March 25, 2026 · Agriculture · 11,921 words · 7 speakers · 103 segments
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. . Yeah.
Good afternoon, everyone. The hearing of the Committee on Agriculture is called to order. We do not have a quorum yet, but we're going to operate as a subcommittee. But as you guys all know, I like to share a fun fact as we kick off the committee hearing today. And so I didn't know if you guys know, but the month of March is National Agricultural Month, just for the record. But also in this month, we celebrate or March is also the National Salary Month. I hope you guys like salary. And the state of California actually leads the nation in salary production by growing roughly 1.4 billion. Yeah, you guys heard a billion pounds of salary every single year. Ventura and Monterey counties produce over 80% of California salary production, making the Central Coast vital for California's salary economy. So that's, I think, another fun fact just connected to salary. Wanted to give you guys a little bit of background, but on one night in the 1960s at Chicago's Ambassador East Hotel, a man grew increasingly frustrated and impatient that his savory vodka cocktail was missing a swizzle stick. Tired of waiting, the man grabbed a nearby celery stalk from a relish tray to sear his drink. Other patrons at that bar witnessed the incident. word of mouth started and the rest is history for the bloody Mary. Again, thank you for indulging me in my fun fact. So before we begin the hearing, I also want to cover a few logistics. As we proceed with the witnesses and public comment, I want to make sure everyone understands that the assembly has rules to ensure we maintain order and run an efficient and fair hearing. We apply these rules consistently to all people who participate in our proceedings, regardless of the viewpoint they express. In order to facilitate the goal of hearing as much from the public within the limits of our time, we will not permit conduct that disrupts, disturbs, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of legislative proceedings. For all those who will be providing comments today, we ask that you please state your full name and the organization you represent and if you support or oppose the bill being considered Any member of the public may also submit written comments to our committee through email Emails may be sent to the address found on the committee website, which is agri.committee at assembly.ca.gov. We have 11 bills on the file today. Five of those bills are proposed for consent. Is it five or two? Oh, all right. Five bills are proposed for consent. We will hear bill presentations in file order today. And if the author of the next bill on the file is not in the room, we will immediately move to the next bill on the file. And since we still do not have a quorum, we will open the hearing, as I mentioned, as a subcommittee to allow bill presentations to happen. If we don't have a quorum by the end of the presentation of the bill, the bill will be placed on call until we do. So we have Assemblymember Lackey, right? So Assemblymember Lackey, well, actually, we have Assemblymember Arons, which is the number one, the file order. AB 1674, Assemblymember Arons. Please proceed with your bill when you are ready.
Well, thank you so much. Thank you. their issues and find a potential path forward. AB 1674 would create the Food Desert Elimination Grant Program to support grocery stores in underserved areas, especially in new housing developments. The bill requires developers to maintain or mitigate any loss of grocery store capacity in these projects, ensuring continued access to healthy food. Access to healthy food and affordable food should not depend on a person's zip code, Yet many communities across California continue to experience limited access to full service grocery stores, particularly in our low income neighborhoods and areas experience rapid housing development. In my district in Silicon Valley, my constituents are often driving over 30 to 45 minutes just to receive their groceries. We're not trying to prevent any form of housing development. But we also want to make sure that the state of California continues to meet its housing goals. However, we want to also consider adding retail and grocery store space where they're badly needed. In my district alone, we're losing several grocery stores to housing development, and it's causing a real impact and will continue to cause an impact throughout the state of California. And in 2026, we have to really recognize that we have to do a better job on addressing serious issues relating to food deserts. The promise of building housing was that we would build livable walkable bikeable communities as best as possible and there are unintended consequences at times due to the way in which we go about our housing laws in the state of California and how we work with our local governments. So joining me today are Deanna Gonzalez and Himanshu Saithi, residents of Sunnyvale in
my district who have been on the local ground advocating for projects being affected in their area. Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Deanna Gonzalez. I'm the chair of the San Miguel Neighborhood Association in North Sunnyvale, Patrick's district. I own and live in the family home my parents purchased in 1954. I do understand the California housing crisis as it is right now. and I support thoughtful housing development. I'm here today to support this legislation that gives cities like Sunnyvale the ability to protect neighborhoods from losing access to essential groceries, services, and community resources. We need this legislation to establish protections and guardrails that prevent neighborhoods from becoming food deserts. My neighborhood is at risk of losing Fair Oaks Plaza, a community hub that has served residents for over 50 years. It is a place where neighbors can walk to family-run grocery stores, restaurants, and essential services. If the plaza is lost, seniors, low-income families, and communities of color will be disproportionately impacted, losing convenient access to daily necessities. Many residents will be forced to travel across Sunnyvale or across their area, in other cases of cities, just to meet basic needs. This is not about development. It's about equity, access, and preserving the health and well-being of our communities. I respectfully urge your support for this legislation. Thank you.
