Senate Rev Taxation — 2026-06-24

Thank you. Thank you. Now come to order. Good morning and welcome to the Senate Committee on Revenue and Taxation. We have 21 bills on today's agenda with two bills proposed for consent. The consent bills are file item 1, AB 611 by Assemblymember Lee, and file item 13, AB 2167 by Assemblymember Macedo. Final item 21, AB 2705 by Assemblymember Dixon has been pulled by the author. And Vice Chair Alvaro Gill is unable to attend today's hearing. We do not have a quorum yet, so we will begin as a subcommittee. We see one of the authors in the House, Assemblymember Ta on AB 760. Please come and present your bill as a subcommittee.

Good morning Chair and Senator. Today I am here to introduce AB 760, a bill that would ensure the victim of the gun growth chemical incident that will be made whole. I would like to start by thanking the committee staff who went beyond and above in working with my office and I will be happy to accept the commitment and amendments. On May 22nd, over 50,000 residents of Orton County were evacuated to the issue of the chemical tank. The wrecking of the tank to releasing pressure became a big concern to everyone in the community. And thankfully, with the hard work from Orton County Fire Authority and several other agencies from the federal, state, and local, we could able to prevent a disaster. Although total disaster was avoided, many of those evacuated still suffer losses. Schools were closed, family was forced from their home to find shelter, small businesses that survived on small margins were forced to close, and many low-income families lost recall ways. I did visit a few shelters at a time and received many concerns from many of my constituents. As a result, today there are several lawsuits that have been filed seeking compensation for these losses. Under current law, a settlement that may arise from this lawsuit can be considered income and tax. These funds are intended to make victim whole Current law would allow the state to take a cut of compensation that is intended for victim Taxing this compensation reduces the ability of this settlement to make victim hold AB 760 ensures that settlement that comes from Garden Road chemical incident will be exempt from California income tax. Victim will be fully compensated and allowed to recover AB 760 Fall of California residents by ensuring that victims are fully reimbursed. I'd like to introduce my witness, Mr. Lan Nguyen, Trustee of Garden Road School Unified District.

I'm the Chief of technical.

Apologies Mr. Chairman, Amy Jenkins on behalf of the Orange County Board of Supervisors in strong support.

thank the chair and the committee staff for working really hard on this view they all go both and beyond and i really appreciate that and this bill is really important for my district. I still remember that for the last four or five days at a time, every day that I visit a few shelters in my district, and I received a lot of concerns, a lot of my constituents, they really, really worried. They didn't know what happened because it never happened before. and until now a lot of president in my district they continue to call me to ask me about what would happen you because you know they they have a lot of losses like they have to take they are from work and their family was evacuated so I I experienced that because that that happened in my district so I respectfully ask for your aye vote

Here.

Here.

Here.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

And you may present when you are ready.

So I'd like to remind the witnesses that you have two minutes to present.

Excuse me, would you please wrap up your testimony?

Would you please wrap up your testimony?

AB 2319. Thank you. I thank the witnesses. Are there any members of the public that wish to voice their support of this bill? If so, please approach the microphone, give your name and

Thank you. Any other members of the public wish to voice their support of AB 2319? Are there any major voices in opposition to AB 2319? Any members of the public wish to voice their opposition Seeing none Very good I will now turn to the committee and see if there are any comments Senator Grayson you recognized Thank you Mr Chair and thank you to the committee and chair for working with the author on this

Senator Becker, you're recognized.

Are you accepting the committee amendments for the record?

With that, I will be supporting the bill. Assemblymember, would you like to close?

We'll add you as a co-author.

mr. chair well again I think the author will know but do we have a motion mr. Grayson has moved the bill and we will now take the vote the motion is due passes amended to the committee on appropriation senators McNerney I

Alvarado Gill. Ashby. Becker.

Becker, aye. Grayson.

Grayson, aye. 3-0. 3-0. The bill is now on call. I thank the author. Thank you, all. Thank you for your testimony. Thank you, Haley. The next author we have is Assemblymember and Chair of the Assembly Reven Tax Committee. Paul McKenna? Have they given permission? Okay. Assemblymember Gibson is prepared to take the seat and let Assemblymember McKenna go ahead. Okay, very good. Assemblymember McKenna, please approach the bench. Make your case.

Thank you. Good morning, Chair and members. The authors write in that taxing reparations undermines their purpose. From our perspective on the ground, this is not abstract. Descendants of formerly enslaved people who receive these benefits are oftentimes the same communities navigating the widest wealth gaps in the state. A tax liability on a reparations payment is not a technicality it is a reduction in justice California has already done the work The task force process has produced a comprehensive record of documented harm AB 2186 honors that record by ensuring the legislative infrastructure catches up A reparations program without a tax exclusion is an incomplete program. We want to highlight the bill's inclusive definition of reparations benefit. By covering monetary payments, grants, trust distributions, debt forgiveness, and other financial compensation, at the state, local, and federal level, AB 2186 future proves this exclusion. Whatever from reparations ultimately take, this bill ensures the protection follows. California has excluded other categories of compensation from gross income before. Disaster relief, certain legal settlements, federal COVID relief payments. Excluding reparations benefits is consistent with that precedent. This is not novel. This is principled. The five-year window through 2033 is reasonable and gives the legislature time to evaluate and extend. We would encourage members to view this as a floor and not a ceiling as reparations programs develop. The NAACP California Hawaii strongly urges your aye vote. Thank you.

Good morning. Jim Lindbergh. On behalf of the Friends Committee on Legislation of California, Friends have a long history of supporting reparative justice, and we support this bill. Thank you. Thank you.

We'd like to comment. Thank you. I want to thank the author for this. We should absolutely pass this bill. And I really appreciate the analysis as well and kind of the history of the different measures we've taken over time. along these lines. So I'd love to move the bill when appropriate and thank you, Governor.

Yes, thank you. Apologies for being late. Whitney Francis with the Western Center on Law and Poverty in support. Thank you.

You recognize me? Thank you, Mr. Chair. I also want to thank the author for coming forward. very appropriate and very supportive of the bill and the work that you've put into this, not just this year, but multiple years building up to this. It's the right time and the right thing to do.

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

So do I go next?

Good morning, Mr. Chair and Senator. Sorry I wasn't here earlier, but I've presented four bills already. So I would like to begin by accepting the committee amendments to provide CDTFA with greater enforcement authority. I'm pleased to present to AB 762, which would ban the sale of disposable nicotine vapes in California. Unfortunately, these disposable devices are incredibly popular and have become an accessory for several age groups. You see them in bars, restaurants, workplaces, and in our children's backpacks. They often resemble mundane objects like pens, but a new trend is emerging to include elaborate screens and buttons to play classic games like Pac-Man or Tetris. As distressing as it is to see these disposable devices in the hands of our children or thrown on the sidewalk, the scariest place to find one is the place the manufacturer designs them for, which is the trash can. With designs that prevent refilling a vape liquid and recharging the lithium battery, these devices have an intended lifespan of about a week. You may be thinking, why is this so bad? Plenty of consumer items are meant to be thrown away. The answer is simple. Lithium batteries and vapes are highly flammable. They cannot easily be removed, so they pose costly and hazardous safety issues at every point in the waste stream. marketed as disposable and without a robust EPR program for these devices. They are thrown in the trash and sent to material recovery facilities and landfills where they ignite and catch entire garbage trucks and recycling facilities on fire, putting facility operators at risk. Local governments and our constituents end up shouldering the cost of extinguishing and cleaning up the dangerous battery fires and imperiling our firefighters and first responders. We must be clear that by allowing these devices to be sold and thrown away, we are putting our first responders directly in danger. This is not a problem without a readily available solution on the market. Right now, there are 40 FDA-authorized reusable vapes available for purchase that are refillable and rechargeable. Despite the fact that disposable vapes contain a battery that is capable of 700 recharges, they are often thrown away after one battery cycle because the manufacturer omitted a charging port. We do not throw away our phones or our laptops after one week of use, and we should not treat other lithium devices any differently. AB 762 has strong enforcement mechanisms to deter the sale of disposable vapes before consumers have the chance to purchase them in the store. And I would like to talk for a second about the illicit market and the argument that this bill will expand it When consumers have a clear preference for a substance they look at the illicit market This is the case for flavored vapes With single versus rechargeable vapes there is a clear and accessible substitute We are not going to see consumers choosing to seek out illicit dealers to obtain a disposable vape over walking into a retailer to get a refill of their rechargeable vape, making it very unlikely to expand the illicit market. A study in the UK showed that prior to a disposable vape ban being enacted, consumers shifted to reusable models, reducing use of disposables from 63% to 35%. This past summer, the UK banned disposable vape. Since then, Elfbar, one of the largest manufacturers, has put out data that 85% of the consumers easily pivoted to reusable devices. This bill keeps these devices out of the trash can and out of the hands of our children. With me to testify in support of the bill are John Kennedy representing the rural counties and Nick Lapis with California's Against Waste.

