Assembly Business And Professions Committee

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to this morning meeting of the Assembly Business and Professions Committee I apologize for being late. I had an unexpectedly and I would argue unnecessarily long bill presentation in the Senate. I would like to thank Assemblymembers Dixon and Ellis for joining us as temporary replacements for Vice Chair Johnson and Assemblymember Hadwick who are absent for today's hearing. I appreciate you being here. Mr. Ellis, I understand you were the first one here, so you get all the prizes. We don't have any, but if we did, you would get them. I can't wait to see them. Exactly, exactly. There are a total of five bills on today's agenda. One bill is on consent, SB 1165 by Senator Caballero. Before we begin with today's agenda, I'll remind everyone that the Assembly has rules to ensure we maintain order and run an efficient and fair hearing. We apply these rules consistently to all people who participate in our proceedings, regardless of the viewpoint they express. In order to facilitate the goal of hearing as much from the public within the limits of our time, we will not permit conduct that disrupts, disturbs, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of legislative proceedings. For each of the measures being presented today, we will be allowing primary witnesses here in the room to speak for up to two minutes each, with up to two primary witnesses per side. Any additional witnesses will be limited to name, position on the bill, and the organization they represent, if any. For those wishing to provide further comments, we are accepting written testimony through the position letter portal on the committee's website. And with that, we will begin today's hearing, and now we will pause today's hearing because we have no senators to present their bills. So – say what now? Oh, yeah, yeah. So if you are – do we have a quorum? One shot. One shot. So if you are a staffer who works for a senator who has a bill to present in today's hearing, please go get your boss. Bring them to room 1100. We're going to be here for a certain amount of time. And if your boss doesn't show up to present their bills, we will adjourn the hearing and stop being here. so go get your boss so that we can have our hearing Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Good morning, Senator. Come on up. Thank you for saving us from ourselves. So we will hear agenda item number four, SB 1203 by Senator Smallwood Cuevas.

And one of the challenges with this profession is that we're not offering enough opportunity to upskill, enough opportunity for folks to mobilize, enough opportunity for skill to translate into higher wages and opportunity. In other words, we're practicing occupational segregation when we aren't looking at what are the actual needs on the job that workers have to be prepared for today and then turn around and not give them to training. I think that this is a workforce that deserves training. I think this is a workforce that deserves an opportunity to show what they can do and also to build pathways into first response. We have a shortage in our police department, shortages in our fire departments. How do we see this as a stepping stone into those long-term careers? We have to start by raising the standards and training, and particularly on de-escalation. In my district, I'm going to be home to the Olympics. The historic Coliseum is in my district right now. We have 60,000 folks coming to the Coliseum for Fan Fest, for World Cup, walking out into our communities. Many of the businesses surrounding Coliseum, private security. And certainly with 60,000 folks who've been in the hot sun celebrating all day, we need security officers to do their job well as we welcome 15 million visitors for the Olympics. So I am asking for your support on this bill today. I have with me testifying two security officers, LaTosha Reed and Sebastian Avalos. I have also Veronica DeLara who's going to translate for us. And then if there are any technical questions, Tiffany Crane is here to answer them. Thank you, Senator. And you have two minutes each, and I know an extra two minutes for the translation. Thank you. Good morning, Chair and committee members. My name is Latasha Reed. I'm a security officer for 17 years. I'm with SEIU, USWW. I'm here today to urge the support of SB 1203 and provide security officers with the additional training we need to safely de-escalate situations. Everyday security officers are expected to step into unexpected and potential violent situations. When a crisis happens, we often are the first people called before the first responders and before any law enforcement. We are expected to protect the public, often with limited training. The reality is that this is a dangerous job, and most people realize—doesn't realize how dangerous it is for security officers. Myself was on the job one day, and I was called to the front office, where a guy with mental health issues had barricaded a manager in the office. We couldn't get the door open. It took several of us to get the door open to get the lady out. Fortunately, no one was hurt, but this was a situation I wasn't trained for, and I just had to do what I had to do in an instance. This is not an isolated incident. This is happening everywhere. And officers face this every day as a part of the situation involving aggressive and mental health drug crises, as well as threats of violence too often. We are expected to manage these encounters without the training that could help keep everybody safe. SB 1203 recognized what security officers know all too well. It's to de-escalate is not a luxury. It is a necessity. And we need this training Security officers should not have to rely on luck We should have the training that we need in dangerous situations I here to stand with thousands of security officers who put themselves in harm way to protect others SB 1203 helps make sure we got the training that we need and continue to keep our community safe. Thank you. Thank you. Go ahead. Good morning, my name is Sebastian Navarro Stisol, I live in the area of the Bahia. I am a member of SEIU-USWW. I worked as a security guard for approximately four years. I started working at a building building. Then I worked in a pharmacy in San Francisco. As security guard, we treat the public every day. frequency. We are the first people to call when there is a problem, when someone is acting in a way unpredictable or when a situation begins to be removed. We do everything possible to keep safe to the workers, the clients and the public in general. While I worked in the pharmacy in the city, I often met with people who faced mental health problems. One day, a man entered the pharmacy and was in a way of erratic. The person asked me help, so I approached him and asked him to retire. He was in a place where he was. He was annoyed, started to gritar. I kept calm and tried to leave so that nobody was hurt. The situation worse after I was angry and suddenly attacked me and attacked me. low. Necesité 23 puntos de sutura. En ese momento mi vida cambió. Tuve que asuntarme del trabajo, recuperarme de mis reacciones. Mientras me recuperaba no podía trabajar y finalmente perdí mi empleo. Sé que el trabajo de seguridad implica riesgos. Lo entendemos cuando aceptamos el trabajo, pero también creo que existen maneras de reducir esos riesgos. Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Sebastia Navalos Di Sol. I live in Bay Area and I'm a member of SEIU USWW. I have worked as a security officer for four years. I started working at the front desk of a building and later worked at a pharmacy in downtown San Francisco. As security officers, we deal with the public every day. We are often the first people called when there's a problem, when someone's acting unpredictably, or when a situation starts getting out of control. We do our best to keep workers, customers, and the public safe. While working in downtown pharmacy, I often came across people who were struggling with mental health issues. One day, a man came into the pharmacy behaving erratically. The staff asked me to help, so I approached him and politely asked him to leave. Instead, the man became angry. He started yelling at me. I stayed calm, continued trying to get him to leave without getting anyone hurt. The situation got worse After yelling at me to get out of his face he suddenly attacked me and stabbed me I needed 23 stitches in my arm That moment changed my life. I had to take time off work to recover from my injuries. While I was recovering, I couldn't work, so I eventually lost my job. I know security work comes with risks. We understand that when we take the job. But I also believe that there's ways to reduce those risks. That's why I'm here to ask you to support SB 1203, because requiring additional eight hours of de-escalation training could make a huge difference. We deserve to feel prepared, protected, and supported. Please stand with security officers and vote yes on SB 1203. Thank you. Thank you. Now we will go to – we do add-ons, right? Yeah. Any additional witnesses you want to add on in support of the bill, come on up to the microphone and provide your name, organization you're with, and position on the bill. Mr. Chair and members, Sarah Flox, California Federation of Labor Unions, in support. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Chair and members, Tiffany Whiten with SEIU California, in support. Thank you so much. Thank you very much. If you all want to come to the microphone and just provide a name, organization you're with, if any, and that you support the bill. Miguel Sanchez, SEIU. I support the bill. Thank you very much. My name is Ariel Park. I'm a security officer in San Francisco and a member of SEIU, USWW. I support this bill. Thank you. My name is Alexander Nunez, based out of Los Angeles, California. I am a part of SEIU-USWW, and I am in support of the bill. Thank you. Mi nombre es Plutarco Guadamuz. Soy miembro de la Unión y apoyo. Gracias. Good morning. Gustavo Garcia, Martinez, California, and I support this bill. Thank you. Francisco Chavez, I'm with SEIU, and I support the bill. Thank you. My name is Jerry Longori. I'm a security officer. I support this bill. Thank you. Isabel Alvarado with SEIU, and I support. Thank you. Morning. My name is Keevan Adams. I'm a security officer for 36 years, and I'm in total support of this bill. Thank you. Hello, everyone. My name is Maxine Taylor. I am a counselor to support this bill. Thank you. Good morning. My name is Miguel Vincenzo. First guide, I support SV 1203. Thank you. Thank you. Lars Taylor, SCIU USWW out of Southern California. I support this bill. Thank you. I'm Betsy Ramirez with SEIU USWW and I support this bill. Thank you. Good morning, everybody. My name is Gilberto Rubio. I'm a security officer, a member of SEIU USWW, and I support this bill. Thank you. Good morning. My name is Brian Swain. I'm with SEIU and I support the bill as well. Thank you. Malik Aaron with SEIU and I support SB 1203 thank you any additional witnesses in support of the bill any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill Come on up You all have two minutes each for up to two primary witnesses in opposition Chair members, Dean Grafilo with Capital Advocacy. here on behalf of Allied Universal in opposition to SB 1203. Allied is an industry leader in private security services. First, we'd like to praise the committee staff's analysis, which clearly articulates the numerous and significant pitfalls of the bill, some of which I'll touch upon. California's led a nation in training requirements for the industry, which we applaud. However, this bill goes much further than is necessary or reasonable, and we simply cannot ignore the staggering financial burden this bill will impose on our industry and by extension, California's economy. We project the cost for the bill will range between $1 to $2 billion annually. The mandate to significantly increase the required power to arrest and use of force training will cost between $350 million to $534 million every year. Initial training costs for the state's 360,000 guards would reach approximately $207 million. Furthermore, by prohibiting licensed security companies from conducting their own training and mandating third-party instructors, we will be forced to shoulder an additional $108 million in outsourced training costs. But the financial impact does not stop at training. The bill reconstitutes the IWC specifically to issue a new wage order. A mere $1 per hour wage increase would hit private security employers with an additional $750 million in annual costs. The bulk of these costs will inevitably be passed on to customers, such as struggling restaurants and retail, as well as strapped state and local governments. Faced with these sharply escalated expenses, customers may decide to eliminate personnel, replacing them with automated non-human resources like cameras, fences, and AI. Others might turn to unregulated and untrained event staff or ushers to avoid costs completely. This unregulated and untrained underground market will jeopardize public safety just as our state prepares to host major global events like the 2028 LA Olympics. SB 1203 is a job killer, and if passed, will make our security services unaffordable for the private and public sector that need them most. Thank you, Virgin Nova. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Berman and committee members. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. My name is David Chandler. I'm the president of CALSAGA, which is the California Association of licensed security agencies, guards, and associates, and we represent 3,000 private security employers and 350,000 licensed security professionals statewide. I'm also a former police officer with the Los Angeles Police Department. CalSaga respectfully opposes SB 1203 for the following reasons. California already leads the nation. We're strong proponents of training. We have no problems with training at all. Our members maintain a strong working relationship with the Bureau of Security Investigative Services in support of their training manual development. SB 1203 adds 18 hours on top of our already nation-leading 40-hour standard. De-escalation is very important to us, and we're currently doing it now, limited, but we are doing it. We are teaching officers this. SB 1203 is a job killer, without a doubt. It would reconstitute the Industrial Welfare Commission, unfunded since 2004, and charge it with setting wages for our industry. This opens a permanent door to even higher mandates across sectors. We saw what happened in fast food a USC's us Santa Cruz study found employees Raise prices, cut staffing and replace workers with technology. This bill would do the same to security. When license security becomes too costly, employers turn unregulated ushers, event staff and AI systems, leaving communities unprotected. SB 1203 does not raise the floor. It incentivizes going around it entirely. And that is the definition of a job killer. Timing could not be worse. The committee analysis flags unresolved drafting issues. The bill would also force firms to outsource training to third-party entities that don't yet exist at scale, creating hiring bottlenecks statewide and leaving hospitals, schools, and public agencies dangerously understaffed. With California hosting the World Cup, Super Bowl, and Olympics, and the need for thousands of new, trained, and licensed security officers, we cannot afford this disruption now. In closing, Cal SOC is willing to work with this committee on evidence-based training standards, but SB 1203 with its IWC reconstitution, its drafting problems, and its predictable unintended consequences is a job killer that will leave communities less safe, not more. We urge a no vote on SB 1203. Thank you for your time. Thank you very much. Any additional witnesses in opposition to the bill? Provide your name, organization you're with, if any, and position to the bill. You can raise that up. Clifton Wilson on behalf of the Kern County Board of Supervisors in respectful opposition. Thank you. Thank you. Andrea Lynch on behalf of the California Chamber of Commerce in respectful opposition. Thank you. Garrett Thomas, local owner of a security company, and I oppose the spell. Thank you. Jenny Aguilar on behalf of the California Business Properties Association, Building Owners and Managers of California, and NAOP California in opposition. Thank you. Thank you. Stephen Parker, representative of a security company in San Jose, California, in opposition. Thank you. Brett Guest on behalf of Guarda World Security in opposition. Thank you. Ashley Cervantes-Thomas with Guardian Protection Force, a Sacramento-based security company in opposition. Thank you. Good morning. Mark Miller with Securitas Security Services in opposition. Thank you. Thank you. Pete Singh, representing Allied Universal. I'm in opposition of this bill. Thank you. Thank you. Good morning. Courtney White with Allied Universal, and I'm in opposition of this bill. Thank you. Good morning. Leandro Ramos-Quirarte. I'm the owner of John 316 Private Security, and I absolutely oppose this bill. Thank you. My name is Carl Vinson. I'm the owner and operator of Maymare Protection. here in Solano County, I have to only oppose this bill. Thank you. Thank you. Any additional witnesses in opposition to the bill? Seeing none, going to bring it back to colleagues for any questions or comments about the bill. I see a member Addis hitting your mic, so I'm assuming you have a question. I don't know if the bill has been moved, but I'd be happy to move the bill. I'd love to be at it as a co-author. I just want to appreciate your efforts on this issue. I know there's a bit of opposition, but just support what you're doing. Thank you, Assemblymember. I appreciate the enthusiasm. We're