WE GO THROUGH OUR
COMMITTEE, BUT WE HAVE TO WAIT
FOR OTHER MEMBERS OF COMMITTEE
MEMBERS WHO ARE IN DIFFERENT
COMMITTEES, AS WELL AS AUTHORS
WHO ARE IN OTHER COMMITTEES, AS
WELL. SO THINGS ARE HAPPENING
SIMULTANEOUSLY. WE ARE GOING TO
TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF A BREAK
AGAIN. WE'LL BE BACK AT 11. SO A
LITTLE ROUGHLY 20 MINUTES. THANK
YOU
GROVE. WOULD YOU LIKE TO PRESENT
SB 1414? DO I, DO WE? I THINK
SO, I APOLOGIZE TO THE CHAIR IN
ADVANCE. I I HAVE SOMETHING IN
MY THROAT AND. OKAY. AND I JUST
WANT TO AGAIN HIGHLIGHT FOR
THOSE PEOPLE THAT HAVE JUST
JOINED US AGAIN SINCE WE JUST,
EXITED RECESS. THE WITNESSES
WILL BE AT THIS LECTERN. THEY
WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES. BOTH LEAD
OPPOSITION LEAD. SUPPORT. AND
THEN THE METOOS AGAIN, WE WOULD
LIKE FOR EVERYBODY TO LINE UP
VERY QUICKLY YOUR NAME, YOUR
ORGANIZATION AND WHETHER YOU
SUPPORT OR OPPOSE, AND THEN,
SENATOR, WHENEVER YOU ARE READY,
AND I THINK I GOT A GAVEL. SORRY
WE'RE BACK IN. AGAIN, APOLOGIES,
MADAM CHAIR. GOOD MORNING, MADAM
CHAIR. AND MEMBERS, BEFORE I
BEGIN, I WANT TO THANK EACH OF
YOU FOR MEETING WITH ME AND
TALKING AND TAKING THE TIME TO
DISCUSS THIS IMPORTANT MEASURE.
THERE'S BEEN MANY RECENT
DISCUSSIONS REGARDING HUMAN
TRAFFICKING AND LEGISLATIVE
SOLUTIONS TO ADDRESS THIS
PREVALENT ISSUE IN CALIFORNIA.
AND I WANT TO THANK ALL OF YOU
FOR NOT ONLY ENGAGING IN THESE
DISCUSSIONS, BUT MORE
IMPORTANTLY AND SPECIFICALLY FOR
BEING A PART OF THE SOLUTION. AS
YOU KNOW, LAST YEAR, THANKS IN
LARGE PART BECAUSE OF THIS
COMMITTEE, WE PASSED SB 14 AND
MADE THE CRIME OF SEX
TRAFFICKING CHILDREN A SERIOUS
FELONY IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA DUE TO THE PASSAGE OF
SB 14, TRAFFICKERS ACROSS THE
STATE HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFULLY
CHARGED WITH THIS HEINOUS CRIME
AND HAVE BEEN STOPPED FOR
EXPLOITING ADDITIONAL CHILDREN.
WE KNOW HOW HORRENDOUS SEX
TRAFFICKING OF CHILDREN IS. THE
UNIMAGINABLE PAIN, ANGUISH, AND
GRIEF CAUSED BY THESE CALLOUS
ACTS LEAVES LIFELONG EMOTIONAL
AND PHYSICAL SCARS ON ITS
VICTIMS. IF THEY'RE LUCKY ENOUGH
TO EVEN MAKE IT OUT ALIVE. WE'VE
ALL FOCUSED OUR ATTENTION ON AS
MUCH AS WE SHOULD HAVE ON THE
TRAFFICKERS THEMSELVES AND THE
BRUTALITY OF SELLING A CHILD,
AND UNFORTUNATELY, WE HAVEN'T
FOCUSED ENOUGH ON BUYING THE
BUYING SIDE OF THE EQUATION. WE
KNOW HOW THE SUPPLY AND DEMAND
WORKS IN ORDER TO SELL A CHILD
FOR SEX, THERE MUST BE SOMEONE
WILLING TO PURCHASE THAT CHILD
FOR SEX. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE
TODAY. TO ADDRESS THE PURCHASERS
AND PUT A STOP TO THOSE WHO
WOULD PAY TO HAVE SEX WITH
CHILDREN. CURRENTLY IN
CALIFORNIA, ANY PERSON WHO
SOLICITS AGREES TO ENGAGE IN, OR
ENGAGES IN ANY ACT OF COMMERCIAL
SEX WITH A MINOR IS CHARGED ONLY
WITH A MISDEMEANOR. NOW, THERE
ARE CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS IN THE
LAW WHICH ALLOW AN OFFENDER TO
BE CHARGED WITH A FELONY FOR
HAVING SEX WITH A MINOR. THE
CHALLENGE IS OFTEN THAT REQUIRES
SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES FOR
EXAMPLE, MANY OF THE STATUTES
WILL ONLY CHARGE A PURCHASER
WITH A MORE SEVERE PUNISHMENT IF
THE CHILD IS UNDER 14 YEARS OLD.
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE
FORCE, ASSAULT, AND LACK OF
CONSENT. AS A RESULT, JUVENILE
SEX OFFENDER VICTIMS BETWEEN THE
AGES OF 14 AND 17 WHO ARE OFTEN
BEING EXPLOITED IN ORDER TO
ALLOW A BUYER TO AVOID HARSHER
PENALTIES. LET ME BE CLEAR A
MINOR CAN NEVER CONSENT TO SEX
TRAFFICKING. THE OPPOSITION HAS
STATED THERE ARE MANY RUNAWAYS
AND YOUNG ADULTS AGES 15, 16 AND
17 THAT USE CHILD PROSTITUTION
PER SE. AS A VOLUNTARY MEANS OF
SURVIVAL. OUR COALITION OF
SURVIVORS SURVIVORS THAT ARE
HERE TODAY WOULD SAY THAT'S NOT
TRUE. TRAFFICKERS, GANGS AND
PIMPS RUN THE STREET WITH SUCH A
TIGHT GRIP THAT IT'S NEARLY
IMPOSSIBLE TO ACT ALONE. IN FACT
, SURVIVORS LIKE BRIANNA MOSLEY,
WHO WAS TRAFFICKED AS A TEEN
THAT'S HERE WITH US TODAY, WILL
TELL YOU THAT ANY TEENAGER
SELLING THEMSELVES ALONE ON THE
STREETS WILL GET SWOOPED UP AND
PIMPED OUT NEARLY IMMEDIATELY IN
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, YOU
HAVE TO BE 18 TO BUY A LOTTERY
TICKET. COLLEAGUES 21 TO
PURCHASE CIGARETS BECAUSE
THEY'RE SO DETRIMENTAL TO YOUR
HEALTH. BUT SOMEHOW THERE ARE
INDIVIDUALS WHO THINK THAT
SELLING YOUR BODY FOR SEX AT 16
YEARS OLD IS OLD ENOUGH, AND IT
SHOULD BE OKAY. REGULATING THE
TOBACCO INDUSTRY, BUT NOT
COMMERCIAL SEXUAL EXPLOITATION
OF CHILDREN SEEMS RATHER
TROUBLESOME TO ME. BUYING A
CHILD OF SEX FOR SEX, FOR AT ANY
AGE SHOULD BE TREATED AS A
SERIOUS CRIME. THAT IT IS.
THAT'S WHY I'VE INTRODUCED SB
1414, A BIPARTISAN MEASURE
THAT'S JOINT AUTHORED BY SENATOR
CABALLERO AND SENATOR RUBIO,
WHICH STATES THAT ANY INDIVIDUAL
WHO SOLICITS, AGREES TO ENGAGE
IN OR ENGAGES IN THE ACT OF
COMMERCIAL SEX WITH A MINOR WILL
FACE FELONY CHARGES. MEMBERS, I
WANT TO REMIND YOU THAT WE ARE
NOT DISCUSSING STATUTORY RAPE OR
ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS. WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT COMMERCIAL SEXUAL
EXPLOITATION OF CHILDREN. AND I
HOPE WE CAN ALL AGREE HERE TODAY
THAT REPEATEDLY BUYING CHILDREN
FOR SEX SHOULD BE CONSIDERED A
FELONY IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. A STUDY BY THE
ORANGE COUNTY HUMAN TRAFFICKING
TASK FORCE SHOWS THAT IN 21,
2021 AND 2022, TWO OUT OF EVERY
FIVE VICTIMS THAT WERE CONTACTED
WERE CHILDREN. AT THE TIME OF
THE FIRST POINT OF CONTACT, MANY
ADULTS WHO ARE BEING TRAFFICKED
NOW WERE BOUGHT AS KIDS, SO IF
WE CONSIDER TWO OUT OF EVERY
FIVE VICTIMS AS A CHILD AND
THEY'RE BEING SOLD 5 TO 10 TIMES
A DAY, THE NUMBERS FOR BUYERS
START TO ADD UP VERY, VERY
QUICKLY. THE LEGISLATURE CLEARLY
SENT A MESSAGE LAST YEAR WHEN WE
PASSED SB 14, WE ADMITTED THAT
SEX TRAFFICKING OF CHILDREN IS A
SERIOUS CRIME AND THAT IT'S
PREVALENT IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, AND IT DESERVES A
SERIOUS PUNISHMENT. WE CANNOT
ADDRESS ONE SIDE OF THE ISSUE
WHILE IGNORING THE OTHER. IT
TAKES TWO CRIMINALS TO COMMIT A
CRIME OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING. A
SELLER AND A BUYER. IF WE'RE
FOCUSED ON STOPPING SEXUAL
EXPLOITATION OF CHILDREN, WE
HAVE TO ADDRESS BOTH SIDES.
EVERY MEMBER OF THIS COMMITTEE
THAT HAS DISCUSSED THIS BILL
MULTIPLE TIMES WITH ME, AND FOR
THAT, I AM SO VERY GRATEFUL. I
WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT I AM
WILLING TO AMEND THE BILL TO
REMOVE STRICT LIABILITY AND SEX
REGISTRATION FOR FIRST TIME
OFFENDERS. I'VE SENT THAT IN
WRITING TO THE COMMITTEE.