Good morning, members. Nick Lapis with California's Against Waste, a proud co-sponsor of this bill. It's not exaggerating to say that the vape crisis, the growing vape crisis, is posing an existential threat to our waste and recycling system. Over 12 million disposable vapes are sold nationally every single month, which breaks down to six vapes per second. Even if managed responsibly, this is a staggering waste of the finite natural resources that go into making them. But the fact is they aren't managed responsibly. A recent study found that 88% of users reported disposing of them in the trash, recycling, or littering them. The batteries in these devices ignite fires at temperatures exceeding 1,200 degrees Celsius, fires that our waste system cannot handle. A recent study in the UK found a 77% increase in waste fires attributed to vapes, and we're seeing similar numbers in the US. The consequences of these fires are enormous, and it is ratepayers that absorb these costs with higher garbage rates and taxpayer-funded cleanups. There was a recent example from one of our co-sponsors in Senator Becker's district who operates a recycling facility. They had a massive fire in 2017 that burned down the facility. It cost eight and a half million dollars worth of damage. Almost more importantly than that, their insurance for their facility went from $180,000 a year to more than three and a half million and they had to split that over 17 different insurers. And they were told if they have another similar fire, they're not going to get insurance at all. that fire they've had 131 smaller fires to give you a sense of the scale of the problem and this is one facility in the Bay Area. Beyond the financial impacts both the workers in these facilities and the firefighters that respond to the fires put their lives at risk every time one of these fires occurs and the environmental toll isn't limited to the impact of the fires. The disposable vapes leach heavy metals and other toxics into our water and soil and the wasted resources in their batteries could power over 3300 electric vehicles. The opposition has argued that this will fuel a black market akin to alcohol prohibition but that is both illogical and empirically untrue. The bill does not ban nicotine, it doesn't ban vapes. AB 762 gets rid of an inherently hazardous, wasteful, and completely unnecessary product that has a commonly available reusable alternative. Each of the six disposable vapes that get thrown away way every second is a ticking time bomb that could be easily prevented. Thank you. Good morning, John Kennedy with our CRC on behalf of our 40 member counties. As local governments were charged The solid waste and hazardous waste management, collection and disposal. Not just our counties, but local governments in general across the state run about 200 household hazardous waste collection facilities where we try to offer free opportunities to take hazardous materials back from residents, households, free of charge, and then also offer opportunities for very small quantity generators. We're here to support AB 762 today because we think it significantly reduces our costs and challenges with management and disposal of single-use vapes. In doing so, we can significantly increase our collection and disposal opportunities for residents to safely get rid of their product. From the management perspective, there are a number of challenges. Fires are just one of the challenges. Local governments are seeing more and more and more vapes in our facilities. They're extremely expensive for us to manage and dispose. It cost us about $350 to manage one five-gallon bucket of vapes. That may contain somewhere between 150 to 200 vapes. The challenge and the cost driver is the nicotine cartridge in that vape device. If we're able to separate and separately manage and dispose of the cartridge from the rest of the device, we can significantly reduce our costs. The cartridge is tiny. The device is large. We can get far more cartridges in that five-gallon bucket. Again, we're not banning the product. just one form of the existing challenging delivery device and shifting to a much more sustainable and recyclable delivery system where we can actually recover some of the lithium ion batteries and circuitry that's in those devices. With respect to the illicit market, you're going to hear comments and concerns about shifting folks to the illicit market. I, as our organization, would be very, very interested in trying to combat the illicit market, increase enforcement, increase penalties, would welcome the opportunity to work with opponents and others to achieve those objectives. And just briefly, a couple other things. EPR as a system works for a lot of products. It's not ideal for vapes because nicotine is acutely hazardous, and that presents a lot of challenges for the PRO to manage through an EPR program. With respect to cannabis, which isn't part of this, cannabis vapes are much easier for us as facilities to manage as e-waste.

The cannabis cartridge is not considered hazardous. So for those reasons, we strongly support AB 762 and urge your aye vote today.

Jim Lindberg, Friends Committee on Legislation at California, in support. Thank you. Good morning. Layla Romero on behalf of the League of California Cities, in strong support. Thank you. Thank you. Aaron, on behalf of the County of San Mateo, in strong support. Thank you. Tony Hackett, on behalf of Californians Against Waste, as well as registering support from Waste Management, American Nurses Association, the City and County of San Francisco, City and County of Sacramento, City of Long Beach, Pacoima Beautiful, Tobacco Education Research Oversight Committee, Rural Counties Environmental Services Joint Powers Authority, California State PTA, Physicians for Social Responsibility Los Angeles, Los Angeles City and County Departments of Sanitation and the Environment, Placer County Board of Supervisors and Republic Services. Good morning. Keely Morris on behalf of the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts in support. Good morning, Mr. Chair and members. Dylan Hoffman on behalf of the California Product Stewardship Council, a proud co-sponsor. the Solid Waste Association of North America's Legislative Task Force, Alameda Stop Waste and the following organizations Yuba County Sutter County Yuba Integrated Waste Management Authority Beyond Plastics Community Environmental Council the National Stewardship Action Council Cleaning Earth for Kids, Sustainable Works, Monterey Waterkeeper, Active San Gabriel Valley, and Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, all in support. Thank you. Great. Good morning. Jack Worson from Nausman on behalf of the County of Monterey in support. Good morning, Carrie Baxter on behalf of the Yuba-Sutter County Regional Waste Management Authority. We're full support. Good morning, Julie Lecheski on behalf of Zero Waste Sonoma Joint Powers Authority, Zero Waste Marin Joint Powers Authority, Environmental Action Committee of West Marin, California Public Interest Research Group, Clean Water Action, CRNR Environmental Services, Parents Against Vaping, Plastic Pollution Coalition, The Last Plastic Straw, Families Advocating for Chemical and Toxic Safety, Free Southern California, and Americans for Nonsmokers Rights. Thank you. Good morning. Jake Schultz on behalf of the Yosemite Rivers Alliance, 350 Bay Area Action, 350 Contra Costa Action, 350 Ventura County Climate Hub, Los Angeles City Department of Sanitation, San Luis Obispo Integrated Waste Management Authority, California Communities Against Toxics, Napa Waste and Recycling Services, Just Zero, San Francisco Baykeeper, the Story of Stuff Project, LA Waterkeeper, and the Endangered Habitats League in support. Thank you. Good morning and thank you for your indulgence. Danielle Lynch on behalf of Heal the Bay, California League of United Latin American Citizens, Central Contra Costa County Solid Waste Authority, Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, Tehama County Solid Waste Management Agency, Western Placer Waste Management Authority, Regen Monterey, Merced County Regional Waste Authority, City of Arcadia, Smoke-Free Air for Everyone, and Linda G. Swan, Councilmember, City of Los Altos Hills. Thank you. Mandy Strella on behalf of Rethink Waste, as well as Santa Barbara County Division of Resource Recovery and Waste Management, Environmental Protection Information Center, Green Science Policy Institute, Oceanic Preservation Society, Shave Our Shores, Zero Waste San Diego, Pacific Beach Coalition, Sunrise Movement California, Save the Bay, Cal Poly Center for Health Research, Alliance of Nurses for a Healthy Environment, Bay Area Student Activists, and Oakland Recycles. Thank you. Good morning. Isabel Ferrand on behalf of Mojave Desert and Mountain Recycling Authority GPA, National Association of Environmental Medicine, Non-Toxic Neighborhoods, San Luis Obispo County Tobacco Control Coalition, Santa Cruz County Tobacco Education Coalition, Southern California Public Health Association, Tobacco Prevention Coalition of Contra Costa County, Del Norte Waste Management Authority, Castro Valley Sanitation District, UBIS Satter Recycles, and then lastly, Southern California Public Health Association in support. Thank you. Morning, Chair. Noah Moira on behalf of Action on Smoky and Health, Alameda County Tobacco Control Coalition, Algalita Marine Research and Education, American Sustainable Business Network, Association of California Healthcare Districts, Azul, Bay Area Pollution Prevention Group, California Health Coalition Advocacy, California Nurses for Environmental Health and Justice, Children Now, Courage California, Defender Health, and Seventh Generation Advisors in support. Thank you. Good morning, Chair and members. Caitlin Leventhal on behalf of the California State Association of Counties in support. Thank you. Good morning, Isha Ayur on behalf of the City of Mountain View and the City of Thousand Oaks in support. Thank you. Good morning Chair and members Connor Gustin on behalf of Teamsters California and our members who work in these facilities in support Thank you Good morning Mr Chair Jean Hurst here today on behalf of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors in support Good morning Mr Chair and members Karen Lang on behalf of the Boards of Supervisors of Humboldt and Marin and the City and County of San Francisco Board of Supervisors all in support. Thank you. Chair and members, Yael Dentes on behalf of the Delamita County Board of Supervisors in support. Good morning Mr. Chair, Doug Subbers on behalf of the California Professional Firefighters in support.

Thank you. Thank you. Very good.

