Senate Budget Sub2 — 2026-03-19

Senate Budget Subcommittee 2 on Resources, Environmental Protection, Energy will come to order. We are holding our hearing in the O Street building and I see that we have a quorum. We'll be calling. Well, let's call

Here. Reyes Here.

Here.

McNerney here. McNerney here.

Good morning, Madam Chair and members. Thank you for having us here today. It's an Honor to present CalRecycle and a couple of our priority budget change proposals. My name is Zoe Heller. I'm the director of the Department of Resources, Recycling and Recovery, also known as CalRecycle. And I'm joined today by Chief Deputy Mindy McIntyre. CalRecycle's mission is to protect public health and the environment through the reduction, reuse and recycling of California's resources, environmental education, disaster recovery, and the transition from a disposable to a fully circular economy. California has long led the nation to recognize waste as a resource. Through landfill oversight, recycling programs, product stewardship laws and market development efforts, the Department implements the legislature's vision for a system that reduces waste, protects communities and strengthens California's environmental leadership. The governor's 2627 budget for CalRecycle proposes 90987 positions and 1.9 billion in funding from 30 funds to continue our mission by focusing on our core responsibilities. It includes resources for the multi BDO landfill response bcp, which you'll be hearing more on later, and proposals to support the expansion of composting compliance assistance and fraud prevention for our Beverage Container Recycling Fund and increased understanding of our various material streams in California. Together, these proposals are designed to ensure that California's waste management systems remain safe, resilient and forward looking, while continuing to advance the legislature's long standing commitment to resource conservation and environmental protection. The transition to a circular economy doesn't happen automatically. It requires strong regulatory oversight, stable program funding and continued partnership between state agencies, local governments, industries and the communities that we serve. We appreciate the committee's continued partnership in that effort. Thank you.

Frankie Mendez with the Legislative Analyst Office. We don't have any prepared remarks for the department overview, but happy to answer any questions.

Jamie Gonzalez, Department of Finance. No remarks at this time. But here to answer any questions.

First of all, I want to talk about food recovery. The department oversees many activities that do address organic waste, including food waste prevention, which would help reduce emissions, among other problems. From what I understand, Cal Recycle is in the past had grant programs that supported the working, recovering food. I have a bill this year offering a tax incentive to find farmers who donate excess food through food banks, et cetera. But there are many others that are doing that work to recover food and distribute it. Where will there be funding for these? Will there be funding for these grants, these grant programs again in the future?

Well, trying to thank you. Great answer. Trying to read between the lines. Would the current trajectory end in reduced recycling and food distribution, or are we on a steady path?

Okay, that gives us our marching orders here in the legislature, if you want to put it that way. I have the wine industry in my district significant, and they're worried about the bag in a box from processing, what that might look like. Where are the current fees on that program, on that process determined? How are they determined?

Just to build on that. The processing fee is a percentage of the processing payment. Processing payment is calculated through a formula that is set in statute. So Calrecycle doesn't come up with those formulas on our own. We don't really have the authority to change the processing fee or the processing payment.

numbers, we plug them into the formula, and that is what the processing fee is. And so what the director has laid out is that the processing fee that has been applied to these containers per statute under 1013, was a different processing fee for containers that cost less to recycle. And so now the processing fee being applied is based on the information specific to bag in a box in these containers.

that infrastructure in place for some of these materials? It's more difficult. So bag in a box is an example of that, where there just isn't a lot of infrastructure to support the recycling of those materials. Another material type, cartons are finding pathways towards recycling. I understand that there's a new facility that's breaking ground in your district that will have the capacity to potentially increase the recycling rate for cartons in California. So there's opportunities here for the producers to look towards ways to continue to build up that infrastructure. Some of that will happen through the packaging EPR program. Senate Bill 54, where there's going to have to be more recycling infrastructure in the state. There's also opportunities to look at other materials, other solutions that have stronger recycling markets currently.

Mindy's going to look for those specific numbers on generation, but I'll share with you disposal because I have those in my head. We're disposing of about 40 million tons in the landfill. And by volume, about half of that is plastic. So that's by volume, not by weight. But that paints a picture of how much plastic is still being disposed in the state of California. So a significant amount. We do have some generation numbers that recently came out in our needs assessment. I don't have them at my fingertips and if we can't locate them, we will send those to you and Senator Blakespeare and the committee and follow up. But we know it's a lot of plastic that's currently being generated as part of the overall needs assessment for the plastic packaging EPR law, what we've done is recently published a needs assessment, and in this needs assessment, part of it is a source reduction baseline that estimates the amount of material that was sold into the state last year. So that's the number I need to get to you. And what SB54 requires is that that amount of material is reduced by 25% or by 20% by 2032 from that baseline. So we'll get you what that big number is. But that will help illustrate the importance of implementation of Senate Bill 54 and achieving that source reduction goal. So we're generating less plastic, managing more of it responsibly by recycling it into new products. So ultimately less of it is ending up in landfill and almost more importantly, escaping into the natural environment.

And we'll get back to you with those numbers.

Thank you, Chair. Obviously, recycling is a very important part of the protecting our environment. I want to go back briefly to the food waste from many restaurants. I understood for some reason that there was a mandated to collect them to collection agencies and what they do with that after that process is I don't know. But what I want to know is that if restaurants, since they produce a lot of food waste from leftovers, is it by law mandated for them to store and to be turned in to collection agencies? Is it done every day on a daily basis, every restaurant in the state at this time.

Collected materials, what happens to that?