HOWEVER I AM NOT WILLING TO
AMEND THE LANGUAGE SO THAT THIS
BILL ONLY COVERS AGES 15 AND
UNDER. I WILL NOT LOOK THESE
SURVIVORS IN THE FACE AND TELL
THEM THAT THEIR STORIES DON'T
MATTER, AND THEY ARE NOT
IMPORTANT ENOUGH FOR ME TO FIGHT
FOR BECAUSE THEY WERE TRAFFICKED
AT ONLY 16 AND 17 YEARS OLD. THE
BELIEF THAT SOMEHOW CHILD SEX
TRAFFICKING VICTIMS ARE ACTING
IN A CONSENSUAL MANNER
PERPETRATED PERPETUATES THE
MISCONCEPTION THAT YOUNG PEOPLE
OF THIS AGE RANGE ARE CAPABLE OF
FULLY UNDERSTANDING THE
CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR ACTIONS,
ESPECIALLY IN THE CONTEXT OF
EXPLOITATION. THIS DISREGARDS
THE FACT THAT THEIR BRAINS ARE
STILL DEVELOPING, THAT MAY THEY
MAY NOT HAVE THE CAPACITY TO
MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS,
ESPECIALLY WHEN UNDER THE
PRESSURE OF MANIPULATION, BRAINS
THAT HAVE ENDURED TRAUMA AND
THOSE WHO ARE VULNERABLE TO
EXPLOITATION MOST LIKELY HAVE
AND ARE FUNCTIONING IN A
SURVIVAL STATE. NOT ONE THAT'S
FOCUSED IN THE DEDUCTIVE
REASONING POSITION. BY FRAMING
THE SITUATION AS CONSENSUAL, IT
SHIFTS THE BLAME TO THE VICTIM,
WHICH ALLOWS PERPETRATORS TO
EVADE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR
EXPLOITATION OF THE VULNERABLE
YOUTH THAT THEY WANT TO GO AFTER
. IT FAILS TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE
LONG TERME IMPACT OF
EXPLOITATION OF YOUNG PEOPLE'S
LIVES, EVEN IF THEY INITIALLY
APPEAR TO CONSENT, THE TRAUMA
AND HARM INFLICTED UPON THEM
WILL HAVE LASTING EFFECTS ON
THEIR MENTAL HEALTH,
RELATIONSHIPS AND FUTURE
OPPORTUNITY. AS EVERY SURVIVOR
IN THIS ROOM CAN ATTEST
FIRSTHAND AND IMPLYING THAT
OLDER TEENS CAN CONSENT TO SEX
IS JUST A COP OUT, IT'S YOUR WAY
OF SAYING THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE
RESPONSIBLE FOR CARING AND
PROTECTING THEM. IT'S NOT THEIR
JOB TO LEARN TO SURVIVE IN THE
SITUATION THAT THEY'RE IN. IT'S
OUR JOB TO PROVIDE THEM SAFETY
AND RESOURCES SO THAT THEY HAVE
EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO JUST BE
CHILDREN. LET'S STOP FAILING OUR
KIDS COLLEAGUES AND SHOW THEM
THAT WE SEE THEM. ADDITIONALLY,
CONSIDERING THAT WE ARE NOT
DISCUSSING ROMANTIC
RELATIONSHIPS, WE ARE ONLY
DISCUSSING COMMERCIAL SEX. THERE
SHOULD BE NO LIMIT ON THE AGE
WHEN IT COMES TO THIS CRIME. IT
SHOULDN'T MATTER IF THE BUYER IS
25 YEARS OLDER THAN THE CHILD OR
SEVEN YEARS OLDER THAN THE
CHILD. PURCHASING A CHILD FOR
SEX IS WRONG AT ANY AGE. SOME OF
THE MOST BRUTAL SELLERS AND
BUYERS ARE YOUNG MEN IN THEIR
EARLY 20S. THESE BRUTALITY
ASSAILS CGRTS. THE BRUTALITY OF
THESE ASSAILANTS HAVE RAPED,
BEATEN, STRANGLED, THREATENED,
KIDNAPED AND EVEN KILLED THEIR
YOUNG VICTIMS. THE STORIES OF
VICTIMS JUMPING OUT OF MOVING
CARS AND VEHICLES JUST TO GET
AWAY FROM THEIR BUYERS. ONE SUCH
STORY OF A YOUNG WOMAN, 16 YEARS
OLD, AS A SURVIVOR WHO WAS
RAPED, URINATED ON AND LEFT ON
THE SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY BY HER
BUYER, WAS SPECIFICALLY VICIOUS.
THERE ARE MANY MORE STORIES LIKE
THESE, AND THE ONE THING THEY
ALL HAVE IN COMMON IS THAT THESE
YOUNG CHILDREN, WE HAVE FAILED
THEM. THEY DESERVED OUR
PROTECTIONS, AND THEN THEY
DESERVE OUR PROTECTIONS NOW. AND
I'M NOT WILLING TO LEAVE THEM
BEHIND. ON SB 14, 14 HAS
RECEIVED OVER 60 LETTERS OF
SUPPORT FROM HUMAN TRAFFICKING
NONPROFITS. DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
AND COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS, AS
WELL AS NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
LIKE THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR
SEXUAL EXPLOITATION AND EXODUS
CRY. IN ADDITION, MY OFFICE HAS
RECEIVED OVER 2000 INDIVIDUAL
LETTERS OF SUPPORT FROM EVERYDAY
CALIFORNIANS THAT WANT TO SEE
THE BUYING OF SEX TRAFFICKING
CHILDREN CLASSIFIED AS A AS A
FELONY, THE BUYING OF SEX
TRAFFICKED CHILDREN, OR THE
BUYING OF CHILDREN CLASSIFIED AS
A FELONY. I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT
ERROR. I'M HONORED TO HAVE WITH
ME TODAY TO TESTIFY. VANESSA
RUSSELL WITH LOVE NEVER FAILS,
ONE OF THE SPONSORS OF SB 1440,
TÍNH LOVE NEVER FAILS FIGHTS
EVERY SINGLE DAY TO END THE
HORRENDOUS, THE HORRENDOUS
PRACTICE OF SEX TRAFFICKING TO
PROTECT SURVIVORS OF THIS
HORRIBLE CRIME. ADDITIONALLY, TO
SHINE THE LIGHT ON THIS ISSUE,
FIRSTHAND KNOWLEDGE. MY SECOND
WITNESS IS AN INCREDIBLE
ADVOCATE WITH THE TEEN SEX
TRAFFICKING AND A TEEN SEX
TRAFFICKING SURVIVOR, SANDY
ESPARZA. MISS RUSSELL. YOU WILL
BE TIMED AT TWO MINUTES. THANK
YOU, THANK YOU. MY NAME IS
VANESSA RUSSELL. I'M THE
FOUNDING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF
LOVE NEVER FAILS. WE ARE A BAY
AREA, NONPROFIT THAT HOUSES
CHILDREN BETWEEN THE AGES OF 12
TO 17 THAT HAVE BEEN IMPACTED BY
HUMAN TRAFFICKING. WE ALSO
PROVIDE JOB WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT FOR THOSE SURVIVORS
AND OTHERS, AS WELL AS MENTORING
AND A VARIETY OF OTHER SERVICES.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE FEEL
SO STRONGLY ABOUT IS TO PROVIDE
LOVE AND HONOR FOR THE COURAGE
THAT THEY, THAT THEY HAVE TO GO
ON AFTER EXPERIENCING THE
HORRIFIC PAIN OF EXPLOITATION.
LOVE NEVER FAILS WAS FOUNDED 13
YEARS AGO AFTER MY 15 YEAR OLD
DANCE STUDENT WAS RAPED IN
HAYWARD AND SOLD FOR A YEAR
DURING THAT TIME, SHE, LIKE
OTHER COMMERCIALLY SEXUALLY
EXPLOITED CHILDREN, WAS UNDER
THE CONTROL OF SEVERAL PIMPS WHO
TOOK ALL HER MONEY AND BEAT HER
WHILE SHE HAD TO SLEEP WITH AND
OR SELL SEX TO AND OR BE RAPED
BY 9 TO 21 MEN. BRUTALLY DAILY
FOR 50 TO $80 EACH. THESE
BUYERS, USUALLY MEN OF AFFLUENCE
AND EDUCATION, WHO SHOULD KNOW
BETTER, TOOK NO ISSUE IN USING A
VULNERABLE AFRO-LATINA GIRL FOR
THEIR OWN SEXUAL GRATIFICATION,
OFTEN TAKING NO CONCERN FOR HER
LONG TERME PSYCHOLOGICAL,
PHYSICAL AND EMOTIONAL PAIN. AS
ONE BUYER STATED, I SEE GIRLS
LIKE A CUP OF COFFEE. I DRINK
THEM UP AND THROW THEM AWAY. I
STAND HERE ADVOCATING FOR THAT
CHILD AND DECLARING THAT WE HAVE
FAILED TO MAKE THEM SAFE TO
PROVIDE THEM SAFE ALTERNATIVES
TO HOMELESSNESS AND ECONOMIC
HARDSHIP, AND SEND A STRONG
MESSAGE TO THE PURCHASERS THAT
CALIFORNIA'S CHILDREN ARE NOT
FOR SALE. IN FACT, OUR CHILDREN
ARE PRECIOUS, VALUED AND LOVED
AND WILL NO LONGER BE SOMEONE'S
PLATFORM FOR GETTING RICH,
SOMEONE'S SEXUAL DUMPING GROUND,
OR SOMEONE'S THROWN AWAY COFFEE
CUP. I URGE YOU TO STAND UP FOR
COMMERCIALLY, SEXUALLY EXPLOITED
CHILDREN AND PUT BUYERS ON
NOTICE TO STOP BUYING OUR KIDS
AND VOTE YES ON PROP 1414 ON SB
1414. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. OUR
NEXT SPEAKER AGAIN, YOU WILL BE
TIMED AT TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR. GOOD MORNING, CHAIR
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS SANDY
ESPARZA. I'M AN ADVOCATE FOR
CHILD VICTIMS OF TRAFFICKING IN
CALIFORNIA. A FORMER FOSTER
YOUTH AND A SURVIVOR OF CHILD
TRAFFICKING. AT 14, I WAS FIRST
SOLD TO MEN AND PURCHASED FOR
SEX. THROUGHOUT MY TEEN YEARS, I
WAS LURED, TRICKED, THREATENED,
AND FORCED TO USE DRUGS AND AT
NO POINT WERE AT ANY AGE DID I
CHOOSE TO BE THERE. I HAD
NOWHERE TO GO. I WAS TERRIFIED,
AND I NEEDED HELP. THAT NEVER
CAME. RECENTLY, I SAT WITH A 17
YEAR OLD VICTIM CONTEMPLATING
SUICIDE AFTER SHE RECEIVED A
POSITIVE HIV DIAGNOSIS.
TRANSFERRED TO HER BY A SEX
BUYER, SHE WAS GROOMED AND
PURCHASED FOR SEX SINCE SHE WAS
14, AND ASKED ME IF ANYONE HAD
EVER PAID FOR WHAT THEY DID TO
ME, I SHARED THAT I NEVER SAW
JUSTICE, SHE RESPONDED, AND I
QUOTE SAYING, MISS, THE GAME
HASN'T CHANGED. IT HASN'T
CHANGED, WHICH TELLS US THAT
SOMETHING HAS TO CHANGE. FOR
HER, IT WAS HIV. FOR ME, IT WAS
CERVICAL CANCER. FOR OTHERS, A
LIST OF LIFELONG RESIDUAL TRAUMA
AT THE HANDS OF SEX BUYERS. THE
OPPOSITION WOULD ARGUE THAT IN
MOST STATES, THE AGE OF CONSENT
IS 16 YEARS OLD, AND THAT IT'S
MISGUIDED TO REQUIRE HARSHER
PENALTIES FOR AN ACTIVITY THAT
WOULD BE LEGAL IN 80% OF THE
COUNTRY. BUT THEY ARE WRONG
BECAUSE CONSENT IMPLIES CHOICE.
AND I KNOW AS A LIVED EXPERIENCE
EXPERT THAT FOR THE MAJORITY OF
15 TO 17 YEAR OLDS, THEY CANNOT
CONSENT BECAUSE THERE IS NO
CHOICE. THEY ARE FORCED OR
COERCED INTO THIS LIFE. AND IF
THEY COULD LEAVE, THEY WOULD.
PERHAPS THE JUSTICE SHIP HAS
SAILED FOR ME. I'M OKAY WITH
THAT. I'M NOT HERE FOR ME. I'M
HERE FOR THEM, FOR THE CHILDREN
STILL OUT THERE BEING BOUGHT AND
SOLD, FEELING AFRAID AND
FORGOTTEN. AREN'T THEY WORTHY OF
PROTECTION? DON'T THEIR LIVES
AND FUTURES MATTER? DIDN'T MINE?