Chair and members, thank you. Alessandra Brichetto on behalf of the California Fuels and Convenience Alliance. This committee is being asked to eliminate one of the only disposable vape products that's actually regulated, taxed, and sold through licensed retailers. That may sound like it advances the bill's goal, but in practice it does the opposite. California's disposable vape market is already dominated by illegal products. The devices creating the environmental problems this bill seeks to address are overwhelmingly entering through the illicit channels, not through retailers complying with California law. In fact, there is only one FDA-authorized disposable vape and only a handful of disposable products that can be legally sold in California today. The other FDA authorized vapes previously mentioned are flavored, so they're not allowed in California. The products allowed here are federally reviewed, state regulated, and generate tax revenue. AB 762 removes the legal market, but it leaves the illegal market intact. We've seen this play out before. The United Kingdom banned disposable vapes to reduce battery waste and fires. Instead, battery fires reached record highs because consumers simply shifted to larger refillable devices that were thrown away in the same manner. The legal product disappeared, but the environmental problem remained. And Belgium and Australia experience similar growth in illicit sales after adopting comparable restrictions. That's the fundamental flaw in this bill. It assumes eliminating the legal market eliminates the problem. It doesn't. AB 762 doesn't reduce the illicit market. It rewards it. Every legal sale eliminated is simply another opportunity for untaxed, illegal products to take its place. That means more products sold outside California's regulatory system, fewer sales through licensed retailers, and no meaningful progress towards the bill's environmental goals. If the legislature truly wants to reduce environmental impacts, the answer is stronger enforcement against illegal imports and illegal sellers, not banning one of the few products that is already regulated. For these reasons, we respectfully ask for your no vote. Good morning. My name is Nate Gergich. I'm a lieutenant with the Sacramento County Sheriff's Office. I respectfully request that you vote no today on AB 762. Let me begin by saying that I understand that the bill is attempting to accomplish. We all share a goal of keeping unsafe and unregulated vaping products out of our communities and away from our youth. However, the vast majority of the disposable vape products causing concern today are already illegal. Many of these products are imported from overseas without proper testing, regulation, or authorization. They violate existing federal and state laws, and in many cases, local ordinances as well. The issue is not a lack of laws prohibiting these products. The issue is a lack of resources effectively to enforce the laws that already exist. As a law enforcement professional, I can tell you that the illegal products continue to enter our communities because there are simply not enough enforcement resources dedicated to identifying, investigating, and removing them from our marketplace. Our agency has conducted numerous enforcement operations involving the sale of illicit vaping products. During those operations, we have already repeatedly encountered products being sold outside of California regulatory framework, including products that were prohibited, untested, and properly labeled, and from an unknown origin. Law enforcement agency also have encountered vaping products that contained substances other than what was represented to the consumer creating significant public concerns and overdoses on fentanyl That is my concern with AB 762 The bill does not address criminal networks already operating outside of existing law. The products creating the greatest risk to public safety are already prohibited. Criminal organization, illicit distributors, and overseas manufacturers do not comply with California regulations, testing requirements, age restrictions, or product bans. Passing an additional prohibition on products that already are illegal does not impact those bad actors. In effect, we would be passing a second law to address a problem that stems from an insufficient ability to do the first. Law enforcement agencies across California are already operating with limited personnel, increasing demands. Rather than creating additional bans, we would encourage legislative bodies to invest in enforcement efforts, investigations, interdiction operations, and compliance efforts that target illegal products already flooding into our communities. I respectfully request you vote no on AB 762. Thank you.

Dennis Sloper for the California Distributors Association in opposition.

Borasi Gonzalez on behalf of California's Business Roundtable, the California Hispanic Chamber, and the API Chamber. All in opposition. Thank you. Alexis Rodriguez with the California Chamber of Commerce in opposition. Thank you. Jasmine Advincula with the CalAsian Chamber in opposition. Thank you. Leticia Garcia with the California Retailers Association in opposition. Thank you.

This is, we're not banning the nicotine, we're banning one specific product that is disposable. There are 40 FDA approved devices that could be used with nicotine. So it's one product and again, we're trying to limit lithium ion batteries as much as possible And if you have something that has a shelf life of one week, it is a vast amount of, there are a vast amount of lithium batteries that are going into the waste stream. And that's what really what is causing the danger. And then I also want to address the illicit market. Obviously, that's a huge issue. But it is for, a lot of it is flavored vapes, which are actually banned. banned. And in this case, again, there is an alternative product. We also thank you to the committee. Strengthen the enforcement. So for CDTFA, they have the authority to seize confiscated disposable vapes, a $50 fine for each recovered vape, and action with the tobacco license suspension for the second violation. And then there is additional enforcement in AB 762, which is financial, the counties and cities, 500 for the first violation, 1,000 for the second, and 2,000 for the third. But I do think that it is really important that the state continue to provide resources to law enforcement to fight the illicit market. That was done a few years ago under the Wood Bill. But it is, you know, it is definitely a concern. But we don't see at all that this increases the illicit market because they're readily available products that are just reusable instead of disposable.

We do think this will allow us to go after everybody as well, because the enforcement penalties would apply to the illicit products as well. And it will be easier to tell for enforcement agencies if it's disposable, it's illegal. So even though the 10 percent is legal, it would be enforcement against the 100 percent.

Well, I think that that was part of the reason that the committee added additional enforcement provisions.

Yes.

I would just respectfully ask for your aye vote and everybody else that is absent, their aye votes, maybe they're watching on TV or...

Yes, please. Thank you very much.

Thank you for allowing me to present Assembly Bill 15 and 19. While the tax administration can be complicated, the concept of statute of limitation is simple. For centuries, the legal code has recognized that lawful claims must have expiration dates, providing certainty and predictability for individuals and society without a statute of limitations on tax collection and taxpayers' lives for their entire life under the shadows of potential collections, actions for liabilities covered for decades earlier. Recorded records would be lost, memories would fade, and the systems would be unworkable. For many years, no statute of limitations exists on the collections on their income or franchise delinquencies at the state level. However, beginning in 2006, a statute of limitations for FTB collections actions went in effect. Despite the 20 years of statute of limitations beginning codified in statues, the clock is reset any time the FTB imposes a fee, penalties, or interest. This undercuts the whole point of having the statute of limitations. Assembly Bill 1519 provides that once the underlying tax liability becomes due and payable, the statute of limitations period begins to run and the subsequent fees and charges do not reset the clock. And that's important to point out. So Assembly Bill 1519 provides once provides the underlying, I want to repeat, provides the underlying the liability becomes due and payable. The liability period begins to run out and the subsequent fees charges do not reset the clock. Plainly put, this bill would create an actual 20-year statute of limitations, not one that the FTB can unilaterally extend whenever the new fees or penalties are imposed. Assembly bill this bill will provide clear directions This bill will not result in significant revenue loss to the state because these amounts are not actually collectible in any cases This bill is important to, one, clarify where people need to stand in this particular bill. I want to thank you very much for allowing this bill to be heard. Here with me to provide supporting testimony is a representative, is the chair of the California CPA Tax Committee and who both were self-introduced and also the California Society of a Role agent. Both will be testifying in support of this bill and both would self-identify. Thank you, Assemblymember. Two minutes each. My name is Andy Mattson. I'm a California CPA with Baker Tilly in San Jose and I am chair of CalCPA's Committee on Taxation. AB 1519 makes a simple but important clarification for California's 20-year statute of limitations on tax collections. When the legislature established that statute in 2006, the intent was to provide taxpayers with certainty that there would eventually be an end point to collection activity. Unfortunately, ambiguity in current law allows certain fees, penalties, interest, and collection-related charges to effectively restart the 20-year clock, extending collection activity far beyond what was originally intended. As practitioners, we help taxpayers resolve liabilities, evaluate payment options, and return to compliance. This requires clear and predictable rules. For example, a taxpayer may discover a decades-old tax liability while settling a family estate or handling another significant financial matter. They reasonably expect that California's 20-year statute of limitations means there is a clear end point to collection activity. Instead, under current law, collection-related fees or similar charges can effectively reset the clock and extend collection efforts to the same underlying liability. That outcome is difficult for taxpayers to understand and undermines the certainty and finality that a statute of limitations is intended to provide. AB 1519 does not forgive taxes, it doesn't change how the FTB calculates an underlying liability, and it does not limit the FTB's ability to collect legitimate tax debts. It simply clarifies that the 20-year statute of limitations period is tied to the underlying tax liability and cannot be indefinitely extended through subsequent fees, penalties, or collection charges. This restores the original intent of the law, improves certainty for taxpayers and practitioners, and strengthens confidence in California's tax system. For this reason, we respectfully ask for your support for AB 1519. Thank you.

Good morning, Chair and members. Jennifer Tannehill with Aaron Reed and Associates on behalf of the California Society of Enrolled Agents. CSEA is pleased that the legislature, FTB, and stakeholders worked on the solution to provide certainty to taxpayers while continuing to allow an extended window for FTB to collect. I just want to note a couple of items. The definition of tax in this bill relates only to the specific section of code and does not affect the definition of tax elsewhere. Also of note, the IRS has allowed 10 years to collect tax liabilities, where California affords the FTB 20 years to collect. So we just are pleased with the solution, and we ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Respectfully ask when I vote.