Thank you. And that, I think will definitely help rather than just grinding all the food waste down to the sewage and sanitation districts. And what treatment job will become less complicated to sort them out? Anyway, I think that's the level I just want to hear, and that's the good news. And the second question I have is that bottles and cans are big items that pollute our rivers and ocean fronts. And especially after rain, a lot of them will end up, even though we do have such an effort to reimburse for recycled items. But many people do throw them away and they end up on the rivers and beaches. Other than paying the value that you designate on the bottles of cans, do you have any program that you hire or use volunteer groups to regularly patrol certain heavily visible areas for plastic bottles or cans and ocean fronts and the beaches? Do you have such a budget and an effort going on?

focus of the question was I know there are out there individuals and volunteer groups such as Maricor, but you may not know. One of them is pava, Pacific Asian Volunteer association, stationed in Los Angeles. Largely. That's a Korean junior and senior high school volunteer group. Their specialty is cleaning up all debris, any recycling items such as bottles and cans and anything that they can pick up in the riverbeds and entire Southern California. And one time I arranged my city of Irvine for them to come and do the cleanup. And they do that. I think this probably weekly basis, a large organization, almost 500 volunteers. Such groups are existing, and when they collect, they just dump and sort them out. And they may sell any sellable items, such as virus or cancer. I'm not sure what they do with that. But my question was whether your office has certain budget or effort and personnel to program paying or organize the team regularly to inspect and collect such items, recyclable items from riverbeds or beachfronts, from your office effort, because I see that your personnel and budget has been increased annually. And I just don't want to take too much time because I gotta take my flight. But the California population has been reduced over the years and we should. The population less population should produce less garbages or such cans and empty bottles. So that's another set of questions of why your program cost is increasing. Budget is increasing and the personnel increases. So that's why, whether you have such your own office directed efforts to have a team or a certain group using such existing volunteer groups in the communities and you pay for and make a contract and not leaving to the volunteer groups.

Thank you. Maybe perhaps you can reach out the large group PAVA Power Volunteer Group. They are very dedicated environmental group in cleaning up our rivers and oceans.

Thank you for that question. Thank you for bringing that group to our attention. I think what is interesting from the questions from Senator McNerney and Senator Choi is that we get to highlight the fact that 300 million meals are recovered through the Edible Food Recovery Program. I think that's impressive. Same thing with Senator Choi's question. When we're talking about the beverage container recycling program revenue generator for CalRecycle 1.5 billion for this coming is projected for this coming year. I think it's important for us to see that through the legislation that is passed and the way that it is implemented. In the end, we want exactly. What we're all requesting is that we have a cleaner environment. And it's good that we have volunteers that work to work on these programs. When we first had the organics materials laws that were passed, we had many restaurants who were very unhappy about having to do this and individuals too. But to hear of the success I think is extremely important. So I thank you for providing that information without any further questions. We want to thank you for your presentation.

And we're going to move back to issue number one. At this point point, All Right. Issue number one, an overview of the California Environmental Protection Agency. Secretary Garcia, welcome and whenever you are ready.