I URGE YOU TO CONSIDER THE CHILD
AND ASK YOU RESPECTFULLY FOR
YOUR. I VOTE ON THIS BILL. THANK
YOU, THANK YOU. WE'RE GOING TO
MOVE ON TO ME. TWO IN SUPPORT,
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, YOUR
ORGANIZATION AND THAT YOU
SUPPORT. PLEASE LINE UP NOW,
THIS PART IS USUALLY PRETTY
QUICKLY. ALL RIGHT, BROOK ORTIZ,
A COUNSELING PSYCHOLOGY STUDENT
AT WILLIAM JESSUP UNIVERSITY,
AND I SUPPORT SB 1414. ALICIA
TRASK WITH HOPS SACRAMENTO, A
NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION AND WE
STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS. CLIFTON
WILSON, ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF KERN AND
TULARE IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING. CHAIR MEMBERS.
ERIC O'DONNELL, ON BEHALF OF THE
CITY OF STANTON IN ORANGE COUNTY
AND SUPPORT HANNAH DIAZ,
SURVIVOR ADVOCATE. LOVE NEVER
FAILS IN SUPPORT. MARJORIE
SAYLOR, SURVIVOR OF SYSTEMS OF
PROSTITUTION AND SEX TRAFFICKING
IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. BRIDGE
NETWORK EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. WE
PROVIDE SERVICES FOR, CSEC AND
TRANSITION AGE YOUTH. WE
STRONGLY SUPPORT. YVETTE
CORCORAN, MOTHER OF TEENAGERS
HERE IN SUPPORT. JOSEPH C¢M,
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC POLICY AT
FAMILY POLICY ALLIANCE. AND
WE'RE PROUD TO SUPPORT. SHANE
HARRIS, THE PRESIDENT AND
FOUNDER OF THE PEOPLE'S
ASSOCIATION OF JUSTICE ADVOCATES
OUT OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY,
STRONGLY URGE YOUR SUPPORT.
NICHOLAS SANCHEZ, CURRENT
DIRECTOR OF LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS
FOR ALLAN HANCOCK COLLEGES,
ASSOCIATED STUDENT BODY
GOVERNMENT IN SANTA MARIA, ALSO
THE FOUNDER AND CURRENT
PRESIDENT OF THE BLUE CAMPAIGN
CLUB IN SANTA MARIA, CALIFORNIA,
AS WELL. AND I WANTED TO BE HERE
TO VOICE MY SUPPORT FOR SB 1414.
DIEGO GARCIA MENDOZA I'M ALSO A
STUDENT AT ALLAN HANCOCK COLLEGE
IN SANTA MARIA, ALSO PART OF THE
ABC CAMPAIGN, AND I FULLY
SUPPORT SB 1414. MY NAME IS
GAMALIEL MUNOZ, AND I'M ALSO
PART OF ABC, AND I'M THE VICE
PRESIDENT, AND I FULLY SUPPORT
SB 1414. PETER JENNER HERE FOR
LOVE NEVER FAILS URGE YOU TO
STRONGLY SUPPORT GREG BURT, VICE
PRESIDENT OF THE CALIFORNIA
FAMILY COUNCIL, IN STRONG
SUPPORT. THANKS, MOLLY SHANNON
WITH THE CALIFORNIA CATHOLIC
CONFERENCE IN STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. AMNA SIDDIQUI FROM
LOVE NEVER FAILS WHERE WE
RESTORE, EDUCATE AND PROTECT
SURVIVORS OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING.
THANK YOU. HELLO. MY NAME IS
CARLA SILVERTON. I'M A MENTOR
AND PEER MENTOR FOR AT RISK
YOUTH AND I FULLY SUPPORT THIS
BILL. MY NAME IS EMILY CAMPBELL
FROM SANTA MARIA. I'M WITH
LIGHTHOUSE BAPTIST CHURCH AND I
SUPPORT THIS BILL BROCK CAMPBELL
ON BEHALF OF THE LIGHTHOUSE
BAPTIST CHURCH IN SANTA MARIA
AND SUPPORT THIS BILL. MANDISA
LEECHMAN FROM OAKLAND AND LOVE
NEVER FAILS A SURVIVOR. I
SUPPORT SANDY CARPIO. LOVE NEVER
FAILS OUTREACH MANAGER I SUPPORT
. CRYSTAL MAZE WITH LOVE NEVER
FAILS AND I SUPPORT SB 1414.
FELICIA MEDRANO WITH LOVE NEVER
FAILS. I SUPPORT SB 1414. ASHLEY
FAISON, FOUNDER OF DIAMOND
COLLECTIVE AND SURVIVOR. I
STRONGLY SUPPORT HALAWI WITH
LOVE NEVER FAILS. I SUPPORT.
BRINA SHEEHY, REPRESENTING PERC
ADVOCACY IN SUPPORT. DOCTOR
STEPHANIE POWELL, NATIONAL
CENTER ON SEXUAL EXPLOITATION WE
STRONGLY SUPPORT. CHAIR MEMBERS
JONATHAN FELDMAN, CALIFORNIA
POLICE CHIEFS ASSOCIATION IN
SUPPORT. THERESA STELL FROM
LITTLE COUNTRY CHURCH, AS WELL
AS A FOSTER PARENT OVER 35
YEARS. I SUPPORT IT. COLLEEN
BRITTON, CALIFORNIA LEADERS
NETWORK AND STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. ROCHELLE CONNER,
CONCERNED WOMEN FOR AMERICA
STRONG SUPPORT. MORNING, PAULA.
CADDY REENTRY COORDINATOR FOR
EBENEZER OUTREACH MINISTRY, A
PRISON MINISTRY IN VACAVILLE AND
A SURVIVOR. I STRONGLY SUPPORT.
1414 CATHY MARTINEZ FAMILY NURSE
PRACTITIONER FOR THREE PREGNANCY
CENTERS IN NORTHERN CALIFORNIA.
I STRONGLY SUPPORT. ELDA
CORLETTO WITH LOVE NEVER FAILS.
I STRONGLY SUPPORT. CARINA
POWERS, CHAIR OF THE REPUBLICAN
NATIONAL HISPANIC ASSEMBLY I
STRONGLY SUPPORT I'M EMMA
POWERS. I'M 14 YEARS OLD AND I
STRONGLY SUPPORT GINA MCKAY, SEX
TRAFFICKING SURVIVOR, AND I
SUPPORT. MITZI SANCHEZ WITH LOVE
NEVER FAILS AND I STRONGLY
SUPPORT JANET JET WITH LOVE
NEVER FAILS AND I STRONGLY
SUPPORT BRIANNA MOSLEY, SURVIVOR
OF CHILD SEX TRAFFICKING. AND I
STRONGLY SUPPORT. RODERICK GRAY,
LIBERTY CHURCH, FAIRFIELD,
CALIFORNIA I STRONGLY SUPPORT
KAYLEE KOZAK, NAMESAKE BEHIND
CAYLEE'S LAW, AND I STRONGLY
SUPPORT JILL BARAKA, SURVIVOR OF
TRAFFICKING IN PROSTITUTION AND
HARDCORE AND WORKING AS AN
ADVOCATE WITH JOURNEY OUT LOS
ANGELES. I STRONGLY SUPPORT. I'M
HELEN TAYLOR, VICE PRESIDENT OF
THE NATIONAL ANTI TRAFFICKING
ORGANIZATION EXODUS CRY,
STANDING WITH SURVIVORS IN
STRONG SUPPORT. MEGAN BERGER
WITH REDEMPTION HOUSE, THE BAY
AREA FORMER FOSTER YOUTH AND
SURVIVOR OF SEXUAL ABUSE AND
HUMAN TRAFFICKING. I STRONGLY
SUPPORT ELIZABETH QUIROZ,
SURVIVOR, HUMAN TRAFFICKING, AND
CO-FOUNDER OF REDEMPTION HOUSE
OF THE BAY AREA, AND I SUPPORT.
HEATHER BOYCE, SURVIVOR ADVOCATE
WITH LOVE NEVER FAILS AND I
STRONGLY SUPPORT. DOCTOR DOUG
BENNETT, FOUNDING EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, ON BEHALF OF MAGDALENE
HOPE. RESTORATION RANCH WOMEN'S
SHELTER RESCUE GROUNDS COFFEE
COMPANY, AND PEOPLE FOR THE
ABOLISHMENT OF TRAFFICKING
HUMANS. I'M A FORMER SEX BUYER.
I'VE BEEN FIGHTING HUMAN
TRAFFICKING FOR 15 YEARS,
PASSING THIS BILL WILL HELP END
SEX TRAFFICKING. I URGE YOU FOR
AN AYE VOTE. THANK YOU. HELLO.
MY NAME IS KRISTY VON WALDBURG.
I'M A RESIDENT OF ORANGE COUNTY
AND A FORMER CHILDHOOD SEX ABUSE
VICTIM. BUT I AM A SURVIVOR
HERE, STANDING TODAY WITH
SHANNON AND HER TEAM. THIS BILL
IS NECESSARY TO SWITCH THE
TIDES. THANK YOU. I SUPPORT.
SORRY. THANK YOU. HI. DENISE
AGUILAR, FREEDOM ANGELS AND FULL
SUPPORT. HI, TARA THORNTON,
FREEDOM ANGELS AND FULL SUPPORT.
PASTOR BRANDON CAMPBELL WITH THE
CALIFORNIA BAPTIST FOR BIBLICAL
VALUES, NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
DIRECTOR IN SUPPORT. CHRISTINE
CAMPBELL I'M JUST A CONCERNED
PARENT AND STRONG SUPPORT. THANK
YOU, SEEING WE HAVE NO OTHER
SUPPORT WITNESSES. AND I WANT TO
THANK EVERYBODY, INCLUDING
ESPECIALLY THE SURVIVORS, FOR
SHOWING UP. I WILL MOVE ON TO
LEAD OPPOSITION. OPPOSITION? YOU
WILL BE TIMED AT TWO MINUTES.
NATASHA MINSKER SMART JUSTICE.
CALIFORNIA. WE OPPOSE THIS BILL
UNLESS IT IS AMENDED TO ADDRESS
THE VERY SERIOUS AND IMPORTANT
PROBLEM THAT SENATOR GROVE AND
THE ADVOCATES HAVE BROUGHT
FORWARD OF OLDER ADULTS
SOLICITING SEX FROM CHILDREN.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE BILL AS
DRAFTED IS MUCH BROADER, AND IT
THREATENS TO HAVE UNINTENDED.
BUT DEVASTATING CONSEQUENCES FOR
TEENS AND YOUNG ADULTS. FIRST,
THE BILL IS DRAFTED IS NOT
LIMITED TO OLDER ADULTS
SOLICITING CHILDREN. IT'S NOT
LIMITED TO ADULTS SOLICITING AT
ALL, BUT APPLIES EVEN IF THE
PERSON SOLICITING IS 16 OR 17.