You may begin when you're ready.

Assembly Bill 2172 provides counties with particular temporary tools to address the growing backlog in complex tax appeals. Under the current law, all appeals must be heard by the multi-member board, an approach that supports transparency but often creates schedule challenges and delays, especially for multi-day cases involving hotel, stadium, and other complex properties. These cases require extensive testimonies, details, financial analysis, and significant coordinations among board members, parties, and counseling, which can push results, resolutions beyond six months and often more than one year. Data from the past three fiscal years show that many assessed appeals takes longer than six months and often over a year to resolve indicating a backlog in the system. Assembly Bill 2172 allow counties to instead use a single qualified assessment appeals commission as a neutral decision making in these complex cases. Importantly, it provides the rights of parties to request a traditional multi-member board. This measured approach improves efficiency and reduce delays while maintaining a fair, consistent, and due process protections for taxpayers. To testifying in support is Assessor Joaquin Torres, who will be here to testify in support of AB 2172.

Great. Thank you so much. Good morning, committee members. Thank you for the opportunity to present our support for Assembly Bill 2172. My name is Joaquin Torres, and I'm here on behalf of the California Assessors Association in support of this bill, and on behalf of Los Angeles County Assessor Jeff Prang, the sponsor of the bill. AB 2172 is a practical modernization of California's property tax assessment appeal system. Large counties are facing a growing reality. The current appeal structure was designed for a much smaller workload and is no longer equipped to handle the volume and complexity of the appeals that we are seeing today. In L.A. County alone, there are now approximately 40,000 pending appeals, roughly double the pre-pandemic volume. These are often complex cases involving significant financial stakes, yet counties must manage them through a system that relies largely on part-time board members meeting on limited schedules. The result is delays for taxpayers, significant refund interest costs for counties, and a growing strain on local government resources. This provides a sensible solution. The bill would allow large counties, through a limited pilot program, use a single member full-time assessment appeals commissioner as you just heard to hear certain appeals it's not a mandate it does not eliminate existing assessment appeals boards it simply gives counties another tool to manage growing caseloads improve efficiency and reduce delays just as

I make a motion.

Chair Gibson, it's always a pleasure to work with you as a sort of a partner on tax issues, and it's always important to make sure that the tax runs efficiently and fairly. I think that's an important task for all of us. This is an approach we're trying, and I wish the assessor praying the best with your board of supervisors to implement it. Good luck. I'm happy to support your bill. Would you like to close?

Well, we have a motion. Would the secretary please call the vote?

Senators McNerney.

McNerney, aye. Alvarado Gill, Ashby, Becker, Grayson.

Grayson, aye. 2-0.

It's the most important thing of the morning. Uh, I'd like to begin with AB 2222, if that's okay.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members, for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Jeff Knox. I'm a member of SAG-AFTRA's NorCal Local Board. I'm here on behalf of my union's 160,000 members, many of whom are broadcasters like myself and who know firsthand the importance of quality journalism to a healthy society. Right now, the situation is dire. Last year, Congress eliminated over a billion dollars in funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, decimating available grants for local PBS and NPR affiliates. These cuts have prompted severe job losses at stations across the country, leaving many outlets, including those in California, scrambling for alternative funding. Broadcasters chose this business because we want to serve our community. We understand the importance of unbiased access to information. And sadly, the corporate-dominated media space is becoming increasingly hostile to local journalists and our ability to keep our communities informed and our livelihoods sustained. Complicating things further is the harm wrought by AI technology and its ability to churn out unreliable and polarizing slop that diverts traffic away from the work of real journalists. Lawmakers need to step in and make the policy changes necessary to ensure continued access to the journalism that keeps our democracy thriving. Assemblymember Ward's AB 2222 is urgently needed. It makes funding available to incentivize the hiring of professional journalists. It's a game-changing plan that's all about giving the power of information back to the people. A $20,000 job retention credit to those who hire journalists is about keeping Californians armed with access to human-made news coverage. This is about preserving the economic viability for outlets of all sizes and preserving Californians intellectual viability This is about our freedom and our future Thank you very much Thank you Chair McNerney What a treat to be back here in the Capitol. A different seat, but a joy and a pleasure to be here. I'm here on behalf of Rebuild Local News. It's a national, nonpartisan, nonprofit coalition developing and advancing effective public policies It's designed to strengthen community news and information. You know, because I sat in the seats that you're in today, I know that part of really trying to do your job well is to have access to information, to know what's happening in your community. And you do that with your own outreach, with your own staff. But a key part of that is the storytelling that you hear from local news about what's happening, whether it's about health care issues or safety or schools or the environment or immigration. It's the storytelling that gives you the information that allows you to try to solve problems, try to make your communities a better place. And it has been said, independent news is in crisis. More than a third of outlets have closed in the last two decades. More than two-thirds of journalists have lost their jobs. And a key question that this bill tries to address is that, What's the role of government in a place in which news wants to have a separation, a distance, because they report on what you and we do? But this bill, Assembly Bill 2222, does it in exactly the right way through a tax credit, just as you provided a tax credit for Hollywood. You don't decide what movies get made or shows get made. This bill is done in a way that's ownership neutral, platform neutral, content neutral. Some of you have heard me say that there is more than 2,000 registered lobbyists here in Sacramento, but few of them have democracy on their client list. Measures like this don't have the power players that typically occupy a room like this. But we know that independent news gathering and reporting is the infrastructure of a democracy. Community news equips you, the people's representative, to do your best work. And with that, I urge a yes vote on Assembly Bill 2222 and thank our wonderful champion author, Assemblymember Gibson. Gibson Ward, excuse me.

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, thank you very much. And to Assemblymember Ward, one of the greatest compliments I ever had in this building was when I was called Assemblymember Ward. So having said that, just a clarification on a qualified journalist. If I understand it correctly, according to the bill analysis, the qualified journalist would be one that is working for a network or a news agency.

I know that we taking a clarifying amendment of course to point out that a qualified journalist would reside in the state would be a resident of the state Right I think it on page four of the analysis I just clarifying just to double check and make sure from you as the author that that is That is the intent That is the intent We double check on that And if that is using. That's a part time journalist. We're qualifying part time. They have a number of hours. OK, mid page. Just check on it for me. Check on that. It's important for me because I think you used one of the witnesses here used the word multiple times, quality. And that's what I know you aspire for, and that's quality journalism. And so that's important to me to make sure that we're getting the right information and exactly what you're trying to accomplish and making sure that the biases are not in there. They're literally laying out the truth. and accurate information. I also want to just thank my predecessor for his great work on this. This is a passion of his, which excites me and makes me want to vote for it. All right, so with that, I will be supportive of the bill and my predecessor as well. Thank you, Assemblymember, for your good work.

Motion is due pass as amended to the Committee on Appropriation. Senators McNerney. Aye. McNerney, aye. Alberto Gill, Ashby, Becker, Grayson. Aye. Grayson, aye. 2-0.

I'm your host, Sloan Higgins-Jensen. On behalf of the California Fields Community Alliance, respect me and support. Thank you.

My name is David Bolag of the SFV Alliance. While the Assemblymember states that this shall allow for the rounding off, it actually makes it mandatory. So if I want to pay the real price or if a merchant wants to charge me the real price, they have no choice in the matter. They have to round it up if this bill comes into play. So far, I understand why the author is considering this bill, because our president, a billionaire, decided that the penny is not valuable and decided that it's better that we do not have a divisible money supply. We disagree. We understand the reason why is because of the cost of striking the penny is over $50 million a year lost to the Treasury. But if this goes through, the losses to the indigent and poor people of California will be up to $5.6 million a year. It doesn't sound like much in comparison. It's only 10%. But it will matter to those who every penny counts and those who want to use cash and those who also want to maintain an honest ledger, who want to make sure that what every penny matters, if they're on the margins of cost for profits, this will affect them very negatively if more of those transactions go to the negative and they have to round it off. I want to also say that in 2029, we will have a new president, which will be very joyful to many of you, I understand. But that new president may understand the value of the divisible money supply and may start striking pennies again. So we do not think it's honest. I really don want to go to a cashless society And I know this bill doesn do this but it is pointing us in that way by removing one form of divisible money So with that we ask you to vote no Thank you

I appreciate your consideration. You know, at one point we had a half penny. At one point we had a penny. I think, you know, the value of the penny, of course, has decreased over time. And even if somebody did decide that they wanted to order the mint to start to reproduce it, it costs more than four cents for a one cent valuation. So it would not make sense to be able to come back. And, of course, this bill would not implement until July 1 of 2027, I think, with the committee's amendments as well. So I know it will help merchants and customers alike because everything is going to wash out over time. You, of course, can still use your pennies. They are legal tender. We just know that over time and over totality, I think, all the currency out there will continue to decline in stock. And so we want to be able to respond to that and update our codes. With that, I respectfully request your aye vote.

So moved.