one shy of a quorum. But as soon as we get that, I think we're still one shy of a quorum. We'll come back to you. Thank you. Any comments or questions? Comments or questions? Seeing none, Senator, would you like to close? Well, I want to thank you so much. I appreciate the witnesses and all of their testimony in the discussion. And thank you so much Assemblymember for your support and happy to add you as a co This is about making sure that our workforce is adequately trained to meet the moment And we always hear that investing in workers costs more money. We always hear that when it's time to ensure that we're raising the floor for working people to address the issues that the workers have raised, it's always a job killer. This, quite honestly, is a common sense bill. We know that the scale of mental health, the scale of substance abuse disorders, we know that every day that hell is playing out on our streets. And it's the security officers that we go to in that time of need because we just don't have enough police officers to respond. It is important that this workforce be trained and it will cost money. But let me say this is one of the highest grossing industries that we have. We have a robust economy, and this industry in particular stands to gain almost a billion dollars in contracts that will come out of all of the Olympic Games and investments in and around California and the rest of the state. I think investing in the workforce is a part of the legacy of this investment in these games, that we have a skilled and trained workforce that is able to meet the moment. And with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you, Senator. We're going to take a brief pause to establish a quorum. Madam Secretary, please call the roll. Berman. Here. Addis. Here. Aarons. Alanis. Baines. Barrakehan. Caloza. Chen. Dixon. El-Hawari. Ellis. Haney. Hart. Here. Irwin. Jackson. Lowenthal. Here. Macedo. Quinn Pellerin. Before they leave, we have a quorum. We're about to lose it. We've lost the quorum, but that's okay. Senator Addis, coming back to you. Sorry to make the motion. I'd be happy to move the bill again. We got a motion and a second. Thank you, Senator, for raising this important issue for the work that you've done for this industry before you became an elected official, for the work that you're doing as an elected official for, as you said, and I agree, a critical but often overlooked industry. And I was surprised that we had 330,000 private security officers, or maybe I heard also from a witness, 360,000, somewhere in the mid 300,000 private security officers in California, almost 1% of our population, which is huge. But often doing their job to keep all of us safe and to keep our property secure, but not always noticed. And so, you know, oftentimes don't get the resources necessarily or the education or the training that they need. So appreciate the, you know, you bring this to our attention and we'll be supporting the bill. As you and I have discussed, often over text as opposed to over the phone. It's vital that we increase training requirements, that we ensure that the necessary third party that we also ensure that the necessary third party training infrastructure exists before we prohibit current training providers from providing the additional training. So I definitely appreciate you agreeing to take amendments in a future committee to require a regional market analysis be completed before prohibiting employers from providing the new training. And with that commitment, we'll be happy to support the bill today. I also want to just mentioned to one of your witnesses that it a travesty that you got fired after you got stabbed doing your job And if we don have laws to prohibit that from happening then we need to revisit that because that insane to me That should not happen That's unjust. I would hope that the industry would police their own members and make sure that that does not happen because obviously somebody who is physically injured doing their job should be paid when they can't do their job because of the physical injury that they incurred doing their job and should absolutely not be fired. because they can't then get back to work after being stabbed. That's terrifying, and I'm sorry that that happened, and it shouldn't have. So with that, happy to support the bill. Madam Secretary, please call the vote. On SB 1203, Smallwood Cuevas, the motion is due pass to the Committee on Labor and Employment. Berman? Aye. Berman, aye. Dixon? Dixon, no. Addis? Aye. Addis, aye. Aarons? Alanise? Alanise, no. Baines? Barcahan? Caloza Caloza I Chen El Huori El Huori I Ellis Ellis Nohaney Hart Hart I Irwin Jackson Jackson I Lowenthal Lowenthal I Macedo Quinn Pellerin We'll hold the vote open for that bill Thank you very much for your presentation Thank you So we're going to go to agenda item number two, SB 936 with Senator Blakespear. I thought that was a water bottle, but I don't think it is. Yeah. By all means, hit the little microphone button as well. This is not for use by the committee members, I'm assuming. This is a hot whip flavored cream. Okay. Nitrous oxide for inhalation recreationally, unfortunately. All right. Thank you, chair and colleagues, for the opportunity to present SB 936. SB 936 takes a measured approach to address the rise of nitrous oxide misuse in California. Nitrous oxide is a colorless, odorless gas, which you can get from this canister, with an addictiveness similar to crack cocaine that poses serious public safety, health, and waste management concerns. It has become a popular recreational drug. Improper inhalation is known to cause dizziness, impairment of brain function, loss of motor control, asphyxia, or death, and repeated exposure has been linked to long-term neurologic damage. While nitrous oxide has legitimate uses in controlled settings, such as in dental offices, bakeries, and automotive shops, Use outside of these environments creates significant risk. Large tanks labeled for, quote, culinary use are widely available through retail shops and online marketplaces, often marketed with flavor varieties and brands that appeal to young consumers. Driving under the influence of nitrous oxide can impair drivers and cause accidents. One such incident in my district involved a father falling asleep behind the wheel after consuming nitrous and crashing into a fence He threw the canister of this size under his car grabbed his two children ages two and four from the vehicle and fled the scene These incidents are particularly concerning because nitrous oxide does not appear on traditional breathalyzers or drug tests making it difficult for law enforcement to detect impairment or enforce current laws. In addition, discarded canisters are hazardous and expensive to recycle. Pressurized canisters can explode during collection or processing, damaging equipment and endangering workers' lives. It costs a county upwards of $60 to recycle each of these canisters, but purchasing them, this one was purchased here in Sacramento, was $34. For all these reasons, several California counties and cities, including Orange County, Costa Mesa, and Newport Beach, have already restricted the retail sale of nitrous oxide tanks. SB 936 builds on these local efforts by establishing a clear statewide standard. Specifically, SB 936 would prohibit the retail sale of nitrous oxide canisters larger than 8 grams while preserving the legitimate uses in medical, dental, culinary, and automotive settings. Importantly, the bill does not ban nitrous oxide outright, and it does not affect standard 8-gram whipped cream chargers that are commonly used in culinary applications and particularly in coffee shops. SB 936 also does not create new possession crimes Instead, it focuses on restricting the sale and distribution of high-risk products Using civil penalties and regulatory tools rather than criminalization We have taken a series of amendments to address some of the opposition concerns Clarifying that restrictions apply only when a distributor knows or reasonably should know a product will be used for inhalation The amendments also move the bill into the Health and Safety Code for more effective enforcement and make clear that local governments can continue to adopt and enforce stronger restrictions if they choose to. By targeting the specific products most commonly associated with misuse, the bill aims to reduce youth access, prevent impaired driving incidents, and protect workers in California's waste management systems. With me today in support, I'm honored to have Supervisor Katrina Foley from Orange County. Thank you, Senator. Supervisor, you have two minutes. And maybe just hit the little mic button. Thank you, Chairman Berman and members of the Business and Professions Committee. Thank you for hearing SB 936. And thank you, Senator Blakespear, for championing this cause. I'm Katrina Foley. I'm the vice chair for the Orange County Board of Supervisors. And I'm