SECOND, THE BILL APPLIES EVEN IF
THE PERSON SOLICITED IS JUST A
DAY AWAY FROM THEIR 18TH
BIRTHDAY AND HAS NO REQUIREMENT
FOR AN AGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
THE TWO INDIVIDUALS. THIS IS A
SIGNIFICANT DEPARTURE FROM THE
LAWS OF ALMOST EVERY OTHER STATE
IN THIS AREA. AS A CONSEQUENCE,
THE WORDS OF A STUPID 17 YEAR
OLD WHO MAKES A DUMB MISTAKE AND
OFFERS ANYTHING OF VALUE TO
ANOTHER 17 YEAR OLD FOR ANY KIND
OF SEX ACT, IS A FELONY UNDER
THIS BILL. AND IF ONE OF THEM IS
18 BY JUST A FEW MONTHS, THEN
THEY'RE FACING UP TO FOUR YEARS
IN STATE PRISON. KEEP IN MIND
THAT THIS OFFENSE IS COMMITTED
THROUGH WORDS ALONE. IF ANY
ACTUAL SEX IS INVOLVED. THERE
ARE MANY OTHER FELONY STATUTES
THAT APPLY, BUT WORDS ALONE
COULD LEAD TO AN 18 YEAR OLD
FACING FOUR YEARS IN STATE
PRISON. IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO SAY
TRUST LAW ENFORCEMENT TO ENFORCE
THESE LAWS FAIRLY, BECAUSE WE
HAVE SEEN FROM EXPERIENCE THAT A
HAMMER LIKE THIS WILL BE USED
UNFAIRLY, AND IT WILL BE USED TO
TARGET THE LGBT COMMUNITY IN
PARTICULAR, WE URGE THE
COMMUNITY, THE WE URGE THE
COMMITTEE TO ACT ON THIS
IMPORTANT ISSUE AND TO ENSURE
THAT THERE ARE APPROPRIATE
CONSEQUENCES FOR OLDER ADULTS
WHO SOLICIT CHILDREN FOR SEX,
NOTHING MORE AND NOTHING LESS.
THANK YOU. YOU WILL ALSO HAVE
TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU. LESLIE
CALDWELL HOUSTON FOR THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION. I'D LIKE TO THANK
THE AUTHOR FOR ACCEPTING THE
AMENDMENT. S, AND, I THINK IT'S
A GREAT STEP FORWARD, BUT WE'RE
NOT ALL THE WAY THERE. Þ YOUTH
BRAIN DEVELOPMENT IS CRITICAL,
IN PART, HERE BECAUSE OF THE
FOCUS ON ON SUCH YOUNG PEOPLE.
AND WE KNOW THAT THROUGH THE
SCIENCE THAT A YOUTH BRAIN IS
NOT REALLY EVEN FULLY DEVELOPED.
IF BY 25, IT WOULD BE
UNFORTUNATE AND WRONG TO FORCE
THOSE YOUNG PEOPLE TO PRISON AND
TO SEX REGISTRY, IT SHOULD BE
NOTED THAT WHILE THE AGE OF
CONSENT IN CALIFORNIA IS 18, IN
AT LEAST 30 STATES RANGING FROM
PENNSYLVANIA TO OHIO, ALABAMA TO
WASHINGTON, THE AGE OF CONSENT
IS 16 YEARS OLD. SEVERAL MORE
STATES HAVE SET THE AGE OF
CONSENT AT 17. MAKE NO MISTAKE,
PROSECUTORS HAVE THE FULL
ABILITY AND ACCESS TO EXISTING
LAWS TO USE AGAINST PEOPLE WHO
SEXUALLY ABUSE MINORS AND SEND
THEM THOSE PEOPLE TO PRISON FOR
DECADES. THE BILL IS STILL
FLAWED, AND WE CONTINUE TO URGE
YOUR NO VOTE UNTIL WE CAN
ADDRESS THE ISSUES RAISED BOTH
BY THE PUBLIC DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION AND BY MY COLLEAGUE
WHO JUST SPOKE. THANK THANK YOU,
WE ARE GOING TO MOVE ON TO
OPPOSITION. ME TWO'S AGAIN,
STATE YOUR NAME THAT YOU OPPOSE
AND WHAT ORGANIZATION YOU BELONG
WITH. NORMA ELLA BAKER CENTER
FOR HUMAN RIGHTS IN OPPOSITION
THÀNH. GLEN BACCHUS, FATHER OF
TWO. ELLA BAKER, CENTER IN
OPPOSITION. ROXANA GONZALEZ, A
SURVIVOR OF SEXUAL ASSAULT WITH
IGE ACTION, STRONGLY OPPOSE.
DANICA ODOM, ON BEHALF OF
INITIATE JUSTICE. CALIFORNIANS
FOR SAFETY AND JUSTICE. THE
PACIFIC JUVENILE DEFENDER CENTER
IN RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION AND
LESS OPPOSED, AMENDED AND
AMENDED. THANK YOU, YOLANDA
NAVARETTE, FOR INITIATE JUSTICE
ACTION AND FELONY MURDER
ELIMINATION PROJECT. ALSO,
SEXUAL ABUSE SURVIVOR IN
OPPOSITION. EMILY HARRIS WITH
THE ELLA BAKER CENTER AND
CALIFORNIANS UNITED FOR A
RESPONSIBLE BUDGET AND
OPPOSITION. AND MIKE ETZEL, IN
BEHALF OF UNCOMMON LAW AND S.F.
PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE, WE
OPPOSE HEAD ON. I'M HERE ON
BEHALF OF LEGAL SERVICES FOR
PRISONERS WITH CHILDREN. WE HAVE
A OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED
POSITION. THANK YOU. ALICIA
BENAVIDES ON BEHALF OF ACLU, CAL
ACTION OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. DO
WE HAVE ANY OTHER OPPOSITION?
SEEING NONE, WE'RE GOING TO TURN
BACK THE CONVERSATION TO MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE. SENATOR SATO
SURE. I'LL START OFF, YOU KNOW A
LOT OF THIS. THANK YOU, SENATOR
GROVE, FOR THIS BILL AND YOUR
EFFORTS OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS
TO ADDRESS WHAT IS A GROWING
PROBLEM. IT'S NOT SHRINKING.
IT'S GROWING. AND IN OUR LACK OF
ADDRESSING IT HAS MADE IT WORSE.
AND SO I THINK YOUR BILL TODAY,
I THINK IT'S A MESSAGE THAT IT'S
TIME TO STOP MAKING EXCUSES FOR
PEOPLE THAT ARE MAKING BAD
DECISIONS, WHETHER WHATEVER
THEIR BRAIN DEVELOPMENT IS, IT'S
NOT HARD IF YOU'RE LESS THAN 18
YEARS OLD, THAT'S A MINOR. AND
IF YOU ARE OVER 18 YEARS OLD AND
YOU WERE PAYING SOMEBODY TO HAVE
SEX, THEN, THEN IT IS INCUMBENT
UPON YOU TO ENSURE THAT THAT
PERSON IS NOT UNDER 18. I DON'T
CARE IF YOU ASK FOR THEIR ID OR
WHATEVER, BUT IF IT SHOULD BE
ILLEGAL AND IT GETS MORE
ATROCIOUS AS THESE SEX BECAUSE
THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE. THEY'RE
SEX OFFENDERS. EVENTUALLY, THESE
OLDER INDIVIDUALS WHO PREY ON
THESE YOUNG KIDS. AND UNTIL WE
MAKE SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES FOR
THAT, IT IS GOING TO CONTINUE
AND IT'S GOING TO GET WORSE, SO,
I WILL BE SUPPORTING YOUR BILL.
IN FACT, I WILL MAKE THE MOTION
TO SUPPORT THIS BILL, AND,
AGAIN, I APPLAUD THE EFFORTS
THAT YOU'RE DOING, IT MAKES AS
MUCH SENSE AS SB 14. AND THAT
WAS A RIDICULOUSLY UPHILL CLIMB
TO GET THERE. THIS THIS GOES
HAND IN HAND WITH TRYING TO
ATTACK THIS PROBLEM. AND I THINK
YOU'RE DOING A GREAT JOB DOING
IT. SO, WITH THAT, I WILL, END
MY COMMENTS AND I WILL MAKE THE
MOTION WHEN IT'S APPROPRIATE.
THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT,
SENATOR WIENER NÓ. DO WE HAVE
ANY OTHER MEMBERS? SENATOR
BRADFORD? ALL RIGHT, I WANT TO
THANK SENATOR GROVE FOR
CONTINUING TO FIGHT ON THIS
ISSUE IN SO MANY MORE THAT DEAL
WITH OUR YOUNG FOLKS BEING
EXPLOITED. AND LAST YEAR, YOU
KNOW, I AUTHORED AN EBONY ALERT,
AND I KNOW THE IMPORTANCE OF
DOING ALL WE CAN TO COMBAT HUMAN
TRAFFICKING. TRAFFICKING,
ESPECIALLY WHAT OUR MINORS, I
WAS SUPPORTIVE OF SENATOR
GROVE'S BILL LAST YEAR, SB 14,
AND WAS THE COAUTHOR OF THAT
MEASURE AS WELL. I HAVE HAD
NUMEROUS CONVERSATIONS WITH THE
SENATOR ABOUT THIS BILL, AS HAS
MY STAFF, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR
WILLINGNESS TO ADDRESS MY
CONCERNS. EXISTING LAW MAKES
SOLICITATION OF A MINOR A
MISDEMEANOR, PUNISHABLE BY AS
FEW AS TWO DAYS IN JAIL. I
GENERALLY, BEEN CONCERNED ABOUT
ENHANCING PENALTIES AND CREATING
NEW FELONIES, ESPECIALLY ABOUT
THEIR CONSEQUENCES ON
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR. HOWEVER, I
BELIEVE A HIGHER PENALTY FOR
THIS CRIME, ONE THAT INVOLVES
THE EXPLOITATION OF VULNERABLE
CHILDREN, IS APPROPRIATE. THIS
BILL WOULD REQUIRE THE PERSON
CONVICTED TO REGISTER FOR TEN
YEARS AS A SEX OFFENDER. I'VE
EXPRESSED MY CONCERNS REGARDING
THIS AND I APPRECIATE THE
SENATOR HAS BEEN AMENABLE TO
APPLYING THIS ONLY FOR REPEAT
OFFENDERS. IF I'M CORRECT.