Motion is due pass as amended to the Committee on Appropriations.

Aye. McNerney, aye. Alvarado Gill, Ashby, Becker, Grayson.

Grayson. Aye. Aye.

Good morning, Chair and members. My name is Taisha Watts from the California Housing Partnership. The partnership is a private nonprofit created by the legislature and the governor in 1988 with the mission of increasing the supply of affordable and sustainable homes through technical assistance and policy leadership. We are proud to co AB 2089 alongside our partners at Enterprise and the California Coalition for Affordable Housing This bill makes three targeted common sense fixes to the will for exemption that together protect affordable housing reduce administrative burden and preserve housing stability for working families across California First, the bill extends a critical but expiring protection for non-profit affordable housing developments that receive low-income housing tax credits. Under current law, if long-term tenants and income rises modestly above the lower income threshold, up to 140% of the area of medium income, their unit can still count toward the property's welfare exemption. Without this provision, that protection expires after the 2027-2028 fiscal year. AB 2089 extends it one year to give the legislature and affordable housing advocates time to pursue a comprehensive unified solution. This matters because without the extension, nonprofit developers could face a sudden loss of their property exemption on units occupied by stable, rent-paying, long-term tenants whose incomes rose only modestly. The practical result would be financial pressure on nonprofits to evict those tenants. The very outcome affordable housing is designed to prevent. Second, the bill modernizes an outdated administrative requirement by allowing county assessors to accept electronic signatures on welfare exemption forms, including annual tenant income verification. Today, many counties still require physical ink signatures, creating unnecessary delays in administrative costs for nonprofit housing developers managing hundreds of units. This is a simple overdue fix. Third, the bill requires counties to release annual tenant income recertification forms by November 15th each year. Currently, there is no deadline and late releases leave housing providers scrambling to meet compliance deadlines through no fault of their own. This fix protects both housing providers and counties. Taken together, these three provisions protect housing stability, reduce bureaucratic burden, and keep Californians' welfare exemption working as the legislature intended. Thank you, and I am happy to answer any questions.

Good morning. Graciela Castillo-Cring is here on behalf of the California Housing Consortium and Enterprise Community Partners. Thank you so much for carrying the bill. We're about to charge you with Housing California in support. Good morning. Jenna Abbott with the California Council for Affordable Housing, proud co-sponsor of the bill and strongly in support.

Ayesha. You've been a strong advocate for affordable housing. That's really important, especially these days. The bill does make the three good changes that were identified by the witness, and I will be supporting your bill.

Motion is due passed to the Committee on Appropriation. Senators McNerney. Aye. McNerney, aye. Orotto-Gill, Ashby, Becker, Grayson. Aye. Grayson, aye. 2-0.

Thank you, Assemblyman Haney, Chairman McNerney, committee members. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I want to also thank the committee consultant for her thoughtful work on this bill. My name is Cindy Heitzman. I'm the executive director at the California Preservation Foundation, co-sponsor of the bill along with the American Institutes of Architects California. At its core, this bill is about preserving California's historic places, giving them new life as housing, businesses, and community assets. But it's also about economic development. Across this state, vacant and underutilized historic buildings can meet some of California's most pressing needs, but financing gaps often stand in the way, and that's where the historic tax credits come in. Thirty-eight states have historic tax credit programs. They stimulate economic development and are proven fiscal multipliers. According to the National Trust for Historic Preservation, states' historic tax credit programs typically generate $1.20 or more in tax revenue for every dollar of credit awarded. They leverage private investment, create jobs, produce housing, expand local tax revenues, and revitalize downtowns, all while preserving the historic buildings that tell California's story and define its character. The amendments to AB 1265 make a good bill better by prioritizing housing, economic development, geographic diversity, and access for smaller projects, while addressing a per-project cap to broaden benefits statewide. And for these reasons, we respectfully ask for your support of AB 1265. Started with good morning, but I guess we can still do that. It's a little getting there. My name is Jonah Hendrickson, and I'm a real estate developer. I'm also one of the recipients of the California State Historic Tax Credit, and I'm here to support the passage of A. B1265. Please have a look at your presentation while you listen. Over the last decade, I've had the exciting opportunity to help redefine the future of Alameda Point, the former Naval Air Station in Alameda, closed in 1996 through the redevelopment of one building at the heart of it all. Building 8, now the storehouse lofts at the center of the former Naval Air Station is an exemplary historic adaptive reuse project enabling economic revitalization of the former naval base and the preservation of California's history and was financed in part by the federal and the California Historic Tax Credit Programs. Over nearly a decade, our redevelopment transformed 270,000 square feet of abandoned naval office warehouse into 200 lofts rented as businesses and residences. The tax credits helped facilitate hundreds of jobs during the redevelopment phase, including during the pandemic, and the project now provides hundreds of residential housing units and space to run just as many businesses. The property enjoys a 99%

Good morning, Mr. Chair and members. Adam Quinones, California Advocates, on behalf of the American Institute of Architects California, in support.

Good morning, Mr. Chair. Karen Lang, on behalf of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, in support.

Good morning. Isha Ayur on behalf of the City of Bakersfield in support.

My apologies, Mr. Chair. Member Steven Sensor with Brownson on behalf of the Housing Action Coalition in support.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to commend the author on this. This is exactly where we need to go and the direction we need to head to produce the results that we need for California. Desperately, desperately need, especially in housing. So excellent work. Thank you very much.

supporting your bill. Assemblymember, would you like to close? Yes, thank you. Thank you so much Mr. Chair and I could not agree more. It's a win-win and we have to make sure that over time that this is funded and really appreciate the witnesses here and I want to give a special shout out Cindy Heitzman, who's here, Executive Director of the California Preservation Foundation, who has been prioritizing this and in so many ways, I've been such a visionary leader there, recently announced her retirement. So I want to say she has not stopped, and I'm sure she will not stop, but it is really an honor to have her here and to be able to work with her on this issue, and with that, respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you. Do we have a motion?

Aye.

Aye.

You're welcome to do that. For sure. Thank you, Mr. Chair and members. I'm proud to present AB 1633, which will impose a 50% gross receipts tax on corporations. operating for-profit private detention facilities in California. We've got close to 7,000 people in our state who are currently being detained in for-profit private immigration detention facilities. There are seven of those facilities in our state, and they have a long and well-documented record of dangerous conditions, including inadequate medical care, health and safety violations, and inhumane living conditions. Despite prior efforts to increase oversight and accountability, serious concerns continue. Following inspections of a newly opened private detention facility in Kern County, the Attorney General purported dangerous living conditions and a lack of adequate medical care, including insufficient medical staff, hygiene products, and inadequate food and water. At the same time, these private companies operating in our state continue to generate billions of dollars through government contracts while Californians and immigrant families fare the human and community costs of this private detention. AB 1633 is rooted in a simple principle. Californians should not reward private corporations for profiting from detention with such conditions. This bill does not regulate federal immigrant policy. Instead, it takes California's longstanding taxing authority to assess business activity taking place in our state. We already apply industry-specific taxes and fees where sectors create significant public costs, including in health care, tobacco, and oil extraction. AB 1633 follows that same principle of accountability and revenue generated by this bill will be reinvested into the due process for all fund to provide immigration-related services and support communities impacted by detention enforcement actions. AB 1633 is about accountability, protecting California communities, and ensuring our laws do not reward private profiteering from detention. Here with me to testify are Bruno Huizar supervising policy manager at the California Immigrant Policy Center and Kimberly Wu Community Organizer for Services Immigrant Rights and Education Network

Good morning. I'm Kimberly Will and I'm community organizer for Services Immigrant Rights and Education Network, also known as SIREN. We serve our immigrant and refugee communities in the Bay Area and Central Valley. And we are a proud co-sponsor for AB 1633, which would impose a 50% tax on corporations operating private immigration detention centers. I have loved ones who sought permanent residency for over 20 years. And when they got to their final interview, ICE agents handcuffed their hands and feet and forcefully shipped them to separate detention centers in California. Words cannot describe the pain of seeing your elder relative who immigrated to this country to build a better life for your family, break down crying behind a glass screen window where it's impossible to hug them and hold their hand. There are not enough words to comfort your loved one who is stripped from their personal belongings, their clothes, their medical needs, and their freedom. No one deserves to experience the pain, suffering, and loneliness that my loved ones felt every day in that prison. Private companies like Giro Group and Coal Civic profit from caging people like my relatives who had never spent a single night apart in their decades-long marriage until they were detained, fiancés weeks away from their wedding, and young children separated from their mother I know these stories because they were in the room with me waiting hours for a chance of a one visit for their loved ones Private detention facilities hold thousands of people across California in inhumane conditions like severe medical neglect, filthy water, rotten food and abuse, and poor access to legal representation. The CEO of CoCivic, one of the largest full-profit attention corporations, reported $7.5 million in annual compensation and more since then, and noted that the recent rise in immigration sweeps was, quote-unquote, truly one of the most exciting periods in my career with the company. This is who California is in bed with, private, full-profit companies who find it exciting to make millions from the suffering of our loved ones. We respectfully urge your aye vote on AB 1633 to hold these corporations accountable and prioritize the safety and dignity of all Californians. Thank you.