Thanks very much, very much. Appreciate the time with you all here this morning and for the opportunity to share with you a bit about our work at Cal EPA at a particularly pivotal moment. I think you'd all agree this is a time where we're seeing fluctuating challenges and opportunities in front of us, ranging from, you know, record setting wildfires and storms coupled with ongoing drought impacts, and a federal administration that is remarkably hostile towards much of our environmental protection work and climate action. And so I want to share with you all a little bit about what we have going on in light of that context. You know, first and foremost, I think, you know, given the situation we find ourselves in, but even notwithstanding some of those challenges, we've done really incredible work as a state in setting long term targets and goals. I think the charge that we have now in front of us is actually meeting the immediate needs of our residents, of our natural resources, our ecosystems and our environment. And so that's what our focus is at the Environmental Protection Agency. As you know, our mission is to restore, protect and enhance the environment to ensure public health, environmental quality, and economic vitality. That is quite a balancing act that we engage in day in and day out. And luckily, we have a very talented workforce dedicated to delivering measurable results to reduce pollution, strengthen climate resilience, and protect health across our state. Our agency's proposed budget does include 7,992 positions and $5.6 billion in funding. And as I highlight some of the examples of our work, you know, I'd like to focus on a few of the ways in which we're again responding to a shifting federal and international political terrain, as well as some of the evolving pollution challenges that are in front of us. So you heard a bit from Director Heller about an aspect of some of our work to reduce methane, but I want to share with you all that this work is extremely critical given the absence of a federal administration in the international sphere when it comes to climate action. This is an area where the state of California is no stranger to stepping into the shoes of an absent federal administration. And so certainly we are occupying a familiar space, but is also an area that is ripe with additional opportunity to dramatically slash methane emissions here at home in our state, but also across the globe, and to inspire international and global partners to do the same, to meet us in collaboration and in a strong coalition aimed at reducing methane and increasing accountability. So, in addition to some of the great Work that Director Heller mentioned and the notable, as you mentioned, Madam Chair, 700 million meals recovered. We are also increasing our ability to monitor and mitigate methane at the source through the use of innovative technologies, satellite monitoring, that help us to, to enhance accountability for those who are emitting methane and contributing to satellite observations of plumes. And this is something that we, again, on a worldwide stage, are really leading in, but is enhancing our ability to take direct action right here throughout California. Our federal rollbacks that we're experiencing all across our state are also leaving far too many communities increasingly vulnerable to the impacts of toxics. And this ranges from our air to our water systems and the lands that our neighborhoods live in and our communities live in. And so we're also enhancing much of the work that we're doing to reduce exposure to toxics. I'll talk a little bit about the work that we're doing with respect to air quality. You know, just today, the Governor and our Chair of the California Air Resources Board joined the Attorney General to announce our participation in a lawsuit against the Federal administration for their unlawful rescission of the endangerment finding, which not only leaves communities vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, but also leaves them vulnerable again to exposure from air toxics and air quality impacts. We are continuing our work in the face of these federal rollbacks to partner with our air districts all across our state to reduce air pollution at the neighborhood level. You'll of course, you know, well, Madam Chair, that you know our work in implementing AB617 and other efforts in this regard remain critically important right now, as is our work to attain national ambient air quality standards. Again, we are very closely coordinated with our air districts, particularly in south coast and the San Joaquin Valley, to ensure that we are dramatically reducing nitrous oxide emissions and improving our ability to reduce particulate matter, which lead to direct health impacts for far too many Californians. The State Water Board is also acutely focused on continuing the great work that they've been doing to deliver safe and clean drinking water to communities all across our state. It's an area that we're extremely proud of some of the progress that we've been able to make and know the urgency with which we have to approach the work that is still ahead of us. We have brought over 300 failing drinking water systems into compliance over the past few years. And we have slashed in half the number of Californians that experience inadequate access to safe, clean and affordable drinking water in the face of much rescission of support for wastewater treatment and other water Infrastructure projects. We are also increasing our ability to, to invest in water infrastructure as well statewide. And we're also looking at ways to increase our ability to respond to cleanups. I know that you all are familiar with the work around the Exide lead acid battery recycling facility. This work remains a key priority for me as secretary, for us as an agency for the Department of Toxic Substances Commission control, as we continue to clean up the legacy contamination from this facility and address a long standing environmental injustice in our state. Finally, I do want to mention some of the work that we've done not only through the Department of Pesticide Regulation, but also in partnership with our colleagues at the Department of Food and Agriculture, in partnership with many like minded growers, with many in the agricultural community, to reduce our reliance on some of the more harmful chemical based pesticide management products. These are products used not only in the agricultural space, but also in urban settings. And this is an area where the Department of Pesticide Regulation and we as an agency are extremely proud of our ability to invest in emerging research and knowledge around integrated pest management practices and more sustainable alternatives to our reliance on some of the chemical based products that we would like to see phased out over time. With these accomplishments and some of this work that's, that's underway, you know, we still of course, have quite a bit to do, as I mentioned, and the governor's proposed budget is focused on targeted actions that help to strengthen our enforcement in particular and to ensure that we remain nimble enough and prepared to respond to emerging environmental risks. Specifically, those risks are emerging from landfills, again from rollbacks of our long standing authority to lead in reducing emissions from the transportation sector. And I'll talk a little bit about those starting with landfills. So as you all know and are seeing in real time, our waste streams are changing and our climate impacts are intensifying. The ways in which our landfills are operating and the ways in which our closed landfills are also potentially degrading over time. So to address these risks, Cal EPA is proposing a coordinated strategy to strengthen landfill response and enforcement capacity across our boards and departments, but also in coordination with local enforcement agencies as well. Our proposal is designed to protect communities, to enhance a consistent statewide approach, and importantly, to ensure that we are insulating ourselves, the state, from financial risk. I think what we've seen with certain operators in the past is that they are all too eager to leave taxpayers in the state of California footing the bill for legacy contamination. And we want to make sure that we get ahead of that through strength and enforcement tools. As well as through multimedia coordination. With respect to some of the recent federal actions that have created uncertainty around some of our emission standards. I'll note that we have a proposal before you the Governor's proposal for a new incentive program designed to support first time buyers of zero emission vehicles. This is a way that we are pivoting toward a strategy that will enhance our ability to continue the great work we have already done to see an uptick in the sales of zero emission vehicles all across our state. This proposal provides a point of sale incentive matched dollar for dollar by original equipment manufacturers for first time zero emission vehicle buyers. And we're excited to see how this could accelerate consumer adoption of new zero emission vehicles. Particularly in light of some of the challenges that are all too real for too many Californians in terms of prices at the pump which right now are about 30% above what they have been in the recent past. Again, with respect to exide and the cleanup work that is still ahead of us, we also have a proposal that would allow additional residential properties and impacted communities to be remediated. This is key to continuing our progress toward addressing long standing contamination in this area. And the State Water Board is also actively implementing Proposition 4 with anticipated awards from four of the five dedicated grant programs within this calendar year. That is also part of our portfolio of proposed funding. We're also supporting in that vein specific work with tribes to address tribal drinking water infrastructure needs. Critically important in light of where the Federal Administration is today. And in the California Mexico border region. We're on track to adopt guidelines in April that will begin project selections for the fall for multi benefit urban Stormwater management program that did not deceive direct did not receive direct implementation funds in 2025. So we're using those allocated resources to develop essential guidelines for future solicitations for this region. Very important to us all in the state and certainly to those in the California Mexico border region. Finally, the State Board is continuing its work to implement the Bay Delta Water Quality Control Plan. This is one of the most important efforts underway to protect California's water resources. Advancing this work is critical to safeguarding water quality and supporting ecosystem health. And so this is something that is also a priority for us in the budget before you. So with that I'm happy to answer questions. Again, thank you so much for your time this morning and chair and remaining members. I know that this is a tricky time where folks are trying to take flights home, but I'm happy to answer any questions if you have any.

Sure. Well, it's not a flight home, it's a drive home for me. Yes, a little bit more flexibility. But certainly appreciate your presentation and the progress that's been made on all the issues that you covered. I have a couple of concerns. First of all, I represent the Valley and we have significant air quality issues. Although the air quality has improved, improved significantly over the last 20 or 25 years. Last year we passed a bill to look at substituting regional gas blends instead of the carbide blend. In drastic shortages like we're having now, that could cause a lot of spikes. Do you see that as representing a significant increase in air pollution if that's implemented on, you know, on an emergency basis?

Well, I mean the theory was that as we get more EVs and higher efficiency vehicles moving to regional blends like Nevada or Arizona might not impact the air quality as much as it could have in the past.

Yeah, it'd be good to get a little bit more clarity on.

So I'm glad to see that there's agency wide approach to landfill issues. There was a significant problem in Chiquita Canyon.

And we don't want to see that problem arise in other landfills. Does EPA have the authority to stay step in and take control when there's an environmental disaster that arises that affects CalRecycle, CarboB and other agencies. Do you have that authority and the authority, preventive authority as well?

Well, I've heard from different sources that 90 degrees is the right temperature. The standard is 130 degrees, and I've heard also that 140 degrees is fine. Do we know where we should be drawing lines or when intervention would be appropriate?

Do these operators have the ability to control the temperature before a catastrophe like Chiquita Canyon occurs, or is this out of their control? I mean, I'm not clear on this, and I've got a landfill in my district that is operating at a higher temperature. I'm a little concerned.