CORRECT. AND WE RECENTLY HEARD A
BILL IN THIS COMMITTEE THAT
DEALT WITH SEX OFFENDER REGISTRY
AND MINORS. AND ALTHOUGH
CONCERNS WAS RAISED ABOUT THE
IMPLEMENTATION IMPLICATIONS OF
THAT BILL, THIS MEASURE IS
SPECIFICALLY FOCUSED ON
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE DELIBERATELY
ENGAGED IN THE SEXUAL
TRAFFICKING OF MINORS. MY
BIGGEST CONCERN ABOUT THE BILL
IN PRINT HAS BEEN THE FACT THAT
THE INDIVIDUAL NEED NOT HAVE
KNOWN THAT THE VICTIM WAS A
MINOR, THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE
PERSON KNEW, OR REASONABLY
SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THE VICTIM WAS
A MINOR IS AN APPROPRIATE IS
APPROPRIATE FOR THESE INCREASED
PENALTIES. I APPRECIATE THE
AUTHOR FOR UNDERSTANDING MY
PERSPECTIVE AND AGREEING TO MAKE
THOSE CHANGES TO THE BILL. I
WILL BE SUPPORTIVE OF THE BILL
WITH THE COMMITMENT FROM THE
AUTHOR TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES. AS
I KNOW THE BILL HAS A LONG WAYS
TO GO AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE
AUTHOR TO CONTINUE WORKING NOT
ONLY WITH THIS COMMITTEE, BUT
WITH THE FOLLOWING COMMITTEES
WITH THIS BILL. THANK YOU, I,
MADAM CHAIR, GO AHEAD. THANK YOU
, SENATOR BRADFORD, I GOT A LOT
OF YOUR DATA FROM EBONY ALERT ON
THE BILL THAT YOU PUT FORWARD,
BECAUSE IT WAS VERY GOOD DATA ON
SEXUAL EXPLOITATION,
SPECIFICALLY OF THOSE OF
INDIVIDUALS AND YOUNG WOMEN OF
COLOR. AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR
SUPPORT. I THANK YOU FOR WORKING
WITH MY OFFICE AND YOUR STAFF,
WORKING WITH MY OFFICE. I DID
OFFER THE AMENDMENTS TO THE
COMMITTEE IN WRITING THAT I
WOULD TAKE THE STRICT LIABILITY
OUT, AND I WOULD ALSO ADDRESS
THE ISSUE AND THE CONCERN THAT
YOU HAD, I THINK THE CHAIR IS
GOING TO ADDRESS THAT NOW, IF
I'M CORRECT, BECAUSE THEY DID
NOT ACCEPT THE SUGGESTED
AMENDMENTS THAT I ASKED OR THAT
I AGREED, AND YOU AND I HAD
TALKED ABOUT. SO JUST TO MAKE
THE RECORD CLEAR, BUT I THANK
YOU FOR YOUR COURAGE AND YOUR
SUPPORT, AND YOUR CONVERSATION
THAT YOU'VE HAD WITH ME OVER THE
LAST SEVERAL MONTHS OVER THIS
PIECE OF LEGISLATION. AND AGAIN,
TO BE THE HERO OF EBONY ALERT. I
I TAG, I TRACK IT ON SOCIAL
MEDIA AND EVERY TIME IT SAYS
APOLENA HASHTAG EBONY ALERT, I
GET AN ALERT. AND YOUR BILL IS
VERY MUCH WORKING TO PROTECT
THOSE IN THIS INDUSTRY. SO THANK
YOU. I DO WISH THE COMMITTEE
WOULD ACCEPT THE TWO AMENDMENTS
THAT I, I OFFERED TO ACCEPT
WITHOUT THE EXCEPTION OF THE
OTHERS THAT, HAVE CONCERN. I
HAVE A TECHNICAL WITNESS HERE
FOR THE ACTUAL, HIGH SCHOOL
DROPOUT AND A WAVE OF
CONTINUATION KID. AND, SOMETIMES
I WONDER HOW I EVEN MANAGED TO
GET IN THIS BUILDING. SO I HAVE
A TECHNICAL ATTORNEY WHO CAN GO
UP AGAINST THE OTHER TWO
ATTORNEYS JUST SPOKE. THAT'S A
WITNESS, FOR THE ACTUAL
TECHNICAL LEGAL ETHICS EXPERT,
HE'S TYSON MCCOY, SUPERVISING
DISTRICT DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY FROM SANTA BARBARA
COUNTY, BUT IN MY LAYMAN'S
TERMS, I HIGHLY DOUBT THAT
SENIORS IN HIGH SCHOOL ARE GOING
TO BE THE TARGETS OF, LAW
ENFORCEMENT GOING AFTER BUYING
CHILDREN FOR SEX. AND, I EVEN
OFFERED AN AMENDMENT THAT SAID,
YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE 18 YEARS OLD
AND YOU'RE WITH YOUR CLASSMATE
AND, AND, YOU'RE GOING TO ENGAGE
IN THIS, THAT, YOU KNOW, WE
COULD ACT, AMEND THAT LANGUAGE
THAT WOULD MAKE PEOPLE FEEL MORE
COMFORTABLE ABOUT THAT
SITUATION. OUR INTENT IS NOT 18
YEAR OLDS. I HIGHLY DOUBT THAT
LAW ENFORCEMENT WILL PURSUE 18
YEARS OLDER. THE EVIL BUYERS,
BUYERS THAT WERE GOING AFTER.
AND I DID ACTUALLY SIT, SUBMIT
LANGUAGE THAT WAS GIVEN TO US
THAT WOULD SUPERSEDE ANY
QUESTIONS ACCORDING TO THE LAW
THAT WAS ALSO DECLINED BY THE
COMMITTEE, FROM MY
UNDERSTANDING, BASED ON THE
COMMUNICATIONS THAT I'VE HAD,
BUT CAN I ASK KAYSON TO COMMENT
ON THE TECHNICAL QUESTION, NOT
AT THIS TIME. I THINK THAT
THERE'S ANOTHER SENATOR THAT
WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT, SENATOR
SKINNER. SENATOR GROVE, LIKE MY
COLLEAGUE, I APPRECIATE YOUR
DEEP COMMITMENT TO THIS AND YOUR
CARE ABOUT THE EXPLOITATION OF
OUR CHILDREN AND THE WORK THAT
YOU'VE BEEN DOING, AND AS OUR
COLLEAGUE, YOU KNOW, I SUPPORTED
THE BILL LAST YEAR, AND I HAVE
ALSO DONE SIMILAR WORK IN TRYING
TO FURTHER PROTECT OUR KIDS FROM
, SEX TRAFFICKING AND
EXPLOITATION. THE ISSUE I HAVE
WITH THE WAY THE BILL IS
CONSTRUCTED NOW, IS IT REFLECTS
SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WE'VE
HEARD AND EVEN THOSE SOME OF THE
FOLKS WHO OPPOSED ARE EVEN
SURVIVORS. LET ME STEP BACK FOR
A MINUTE. SO AND I TOTALLY
APPRECIATE AND IT IS WHY I
SUPPORTED AND PASSED LEGISLATION
REMOVING THE CRIMINALITY. WE
USED TO CONSIDER A MINOR WHO WAS
SOLD FOR SEX. WE USED TO
CONSIDER THEM MINOR, THE
CRIMINAL, WHICH WAS COMPLETELY
INAPPROPRIATE, AND I SUPPORTED
THE LEGISLATION TO CHANGE THAT.
AND I WILL NOTE THAT WE HAD MANY
DA'S MANY OF THE SAME DA'S WHO
SUPPORT THIS, WHO COMPLETELY
OPPOSED THAT, AND WHO SAID NO,
WE MUST KEEP THE MINORS
CRIMINALS, BECAUSE THAT'S THE
ONLY WAY WE'RE GOING TO STOP
THIS. YOU KNOW, WE'RE THAT'S OUR
WAY TO. AND I WAS LIKE, NO, WE
HAVE TO STOP THE MARKET. WE HAVE
TO STOP THE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE
TO GET INTO CUTTING THAT. NOW,
OF COURSE, THAT IS NOT EASY TO
DO BECAUSE I THINK, AS ALL OF US
KNOW, SELLING SEX HAS BEEN
WITHIN HUMAN CULTURES FOR
MILLENNIA, NOT TO SAY THAT I
DON'T SUPPORT US DOING
EVERYTHING WE CAN TO TRY, BUT
THE PROBLEM WITH HOW IT'S
CONSTRUCTED NOW IS, IS IT IS NOT
DESIGNED SOLELY AND ONLY TO GET
THOSE PERSONS WHO ARE BEING SEX
TRAFFICKED. ADDITIONALLY, IT
GOES AFTER INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE
NOT WHO AGAIN, IT'S VERBAL. THEY
HAVEN'T ACTUALLY, ENGAGED IN IN
ANYWAY. IT'S S YOU COULD HAVE
STING OPERATIONS WHERE, YOU
KNOW, IT'S JUST A VERY DIFFICULT
AREA OF LAW TO GET INTO. BUT
CERTAINLY WHERE WE HAVE, FOR
EXAMPLE, TEN YEAR AGE
DIFFERENCES AND PERPETRATOR WHO
HAVE COMMITTED AN OFFENSE MORE
THAN ONCE, THEN IT'S CLEAR THE
THEY KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND
THE AND SUCH PENALTIES AS THE
KIND OF PENALTIES YOU HAVE
RECOMMENDED ARE APPROPRIATE. BUT
HOW IT'S CONSTRUCTED NOW FOR MY
TASTE, AND I THINK AS MY
UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE
COMMITTEE HAS OFFERED GOES TOO
FAR, SO I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE
AND WOULD SUPPORT YOUR BILL IF
IT HAD THE AMENDMENTS THAT THE
COMMITTEE HAS BEEN ASKING FOR.
AND THOSE AMENDMENTS ARE GOTTA
GET MY GLASSES ARE THE REMOVAL
OF THE STRICT LIABILITY. THAT'S
THE KNOWLEDGE PART, THE MAKING,
THE PENALTIES AND MANDATORY
REGISTRATION APPLY ONLY TO ADULT
PERPETRATORS. FOR MINOR VICTIMS
UNDER 16, MAKING IT A WOBBLER ON
THE FIRST OFFENSE AND A STRAIGHT
FELONY ON THE SECOND OFFENSE IN
COUNTY JAIL. AND ME PERSONALLY,
I WOULD LIKE THE TEN AGE, THE
TEN YEAR AGE DIFFERENCE THERE,
BUT I KNOW THE COMMITTEE HAS
OFFERED WHAT I JUST DESCRIBED. I
I CAN LIVE WITH THAT. AND THEN
FINALLY, THE MANDATORY
REGISTRATION, IF THE MINOR WAS
UNDER 16 AND THE PERPETRATOR OR
DEFENDANT WAS MORE HAD THE TEN
YEARS DIFFERENCE. SO FOR REPEAT
OFFENDER, SO THOSE ARE THE
AMENDMENTS I WOULD LIKE TO SEE.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S
APPROPRIATE. WELL WOULD YOU TAKE
THOSE AMENDMENTS THAT THE
COMMITTEE HAS OFFERED. SO BEFORE
I ANSWER THAT I ANSWERED IT WHEN
I WAS HAVING A CONVERSATION. I'D
LIKE MY TECHNICAL WITNESS TO
COME UP AND, EXPLAIN TO YOU WHY
THAT DOESN'T WORK IN THE REAL
WORLD. AND, AND I APPRECIATE
YOUR COMMENTS. AND I KNOW YOU
WEREN'T HERE WHEN I STARTED THE
CONVERSATION, BUT THIS COMMITTEE
HAS ENGAGED WITH ME IN
CONVERSATION, INCLUDING THE
CHAIR, INCLUDING MY COLLEAGUE
FROM SAN FRANCISCO. I THINK WE
WERE TEXTING TILL 11, AND I
FINALLY WAS LIKE, I HAVE TO GO
TO SLEEP, BUT WHO HAS ENGAGED IN
THE CONVERSATION TO TRY TO SOLVE
THIS PROBLEM AGAIN? MY COLLEAGUE
MR. BRADFORD, WHO WROTE THE
EBONY ALERT, I CAN TELL YOU
THAT, WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT
STING OPERATION AND YOU
MENTIONED THAT AND YOU MENTIONED
THE INDIVIDUALS WHO PURCHASED
CHILDREN FOR SEX AND YOUR
AMENDMENT THAT YOU'RE
REQUESTING, I WROTE AS FAST AS I
COULD. I APOLOGIZE, BUT WHEN YOU
TALKED ABOUT THE AMENDMENTS FOR
THE, WOBBLER ON THE FIRST
OFFENSE AND THE SECOND OFFENSE,
THE BOTTOM LINE IS, IS THAT
OFFENSE IS NOT A WOBBLER, OR THE
SECOND OFFENSE IS NOT A WOBBLER,
IS THE COMMITTEE, IF I'M
CORRECT, HAS HAS HAS PROVIDED
THOSE IN WRITING TO YOU WHAT THE
AMENDMENTS THAT THEY WERE HOPING
. YES, MA'AM. AND I WILL CONFESS
THAT I DO HAVE THOSE RIGHT IN
FRONT OF ME. AND I COULD READ
THEM IF I COULD BORROW YOUR
GLASSES, WHICH I FAILED TO BRING
TO THIS HEARING, MINE. SO THAT'S
WHY I'M KIND OF JUST SUMMARIZING
THIS. AND SO JUST TO SAY THAT,
YOU KNOW, WE DID ACCEPT THE
STRICT LIABILITY, AMENDMENT. WE
UNDERSTOOD THAT WE HAD
CONVERSATIONS WITH OTHER PEOPLE,
AND WE UNDERSTOOD WHY THAT WAS
IMPORTANT. THE OTHER AMENDMENT
THAT WE DID ACCEPT WAS THE NOT
THE FIRST TIME, SEX REGISTRY
OPTION. WE'LL GIVE EVERYBODY AN
OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, YEAH, YOU
KNOW, I THOUGHT SHE WAS 18, BUT
SHE WASN'T AN AND, OR WHATEVER.