Good morning. Carlos Lopez with the California School Employees Association in support. Good morning, Christian Diaz. On behalf of the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Tony Thurman, San Bernardino Community Service Center, the South Asian Network, the Southeast Asia Resource Action Center, the Street Level Health Project, the Thai Community Development Center, the California LGBTQ Health and Human Services Network, the Fund for Santa Barbara, the Trans-Latina Coalition, the Uncommon Law, Univisidad Popular, and the Working Partnerships USA. Thank you. Good morning. Joanne Aviga-Garcia on behalf of Next in California in support. Good morning, Mr. Chair, Senator Grayson, Campus Society with the California Immigrant Policy Center. Here in support also Indivisible California State Strong, Indivisible East Bay Area, Indivisible Euclid, Indivisible Fair Oaks Carmichael, Indivisible Palo Alto Plus, Inland Coalition for Immigrant Justice, Interfaith Movement for Human Integrity, Jewish Family and Children's Services East Bay, Justice to Jobs Coalition, Kern Welcoming, Extending Solidarity to Immigrants, La Defensa, and LA Voice. Thank you. Good morning. Shamin Chir with the California Immigrant Policy Center. Also registering support for AAPIs for Civic Empowerment, Access Reproductive Justice, Alliance for a Better Community, Asian Americans Advancing Justice Southern California, the Black LGBTQIA Plus Migrant Project, Blue Turn, Indivisible, Buen Vecino, the California Dignity Not Detention Coalition, the California Food and Farming Network, California Immigrant Youth Justice Alliance, as well as the Council on American Islamic Relations, East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, Empowering Marginalized Asian Communities, Ensuring Opportunity Contra Costa, Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin, Freedom for Immigrants, Future Leaders of America, Healthy Contra Costa, Immigrant Justice and Action Coalition, Immigrant Legal Resource Center, Imperial Valley Equity Justice, and Indivisible Alta Pasadena. Anayeli Martin, registering support for California Immigration Project, California National Organization for Women, California Partnership to End Domestic Violence, California Work and Family Coalition, California United for a Responsible Budget, Canal Alliance, Central Valley Immigration Integration Collaborative, Chispa, Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice, Courage California, Drug Policy Alliance, Latino Health Access, Legal Aid at Work, Mid-City Community Advocacy Network, Mixteco Indígena. Community Organizing Project, New Light Wellness, NorCal Resist, Orale, Orange County Equality Coalition, Orange County Rapid Response Network, Parent Voices California, Filipino Workers Center of Southern California, and Public Council. Thank you. Kylie Landeli on behalf of Asian Americans Advancing Justice in support. Karen Lang on behalf of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in support. Greg Rapier, a pastor of Westminster Presbyterian Church, here with Sacramento Area Congregations Together in support. Chet Hewitt with the California Community Foundation in support. Linda Wheaton, volunteer with NorCal Resist, SAC Act, and Indivisible in support. Alicia Deans, with Sacramento Area Congregations Together in support. Good morning, Mr. Chair. Ryan Sherman with the Riverside Sheriffs Association in support. Eric Paredes with the California Faculty Association in support. Thank you.

Yes, absolutely. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I want to thank the witnesses and the many, many, as you heard, over 100 organizations who have been in support and all of the folks who have directly experienced these facilities and have been seeing firsthand the cruelty that is associated with them and the impact that it's had on their families and our communities. and with that, I appreciate your words and respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Aye.

Aye.

The next author is RBK. Please come and present your bill.

Two minutes, please.

Right to the second. Very good. Any members of the public that would like to add on in support Your name affiliation and position Please Angelo Pontes on behalf of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California in support

Very good. Any others in support? Seeing none. I don't believe we have lead witnesses in opposition. Anybody in the public or in the room in opposition? Seeing none, move. I'll bring it back to committee. I have no questions. I do want to make a comment. Thank you very much for bringing this bill forward. Assemblymember Barrake and DEI should not affect an organization's tax-exempt status under California law in any way whatsoever. So this bill says that California must evaluate nonprofits on their actual compliance record. So thank you very much for that. And when we get, well, would you like to close?

Thank you, Senator. Awesome close. When we get to a place where we can get a motion and take a vote, we will. Thank you so very much for your presentation. Do we have, is this Elowary? Is that how you pronounce her name? I believe we have, I almost gave you a promotion. I'll take this. Assembly member Elower, you are here today with AB 2403.

You can present when you're ready. Glad to have you here.

Great. You have two minutes each.

Next witness, two minutes.

Thank you so very much. Great testimony on that. Any members of the public that would like to add on and support your name, affiliation, and position, please?

Thank you so much. Any other members of the public in support? Seeing none, I don't believe we have listed lead opposition, so are there any members of the public that would like to step up in opposition? Seeing none moving toward the microphone, we'll bring it back to the committee. and no questions. I just wanted to first of all thank you for your presentation. Great testimonies from your witness. Commercial production is an important part of California's broader film and media economy and so what this bill makes California, it makes it more competitive for commercial production by providing an incentive to keep productions right here in California just as you testified. So I also want to apply the AI guardrails that are contained in this measure and thank you for working with the committee to improve the bill. So that's very important. So really appreciate that. And thank you to the committee as well. With that, would you like to close?

Fantastic. Close. When we get to a place where we can get a motion and a vote, we'll take one. Great. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so very much. Moving on to item 15. We do have an author with us. Item 15, AB 2250.

When you are ready, you can begin to present.

I'll make it in two minutes, okay?

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members. AB 2250 is a straightforward cleanup bill to help our hemp enforcement laws work as intended. Last year I ran AB 8 to better regulate hemp derived products and address the rise of intoxicating products in the unregulated market. That law gave CDTFA additional enforcement tools but a few technical fixes are needed to ensure that the law is fully effective. The existing gaps in language could create enforcement challenges or cause uncertainty for businesses trying to follow the law. AB 2250 makes targeted clarifications to close those gaps. It It makes the law clear and enforceable so illegal products can be removed. It ensures products are treated consistently under state law, and it protects public health while giving businesses clear rules to follow. The bill does not change the underlying policy. It simply ensures the framework that the legislature passed last year can work as intended. With me today, I have Amy Gorman Jenkins on behalf of the California Cannabis Operators Association.

Thank you, sir. Is this my, it's my gun? Okay.

Amy Jenkins, on behalf of the California Cannabis Operators Association, we represent about 500 license holders statewide. Prior to the enactment of AB8, also authored by the majority leader, intoxicating hemp products flooded the California marketplace. Data from public reporting, including our own analysis, showed widespread availability of these products in youth-accessible environments, often with potency levels well in excess of what is permitted in the regulated cannabis market At the same time these manufactured products were sold entirely outside the legal cannabis framework AB 8 the prior bill put a stop to that. That was the right policy decision, and I applaud the legislature and the author for championing that measure. But passing a law is not necessarily the same as implementing it, and AB 2250 is about making that policy real. It does so by tightening and clarifying key provisions related to how cannabinoid products are treated under cannabis tax law and refining CDTFA seizure authority. These may be technical changes, but they go directly to tax compliance and enforceability. AB8 put an end to that. AB 2250 supports its implementation and practice, and we urge your aye vote today. Thank you. Thank you so very much for your testimony.

Okay. It's not rolled very well. Okay, all right. Well, good afternoon, right? Good afternoon now. Retirement savings, while important for everyone to have, many do not plan for it until it's too late. Planning for retirement in today's economy is becoming increasingly more difficult to attain. As of 2020, over one-fourth of non-retired adults and two-thirds of millennials do not have any form of retirement savings at all. Cal Savers was created by this body in 2016 to tackle California's retirement savings crisis. Since its launch in 2019, California has seen private employer plans grow by 15% with Cal Savers, adding more than 630,000 accounts to supplement that coverage. However, multiple problems are facing the CalSAVERS program, which have affected implementation and require updating. AB 2650, the Save for All Workers Act, makes several technical updates to modernize the law, bringing the program closer to sustainability and maintaining employer compliance over time. Furthermore, it allows CalSAVERS to assist participants in claiming government retirement benefits by cutting the red tape, which can result in an increase of $136 million a year. The bill also clarifies that domestic employees are included in the program, ensuring that they have access to the same retirement as their boss. With me to testify in support is Cal Savers Deputy Director of Policy, Tristan Woolicott.