Good morning. Alana Matthews Chief counsel for Cal epa. The operators should have monitoring equipment that measures the temperatures. And that's one of the reasons that's really reflected in our proposal is that we want to make sure we have enough staff and resources to coordinate all of the data that landfill operators should and should be able to provide and have it in a centralized, you know, location. So we need to build up the infrastructure, but we also need to monitor to make sure that the existing infrastructure and data that different landfills have that it is accurately captured and reported to

Because as you Know, this is a very multi agency, whether it's federal, state and local jurisdictions that are handling this. So they do have the ability to monitor the temperatures. Again, I'm a lawyer and not a scientist, but there are indications from past set events that give us pretty good indications. One, if a set event has been confirmed or is it likely? 1. And then there are also temperature indications that let us know if it has a more significant impact, such as, you know, deteriorating the lining or it's going to lead to more disastrous results. So we are working to, in our proposal to have the infrastructure as well as the staff and resources to, to monitor and assess and address and appropriately respond.

Well, that's a mixed answer because part of that might be a compliance issue and an enforcement issue. So they should have control to actually understand. And when they have temperatures that are high enough that are indicating, such as a set event, there are actions that they should take.

Well, I think very specifically, I just want to push back a little bit more as an attorney. Also, I want to rely on the scientists. I want to know that there is somebody somewhere within Cali, PA. Who's going to be able to tell us specifically if we're talking about Chiquita Canyon Landfill. And we know one of our colleagues has been very concerned about this, has brought this to our attention numerous times. And we have landfills that are on fire. It isn't just the fumes. They're on fire. Literally what is it and who is it that is going to step in so that we can then say, this is who's responsible. This is what the response will be.

Yes, that sort of brings up the question, do you have the scientific resources or engineering resources? If you don't, we need to know that.

And one of the positions includes that technical expertise.

Appreciate the question. Of course, your own personal history, Madam Chair, with these priorities reflected in AB617 and that law in particular, I would say that AB617 has yielded a lot of success when it comes to better coordination, data information sharing, monitoring and localized enforcement activities. In minimally, the big three air districts in the Bay Area, San Joaquin, Valley and in south coast in my time, not only as secretary but in prior positions held within the agency at the Department of Justice and frankly as an advocate, I've seen quite a bit of progress in this space around air quality and some of the coordination going on among the state, the air districts and pollution impacted communities. I think as we look ahead a couple of intangibles and a few tangibles that can result from AB 617 in terms of the intangibles. I think the inherent trust relationships that have been built between government and community cannot be overlooked. Particularly at a time when trust in government is not only a problem sort of big picture politically, but is actually an immediate problem for people's safety and well being. Second, I think in terms of the more tangible results that can come from AB617 and our ongoing commitment toward it is really around continuing to reduce pollution at the local level. I mean, we have the accountability metrics built into AB617 around implementing best available technologies for stationary sources in impacted communities. We have the transparency around emissions data. We have real enforcement results that we have to report on that the Air Resources Board works in close coordination with the air districts to report on. And so I think those will only remain all the more critical as we're seeing the federal rollbacks before us, certainly in the climate space, but to the extent that impacts again communities exposure to toxics and air quality impacts as well in that space.

So as I mentioned, you know, some of the emerging issues that we're certainly dealing with in terms of the characteristics of pollution and Pollution impacts and how those are impacting Californians as well as the change in the federal political terrain, certainly inform some of the ways in which we've had to to pivot and enhance and grow some of our capacity. I'll note that the other couple of things underlying some of the growth that you've seen is a real strategic effort to strengthen coordination, to modernize our systems and improve our ability to remain responsive. Now, specifically, that deals with a few things. First, modernizing our technology infrastructure. That's been a key priority of ours and something that we have had to do by necessity to support the work of our boards and departments and the agency that we operate. With new IT positions, we've been able to implement consolidated technology services across all of these boards and departments, but we've also been able to improve efficiency and cybersecurity and cost effectiveness across the agency. One example of this is the development of CERS NextGen, which some of you may be familiar with. This replaces an outdated reporting system with a more modernized and secure platform that will improve environmental data, environmental data management, and supports local governments, including in their localized enforcement actions. Second, we've also strengthened coordination of our Critical Response and Hazardous Materials Program. This includes the Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Regulatory Management Program and our hazardous material and oil emergency support, the California Accidental Release Program, calarp. This is a critical program to work with and across businesses to bring our functions together and improve statewide coordination, preparedness and response in the face of potential chemical and hazardous incidents all across our state. And then finally, but importantly, we've added legal capacity and, you know, we have our partnership with the legislature to thank for this as well. And that's to respond to the more complex and evolving environmental issues, including actions to unlawfully rescind our authority and enhance our ability to engage in the courts with, again, a hostile federal administration.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. All right, issue number three. Budget change proposal on minimum standards for compostable material. We will first hear from the department, followed by Finance and then lao. After that, members will have an opportunity to ask questions, especially Senator, as it is your bill.

All right, again, when you are ready.

Thank you. Department of Finance,

Working,

Thank you.

Thank you.

There's two critical activities that the department will take on. The first is updating our regulations to reflect the changes that are in 279. And you know, through our regulatory process, we'll be doing engagement with all relevant interested parties to make sure that they understand what those changes mean for many, like the community composters that will be expanding their sites or for the ag businesses, agricultural businesses that may be doing these, these large biomass composting operations. There's the regulations will change as far as their notification tiers and their requirements under law. But we as CalRecycle are supportive of continuing to provide technical assistance, which is part of our budget request as well, to ensure that there's those protections that are still in place that are needed and that if there's any other assistance that they may need, we can provide it for them. We also want to make sure our local enforcement agencies that are working with these Various land owners or businesses throughout the state of California understand the change as far as what they'll be looking for and how they'll be working with these different businesses and composting sites. Our goal is to align with yours to ensure circular systems for organics wherever possible. Diversify where we can, but do so where we're still ensuring strong protections for. For the environment.