RIGHT. BUT THEY DO IT AGAIN.
THEN THEY'RE A REPEAT OFFENDER
AND THEY SHOULD GO TO PRISON, I
CAN'T ACCEPT THE AMENDMENT THAT
SAYS JAIL TIME AND JAILS ARE
OVERCROWDED. PRISONS ARE CLOSING
DOWN BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH
PEOPLE IN THERE. AND ANYBODY IN
MY MIND THAT IS PURCHASING
SOMEONE FOR SEX SHOULD GO TO
PRISON. IT SHOULDN'T BE TWO DAYS
IN JAIL OR TIME IN JAIL. IT
SHOULD BE PRISON. WE'RE ONLY
ASKING FOR TWO YEARS, FOR THESE
REPEAT REPEAT OFFENDERS, THE
FELONY JAIL THAT IS NOT A
WOBBLER IS A MINIMUM YEAR. SO I
JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE TO PUT ON
THE RECORD. WE'RE NOT TALKING
ABOUT TWO DAYS, JUST CURRENTLY
IT'S TWO DAYS. YES. BUT THE
AMENDMENT THAT IS THE AMENDMENT
THAT THE CHAIR YES. AND THE
COMMITTEE HAS OFFERED IS NOT TWO
DAYS. EXACTLY. JUST LET'S PUT
THAT ON THE RECORD. LET'S NOT
HAVE ANY CONFUSION. I'M TRYING
NOT TO HAVE CONFUSION. I'M
ASKING FOR TWO YEARS, I DID
ACCEPT SOME OF THE COMMITTEE'S
AMENDMENTS. I CAN'T ACCEPT THE
OTHERS. I'D LIKE MY TECHNICAL
WITNESS, THE SUPERVISING DEPUTY
DISTRICT ATTORNEY FROM SANTA
BARBARA COUNTY TO EXPLAIN WHY
THAT WON'T WORK, THAT THAT WILL
NOT BE NECESSARY. WE ARE NOT
GRANTING THAT PRIVILEGE. SENATOR
WIENER. WOW THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR. AND I APPRECIATE THE
CONVERSATIONS THAT THE AUTHOR
AND I HAVE BEEN ABLE TO HAVE. I
APPRECIATE THAT LAST YEAR WITH
SB 14, WE WERE ABLE TO COME TO A
RESOLUTION, WITH THE AUTHOR AND
PASS THAT BILL UNANIMOUSLY OUT
OF THIS COMMITTEE, AND THAT GAVE
IT THE I THINK THE HIGH ENERGY
TO PASS THE SENATE UNANIMOUSLY,
IT HAD SOME TURBULENCE IN THE
ASSEMBLY, BUT ULTIMATELY PASSED
THE ASSEMBLY AND WAS SIGNED INTO
LAW, ESSENTIALLY UNANIMOUSLY VÆ
AND THAT ALL, AND THAT ALL
STARTED IN THIS, THAT THAT ALL
STARTED IN THIS, IN THIS
COMMITTEE, BECAUSE WE KEPT. I'M
SORRY. WHAT'S GOING. IT'S ALL
RIGHT. I'M SORRY, THAT ALL
STARTED IN, IN THIS COMMITTEE
BECAUSE WE KEPT AN OPEN MIND ON
THE ISSUE. WORKED WITH YOU, AND
WE WERE ABLE TO COME TO A
RESOLUTION, AND I THINK WE'VE
ALL GONE INTO THIS. WE COULD
HAVE EASILY JUST SAID NO TO THIS
BILL. BECAUSE, AS I'LL EXPLAIN,
THIS BILL IS INCREDIBLY
OVERBROAD, IN MY OPINION, AND WE
COULD HAVE JUST SAID NO, BUT WE,
IN GOOD FAITH, AND I THINK ON
BOTH SIDES TRIED TO WORK THROUGH
THIS. AS MY COLLEAGUE FROM.
SORRY. GO AHEAD. SORRY. GOING
ON. YEAH, AS MY COLLEAGUE FROM
BERKELEY, ARTICULATED, THIS BILL
GOES WELL BEYOND HUMAN
TRAFFICKING, AND I'M, I THINK
HUMAN TRAFFICKING. WE SHOULD BE
THROWING THE BOOK AT PEOPLE.
THIS BILL WILL SWEEP IN A LOT OF
PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT TRAFFICKING,
THIS BILL WILL SEND PEOPLE TO
STATE PRISON, PUT PEOPLE IN THE
SEX OFFENDER REGISTRY, WHICH IS
BASICALLY EFFECTIVELY, IN MANY
WAYS, THE END OF THEIR LIFE FOR
PEOPLE, WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE
ENGAGED IN HUMAN TRAFFICKING.
AND AGAIN, EVEN IF THERE'S NO
PHYSICAL CONTACT WHATSOEVER, AND
SO I THINK THE AMENDMENTS THAT
SENATOR SKINNER HAS ARTICULATED,
ARE REASONABLE. AND I'M
SUPPORTIVE OF THE BILL WITH
THOSE AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. I DO BELIEVE THAT WAS
ALREADY IN MOTION, A MOTION TO
AMEND THE BILL. AS I DISCUSSED.
OKAY OKAY. SENATOR SKINNER
AGAIN, SORRY. THANK YOU. I WOULD
HOPE, SENATOR GROVE, THAT THE
AMENDMENTS WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE
TO YOU BECAUSE I THINK THAT AS
THE CHAIR'S EXPRESSED, YOU'VE
ALL I KNOW HAD A LOT OF
INTERACTIONS AND AS, MY
COLLEAGUE FROM SAN FRANCISCO WHO
YOU VISITED INDICATED TEXT YOU
WERE TEXTING UNTIL 11 P.M. LAST
NIGHT. IS THAT FOR SOME OF US,
EVEN WHAT THE COMMITTEE IS
OFFERING IS SOMEWHAT BEYOND THE
COMFORT ZONE. BUT WE DO LIKE YOU
WANT TO DO WHATEVER WE CAN TO
BASICALLY WHACK AT THIS MARKET,
THIS DEMAND. IT'S THE DEMAND
SIDE THAT THESE INCREASED
PENALTIES ARE TRYING TO GET AT.
SO AND YET WE ALSO KNOW, AS YOU
KNOW, PERSON THAT'S BEEN ON THIS
COMMITTEE FROM THE DAY I GOT
INTO THE SENATE. WHENEVER WE ARE
CRAFTING LEGISLATION, WE ARE
TRYING TO BALANCE FOR UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCES. SO I AGAIN, I
THINK THIS WHAT THE COMMITTEE
HAS OFFERED IS VERY SUBSTANTIAL
AND WELL BEYOND SOME OF OUR
COMFORT ZONE. AND I WOULD HOPE
THAT YOU COULD APPRECIATE THAT.
BUT IF YOU ARE, I GUESS I'M
WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION TO
ADOPT THE AMENDMENTS AS THE
COMMITTEE HAS OFFERED. SO I MOVE
THAT WE ADOPT THE AMENDMENTS AS
THE COMMITTEE HAS OFFERED. THANK
YOU. WITH A CLEAR DESCRIPTION.
ARE YOU FORCING THESE AMENDMENTS
ON ME, MADAM CHAIR? MOST LIKELY,
YES, YES. SO TAKE A MOTION,
PRIOR TO THAT, I WOULD LIKE THE
SENATOR TO CLOSE. NO, NO, YOU
HAVE TO DO THIS FIRST. OKAY. WE
HAVE A MOTION, TO AMEND, TAKE
THE AMENDMENTS. ROLL CALL.
WAHAB, I WAHAB, I SATO. NO.
SATO. NO. BRADFORD SKINNER. YES.
ON THE AMENDMENTS ONLY I SKINNER
I WIENER WIENER I. LEAVE IT OPEN
. NO. THE AMENDMENT IT HAS TO BE
PRESENT AND VOTING. OKAY THE
AMENDMENTS ARE ADOPTED. AND IF
YOU WOULD LIKE TO CLOSE. WELL I
COULD SAY THAT'S A FIRST. BUT
THAT HAPPENED TO ME IN THE
ASSEMBLY WHEN I FIRST GOT HERE,
TO HAVE FORCED AMENDMENTS ON AN
AUTHOR'S BILL. I'M ON RECORD
DECLINING THOSE AMENDMENTS. I'M
ON RECORD ACCEPTING TWO OF THE
AMENDMENTS THAT YOU HAVE SAID. I
APPRECIATE MY COLLEAGUE FROM
BERKLEY'S COMMENTS ABOUT BEING
OUT OF A COMFORT ZONE. YOU TALK
ABOUT BEING OUT OF A COMFORT
ZONE. YOU HAVE A COMMITTEE
FORCED AMENDMENTS ON YOU IN
FRONT OF SURVIVORS THAT ARE
STANDING HERE ADVOCATING FOR
THIS BILL. TO WATER THIS DOWN,
TO SAY THAT 16, 17 YEAR OLDS
DON'T MATTER, THAT THEM BEING
AND IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT HUMAN
TRAFFICKING. AND I THINK THAT'S
THE DISCONNECT. I BELIEVE THAT
HUMAN TRAFFICKING IS ANYTHING
THAT, IS FORCING SOMEONE TO DO
SOMETHING AGAINST THEIR WILL,
THIS BUYER SITUATION IS A RANDOM
PERSON DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD,
SEEING A KID THAT LOOKS LIKE
THEY'RE 12 OR 13 AND SAY, HEY,
50 BUCKS FOR THIS. THAT'S THE
GUY I WANT TO GO AFTER, I CAN
TELL YOU THAT BRIANNA MOSLEY,
SINCE WE'RE TOTALLY OUT OF
DECORUM HERE, BRIANNA, STAND UP
FOR ME, PLEASE. WHERE ARE YOU AT
? BRIANNA MOSLEY TOLD A STORY
THIS MORNING, AND I'VE HEARD HER
STORY BEFORE. HER AND HER SISTER
WERE BOTH TRAFFICKED. HER MOTHER
LOOKS DESPERATELY FOR HER
DAUGHTERS IN THIS DARK
UNDERWORLD. SHE PUT POSTERS UP
ALL OVER. MY 15 YEAR OLD
DAUGHTER IS MISSING. THE BUYERS
WOULD SEE THESE POSTERS AND COME
SEEK HER OUT AND SAY, ARE YOU
REALLY 15? I WANT YOU BECAUSE
YOU ARE 15 OR 16. ACCORDING TO
HER, 15 WAS HER SISTER AND 16
WAS SHE WAS. SO THERE ARE PEOPLE
OUT THERE THAT ARE PURPOSELY
DOING THIS. AND TO SAY THAT
BRIANNA DOESN'T MATTER. OR HER
SISTER WHO WAS KILLED, OR DIED
BECAUSE OF THIS HORRIFIC,
HEINOUS CRIME, TO SAY THEY DON'T
MATTER IS, IS COMPLETELY
UNACCEPTABLE. AND I WANT YOU TO
KNOW THAT I FULLY OBJECT. I
DON'T HAVE A RULE OR ANYTHING ON
THIS THAT YOU HAVE LEGAL
EXPERTISE ON THE DAIS, AND YOU
HAVE LEGAL EXPERTISE THAT CAME
AND TESTIFIED IN OPPOSITION AND
THAT, MADAM CHAIR, YOU REFUSED
TO ALLOW MY LEGAL EXPERT TO TALK
TO YOU ABOUT THE OPPOSITE.