No worries. Good afternoon, members of the committee. I'm Tristan Woolicott, Deputy Director for the Cal Savers Retirement Savings Board. Cal Savers is a small agency within the State Treasurer's Office. headed by Treasurer Fiona Ma and proud sponsor of AB 2650, the Safe for All Workers Act. CalSAVERS, California's retirement savings program for employees who don't have one at work. To California employees, we function like most other workplace retirement programs, save for a few notable distinctions For employees their accounts are completely portable They follow them wherever they go for work And employers they pay no fees and they not fiduciaries The Save for All Workers Act, while mostly technical at first glance, solves some real problems for our constituents and sets up our future ones for success. The bill cuts red tape, as the Assemblymember mentioned. We're most practical allowing Cal Savers to open specified retirement accounts for participants who are eligible to receive retirement benefits. This puts us to work for our constituents, saving them time while still keeping them fully informed about what is happening and allows them to stop the process whenever they'd like. Other benefits include maximizing federal dollars going into accounts because we're eliminating a key friction point for our participants. and it also saves our program significant time and money, allowing us to do the back-end work by ourselves. Additionally, the bill expands CalSAVERS to household employees, ensuring they can save for retirement while at work, just like any other employee in California. Lastly, among other things, the bill ensures our participants can contribute meaningful retirement savings and at a time that is appropriate for them. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today in support of the Save for All Workers Act, I'm happy to answer any questions.

Good afternoon now, Chair and members. AERP California, I'm David Azevedo in strong support.

Thank you. Well, since it's my birthday, I request an aye vote.

Can I have permission to use a prop to pass around to the committee of you?

I would really like to thank the chair and the committee staff for working with me on this critical issue. I accept the committee's amendments. Teenagers and adults in America are buying roughly 12 million disposable vapes per month, and four and a half vapes are thrown away every second. As a mom of teenagers, I fought the vaping crisis with my own children. We don't yet have the research to know the full damage that vaping will have on our youth. Rural areas are seeing higher statistics than anywhere. In my schools, almost every kid has tried it and half of them are addicted. When we asked kids what percentage of their school was vaping, they almost always said 80%. When I asked parents that same question, they would say 10 to 20. An even more troubling trend is kids are using vapes at schools disguised as everyday items like the Sharpie pen that I passed around key fobs chargers highlighters and hoodie strings Some have features intentionally designed to increase dependency and addiction like built video games. These hidden devices make it even harder to train teachers and staff on what to look for to stop kids from vaping. Even if a school can detect and confiscate these disguised vapes, the school has no way to dispose of it. As a tobacco use prevention education program director, I had a drawer full of vapes, hundreds of vapes that I could not do anything with because they are considered hazardous waste coming from a school. Because some vapes are disguised, some waste facilities never catch them, leading to battery fires and the release of hazardous waste, and a special permit is required to separate the nicotine or cannabis cartridge from the battery and other electronic components. AB 2667 bans disciplinary marketed and disguised vapes targeting children to look like a handheld video game, food, candy, school supplies, or clothes. It also protects kids, supports schools, and ensures that hazardous materials are handled responsibly. I respectfully ask for your aye vote, and I'm joined today by the bill's sponsor, John Kidney, with rural county representatives of California, and Carrie Baxter, Executive Director of Yuba-Sutter Regional Waste Management Authority. Thank you.

Thank you. My name is Carrie Baxter, and I serve as the Executive Director of Yuba-Sutter Regional Waste Management Authority. I'm here today in support of Assembly Bill 2667. The Regional Waste Management Authority is a JPA dedicated to providing solid waste management services to residents and businesses in our jurisdictions. We also contract with Recology to operate the household hazardous waste facility. Vape devices have become an increasingly challenging waste stream for local government schools and collection facilities to manage, and these products must often be managed as hazardous waste. This issue has become especially difficult for schools. Vapes are increasingly designed to appeal to minors, as you just saw. School supplies, everyday items, even gaming features are included in them. These products are harder for educators to detect and create real challenges when they're confiscated from students. In our region, we've been holding monthly discussions with Ritcology. The U-Band Sutter County health departments and local school districts to determine how to coordinate proper collection and disposal of vapes, particularly those confiscated by schools. The needs clear last school year from August to March. Marysville High School collected over 50 vapes. Wheatland High School, 130. And the list just goes on and on. Schools want to do the right thing, but they're not households under the hazardous waste regulations. and disposal options can be limited, confusing, costly. Ultimately, schools are left to foot the bill for managing hazardous devices that were illegally used on school property. AB 2667 takes an important step by directing the state to identify ways to improve and simplify vape management and disposal, providing clearer guidance for schools and collection facilities and increased flexibility for local governments to coordinate safe disposal opportunities. It also helps by giving household hazardous waste programs more flexibility to safely manage these devices. And for these reasons, the Regional Waste Management Authority and its member agencies are pleased to support AB 2667, and we respectfully ask for your support.

Good afternoon. John Kennedy with RCRC. We're very proud to be a sponsor here today. We're really trying to get at vapes and management, focusing on schools, safety, and cost savings. These, as you heard earlier today, are very expensive for us to manage, $350 per five-gallon bucket. We're trying to provide pathways so we can reduce our costs as local HHW programs, hopefully accept more from the public, find ways that we can manage. We can provide additional services to our colleagues in the school settings, provide more clarity with respect to what we can accept, what we can't accept, and then deal with disguised vapes that pose very serious public safety and health risks for students and also in our waste management settings because they're hard to tell that they have lithium-ion batteries and they might go through our sorting systems, get crushed by bulldozers or any other things. So for those reasons, we're pleased to sponsor the bill. I'd also like to meet two for CPSC, SWANA, and Stop Waste.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Jean Hurst here today on behalf of the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors in support.

Melissa Sparks-Kranz with the League of California Cities in support.

Sasha Horwitz, Los Angeles Unified School District in support. Karen Lang on behalf of the Shasta County Board of Supervisors in support. Mandy Strela on behalf of Rethink Waste and Californians Against Waste in support.

Chris Grong with Capital IFC on behalf of Republic Services in support.

Yes.

Oh, no, I respectfully ask for your aye vote and thank you for your time.

Thank you, Chair and Senators, for the opportunity to present AB 2465 today. I wanna thank the Chair and his staff for their incredible work on this bill and have agreed to take amendments following this committee. Trump DHS and I are paying billions to private prisons and spy companies for their campaign of terror Thousands of children are sitting in immigrant detention centers without medical care or even proper nutrition It's costing lives. The rate of death in ICE custody is now one person every four days. Geo Group and Core Civic, two of the largest private prison contractors that work with ICE, posted a record revenue of nearly $5 billion last year. Here in California, we're giving these businesses grants, loans, and tax credits paid by us, while at the same time we're making deep cuts to health care, education, and even food assistance. I was a three-year-old little girl when my parents brought me to this country, but I was one of the lucky ones. I was not put in a cage, and I was not separated from my parents. So I'm going to make sure that not a dime of our money goes to companies who are profiting from keeping kids in cages. And that's why AB 2465 says, no more. California taxpayers do not support this, and we will not be forced to pay for it. My witnesses today are Xu Ming-Chi with the California Immigrant Policy Center and Jessica Marquez on behalf of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, Tony Thurman.

Good afternoon Chair and members My name is Jessica Marquez and I a legislative representative at the California Department of Education speaking on behalf of State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurman, who is a sponsor on behalf of students and families. As we all know, over the past year, immigration enforcement has intensified in our communities. Across California and the nation, entire families are living in fear. Workers are staying home from work, students are missing school, and shifting to online learning. Some advocates have described these conditions as the ICE pandemic. At the department, we have been deeply disturbed by the deportation of a six-year-old student from the California School for the Deaf in Fremont, who was detained and deported without medical devices essential to his ability to hear. These aggressive enforcement practices are threatening the health, safety, and stability of our youngest community members, specifically our babies and TK through 12 students. A recent report found that ICE has detained over 500 babies and toddlers since January 2025, of which advocates say that our immigration system is breaking children. The fear of being detained is also creating a chilling effect on attendance and straining already limited district resources. And in California, attendance matters. School funding is tied to average daily attendance. meaning these absences don't just impact students, they directly impact the resources schools need to serve them. Meanwhile, private detention operators and those they contract with are reporting record profit from higher detention rates. California now has eight ICE detention centers, two of which opened since President Trump took office in 2025. California has led the nation in advancing policies rooted in inclusion, equity, and respect for human dignity. Our values are defined by our policy choices. Every funding decision is a statement about who and what we are willing to support. If we believe in human dignity, justice, and opportunity for all, then our public taxpayer dollars should reflect those commitments. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Renee Bayardo representing one of the co-sponsors, PICO California, as well as Californians United for a Responsible Budget, A New Path, South Bay People Power, 805, Undocufund, Invisible San Francisco Alliance for San Diego, and Health and Partnership.

Good afternoon, Chair members. Mari Lopez with the California Nurses Association in support.

Diego Zambolla, Paula Seaton with Mesa Verde Group on behalf of Inclusive Action for the City in support. Good afternoon, Whitney Francis with the Western Center on Law and Poverty in support.

Good afternoon, Christian Diegas on behalf of the congregations organized for prophetic engagement, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders for Civic Empowerment, Local Progress California, California Native Vote Project, Unidos 805, ORLA, the organizing rooted in abolition, liberation and empowerment, and the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law.