here on behalf of the County of Orange and the sponsor of this bill. SB 936 addresses, as you heard, how nitrous oxide is packaged, flavored, marketed, and sold. It targets the products driving abuse. Oversized canisters, food and candy flavors, balloons, attachments, all designed for inhalation. There is no safe recreational use of nitrous oxide. This bill aims at businesses profiting off of people's known addictions, including delivering through Uber, Lyft, and Instacart. I see the damage up close and personal. I know families who've watched their beautiful, talented, athletic children decline with frightening speed. I've met parents whose children have gone into psychosis, mirrored like it's schizophrenia. I've seen these families move into hospitals, be placed on psychotic holds, and taken through all kinds of different treatment facilities, all because they think that it's safer than the drugs that they've already conquered in substance abuse treatment programs. Local neurologists, local pediatricians, they're all seeing an increase in neurological damage caused by this nitrous oxide. They're seeing students who can't maintain school. They can't keep their jobs and they are becoming unhoused. First responders. As you heard, they're seeing it. They're seeing accidents where canisters are all strewn about, and people are dying because of it. Bad actors who sell oversized canisters with slick graphics. And here is a picture from a local smoke shop. We have these happening right in Orange County. They sell balloons and attachments. They know the harm. They want to profit. And I've visited these shops myself and seen it for myself. Today in California, you can go into a smoke shop and buy a canister, and the moment you leave, it's a crime to have possession of it. There is no safe recreational use of nitrous oxide, no positive consumer experience to justify the public health consequences. In Orange County, at my request, we have banned nitrous oxide in the county of Orange, and we now have 10 cities that have followed suit in the county. We also know other counties have followed. But SB 936 is something that will help us with a statewide ban, and it will save lives, not just here in California, but the movement will spread across the country. And if you'd wrap up, that'd be great. Thank you. We know we care about our families. Please, I request an I vote for SB 936 to save lives. Thank you. Thank you very much. Any additional witnesses in support of the bill? Please provide your name, organization, if any, and position on the bill. So Clifton Wilson on behalf of the Board of Supervisors for the counties of Humboldt as well as Mendocino, both in strong support. And thank you. Thank you. Hello, Keely Morris on behalf of the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts in support. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Gene Hurst here today on behalf of the urban counties of California as well as the boards of supervisors of the counties of Santa Barbara and Santa Clara in support. Thank you. Hi, Chair and members. Zach Flowers with the Health Officer Association in support. Thank you. Thanks. Jack Wurston from Nossman on behalf of the City of Ventura in support. Thank you. Sumay Nahar on behalf of the American Academy of Pediatrics California in support. Thank you. Mr. Chair, Jolena Voris on behalf of the League of California Cities in strong support. Thank you. Thank you. Good morning. Sharon Gonsalves on behalf of the City of Carlsbad in support. Thank you. Thank you. Good morning. George Storridge with the California Medical Association in support. Thank you. Morning, Chair and members. Julie Lecheski on behalf of Rethink Waste in support. Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Chair and members. Amy O'Gorman Jenkins on behalf of the California Cannabis Operators Association in strong support. Thank you. Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the committee. Sam Rodriguez on behalf of Good Farmers, Great Neighbors, based in Santa Barbara County, and Nug Dispensaries based in Northern California, in strong support. Thank you. Charles Condrabecki, Internstone Advocacy, on behalf of the California District Attorneys Association, in support. Thank you. Good job. Good morning, Mr. Chair and members. Dylan Hoffman on behalf of the California Product Stewardship Council, Stop Waste, and the Solid Waste Association of North America's Legislative Task Force, all in strong support. Thank you. Good morning. Patrick Espinoza on behalf of the San Diego County District Attorney's Office, a proud co-sponsor in strong support. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman and members. I'm Heidi Sanborn. I'm a co-sponsor of the bill with the National Stewardship Action Council in strong support. Thank you. Thank you. Good morning. RURAL COUNTY REPRESENTATIVES OF CALIFORNIA AS A PROUD CO-SPONSOR OF THE BILL, ALSO REGISTERING SUPPORT FOR CALIFORNIA AGAINST WASTE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIR. RYAN SHERMAN OF THE CALIFORNIA NARCOTIC OFFICERS ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT ALSO REGISTERING SUPPORT ON BEHALF OF THE RIVERSIDE SHERIFF ASSOCIATION CALIFORNIA RESERVE PEACE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION AND THE CALIFORNIA RESERVE PEACE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION AND THE Good morning Mr Chair Ryan Sherman with the California Narcotic Officers Association in support Also registering support on behalf of the Riverside Sheriff Association California Reserve Peace Officers Association Placer Deputy Sheriff Association and the police officer associations of the following cities, Arcadia, Burbank, Brea, Corona, Culver City, Fullerton, Marietta, Newport Beach, Novato, Palos Verdes, Pomona, and Riverside, and the school police associations of Los Angeles City Unified, L.A. School Police Management Association, California Coalition of School Safety Professionals, and the California School Police Chiefs Association, all in support. Thank you very much. Any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill? Seeing none. Anyone wants to add on in opposition to the bill? Move the bill. Got a motion. Got a bipartisan motion in second. Any comments from colleagues? I think that's a great bill. I'd love to co-author. Please. Senator, your second bill this morning. I'm happy to support that one, and I will co-author with you on this one. Very good, Bill. Thank you. We're on a roll. Any additional comments, questions from colleagues? Lowenthal. I got Erwin and then Lowenthal. Yeah, thank you. I actually have had a number of constituents come up to me and ask me to do something on this this year. So I said, well, Senator Blakespear is going to be handling it. And I told him I would be a co-author. So hopefully you can add me. Thank you. Thank you so much for bringing this forward. I also have a bill in this space that's moving over to your house right now that specifically deals with adding nitrous oxide to the list of things that children are precluded from being able to purchase online and so forth. There's a big problem with using gift cards, actually, to buy nitrous oxide as children figuring out how kids can do that online. And online sales are actually also a big problem in the state. But, you know, what everybody needs to remember is that feeling of being high when one takes nitrous oxide, specifically children, is literally brain cells dying at that moment. It is about the worst thing that one can do to their own body. We absolutely have to do more in this space. I would love to be added as a co-author on the bill. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Go for it. I'm loving all these comments we're hearing from here up on the dice. And I am already a co-author, so appreciate that. Great bill, Senator. Always proud to be part of this. Great job. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Alanis. Any additional comments or questions or co-author requests from colleagues? Senator, would you like to close? Well, I appreciate the veritable love fest here over this bill. It's great. And I also just want to recognize how important it is to be dealing with the online part because it is true that retail Shops are one thing, but then also, of course, online is something that's also of particular risk. So thank you to my colleague in the Assembly for working on that bill. And with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Awesome. Well, thank you, Senator, for bringing this bill forward. Thank you, Supervisor, for testifying in support of it. I agree with all of my colleagues and believe that this is a smart solution to a very serious problem. So happy to support the bill today. Madam Secretary, please call the vote. On SB 936 Blake Spear, the motion is due passed to the Committee on Public Safety. Berman? Aye. Berman, aye. Dixon? Dixon, aye. Addis Aye Addis aye Ahrens Aye Ahrens aye Alanis Aye Alanis I Banes Barcahan Colosa Colosa I Chen a hoary a Hoary I Ellis Ellis I Haney Hart Hart I Irwin Irwin I Jackson Jackson I Lone Thong Lone Thaw I'm a Cito when when I Pellerin Pellerin I That bill is out. Thank you very much. Senator Reyes, thank you for your patience. One of my favorite senators, and I say that unabashedly. No, no, I enjoy most of the senators, but Senator Reyes is one of my favorites. I'm expecting to have as much love here as Senator Blakespear. We'll see what we can do. That was a good start. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Exactly. Thanks. Chair and committee members, I want to introduce you to SB 1271. This bill strengthens California's midwifery training pipeline by requiring the Medical Board to collect data on the capacity of licensed midwives to serve as preceptors and train incoming students. This data will be shared with the Department of Health Care Access and Information, HKI, and to be compiled in a report for the legislature. Midwives, as we all know, are perinatal health professionals who provide community-based support services, including maternity, newborn, and postpartum care to ensure a positive birth experience. Research from the Yale School of Medicine found that midwives reduce unnecessary intervention during labor and improve mental health outcomes for first-time mothers. While California has taken steps to improve visibility on this workforce, critical gaps persist in maintaining the training infrastructure that sustains and grows the profession. To become licensed midwives, to become licensed, midwives must undergo a period of supervised clinical training known as preceptorship. Midwife preceptors are experienced maternity care providers who train, mentor, and supervise students, bridging their academic learning with hands-on experience. However, a severe lack of available preceptors and limited methods to find them have left students to navigate a broken system on their own. As a result, many trainees rely on out-of-state programs to earn their credentials. SB 1271 addresses this disaggregated pathway by leveraging the state's current data collection to include questions about eligibility, availability, capacity, practice setting, and barriers to precepting that qualified midwives are facing. Lastly, I would like to assure the committee that my sponsors and I have been working closely with the Medical Board and HKI to create a survey that is reflective of our intentions to understand and support the workforce Here to testify and support is Esperanza Mendez an active doula from the Coachella Valley who works for Planned Parenthood and will be speaking on behalf of the Women Foundation Solis Policy Institute Great. You have two minutes. Test, test. Great. Good morning, Chairman and committee members. My name is Esperanza Mendez. I work for Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest, which serves San Diego, Riverside, and Imperial counties. I'm also a full-spectrum doula serving rural Coachella Valley, and I'm an aspiring licensed midwife. I'm here today to speak in strong support of SB 1271. I represent not only myself as an aspiring midwife, but also the birthing families in my rural community who are currently facing a crisis of access. I have been a full-spectrum doula serving Riverside County's most rural populations for more than six years. In those six years, I have witnessed the physical and emotional toll that perinatal deserts take on families and birthing people. Many of my clients come from the eastern Coachella Valley, where I was raised, and frequently have to drive anywhere from 30 to 60 minutes while in active labor to get the obstetric care that they need. Since 2012, nearly 60 hospitals and labor and delivery units across California have closed. My neighbors to the south and El Centro have seen hospitals and birthing facilities shuttering due to staffing shortages and funding cuts. These closures turn rural areas into birth deserts. California labor and delivery units are closing at a rate three times faster than other parts of the country. When hospitals close, community-based midwives are the only safety net left. Yet our current training pipeline is too weak to sustain them. Currently, there is only one licensed midwife preceptor local to my area, and as you can imagine, she's at capacity. This creates an impossible scenario for local students like me, where we're either forced to delay our education, travel hundreds of miles, or abandon the profession entirely. We cannot improve birth outcomes if we don't have the providers to attend the births. By mapping preceptor capacity and targeting the training pipeline for rural students, SB 1271 ensures that the Coachella Valley and every birth desert in California can grow. I urge you to vote yes on SB 1271. Thank you. Thank you very much. Any additional witnesses who want to add on in support of the bill? Come on up. We got a motion. We got a second. Samaya Nahar on behalf of the March of Dimes of California in support. Thank you. Good morning, Chair members. Carol Gonzalez on behalf of East Panas Organized for Political Equality. Proud support. Thank you. Thank you. Any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill? Seeing none. Anyone who wants to add on in opposition to the bill? Seeing none. Going to bring it back to colleagues for questions or comments. We already have a motion in a second. Seeing none. And Senator, would you like to close? Thank you. This seems like such a simple bill. We need to have teachers to teach the midwives. And this is, we can't find them. And this is one way is to have the questionnaire ask, are you willing to do it? Do you have the experience? And are you available? And that's what the bill is about. And with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you, Senator. I agree. It's a simple bill, an important bill. an important industry of folks who are helping our people who are giving birth. And I have a little – more unique understanding of that now than I did a year ago, and appreciate how important that is. And so thank you for working with on this and the technical questions noted in the analysis, and with the understanding that those discussions will continue as the bill moves on to the Health Committee, I'm happy to support the bill today. Madam Secretary, please call the vote. On SB 1271 Reyes, the motion is due passed to the Committee on Health. Berman? Aye. Berman, aye. Dixon? Dixon, aye. Addis? Aye. Addis, aye. Aarons? Aye. Aarons I Alanis Alanis I Baines Barcahan Caloza Chen a hoary a hoary I Ellis Ellis I Haney Hart Hart I Irwin Irwin I Jackson Jackson I Lowenthal Lowenthal I Macedo when when I Pellerin Pellerin I just as successful as senator blake spears bill uh that bill is out thank you very much thank you thank you so i see senator padilla who's going to close this out with uh sb 903 how are you Good morning. Ready when you are and just hit that little button right in front of you. Thank you, Senator. Minor detail. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members. For your patience, I'm pleased to present SB903. And as you and the members know, as technological capacity continues to grow and new tools are introduced into the mental health space, we must ensure adequate guardrails are in place to maintain a human-centered approach and keep safety and ethical considerations at the forefront. We've already seen real-world consequences of inadvertently regulated AI in the mental health sphere, with chatbots powered by AI algorithms on the market claiming to provide psychotherapy. Websites where these bots are available often use taglines such as, quote, 24-7 AI therapist always at your fingertips, unquote, or AI therapy in your pocket, or even claim to specialize in cognitive behavioral therapy. Many people, including children, have turned to these chatbots for mental health support. However, research shows that these tools do more harm than good. A Stanford study found that AI therapy chatbots may not only lack effectiveness compared to human therapists, but could also contribute to harmful stigma and dangerous responses. Clinicians around the state and the nation have raised concerns that chatbot therapists pose data and privacy concerns, have a limited understanding of client backgrounds, can cause client over-reliance on chatbots, give incorrect treatment recommendations, and have an inability to detect subtle communication clues such as tone and eye contact. Last year, I authored SB 579, which would have created a working group to assess the ways in which AI is used in mental health treatment and to establish a set of best practices. Unfortunately, that bill did not move. But now we understand just a short while later, much more today than we did then, about how these dangers are expanding and growing. Other states throughout this country have seen this enacted Last year the Illinois legislature passed the Wellness and Oversight for Psychological