Yeah.

So what more can we do then to open up composting capacity to help these farmers and ranchers keep up with the program?

So I understand that ag waste streams are often cleaner than urban and suburban waste streams. Is that true?

So we want to. We want to keep that. We want to make sure that continues.

Thank you.

Yeah.

All right, thank you, Madam Chair.

CalRecycle is requesting seven permanent positions from the Beverage Container Recycling Fund to carry out expanded compliance and enforcement responsibilities under Senate Bill 1013. Senate Bill 1013 increases oversight needs by adding more dealers required to redeem in store or join a dealer cooperative in Creating this new dealer cooperative model which operate under different regulatory frameworks than our other program participants. New dealer cooperatives, which began operating this past year, have introduced a rapidly growing number and variety of redemption operations. This includes mobile recycling, bag drop recycling, and reverse vending machines where you can pop your beverage container into something that looks like a vending machine and get your nickels and dimes back. To keep pace with this expansion, CalRecycle is requesting resources to provide compliance assistance and reduce the risk of fraud across these new redemption operations. These resources will help ensure consumers continue to have convenient access to redeem their beverage containers while safeguarding the integrity of the beverage container recycling fund.

Department of Finance Jamie Gonzalez, Department of Finance.

to answer any questions you may have.

The proposal raised no concerns for us during our review, but happy to answer questions.

Thank you for that question. And dealer cooperatives are unique to California in that they complement our existing recycling center infrastructure. Many other states have more traditional extended producer responsibility programs for beverage container recycling. So where the beverage container manufacturers and producers are running the program through a nonprofit. So the dealer cooperatives have some of those elements that exist in like Oregon and other beverage container that bottle bill states. I think some of the elements that we're most excited about, that we're learning from other states that we are implementing here is the value of having more diversified options for redemption for Californians because not every Californian has has the same needs based on where they live, based on, you know, what their 9 to 5 or other work schedule looks like. So being able to offer options like mobile recycling, where there's a truck that moves around a community and those hours are posted, can be helpful for some Californians. Others like the convenience of the reverse vending machines. So these dealer cooperatives really provide an opportunity for the beverage dealers to come together under the nonprofit and determine what does convenient collection mean for this community and how can we ensure that this community is able to conveniently get their nickels and dimes back.

Yeah, thank you for that question. You know, fraud prevention is a big part of our overall beverage Container recycling program. And we have partnerships with Department of Justice, with CDFA and others to prevent fraud to the extent that we can and catch it when it's happening in real time, one place where it happens quite frequently and where we've. Our partnerships with these other entities have been extremely productive, has been people that are bringing beverage containers over the state borders. So bringing in beverage containers from Arizona that have been purchased in Arizona and attempting to bring them to a recycling center or recycling location in California. So because there's so many new entities that will be covered in the dealer cooperative program, you know, we have over 30,000 beverage container dealers throughout the state of California. So your supermarkets and other entities like that, we want to make sure that they understand that this is a potential threat and what to look for. We have a lot of experience in the many years that we've been implementing the program and understanding, you know, what these fraudulent activities could look like. So that's one place in which we'll focus where we've had a significant amount of experience and luck in deterring that, catching and deterring that kind of activity. So that's an example that very good.

But we know the one.