Good afternoon, Mr. Sharon, members, Campus Society with the California American Policy Center, registering support for Santa Bernardino Community Service Center, Inc., Services Immigrant Rights and Education Network Siren, Southeast Asia Resource Action Center, C-RAC, Uncommon Law, Nonprofit Housing Association of Northern California, the Kennedy Commission, Housing Authority of the County of Santa Barbara, Immigrant Legal Defense, Canal Alliance, California Coverage and Health Initiative CCHI Immigrant Defenders Law Center and Friends Committee on Legislation of California Thank you Thank you Krista Ramos with the California Immigrant Policy Center On behalf of A New Way of Life Reentry Project, Asian Prisoner Support Committee, California Faculty Association, California National Organization for Women, California Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, Community Action Board of Santa Cruz County, Courage California and

Anayeli Martin, registering support for Ensuring Opportunity Contra Costa, Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin, Harbor Institute for Immigrant and Economic Justice, Healthy Contra Costa, Immigrant Justice and Action Coalition, Immigrant Legal Resource Center, Indivisible Alta Pasadena, Enland Coalition for Immigrant Justice, Interfaith Movement for Human Integrity, New Light Wellness, Orange County Equality Coalition, and Public Council. Thank you. Good afternoon. Pavel Archerji with Housing California in support.

Good afternoon. Alicia Deans from Sacramento Area Congregations Together in support.

Greg Rapier, Sacramento Area Congregations Together in support.

Sorry, Rene Bayardo again. I missed SCIU California, also in support.

Good afternoon. Alexis Rodriguez with the California Chamber of Commerce, and we are here regrettably opposed to AB 2465. First, we'd like to be clear that we do not oppose this bill out of any support for ICE or the troubles that federal enforcement has caused Latino communities. Our opposition here is based on the practical concerns with the bill's language and its implications for California's businesses. The bill is not limited to companies that contract directly with ICE. Instead, the bill applies broadly and penalizes a company from contracting with DHS and its agencies. For companies who contract with any agency, the bill would then deny that company any state provided grant, loan, or tax credit. from any state-provided grant, loan, and tax credit. Though we appreciate the recent exclusion of medical care providers because denying health care to such agencies and facilities would ultimately hurt detained individuals and punish non-problematic contracts. We are concerned that medical care is not the only non-problematic contract that is looped into this bill. For example, companies who contract to provide blankets to an agency under DHS or service air conditioning machines would be impacted by this bill. In short, we are concerned that AB 2465 is vague as to the covered federal agencies and also loops in a large pool of non-problematic contracts. Though we are sympathetic to the author's goals, at this time we remain opposed. Thank you.

Yes, can I voice support as well? I want to thank the author. this forward. And we've seen how ruthless ICE has been in targeting immigrant communities. And I've been proud to co-author and stand with the Latino Caucus on key priorities and co-author the No Secret Police Act and some of the other pieces of legislation that we've passed here in California to try to make a stand. And in fact, we've been doing it and and winning in a number of cases. There's just a case out of San Francisco that's going to help immigrants across the country. So really happy to support it. I do look forward to continuing to work and make sure we continue to look at any unintended consequences for the innovation economy. And so I do want to hopefully work forward going forward, but very proud to support this today. Thank you.

I know you've been working on this very hard. Thank you to the staff and the chair of the committee who also have dived deep on this and worked very hard on it. I incredibly support it, and thank you for carrying this and the passion that comes from you shows. I too share concerns about unintended consequences, so I'm just going to ask. I know this has some other committees it's got to go to before any kind of final destination. So I'm just going to ask that we really sweep through this, work with the chamber and some other stakeholders to make sure that we aren't exposing ourselves or opening up to some unintended consequences, especially for those that very well may be providing things for those that are being detained. We definitely want to make sure we take care of those that are detained. So with that, I thank you for carrying the bill.

I want to thank the author for this bill. I mean, the intent is very, very important. It's been difficult to see what's happened in California and across the nation. there were initially some very big problems that we identified in terms of how to implement this, how to make it a bill that could get signed into law and enforced properly. And the author has been very cooperative in working with the committee to make sure that we have a product that we can put forward to the next Judiciary Committee and feel like we've done our job and been responsible not to put something out there that would require them to take a failure position. So I appreciate the work. I know the committee staff has worked hard as well. My own staff has worked hard. It's been a lot of back and forth. And, again, I appreciate that. But you have been a strong author. You've been there. You've made the effort. Assemblymember Lee had a similar bill, had similar issues. and I encouraged him to join forces with you on this. I think that's happened. So I appreciate that. And it has been a pleasure to work with you and your staff. And I just want to reiterate that you have committed to accepting the amendments that we can't implement today but that will be agreed to the next committee. So I'll get a yes from you on that.

Thank you with those commitments I am supporting the bill today And do we have oh would the assembly member like to close

Well, again, I thank the author, and I just want to ask the opposition to look carefully at the amendments that have been accepted. I think a lot of the concerns that you raised have already been managed in an appropriate way. So do we have a motion on this?

Please call the roll.

Aye.

Aye.

Becker, aye. Grayson, aye.

Thank you.

The consent calendar consists of file item number 1, AB 611 by Assemblymember Lee, and item 13, AB 2167 by Assemblymember Macedo. Motion is to adopt the consent calendar. Senators McNerney.

McNerney, aye. Alvarado Gill. Ashby.

Ashby, aye. Becker.

Becker, aye.

Aye. Grayson, aye.

This is AB 760 by Assemblymember Ta. Motion is due passed as amended to the Committee on Appropriations. Current vote is 3-0. Chair voting aye. Senator Ashby Aye Ashby aye 4 4 The bill is out We now moving to AB 762 Erwin I file item number 4 I move it

The motion is due passed as amended to the Committee on Appropriation. Senators McNerney. Aye. McNerney, aye. Albrado Gill. Ashby. Aye. Ashby, aye. Becker. Aye. Becker, aye. Grayson. Aye. Grayson, aye. 4-0.

The motion is due passed as amended to the Committee on Appropriations. Current vote is 2-0. Chair voting, aye. Senators Alvarado Gill, Ashby.

Ashby, aye. Becker.

Becker, aye. 4-0.

Motion is due passed to the Committee on Appropriations. Current vote is 2-0. Chair voting aye. Senators Elbrado-Gill, Ashby?

Ashby, aye. Becker?

Becker, aye. 4-0.

We need a motion. A motion has been moved by Mr. Grayson. Please call the roll. Motion is due passed to the Committee on Appropriations. Senators McNerney. Aye. McNerney, aye. Alvarado Gill. Ashby. Aye. Ashby, aye. Becker. Aye. Becker, aye. Grayson. Aye.

Motion is due passed to the Committee on Appropriations. Current vote is 2-0. Chair voting aye. Senators Alvarado-Gill, Ashby?

Ashby, aye. Becker?

Becker, aye. 4-0.

The motion is due pass as amended to the Committee on Appropriations. Current vote is 2-0. Chair voting aye. Senators Alvarado-Gill, Ashby. Ashby aye. Becker? Becker aye. 4-0.

The motion is due passed to the Committee on Appropriations. Current vote is 2-0. Chair voting aye. Senators Alvarado Gill, Ashby?

Ashby, aye. Becker?

Becker, aye. 4-0.

The motion is due passed as amended to the Committee on Appropriations. Current vote is 2-0. Chair voting aye. Senators Alvarado Gill, Ashby?

Ashby, aye. Becker?

Becker, aye. 4-0.

Senator Becker moves the bill.

Motion is due passed to the Committee on Appropriations. Sorry. Senators McNerney.

McNerney, aye. All right, go.

Ashby aye Becker Aye Becker aye Grayson Aye Grayson aye 4 The vote is 4 The bill is out We moving along folks

Motion is due passed to the Committee on Appropriations. Current vote is 3-0. Chair voting, aye. Senator Zalvarado Gill, Ashby? Aye. Ashby, aye. 4-0.

Motion is due passed to the Committee on Appropriations. Senators McNerney. Aye. McNerney, aye. Alvarado Gill. Ashby. Aye. Ashby, aye. Becker. Aye. Becker, aye. Grayson. Aye. Grayson, aye. 4-0.

The motion is due passed as amended to the Committee on Appropriations. Current vote is 3-0. Chair voting aye. Senators Alvarado Gill. Ashby. Aye. Ashby, aye. 4-0.

Moved by Senator Ashby.

Motion is due passed to the Committee on Public Safety. Senators McNerney. Aye. McNerney, aye. Alvarado Gill. Ashby. Aye.

Becker. Aye. Becker, aye.

Grayson, aye. 4-0.

Senator Ashby moves the bill. Please call the roll. Motion is due passed to the Committee on Appropriation. Senators McNerney. Aye. McNerney, aye. Alredo Gill, Ashby. Aye. Ashby, aye. Becker. Aye. Becker, aye. Grayson. Aye. Grayson, aye. 4-0.

Senator Becker moves the bill. Please call the roll. Motion is due passed as amended to the Committee on Appropriations. Senators McNerney.

McNerney, aye. Alvarado Gill.

Aye. Ashby, aye.

Aye. Becker, aye.

Aye. Grayson, aye.

Thank you.