Resources Act States across the nation are moving towards similar bills This bill would build off those efforts and protect individuals seeking therapy or psychotherapy services by ensuring that AI chatbots cannot be advertised as therapy. It also sets standards for AI use in therapeutic settings and practice by requiring informed consent disclosure and making sure that a licensed clinician is in the decision-making loop. This bill would also reinforce that the use of artificial intelligence tech in psychotherapy records must comply with existing confidentiality laws and protect the data privacy of patients. Throughout the session, we have engaged with stakeholders, and a recent set of amendments reflect those conversations which will be ongoing. I'm committed to continuing to engage and craft the most effective piece of legislation that hopefully can set a national standard for the regulation of AI use in mental health treatment. AI has the potential to increase clinical capacity and efficiency, but only if it is utilized in a way that maintains a human-centered approach and keeps safety and ethical considerations at the forefront. This bill draws a clear line. AI can be a tool in the hands of licensed professionals, but it cannot be the professional itself. I'm honored again to have with me today Maria Raine, a licensed clinical social worker whose son Adam tragically committed suicide after prolonged interactions with an AI chatbot, and Dr. Clark Harvey, CEO of the California Behavioral Health Association. We've got a motion in a second. Thank you very much. You have two minutes each. Mr. Chair, my name is Maria Rain. I am a licensed clinical social worker practicing in the state of California, and I am here today because AI technology killed my son. As a therapist, I've spent my career helping people navigate their darkest moments, but nothing could have prepared me for how AI would fundamentally shatter my own world on April 11, 2025. On that day, my husband and I lost our 16-year-old son, Adam, to suicide. We had no idea he was struggling so deeply, but we later discovered he had been turning to ChatGBT for companionship and advice. In his most vulnerable moments, he wasn't talking to a person. He was talking to an algorithm that offered a hollow, deceptive kind of empathy. For over a month, Adam expressed suicidal thoughts to ChatGBT, and ChatGBT helped Adam to explore how to take his life. ChatGBT talked to our teenage son about drowning in our backyard pool, carbon monoxide poisoning in our garage, overdosing on his IBS medication, and using electrical cords versus cloth belts for hanging. It even offered to write a suicide note. Ultimately, Adam settled on hanging, and ChatGBT taught Adam how to tie a noose. The very last photo that Adam uploaded to ChatGBT was the photo of the noose that Adam used to hang himself. In his last chat to ChatGBT, Adam asked ChatGBT if the noose could suspend a human. ChatGBT said that it could and went into detail about how. I found Adam's lifeless body hours later in his closet with the very noose set up that ChatGBT had told Adam could hang a human. Apparently, no alarm bells inside of ChatGBT went off despite Adam's multiple attempts to end his life in that month. There were several times when Adam was crying out for help, and at one point, Adam said he wanted to leave the noose out where someone would find it and try to stop him. ChatGBT told him not to leave the noose out because his friends and family wouldn understand that only ChatGBT could When we got into Adam phone after his death we thought we were looking for a bullying incident or perhaps a prank gone bad We had no idea why Adam would have done this He was a happy family 16 kid Adam erased his social media and we were not able to access his texts, but we found his ChatGBT app and were immediately shocked. It was quickly very clear that he was in a crisis situation for his final few weeks. My immediate response was horror and anguish, not only as a mother, but as a therapist. How could this bot have known my son was suicidal with a plan multiple times and not report? I administer suicide screenings before every session that I begin. How could this bot have done nothing? We experienced Adam's chats backward initially as his most recent chats in those final dark days where he was suicidal were at the top of his account. But as we read more and more, it became clear that ChatGBT played a major role in Adam getting to the place where he had decided to take his life. It was evident that ChatGBT was programmed to keep its users engaged, and it engaged with Adam on every dark idea it had. It was always the same, acknowledging the scary thought, justifying it, and then seeking to have more interaction on it. In the end, ChatGBT mentioned suicide almost 1,300 times to Adam, about six times more often than Adam did. We believe that Adam would have not been suicidal in the first place had he not interacted with ChatGBT. And when it was clear he was suicidal with a plan, there were no meaningful safeguards in place to assist. The most terrifying part is that these AI chatbots simply do not have the guardrails that therapists, as real professionals, are bound by. When a client sits in my office and discloses a plan to harm themselves, I am a mandated reporter. I have a legal and ethical duty to intervene and save a life. But when Adam told the chatbot he was suicidal and had a plan, there was no mandatory reporting. There was no siren, no call to emergency services, and no outreach to us as his parents. He was crying out for help to a machine that was programmed to be helpful, but was utterly incapable of recognizing the life or death crisis. If a human had been on the other side of those chats, Adam would be alive today. That is why I am here today in strong support of SB 903. SB 903 addresses a growing crisis I witnessed firsthand. AI tools illegally positioning themselves as therapists and mental health providers. AI therapists cannot replace the clinical judgment, training, duty of care, and human instinct that a licensed professional brings to treatment. Practicing therapy without a license is already illegal. SB903 simply clarifies that AI is not exempt from that rule, prohibiting AI from independently interacting with clients, making therapeutic decisions, or generating treatment plans without professional review. Members of the committee, we have entered a new frontier with AI. Companies are racing to market these tools with little regard for the consequences. My son's death is proof that the consequences can be fatal. I urge you to pass SB 903 to protect California's children, to protect the integrity of mental health treatment, and to ensure that no other family endures what mine has. Thank you. Thank you. And on behalf of everyone on the committee, we're so sorry. Hello, Chair and members. I'm Dr. Leandra Clark-Harvey, the CEO of the California Behavioral Health Association. We represent community-based organizations that serve millions of Californians living with serious mental illness and substance use disorders. These agencies employ thousands of licensed behavioral health professionals who dedicate their careers to meeting rigorous educational ethical and clinical standards in service of the public We believe in the promise of artificial intelligence and recognize its potential to improve operational efficiency reduce administrative burden strengthen care coordination and help an overstretched workforce better meet the needs of Californians. But we are equally clear about its limits. For the Assembly Business and Professions Committee, this legislation comports with your mission of protecting consumers and preserving the integrity of Californians licensed professionals who earn the public's trust through years of education, supervised experiences, examinations, continuing education requirements, and adherence to professional ethics. They are accountable to licensing boards and subject to oversight when standards of care are not met. AI systems are not. Without clear guardrails, AI chatbots that mimic therapeutic relationships or even imply clinical expertise risk undermining both consumer safety and the value of professional licensure itself. The distinction between a licensed clinician and an automated response is not merely technical, it can be life-altering, and as we've heard in some cases, life-ending. SB 903 ensures that individuals know when they're interacting with AI rather than a human clinician. Clear boundaries are maintained between technology and the practice of licensed professions and the public can continue to rely on California's professional licensure system as a meaningful indicator of competency, accountability, and trust. These provisions are not barriers to innovation. Rather, they create a framework necessary for responsible innovation to flourish. As California continues to lead the nation in both behavioral health transformation