Thank you. Thank you so much. Chair Gomez Reyes. Nice to see you today. Thank you for this opportunity to share information on our department's work. We've made tremendous progress since DTSC fee and governance reform was implemented just five years ago. But reform takes constant vigilance and diligence in carrying it through. And so the proposals we have before you today will keep DTSC at the forefront of science, innovation and environmental protection. So at DTSC, we address the past, present and future of hazardous waste and hazardous constituents. Our site mitigation and restoration program cleans up contamination from the past and restores land for beneficial uses. In fact, cleanup of brownfields and contaminated land is one of the biggest policy levers to reverse environmental injustices. For present day hazardous waste operations. We oversee inspections, permits for hazardous waste operations. We work closely with our county partners. The local unified agencies provide training, evaluation. They oversee inspections of generators of hazardous waste at a local level. So it really takes a team to do our job and we work hard to hold operators accountable through timely, consistent and equitable enforcement for a more sustainable future. Our Safer Consumer Products program has made huge strides recently and they prevent harmful chemicals from even entering our waste streams, our environment in the first place. They are charting the way to a safer future so that Californians are not exposed to toxic chemicals and we don't have to contend with these in the environment in the future. Our work is funded through about 20 different fund sources. Many of these are special funds. Two of the largest revenue sources are the environmental fee and the generation and handling fee which allow us to continue our work protecting human health and the environment. So with reform came the necessary resources to support our mission driven workforce. The Board of Environmental Safety and I'm happy to be joined here today by Andrew Rakstraw, the Chair. They bring the necessary oversight that is key to a transparent, accountable organization. They also have a key role in setting our annual fee. Reform also brought community centered cleanup initiatives that have been tremendously successful and our newly established Environmental Justice Advisory Committee. So we've been putting to good use these resources from reform and I want to highlight just a few notable accomplishments. Our permitting backlog has always been a subject in this committee hearing. I'm happy to report that out of 103 permits, we have eight left that are running on continued permits. The majority of these have actually been public noticed with a draft decision. This is a huge improvement considering that five years ago we had four times the number of continued permits still on our books. This has been a priority of mine since I came to the department to continue to clear this backlog. But let me be clear, we will not sacrifice community protections for timely issuance. So our permits are some of the strongest, most health protective in the nation. And going forward, we will keep this culture of continuous process improvement alive and well at the department. Switching gears to our Safer Consumer Products Program. We've heard concerns before this same committee about the pace at which we're moving. And we've talked about how important it is to onboard staff to ramp up our regulation process so that we can deliver more outcomes through our Safer Consumer Products Program program. And we've done exactly that. So in this current fiscal year, the Safer Consumer Products Program has achieved more success than in the past two years combined. We proposed four new product chemical combinations to address chemicals in nail products, shampoos, dish detergents and cleaning products to be listed under RC for consumer product regulations and we finalized a rulemaking for a fifth product, chemical combination in nail products as well. We've demonstrated the efficacy of the impact this program has through compliance testing. We tested nail products for toluene and demonstrated that 95% of the products we tested were compliant. We issued our first regulatory response for spray foam systems and that response now requires spray foam manufacturers to do critical training, labeling and invest in safer solutions that avoid regrettable substitutions. So we're paving the way for a safer, more sustainable future. Now turning to the exide cleanup. As Secretary Garcia mentioned, this is a top priority for the agency and for the department. And we've successfully cleaned up over 6,000 residential homes. We've completed 100% of the Parkway cleanups. And I credit much of this success to the community leaders, to the legislature, the partnership. We have to continue this cleanup without any interruption, to continue to train, develop the local workforce that's now versed in environmental remediation. And we have a robust system of checks and balances to continue this cleanup successfully. We have a third party monitor in the field on a daily basis with our contractors giving real time feedback to our teams so we can continue this cleanup successfully. With approval of our proposal for exide for added funding over the next two years, we look forward to continuing our community engagement in the same way we're doing now and our successful workforce development program. So while I'm pleased with what we've been able to accomplish, our work is far from over. The requested funding allocations will allow DTSC to make more forward progress in critical areas. Cost recovery and enforcement efforts. The added positions would directly support DTSC's enforcement efforts. By building capacity for timely identification of responsible parties and then holding them accountable for the cost of cleanups. We have to avoid any future exide from happening again. Secondly, PFAS pollution efforts. I know there's a lot of interest in this among the legislature. It's a priority of the department, one of four priorities this fiscal year to develop a holistic approach to pfas. Tackling it in the past, present and future programs that we have. So with state of the art instrumentation for our environmental chemistry lab, combined with innovative science based compliance methods through safer consumer program, we have an opportunity to really strengthen the preventative approach to addressing PFAS pollution. Because we know how hard their PFAS is to destroy. It's unfortunately forever chemical. That's why it has that unfortunate name. Third, recycling infrastructure efforts. We acknowledge that there's a growing demand for recycling infrastructure, particularly for solar panel and lithium battery recycling. And it has to be done safely. We have two funding proposals that are critical to addressing this demand the Statewide Planning Division, which we'll talk more about later, dedicated to modernizing hazardous waste management, state standards and addressing emerging waste streams and second, implementation of the Battery Recycling Act. With our colleagues at CalRecycle, we are focused on advancing policy for battery stewardship and promoting best management practices when it comes to lithium ion batteries. So ultimately, these efforts will help us identify and implement sustainable management practices for emerging waste streams. We will continue to foster an environment of continuous improvement, humility and transparency across the Department. We learn as we go, we use our scientific expertise, we rely on community engagement for lived experience to inform our policies, our actions. So thank you for considering our proposals and I'm happy to answer any questions

Senator thank you very much Chair Reyes, for the chance to speak about the Board of Environmental Safety, including its mandate, composition, funding and 2026 priorities. My name is Andrew Rakestraw and I have the honor of serving as Board Chair. So our Board of Environmental Safety became fully operational in 2022 when its members and staff first convened following the enactment of SB158 the previous year. The Board is a partial oversight board within DTSC to promote the Department's transparency, fiscal stability and accountability. In particular, the board promotes DTSC's transparency and public responsiveness by for example, holding regular public meetings that provide the public the opportunity to understand and influence DTSC's decision making. Her beatings are all hybrid with Spanish language interpretive services. The board also promotes DTSC's transparency in the permit appeal process by hearing and deciding permit appeals by the Board in a public setting, a first for the Department. The board promotes DTSC's accountability by, for example, approving strategic documents such as the Hazardous Waste Management Plan, developing performance metrics for DTSC's programs, and preparing an annual review of DTSC's performance as compared with his objectives. And the board promotes DTSC's fiscal stability by setting fee rates for the Department. While the Board sets annual fee rates for DTSC, it is not involved in in developing DTSC's budget including budget change proposals on the Board. Composition this Board is composed of five members, one full time chair and four half time members. Three of the members, including the Chair are appointed by the Governor, one is appointed by the assembly and one by the Senate. So the Governor appointed me Vice Chair Alexis Strauss Hacker and recently Reece Williams who will join the Board in the coming weeks. The assembly appointed Ingrid Brostrom and the Senate recently appointed former Senator Pro Tem Tony Atkins. Board members are mandated to represent the general public interest and act to protect public health and reduce risks of toxic exposure, with a particular focus on disproportionately burdened and vulnerable communities on the Board. Funding the Board is funded equally from the Hazardous Waste Control Account and Toxic Substances Control Account, which are funded by payments of the Generation and Handling Fee and environmental Fee, respectively. The Board does not have any pending budget change proposals at the moment, and since its inception, the board has had 1 bcp to increase funding to upgrade several staff positions. And finally, on our 2026 priorities, right now the Board is focused on onboarding our two new appointees, ensuring a timely, fair and transparent appeals process for the two pending permit appeals for the Fibertech and Ecobat facilities in the Los Angeles area providing oversight of DTSC's implementation of its Hazardous Waste management plan, adopting performance metrics for DTSC's safer consumer products and site mitigation and restoration programs and ensuring the public can regularly engage with DTSC and senior leadership during our Board meetings. Thank you.

Jamie Gonzalez, Department of Finance. No comments at this time, but here to answer any questions.

No prepared remarks for the department overviews, but happy to answer questions as always.