SENATOR, YOU HAD TWO WITNESSES
THAT YOU COULD HAVE BROUGHT IN.
YOU ALSO HAD A LARGE COALITION.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH YOU. I
WOULD LIKE YOU TO STICK TO THE
CLOSE. ABSOLUTELY. YOU HAD TWO
WITNESSES AND YOUR LEGAL SUPPORT
ON THE DAIS. LET'S JUST BE REAL,
OKAY? SO MY LEGAL EXPERT THAT IS
HERE, STANDING HERE HAS THE
OPPOSITE OF WHAT? IF YOU WOULD
HEAR, COULD CONVEY THE REASON
WHY THOSE AMENDMENTS ARE NOT
ACCEPTED AND I REALIZE THAT
YOU'RE LOOKING AT YOUR COMMITTEE
CONSULTANT, BUT I WANT YOU TO
KNOW THAT I THINK THAT FORCING
THE AMENDMENTS ON ME AND THIS
BILL IS COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO CLOSE WITH
THIS. AS I WAS STANDING HERE
TODAY, I GOT A TEXT FROM JOHN
PEREZ, THE FORMER CALIFORNIA
STATE ASSEMBLY, SPEAKER, AND HE
SAID THE PUBLIC DEFENDER IS
RIDICULOUS. SHE SAYS, SHE WHAT
SHE SAYS IS NOT FULLY DEVELOPED
UNTIL 25 AND OPPOSES PROTECTING
THEM. SO THESE SHE ADVOCATES,
ACCORDING TO MR. PEREZ, THAT SHE
WANTS TO PROTECT CHILDREN THAT
ARE NOT FULLY DEVELOPED IN THEIR
BRAINS UNTIL 25, BUT THEN
ADVOCATES AGAINST PROTECTING
THEM. UNDER THIS PIECE OF
LEGISLATION. I THANK THE FORMER
SPEAKER FOR SENDING ME THAT
TEXT, BECAUSE I DID NOT KNOW
THAT HE HAD APPARENTLY WORKED
WITH HER ON THAT LEGISLATION.
I'M GOING TO LEAVE IT AT THAT.
THANK YOU, SENATOR, WE NEED A
NEW MOTION BECAUSE THE BILL HAS
BEEN AMENDED. ALL RIGHT. I MADE
THE MOTION. WE NEED A NEW ONE
BECAUSE IT WAS AMENDED. THE
MOTION. WE NEED A NEW MOTION.
ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE A MOTION
ON THE AMENDED BILL? CAN YOU
STATE THE AMENDMENTS FOR THE
RECORD AS WELL? DON'T JUST POINT
TO A PIECE OF PAPER, PLEASE.
THEY HAVE BEEN STATED, BUT. SHE
HAS ALREADY READ THEM ON ON
RECORD. SENATOR, WOULD YOU LIKE
TO MAKE A MOTION? I WILL MOVE
THE BILL AS AMENDED AND THE
AMENDMENTS ARE THE ONES THAT I
STATED, WHICH ARE THE AMENDMENTS
THAT WERE SUBMITTED IN WRITING
BY THE COMMITTEE TO THE AUTHOR.
ALL RIGHT. ROLL CALL. WAHAB. Ã.
WAHAB. AYE. SATO RADFORD.
SKINNER SKINNER. AYE. WIENER.
WIENER. AYE. THAT BILLS ON CALL
.
OKAY. I COULD DO THE MOTIONS ON
THE ONES THAT HAVEN'T BEEN. SO
LET'S. LET'S CALL FOR A MOTION
ON A FILE. ITEM NUMBER ONE, SB
894. SO MOVED. OH, NO. SORRY. I
DRAW YOUR MOTION TO WITHDRAW
THAT MOTION. APOLOGIES. WITHDRAW
THAT MOTION. NO. MOVE SB 894.
ALL RIGHT. CAN YOU SAY WHICH
ONE? RIGHT. NEEDS A MOTION.
CORRECT. YEAH, BUT NOBODY
EVERYBODY WAS IN THE ROOM. YES
OKAY. THAT HAS NO MOTION. THAT
BILL WILL BE HELD IN COMMITTEE.
OKAY YEAH. FAILS FOR A LACK OF
MOTION. ALL RIGHT. YOU CAN LIFT
THE CALL ON NINE, EIGHT, NINE.
LET'S LIFT THE CALL. SB 989,
ASHBY. MOTION WAS Dð PASSED, AS
AMENDED TO JUDICIARY COMMITTEE.
BRADFORD SKINNER. SKINNER. AYE.
WIENER. WIENER. AYE BRADFORD.
THAT BILL WILL BE ON CALL. 1011
JEALOUS. 1011 JONES. MOTION IS
TO PASS TO APPROPRIATIONS.
CURRENT VOTE IS 1 TO 2. BRADFORD
WIENER NØ. WIENER. NO THAT BILL
IS ON, SENATOR JONES WOULD LIKE
RECONSIDERATION ON THAT BILL,
SENATOR JONES WILL BE GRANTED
RECONSIDERATION. THAT BILL IS
STILL ON CALL, THOUGH. JUST FYI,
1133 BECKER MOTION WAS Dð PASS,
AS AMENDED, TO APPROPRIATIONS AS
NEEDS A MOTION, SO. MOVED.
MOTION BY SKINNER WAHAB, A WAHAB
. AYE. SATO. SATO. NO. BRADFORD.
SKINNER SKINNER. AYE. WIENER.
WIENER. AYE HOLD ON. CONSENT
CALENDAR. SHE PRESENTED. WE NEED
A MOTION ON THAT. WE NEED A
MOTION ON SMALLWOOD. YEAH YES,
YES. OKAY. I WILL MOVE, ITEM
NUMBER NINE, SB 1484, MOTION IS
TO PASS TO THE FLOOR. WAHAB.
NAY. AYE. SATO BRADFORD. SKINNER
AYE. SKINNER. AYE. WIENER.
WIENER. AYE. NØ SATO. NO BILLS
ON CALL. DO YOU NEED A MOTION ON
CONSENT CALENDAR? WE NEED A
MOTION ON CONSENT. OH, NO. WE
NEED A MOTION ON 1317. WAHAB
OKAY. 12, I WILL MOVE ITEM
NUMBER 12, SB 1317, MOTION IS TO
PASS, AS AMENDED TO THE FLOOR.
WAHAB Ã. AYE SATO. SATO. AYE.
BRADFORD. SKINNER AYE. SKINNER.
AYE. WIENER. WIENER. AYE ROLL
CALL ON. THAT IS ON. CALL AND
THEN ROLL CALL. CONSENT IS ON
ROLL CALL AS WELL. IT'S
CURRENTLY 2 TO 0. BRADFORD
SKINNER. SKINNER. AYE. WIENER
CONSENT CALENDAR. WIENER. AYE.
CONSENT ON CALL AS WELL, WE'RE
GOING TO MOVE ON TO A FILE. CAN
I JUST SAY ONE THING? YES. GO
AHEAD. YES, SIR. AND I KNOW THIS
IS A LITTLE BIT OUT OF ORDER,
BUT ON ONE BILL, SINCE IT WAS ON
CALL AND I WAS NOT HERE FOR THE
PRESENTATION, I APOLOGIZE FOR
THAT. FOR SB, 1011, AS I'VE
EXPRESSED, TO THE AUTHORS OF
THAT BILL, CITIES CURRENTLY HAVE
THE ABILITY TO ENACT THESE
RESTRICTIONS, ON, ON,
ENCAMPMENTS IN PUBLIC AND TO
MANAGE PUBLIC SPACES, THE REASON
WHY I DON'T SUPPORT THAT BILL IS
WE DO NOT NEED A STATEWIDE LAW
TO DO IT. CITY SHOULD BE ABLE TO
EXERCISE THEIR OWN FLEXIBILITY
ON THAT WHICH THEY CURRENTLY DO.
THANK YOU FOR THAT, COURTESY,
MADAM CHAIR. DEFINITELY SO WE
ARE GOING TO MOVE ON TO SB 1256.
SENATOR GLAZIER HAS BEEN WAITING
PATIENTLY. I APPRECIATE YOUR
PATIENCE. THANK YOU. WELL, WITH
THAT, OKAY. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR. AND MEMBERS. SO CONTRARY
TO THE BILL YOU JUST HEARD THE
BILL THAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU DOES
NOT PROPOSE ANY NEW PENALTIES IN
THE AREA OF SOLICITATION OF A
MINOR OR OF ANOTHER ADULT IN
REGARD TO PROSTITUTION. THE BILL
IS CRAFTED TO ONLY DEAL WITH A
VERY NARROW ISSUE. AND THAT'S
THE, TAKING OF DNA FROM SOMEONE
WHO HAS BEEN CONVICTED, WHO HAS
BEEN CONVICTED OF ILLEGAL PAYING
FOR SEX WITH A MINOR OR WITH
ANOTHER ADULT. I WANT TO THANK
THE COMMITTEE STAFF FOR THEIR
ANALYSIS, THOROUGH ANALYSIS. IT
JUST HAS ONE SMALL ERROR IN IT.
THAT THE ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT
A BILL SIMILAR TO THIS FAILED IN
THIS COMMITTEE. AND THE ACTUAL
OPPOSITE OCCURRED A BILL SUCH AS
WHAT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY.