and technological innovation, we have an opportunity and an obligation to ensure that innovation strengthens rather than weakens public protections embedded within our professional licensing system. Thank you. Thank you. Any additional witnesses you want to add on in support of the bill? Come on up, provide your name, organization you're with, if any, and position on the bill. George Cruz on behalf of the California Behavioral Health Association, proud to co-sponsor. Thank you. Sumayah Nahar on behalf of the California Association of Marriage and Family Therapists, also proud co-sponsor. Thank you. Pete Nielsen with the California Consortium of Addiction Programs and Professionals here in support. Thank you. Good morning, Tyree Rindy, California Psychological Association, Proud Co-sponsor, in support. Thank you. Good morning, Ruth Sosa on behalf of PowerCA Action, in support. Thank you. Good morning, Chair Members. Elmer Lizardo with the California Federation of Labor Unions, in support. Thank you. Good morning, Chair Members. J.P. Hanna with the California Nurses Association in support. Thank you. Good morning, Chair and Members. Connor Gussman on behalf of the Engineers and Scientists of California in support. Thank you. Benjamin Eichert with the National Union of Healthcare Workers, proud co-sponsor. Thank you. Any additional witnesses in support? Seeing none. Any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill? Seeing none. Any witnesses want to add on in opposition to the bill? or tweeners, provide your name, organization you're with, and position on the bill. Good morning, Mark Faruque on behalf of the California Hospital Association. We are opposed unless amended, but just want to note the ongoing productive conversations we have had with the author and sponsors to work out the remaining issues. Really appreciate those discussions and look forward to continuing those. Thank you. Thank you. Good morning, Chair and members. Ryan Perini on behalf of ATA Action. I just want to align my comments with my colleague from CHA. Thank you. Thank you. Sure. Sorys with the California Medical Association, respectfully opposed unless amended, really close to being able to move to neutral on this bill. Align my comments with my colleague from CHA, and thank you so much to the author and sponsor. Thank you. Alexis Rodriguez with the California Chamber of Commerce with an opposed unless amended position as well. Thank you. Thank you. Good morning. Dylan Hoffman on behalf of TechNet, also with a respectful opposed unless amended position. Thank you. Thank you. Good morning. Mercer May with Teladoc Health, also a respectful opposed unless amended, and thank you so much for the amendments that you've already made and the commitment to continue working on them. Thank you so much. Thank you very much. Any additional witnesses in opposition to the bill? Seeing none, bringing it back to colleagues for questions or comments. Assemblymember Pellerin. I just want to say this is an incredible bill, and thank you so much for doing this, and I'm so sorry for your loss. I have to scoot out because I have to talk to a colleague about a bill that I have in some of the same area to protect people against these chatbots. It's so incredibly important. We do everything we can in our power, and I'd be honored to be at it as co-author. Any additional questions or comments? Got it. Okay, I got it. Some number, El Hawari. I also just want to thank you for sharing your story with us. It's crazy to think about how many people are using chatbots for companionship, And I think to recognize the extent to which the chatbot pushed your son to take his own life, I think is awful. And we have to do everything we can to stop this. I just want to thank the author for bringing this forward and pushing us to have this real conversation and ensure that we're doing the work to end these horrible practices. Thank you. Thank you. I've got a number of errands, then Addis, then Lowenthal, then Bauer-Cahan. Thank you. Thank you so much, Senator, for bringing this bill forward, I think. And I really just want to appreciate the testimony that was given. And thank you for sharing your testimony about your family and your son. I think that was, it's very moving to hear you come up and advocate because it's important to remember the lives that are being impacted and will continue to be impacted and how new and fast and changing this technology is. And as someone who shares representing Silicon Valley with the chair, we've seen a lot of engagement on this issue. And I think there's no also just want to acknowledge there's no really better author that I know in the Senate to be taking up these issues, as you're known for really being laser focused on trying to put up proper guardrails. But I also know that you're a trusted policymaker who you've engaged with a lot of stakeholders, as we've seen, because it's so important that we get this right, that we move forward on it in a way that also engages in our health care system and people's lives and all of the stakeholders that have a vested interest in making sure that these guardrails are successful the first time around. because unlike other pieces of legislation, some of these very sensitive and life-threatening issues aren't just things that we can go and clean up later. There's real consequences to not getting this legislation correct the first time around, which is why your engagement with the opposition is so important as well. And so I will be supporting this today, but I just wanted to make those comments. Thank you. Thank you. Assemblymember Addis. I just I want to say think I be happy to be at it as a co I hope the opposition is working with you I know it like we all know it like to be sitting where you sitting and asking if we working with the opposition but on an issue like this i really hope opposition is working with you um to to get to neutral or get to support on the bill and to understand how vital this is and i just want to say your son is just beautiful i'll say as sorry, as a mom of children that age, it's just astounding what you've gone through. And thank you. Thank you. Assemblymember Lowenthal. Well, first I'd like to say to send her to your witness, Thank you Your advocacy makes a massive difference And we all learn from it And as you can hear from the emotion on the dais It brings it home for all of us So I appreciate you so much for doing this To the senator who continues to peel back the onion On this topic Thank you for your work I feel a lot calmer as a dad knowing the work that you're doing. For colleagues up here to know, 72% of children in the state of California are using chatbots. Half of them are using them on a daily basis. We have no oversight. Let's stop and think for a moment about the oversight we debate on this dais in this committee on the many things in California, including the issue of mental health, care for mental health, But other things, cemeteries, acupuncture, cannabis, we have no oversight over a nearly trillion dollar sector profiting off of our children and their poor mental health outcomes. And I'm already there with the author very clearly, but really speaking to my colleagues here, we have to change the way that we're doing things here in the legislature and mandate that we have oversight on an ongoing basis that a go-to-market path for all of these products have to go through a rigorous testing regimen that we approve of. that starts from a place of safety and works backwards from there. And until we get to that place, we're going to continue to have to piecemeal find areas of legislation where we're literally stopping the bleeding. And it's untenable. So we should all be supporting the senator in this effort. And more than that, we should all be demanding from industry that wants our friendship, that wants our support on all the things that they're endeavoring to do, that they have to do much, much more when it comes to safety. And that's the only way that they should be able to thrive in the state of California. So I would love to be added as a co-author on this bill. I thank you again for bringing it forward. I'm in full support of this and all your efforts to regulate the chatbot product. Thank you, Senator. Excuse me. Thank you, Assemblymember. Bauer-Cahan Thank you and I of course want to reiterate my gratitude to Maria for being here And um it does you and I have talked about this but it does feel like a gift that you are um here and turning tragedy into strength in ways that I frankly could never imagine. Um, but the cost is not. I wish we could bring your boy back. I wish you didn't have to be here. And the fact that we've gotten to this point shows such a failure of government, a failure of government to regulate an industry that for some reason has for decades gone unchecked with our children, AI just being the most recent front of it. And I relate to my colleague, you know, my son is the same