Yeah. Thank you. I think we have a vision of the emerging waste streams that are expected to grow in coming years. Solar panels, lithium batteries, all necessary to meet our clean energy goals. And we have a vision that those do not end up in landfills, that they are recycled. And so we, and this is part of our statewide Planning Division proposal, we are anticipating the need to develop new regulations, new frameworks to deal with these emerging waste streams. And we currently don't have the resources to fully research evaluate what those safe, responsible health protective mechanisms for managing those wastes would be. And that's something we need to advance, we need to stay on top of before those waste streams become too large. So now is a critical moment for us to address that and stay ahead of it when it comes to other emerging issues. I wouldn't call it emerging. I would call it a now issue. Pfas, as I mentioned. And that's something that we continue to develop a holistic strategy at our department to tackle.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, Senator for that question. We hear regularly from disadvantaged communities at our board meetings. And a few of the issues that are top of mind for the department, I would say first, is adopting health protective regulations on cumulative impacts of environmental pollution as required by SB673. The department is in the middle of a rulemaking process for that. There have been several very specific asks that the communities have put forward with regard to that rulemaking. Be happy to go into more detail if requested and I'm sure the Director would as well. Second, I would say concern that DTSC's implementation of its hazardous waste management plan, which the board considered last year and worked closely with DTSC on, will ultimately lead to less health protective outcomes and an insufficient focus on waste reduction. The board did approve that hazardous waste management plan, but decided to retain oversight to of certain aspects of the implementation of the plan in response to the concerns that we heard from disadvantaged communities. Another issue I would say just kind of more generally is stakeholders want more accessible and user friendly data on what's happening in their communities. We hear that really regularly with respect to facilities enforcement actions, site cleanups. And finally, I would say the perennial issue we hear is kind of while DTSC has been made progress with its communication efforts Stakeholders still want to be more engaged, have their input reflected and to kind of turn, you know, not only a procedural engagement, but also substantively reflecting the disadvantaged communities perspectives in whatever regulation or document or outcome that the department is working on. I would say those kind of come to mind as the four, four top ones. And of course I should also mention that the Department now has an Environmental Justice Advisory Council which kind of has its own perspective and the board looks forward to closely working with that body as well.

Thank you. Thank you so much for that question, Senator. I would say kind of the biggest areas that we have both been involved in and witnessed with the department, I would say first, DTSC is now a more fiscally stable agency or fiscally stable department as compared with pre reform. So however, of course the hazardous waste control account, which includes the generation handling fee, is in a structural deficit and the department and the board worked together to write that. Second, as the Director mentioned, I think it really is quite impressive the department's role under the Director's leadership in clearing the backlog of long expired permits. The ones that come up most acutely in front of the board are those that have been expired for more than five years. And so right now I believe that number sits at just two. And so that is a substantial improvement from pre reform as well, I would say. Fourth, the board's permit appeals process I think is a substantial improvement on the permit appeals process that was previously handled kind of exclusively within DTSC as well. In addition, the board's regular well attended meetings I say are a real step forward in DTSE's public engagement as compared with pre reform as well. And then I would say finally, kind of the strategic vision of the department as required by SB158 is clearer and more publicly accessible than it certainly was. And so the board of course has a role in approving some of these strategic documents, but very much with the input of the community. So just the regular engagement between the community and the department. So those are kind of the big areas that come to mind on dtsc. Pre reform versus now.

So still dtsc.

Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. So I'm joined here by our Branch Chief of the Office of Policy, Gabby Nepuceno. And we are requesting additional resources essentially to expand our current Office of Policy into a statewide Planning division that will help us tackle exactly some of the topics we just covered and meet our legislative mandates from DTSE, fee and governance reform. This will be phased over two years with eight positions in the fiscal year 2627 and 13 positions in the fiscal year 2728. So our office of Policy to paint the picture for you is a team of multidisciplinary scientists, data analysts, engineers, even economists. And our hazardous waste rules and regulations are complex and businesses often seek clarification or information from our department experts. So one aspect of their job is to be the first line of contact for businesses that want to understand whether their waste is hazardous. What options are available, for example, for recycling or reducing their waste streams, how to obtain waste identification numbers or register their transporter. So this office is also responsible for technical assistance to our enforcement teams to make sure our enforcement activities are consistent, timely, equitable. The same office has shouldered many of The Senate Bill 158, the Fee and governance reform mandates, including new reporting requirements, development of the Hazardous Waste Management Report and Plan, which was recently published and approved by the board last year. And so these resources are required for us to begin implementing that plan. We had in depth analysis to determine what the gap in resources are, and that's what's reflected in our proposal. We currently do not have staff capacity to implement the Hazardous Waste Management Plan that was developed as a result of DTSC form reform. There's also a very practical benefit to our proposal. We currently have duplicate reporting systems and this sort of came about as changes with reform came. And so this proposal would allow us to consolidate reporting systems and that would help our data intake. It also would help businesses with more streamlined reporting overall, improving our efficiency of how we regulate. So ultimately we will be better positioned to advise businesses how they can reduce hazardous waste generation to promote a more sustainable end of life management paradigm for for newer technologies as they evolve. We didn't have smartphones or lithium ion batteries 50 years ago when our hazardous waste laws were first created. So this modernization is essential to a sustainable future. And I'd be happy to answer any questions.

So I'm Gabby Nepomasano and I'm the branch chief in our office of policy.

I defer to the director.

So one aspect right now which we actually have influx of calls is for reporting into our electronic system how much waste they're generating, the types of waste. We have increased some of the reporting requirements so we have better data statewide and visibility on various waste streams. And so sometimes it's simple questions as far as how to report, how to navigate our reporting systems. And then waste classification is a big topic that comes up and there's complexities to how to approach waste classification and the types of tests they may need to conduct. So that's an example of the type of advice that we give.

Great question. So if we are allocated these resources, you know, we will get to work right away onboarding the staff from reform. Our previous efforts, when we had many new positions, we did take efforts in our human resource department to streamline hiring and make more efficient onboarding. And so I know from onboarding positions in the past, from reform, we're ready to do that here. So as far as a specific timeline when the office would be fully staffed, probably a minimum of two years,

in short order we would onboard as quickly as possible.

Yes. So we've already Started implementing some of the elements of the plan, redirecting folks to some of the highest priorities that we heard from the public during our workshops as far as source reduction goes. And I'd like to ask Gabby if she wants to add anything.