ACTUALLY, THIS IS EVEN MORE
NARROW. DID PASS THIS COMMITTEE
7 TO 0 ON JANUARY 9TH, 2018,
SUPPORTED BY SENATOR SKINNER,
SENATOR WIENER, SENATOR
BRADFORD, I THANK YOU ALL FOR
THAT SUPPORT. FOUR YEARS AGO,
FIVE YEARS AGO. AS I SAID, THE
BILL BEFORE YOU WOULD SIMPLY
REQUIRE PEOPLE CONVICTED OF
ILLEGALLY PAYING FOR SEX OR
ENGAGING IN PROSTITUTION WITH A
MINOR TO PROVIDE DNA SAMPLES FOR
LAW ENFORCEMENT IDENTIFICATION,
ANALYSIS. RESEARCH SHOWS THAT
DNA SAMPLES COLLECTED FOR BOTH
VIOLENT AND NONVIOLENT CRIMES
HAS USES IN INVESTIGATING OTHER
CRIMES, INCLUDING SEXUAL CRIMES
LIKE PROSTITUTION AND HUMAN
TRAFFICKING. I WANT TO READ YOU
THESE STATISTICS THAT I SHARED
FROM THE LAST HEARING WHERE I
PRESENTED THIS BILL, A STUDY WAS
DONE ON HOMICIDES IN OAKLAND,
OAKLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT,
HOMICIDE SECTION CONTRACTED WITH
THE URBAN STRATEGIES COUNCIL TO
LOOK AT THE ISSUES THAT THEY HAD
WITH UNSOLVED HOMICIDES IN
OAKLAND. AND HERE'S WHAT THEY
FOUND. AND THE VAST MAJORITY OF
OAKLAND'S UNSOLVED HOMICIDES
ALSO INVOLVED INVOLVED VICTIMS
WHO WERE OR SUSPECTED TO BE
ENGAGED IN PROSTITUTION ACTIVITY
. 80 OF THE NEARLY 200 UNSOLVED
HOMICIDES IN OAKLAND, 85% OF
THOSE CASES INVOLVE THE VICTIM
BEING A PROSTITUTE, 85% OF THOSE
200 HOMICIDES INVOLVED A
PROSTITUTE. IT'S VERY POWERFUL
EVIDENCE THAT TAKING DNA FROM
SOMEONE WHO HAS BEEN CONVICTED
OF A CRIME, A SEX CRIME AGAINST
A MINOR, CAN AID IN TRYING TO
SOLVE MURDERS. AND I'M SURE
BEYOND THAT. TODAY I'M JOINED BY
JONATHAN FELDMAN WITH THE POLICE
CHIEFS ASSOCIATION, ONE OF THE
MAIN SUPPORTERS OF THE BILL. AND
I WOULD, IF THE COMMITTEE WOULD
ALLOW HIS TESTIMONY TODAY, WE
ALLOW ALL WITNESSES. HIS TWO
MINUTES ARE VERY GRACIOUS. THANK
YOU, CHAIR MEMBERS JONATHAN
FELDMAN, CALIFORNIA POLICE
CHIEFS ASSOCIATION IN STRONG
SUPPORT. I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS
IS INCREDIBLY HELPFUL
INFORMATION. AS THE AUTHOR HAD
MENTIONED, THE CONNECTION
BETWEEN SOME OF THESE CRIMES AND
OTHER MORE SERIOUS VIOLENT
CRIMES IS PRETTY SIGNIFICANT AND
WELL DOCUMENTED. AND RESEARCH
THAT'S BEEN DONE, I KNOW THERE'S
OPPOSITION CONCERNS ABOUT, THIS
TOOL BEING USED, WITH PREJUDICE,
OBVIOUSLY THAT IS AN ISSUE IN
AND OF ITSELF, YOU KNOW, ANY
TYPE OF BIAS, PREJUDICE,
POLICING IS UNACCEPTABLE, YOU
KNOW, WE HAVE PASSED LAWS OVER
THE YEARS, DECERTIFICATION,
TRANSPARENCY LAWS, BACKGROUND
CHECKS, REVIEW TO ADDRESS ANY
TYPE OF BIAS ISSUES WITHIN
POLICING. I DON'T THINK THAT IT
SHOULD BE AN ARGUMENT IN AND OF
ITSELF TO STOP FROM EXPANDING
IMPORTANT TOOLS THAT LAW
ENFORCEMENT CAN USE TO HELP
SOLVE MURDERS, HELP SOLVE CRIMES
, AND PROTECT PEOPLE, WE CAN
CONTINUE TO WORK ON ANY TYPE OF
ISSUES AROUND BIAS POLICING
WITHOUT, AGAIN PREVENTING THESE
THESE TOOLS FROM BEING AFFORDED
TO LAW ENFORCEMENT. SO FOR THAT
REASON, WE ARE IN STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER WITNESSES?
SEEING NONE, WE'LL MOVE TO
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE
MEMBERS, SEEING NONE. WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSE? OH, SORRY. SORRY.
LEAD OPPOSITION. SORRY. WE'RE
RUNNING ON A TIMELINE, LEAD
OPPOSITION. SEEING NONE, DO WE
HAVE ANY ME TWOS FOR BOTH OPPO
OR SUPPORT, PLEASE STATE YOUR
NAME, YOUR ORG, AND THAT YOU
EITHER OPPOSE OR SUPPORT.
KRISTEN SCHLUSSEL, SACRAMENTO
COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE ON BEHALF OF CALIFORNIA
DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S ASSOCIATION
IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. ANYBODY
ELSE SEEING NONE, WE'LL MOVE THE
CONVERSATION TO COMMITTEE
MEMBERS, SEEING NO CONVERSATION.
THANK YOU, SENATOR, WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSE? WELL, I WOULD
APPRECIATE THE DIALOG. IF
THERE'S A CONCERN FROM THE
COMMITTEE, I HAVEN'T REALLY
HEARD ANY. MADAM CHAIR, I'D LIKE
TO HEAR IF THERE'S SOME CONCERNS
THAT THEY BE RAISED SO I COULD
ADDRESS THEM. THANK YOU. SEEING
NONE, WE HAVE A MOTION BY
SENATOR SARDO. THAT WAS A
QUESTION, MADAM CHAIR. NONE AT
THIS TIME. NO. NO WHAT? NO
CONCERNS. SO NO CONCERNS WITH
THE BILL. OKAY. LET ME JUST
THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR HEARING
THE BILL. I APPRECIATE THE
MEMBERS WHO HAVE SUPPORTED THIS
IN THE PAST. IT'S A SMALL TOOL
TO TRY TO CRACK DOWN ON SOME
VERY SERIOUS CRIMES OF MURDER.
OF RAPE, IT DOESN'T CREATE A
GREAT INVASION OF PRIVACY. OF
PRIVACY. THEY'VE BEEN CONVICTED
OF A OF A SERIOUS CRIME AND
ACQUIRING THE DNA TO HELP SOLVE
MORE SERIOUS CRIMES IS A PRUDENT
STEP FORWARD. AND WE
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN AYE
VOTE. THANK YOU. SO I, WE HAVE A
MOTION BY SENATOR SATO. CAN WE
CALL ROLL CALL. MOTION IS DUE.
PASS TO APPROPRIATIONS WILL HAVE
A I SAY I SATO I BRADFORD
SKINNER. SKINNER I WIENER I
WIENER I OKAY SO THAT BILL HAS
BRADFORD BRADFORD I SO FIVE ZERO
THAT BILLS OUT. THANK YOU
SENATOR. AND THEN SENATOR
BRADFORD, WOULD YOU LIKE TO
PRESENT. COPIES PEOPLE MCGUIRE
IS GOING TO BE MAD AT YOU. HE
DOESN'T MATTER. LET'S WRAP IT UP
. IS THAT RIGHT? YES. SENATOR
BRADFORD WILL BE PRESENTING SB
1020. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
MEMBERS, I'M HERE FOR 1020,
WHICH PROHIBITS LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCIES FROM UTILIZING SHOOTING
TARGETS THAT LOOK LIKE ANY
ETHNIC GROUP. AND A MULTITUDE OF
STUDIES PUBLISHED BY THE
AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL
ASSOCIATION. RESEARCHERS
ESTABLISHED THAT PARTICIPANTS
WOULD SHOOT AND ARMED TARGET
QUICKER IF IT RESEMBLED AN
AFRICAN AMERICAN COMPARED TO IF
THE TARGET WAS WHITE.
PARTICIPANTS ALSO ARE LESS
LIKELY TO SHOOT AN UNARMED WHITE
TARGET COMPARED TO AN UNARMED
AFRICAN AMERICAN TARGET, AS WE
JUST SAW JUST THIS WEEK, AN
INDIVIDUAL BEING SHOT UNARMED
UBER DRIVER. THESE RESPONSE
TIMES SHOW SUBCONSCIOUS RACIAL
BIAS, WHICH LEADS TOWARD AN
INCREASED RISK OF DEADLY HARM
TOWARDS CERTAIN ETHNIC GROUPS.
THE USE OF THESE SHOOTING
TARGETS ONLY REINFORCES THE
INHERENT RACIAL BIASES THAT
WHITE INDIVIDUALS ARE LESS
DANGEROUS THAN EVERYONE ELSE,
BUT LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES
ACROSS THE NATION STILL USE
ETHNIC SHOOTING TARGETS AND
WHETHER INTENTIONAL OR
UNINTENTIONAL, IT'S HARMFUL.
HARMFUL SB 1020 IS A COMMON
SENSE MEASURE THAT WILL ENSURE
IMPLICIT RACIAL BIASES ARE NOT
PRESENT IN OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT
OFFICERS, AND THAT ALL PEOPLE
ARE TREATED FAIRLY AND
EQUITABLY. AND I RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR AYE VOTE. THANK YOU. DO
YOU HAVE ANY WITNESSES? NOT THAT
I'M AWARE OF. OKAY DO WE HAVE
OPPOSITION WITNESSES MORE,
SEEING NONE, DO WE HAVE ANY
SUPPORT ME TO JUST STATE YOUR
NAME, YOUR ORGAN THAT YOU
SUPPORT? JUSTIN. FOR THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DEFENDER'S
OFFICE, ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. NORMAN. ROSCOE, ELLA
BAKER CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. YOLANDA
NAVARETTE. IN BEHALF OF INITIATE
JUSTICE ACTION AND FELONY MURDER
ELIMINATION PROJECT IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. ROXANA GONZALEZ, IG
ACTION AND STRONG SUPPORT. THANK
YOU, WE'LL RETURN THE
CONVERSATION BACK TO COMMITTEE
MEMBERS, MOVE THE BILL BY
SENATOR WIENER, WOULD YOU LIKE
TO CLOSE, SENATOR? RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR AYE VOTE. THANK YOU, WE
HAVE A MOTION BY SENATOR WIENER.
CAN WE CALL ROLL CALL SB 1020,
MOTION IS DUE. PASS TO
APPROPRIATIONS WILL HAVE. AYE,
AYE. SEYARTO BRADFORD. BRADFORD.
AYE. SKINNER. SKINNER. AYE.
WIENER. WIENER I. BRADFORD, THAT
BILL IS OUT. SENATOR SARDO VOTED
NO. I MEAN, NO, NO VOTE, AND
THEN, CAN WE LIFT THE CALL FOR
BRADFORD FOR BRADFORD? YOU'RE
GOOD. NO. WE'RE DONE. NO. HE WAS
HERE WHEN IT HAPPENED, SO SB
989, ASHBY. THE MOTION WAS TO
PASS, AS AMENDED, TO JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE. CURRENT VOTE IS 4 TO
0. BRADFORD IT'S 4 TO 0. ALL
RIGHT. BILL IS OUT. 5 TO 0 OUT
SB 989 IS OUT SB 1011. MOTION IS
Dð PASSED TO APPROPRIATIONS.
CURRENT VOTE IS EXCUSE ME 1 TO
3. BRADFORD. IT'S AN OKAY.
ABSTAIN THAT BILL FAILED
RECONSIDERATION. THAT BILL HAS
FAILED. SB 1011 HAS BEEN GRANTED
RECONSIDERATION ON. SB 1133
MOTION IS TO PASS, AS AMENDED,
TO APPROPRIATIONS. CURRENT VOTE
IS 3 TO 1. BRADFORD. BRADFORD. I
4 TO 1. THAT BILL IS OUT.
CONSENT. CONSENT CURRENT VOTE IS
4 TO 0. BRADFORD BRADFORD I
CONSENT IS OUT AND THEN GROVE AS
AMENDED. HE WASN'T IN HERE SB
1414 GROVE IS DO PASS AS AMENDED
TO APPROPRIATIONS. BRADFORD. THE
VOTE IS 3 TO 0 BRADFORD. AYE 4
TO 0. THAT BILL IS 4 TO 0. THAT
BILL IS OUT SB 1484 CæA
SMALLWOOD. CUEVAS ACTION IS DUE.
PASS TO THE FLOOR. CURRENT VOTE
IS 3 TO 1. BRADFORD. BRADFORD I
GOES OUT 4 TO 1. THAT FILLS OUT
4 TO 1. THAT BILL IS OUT AND WE
ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU
EVERYBODY. THANK YOU. WAIT A
MINUTE. OH NO. WE GOT THEM ALL
WET. WELL I DIDN'T DO IT. OH, WE
KNOW HE WAS HERE. NO. OH NO. HE
WASN'T HERE. OKAY. SORRY. WE
HAVE TO ACTUALLY, RE ADJOURN.
READJUST WE HAVE OUR FINAL BILL.
CAN WE READ IT OUT BY SENATOR
WAHAB MYSELF? THANK YOU. 1317,
THE MOTION IS TO PASS, AS
AMENDED, TO THE FLOOR. CURRENT
VOTE IS 4 TO 0. BRADFORD
BRADFORD. AYE. OKAY. THAT'S 5 TO
0. THAT BILL IS OUT. THANK YOU
ALL. WE ARE NOW ADJOURNING.