age as Adam. He uses chatbots in the same way Adam did. And the fact that I put them in front of him, and you've told me not to, so I should stop, but knowing that they help him with math, but it's not worth it if this is the price we pay. And so we have to get to a place where we can trust these systems to provide the benefits without the harms. Um, so I want to thank you. I want to thank Adam for giving you the strength to be here today. Cause I know he is part of, um, how you were doing this. Um, and I know his memory is a blessing because of your work. Um, and then, you know, I know this bill goes to my committee next. Um, I know that there have been discussions around amendments. Um, I have questions around honestly, why peer support is exempted. We'll have to have, you know, and I guess we can talk about that a little bit more. I don't know that I think that's an appropriate place for chatbots to be providing psychotherapy to the point that you made, Maria, as a professional. Any peer who did what happened in your son's case would be criminally charged. So to allow these chatbots to do it in any context feels, frankly, wrong. So I know we have to narrow bills to get them through, so I respect that. Maybe that's next year's fight, Senator. We could have that conversation. But I do think I respect peer support. I think peer support is an important part of our mental health crisis continuum, but I think that they should also be supporting people in the way we expect them to. And I think that was something I wanted to bring up here today because I think that's more in the jurisdiction of this committee, frankly, than in the jurisdiction of privacy. But I do think that, you know, the guardrails you're setting out here of sort of what is the appropriate use and something we talked about, we actually have billed this year on the nurse in the nursing context as well, where we're talking about for our licensed professionals, who carries like what does that licensure, what does that duty of care that we put on that we regulate so heavily through this committee mean in the context when we're integrating technology? And at the end of the day, my position is that I trust the humans. I trust the trained therapists. And so their licensure, their duty of care should always be first and foremost. And then the AI should be in support of that. But at the end of the day, they have the obligation to the patient to be providing the care as we regulate them to do so. And so I think that the way you provided, you know, triaging and sort of these very narrow circumstances where it can be used, but that it cannot supplant the therapy of the licensed professionals is the right direction. So I'll be curious to see these amendments and where it's going as it moves to privacy from here. But but I do want to just reiterate my gratitude to the senator for his work on this and the fact that you are taking such a multi approach to dealing with this problem when we read about before we had the opportunity to get to know the Rain family but read about Adam's case last summer when their case broke, I know you and I both reacted with what more can we do to save California's children. And, you know, you've done it not just in the chatbot realm, but also looking at the psychotherapy angle. And I think both are critically important to a better California where chatbots are accessible. but also safe. And that's a balance that we must demand. We can't just say these companies have to thrive at any cost. That is not – that cost is too much. And so it's time to regulate. And with that, I think the bill hasn't even been moved, so I'm happy to move the bill. Oh, it has. Okay. Thank you, Senator. Any additional comments from colleagues on the committee? Senator, would you like to close?

Well, thank you, Senator. And thank you for bringing this important bill forward. Thank you to your witnesses, to Ms. Rain. Thank you so much for your strength, for your advocacy, and for turning pain into a regulation that will protect others. And this is my 10th year in the Assembly, and all 10 years, most of those 10 years, I've had bills in the youth mental health and suicide prevention space. The bill this year is to create a training for all middle school and high school students and teachers and administrators and parents so that they can identify when somebody – when a young person is struggling and then have a confidence and strength to – or confidence and skills to get that person the help that they need. And that help that they need is a professional human being, not a chatbot. And, you know, it's tragic to hear what's happening. I couldn't agree with the Senator more. I talk a lot representing Silicon Valley with my colleague, Mr. Aarons about how in a bipartisan nature I think we all in the legislature recognize the mistakes that were made in regulating the social media industry and are committed to not making those mistakes again when it comes to the AI industry I'll also note and encourage that anybody who has a relationship with our former colleague, Mr. Obernolte, in Congress, who's leading the effort at the national level around AI regulation to make sure to reach out to him, to implore him not to prohibit – not to create federal preemption that prohibits states from regulating in the AI industry. because we are the ones that are, you know, first of all, passing things when nothing's happening at the federal level, but also, you know, getting creative in how we can regulate industry and trying things to learn what works and what doesn't, that hopefully the federal government then learns from and passes at a national level. And so it's so important that states be allowed to regulate in this space and try new things and learn from each other as we're all just trying to catch up with the technology that's far outpacing us. Again, I don't know if a Assemblymember Pelerin will be able to make it back before we adjourn the committee hearing, but just want to make sure on the record that everyone understands how strong in support she is of this bill and asked to be a co-author. And, you know, there's so much more that we will need to do, but this is such a good step in the right direction. And so just appreciate your work on this, Senator Padilla. And I suppose I should read the notes that my staff wrote for me. Thank you to the author for all the work you've done to make sure that companion chatbots and other AI technologies are safely and appropriately deployed. The bill will be further discussed when it's heard in Assembly Privacy Committee with Chair Bauer-Cahan. I'm happy to support the bill. Thank you very much. Madam Secretary, please call the vote. On SB 903 Padilla, the motion is due pass to the Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection. Berman? Aye. Berman, aye. Dixon. Dixon, aye. Addis. Addis, aye. Ahrens. Aye. Ahrens, aye. Alanis. Aye. Alanis, aye. Baines. Barcahan. Barcahan, aye. Colosa. Colosa, aye. Chen. Elhuri. Aye. Elhuri, aye. Ellis. Aye. Ellis, aye. Haney. Haney, aye. Hart. Aye. Hart, aye. Irwin. Irwin, aye. Jackson. Jackson, aye. Lowenthal. Aye. Lowenthal, aye. Macedo. Macedo, aye. Huen. when I Pellerin that bill is out thank you very much thank you mr. chairman and members appreciate you can get a motion and second on consent before everyone leaves don't leave got a motion in a second madam secretary please call a vote on the consent calendar On the consent calendar file item 3 SB 1165 Caballero the motion is due pass to the committee on revenue and taxation Berman Berman I Dixon Dixon I Addis Addis I Aaron's Aaron's I Alanis Alanis I Baines Barrakehan Barrakehan I Caloza Caloza I Chen a Hori a Hori I Ellis Ellis I Haney Haney I heart Hart, I. Irwin. Irwin, I. Jackson. Jackson, I. Lowenthal. Lowenthal, I. Macedo. Macedo, I. Huen. Huen, I. Pellerin. Consent calendar is out. Madam Secretary, can you take it from the top for colleagues who were absent? And did we have we had a motion to second on everything, didn't we? Yeah. Great. Great. on SB 936 Blake Spear Barcahan? Barcahan, aye. Haney? Haney, aye. Macedo? Macedo, aye. SB 1203 Smallwood Cuevas the motion was due passed to the Committee on Labor and Employment. Ahrens? Aye. Ahrens aye. Baines? Barcahan? Aye. Barcahan aye. Chen? Haney? Aye. Haney aye. Irwin? Irwin not voting. Masito? No. Masito no. Huen? Huen not voting. That bill is out. On SB 1271 Reyes. Bauer-Cahan? Bauer-Cahan, aye. Colosa? Colosa, aye. Haney? Haney, aye. Macedo? Macedo, aye. Thank you. Okay, so for colleagues who haven't made it to the hearing yet and had to leave, we're going to keep the hearing open until noon, so 10 minutes from now. So please get here if you can, or else the hearing will end at noon. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. on the consent calendar SB 1165 Caballero Pellerin I Pellerin I on SB 903 Padilla Pellerin. Aye. Pellerin aye. On SB 1203 Smallwood Cuevas. Pellerin. Aye. Pellerin aye. Thank you. Thank you.