I will tell you that a concern that I have is if we are creating new subdivisions for the work that should be done by dtsc, we're creating new subdivisions to create new positions for the work that needs to be done by dtsc. And that is a concern. Would you like to address that?

each of those units.

I absolutely understand that. I understand what you're saying. I'm just saying that if it's within the department of DTSC that the work needs to be done, and creating new divisions and new departments doesn't necessarily warrant additional people if we're just calling it different departments.

I thank you so much for those responses. And again, this has to do more with my many years of hearing from DTSC over the last 10 years. And I appreciate the new direction and hope that the results will justify the additional budget and additional personnel. Thank you. All right. And I think we're on our last issue. Number seven, landfill support, Response and Enforcement. And for this, we're going to Hear from Kelly, Pennsylvania, who will present the proposal. We'll hear from DTSC, CalRecycle, and the Water Board will be available for questions. Deputy Secretary Hunt, welcome. Please begin.

These LCT events that you're talking about are relatively new phenomenon in the state. Is that true?

De Be and if so, why is that?

You mentioned that it's new to California, but not in other states. What can we learn or what have we learned from the other states? What have we learned?

Are we keeping track? Do we have data to keep track of these suts?

Hopefully they don't occur. I want to look to my. To my fellow attorney since we most of these landfills are privately owned and what enforcement power, what legal power do we have to have them clean it up, but more importantly to shut them down if they are continuing to cause problems?

Thank you. I know Secretary Garcia went into lots of detail about this earlier, and I appreciate that. I think what should be clear is that what you all do is very important to the work that we do. We are elected to represent the people, and when the people suffer, then we need to be able to do something. But we can't do it personally. We do it through the departments, through the work that you do, through the scientific research, through the legal enforcement. And it is to have the Dialogue is extremely important to be able to know what the needs are so that they can be addressed. And I know part of it is with additional positions, additional funding, but I think always trying to find the creative ways to be able to work collectively to make sure that we take care of the needs of our Californians, those who live in California, because that is our responsibility. It isn't one department's responsibility. It is our collective responsibility to make sure that we do everything that we can with the fundamental. We know that sometimes we have lean years, this is not going to be the best of budget years. And now we have a structural deficit we have to deal with. So as we try to figure out how we're going to spend the people's money, we want to make sure that it is to protect the people of California and doing it in the best way possible, but recognizing that we still have this structural deficit we have to deal with. But I do want to thank you all for being at the table and for answering my questions. Thank you.

I didn't ask Department of Finance if you had anything to add.

JAMIE Gonzalez, Department of Finance Nothing to add at this time, just here to answer any questions.

And Elio, just as you mentioned, Madam Chair, the state does face lean budget conditions, but we find in this proposal in particular that it does meet a high bar of addressing addressing critical health and safety needs. It provides state and local departments funding to address the two current active set events and it provides ongoing funding to mitigate and prevent future events from happening.

Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the committee, Dylan Hoffman, on behalf of Stop Waste. Stop Waste is a joint powers authority located in Alameda county. And we help our member agencies and the community of Alameda prevent waste and help be better environmental stewards. And wanted to appreciate the conversation earlier and some of the questions from the committee related to edible food recovery. That's a huge part of what Stop Waste does in our area. And we believe that more funding and more ongoing funding is absolutely necessary in order to build upon some of the successes that were mentioned by CalRecycle earlier. Just to reiterate the context here, 2.5 billion meals, edible meals are landfilled every single year. Meanwhile, one in five Californians are food insecure. And so despite, you know, the goals and a lot of progress being made towards diverting 20% as required by SB 1383. For from landfills back to food organizations, there's a lot more work that can be done. And as was mentioned, the grant programs at CalRecycle are in need of funding. We've put together a broad coalition of organizations to request $29 million ongoing funding which we believe would just further solidify the gains that we've made. It would go towards staffing these agencies because many of them are non profits, they rely on volunteers. But in order to make this all work, they need full time staff. They need logistical and operational supports like refrigerated trucks, fridges, in order to store these food, this food and get it to the communities. So as was also mentioned, rotting food is a huge contributor to methane and GHG emissions. So we're really talking about a very efficient use of dollars here to reduce emissions, feed hungry Californians and actually create local jobs in the area. So appreciate your consideration and your time. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair Kayla Robinson with California's Against Waste. I just want to start by strongly supporting issue seven on landfills. You know, the situation in Chiquita Canyon landfill is, has completely decimated nearby communities. These folks have been complaining for about three year, three years now raising these concerns and you know, agencies have been pointing fingers. So we think that this approach laid out in issue seven is the right approach that should have been taken from the beginning to really stop this atrocity and tackle the issue head on. We also appreciate the administration including illegal dumping in this BCP and the dumping disguised as land application really mirrors what has been happening down in Chiquita County Canyon in terms of the community has been raising concerns. Nothing's being done and so we think this BCP could help kind of tackle this head on as well. As one of the sponsors of SB279, we support issue three and the implementation of this measure. And then lastly, as the person before me mentioned, we strongly Support funding for CalRecycles GGRF programs, including the Edible Food Recovery as well as the Community Composting for Green Spaces program. We think both these programs have been highly effective on a GHG basis as well as diverting organic waste and really supporting small nonprofits that often don't have funding, ongoing funding. So really important issues.

Thank you.

Waste Management here in Support of Item 7, the Multi Agency request on coordinated landfill response. Thank you.

You.

Thank you. Hi.

Thank you. Well, thank you to all the individuals who participated in public testimony today. If you are unable to testify, please submit your comments and suggestions in writing to the Budget and Fiscal Review Committee or visit our website. Your comments and suggestions are important to us, and we want to include your testimony in the official hearing records. Thank you, and we appreciate your participation. Thank you to our presenters also and members for today's discussion on issues and department overviews. We have concluded the agenda for today's hearing. Senate Budget Subcommittee 2 is adjourned.