Hi. Good afternoon, Chair and members. My name is Himanshu Sethi, and I'm from the San Miguel neighborhood in North Sunnyvale, a historically underprivileged community. I want to be clear upfront that we are pro-housing. North Sunnyvale has stepped up in meeting that need, and we have actually welcomed significant housing growth and helped our city meet its RENA goals and earn its pro-housing designation. But our community should not have to give up our basic needs in the process. At the heart of our neighborhood is Fair Oaks Plaza, anchored by Taj Mahal Groceries. It's an ethnic grocery store that many seniors, lower-income families, and working households rely on for everyday food. And this is not just one site. In the nearby Lakewood neighborhood, also in North Sunnyvale, there's another grocery store also at risk. We are watching access to food disappear one site at a time. So we have a Change.org petition that now has over 3,400 signatures, largely from residents across Sunnyvale, that reflects this broad concern. When neighborhood-serving retail is removed and not replaced, it is low-income and ethnic communities like ours that feel it first and the hardest. It creates barriers to basic and healthy food. This is how food deserts are created, step by step. And we already know how to identify these risks What has been missing is the will to act before it is too late So AB 1674 helps change that It creates a clear framework with protections and enforcement so the communities are not left behind as growth happens around them. So we are open to refining the scope, however, because those protections, but those protections and enforcement mechanisms should remain because growth should not come at the expense of a community's ability to access food. I urge your support for 1674. Thank you.
Thank you so much. Before we proceed with opposition, I want to establish a quorum. I think we have now the necessary members. So secretary, please call the roll and then we'll continue once the quorum is established. Chair Soria? Here. Padwick? Here. Alanis? Aguirre-Curri? Is it Connelly? Sure. Jeff Gonzalez? Sure. Erwin? Ransom? Great. So we have a quorum. Now we'll proceed. Is there anyone in the audience who represents opposition? If you can please come forward. Take a seat. And again, please state your name and the organization you're here with.
Good morning, Madam Chair and members. Skylar Wanacott on behalf of the California Business Properties Association here with a respectful, opposed, and less amended position on AB 1674. We appreciate the author's intent and agree that improving food access in underserved communities is very important. We also want to thank Assemblymember Ahrens and his staff for their engagement early on to hear and address our concerns. Those concerns are focused on Section 3 of the bill, which would allow a new state requirement on housing projects that operate outside of local zoning and land use decisions. It requires projects to maintain space for a large grocery store or provide mitigations, which could add costs, could lead to delays, and also uncertainty. For commercial corridor, logistics, and mixed-use developers, the core issue is precedence. This approach shifts decisions about how land is developed from the local level towards a state-directed requirement tied to a specific commercial use. We would much prefer a more targeted approach that removes this mandate and instead looks at voluntary incentives or grant programs. Again, I want to thank Assemblymember Aarons and his staff, and we look forward to continuing to work on this. But for these reasons, we respectfully remain opposed unless amended. Thank you. Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members. Kareem Dresi on behalf of the California Building Industry Association. We want to applaud the author for his continued leadership on housing issues. We have had ongoing conversations, as the author indicated in his opening remarks. We are continuing to have those conversations. I want to thank the author for considering our concerns. We very much appreciate it, and we look forward to hopefully resolving our concerns with the bill before a second policy committee. Thank you so much.
Great. Thank you. At this time, we will open it up for public comment. Any members of the public who wish to come, register your supporter opposition. Again, state your name and the organization. Cool.
Freddy Quintana on behalf of the California Apartment Association, respectful opposition. Good afternoon, Chair and members. Adam Regley on behalf of the California Chamber of Commerce and NAEP SoCal in respectful opposition, unless amended. Thank you. Hello. My name is Alka Patel Sethi. I'm a San Miguel resident in Sunnyvale, California, and I support this bill.
Great. Thank you so much. Now I'll see if the committee members have any questions or comments. Member Hedwig.
Thank you for talking to me about this bill earlier. I appreciate you bringing it forward. I represent 11 very rural counties. I'm pretty sure my whole district is a food desert, but I had some just clarifying questions. So what is a food desert and what is an area at risk of becoming a food desert and how is it defined under your bill?
Thank you Assemblymember Hadwick for your engagement with me on this issue. I know that we both represent very different areas in the state of California, and we're trying to address this need and wanted to also very much acknowledge the difficulties in virtually all access to critical issues for your constituents in your 11 more rural areas of California. Under the context of my bill, the food desert means a census tract or component layer. That means the definitions of both low access area and low income area. So low income area would be defined as means of a census tract or component layer with a poverty rate of 20 percent or higher or a census tract or component layer with a median family income of less than 80 percent. And I believe it is within one half mile of non-rural areas or more than 10 miles for rural areas of large grocery stores. But as I committed to you before this hearing, that is inconsistent with your area, which sometimes could have grocery stores within 80, 100, 150 or more miles. So certainly willing to work with your office and anyone else on the committee to see if we can define and better exact language, as well as my commitment to continue to work with the opposition to see if we can find a path forward. But certainly want to be sensitive and uplift the issues of rural California and just how already difficult it is. I'm trying to prevent issues facing, you know, just how difficult we've lost nearly three grocery or will lose three grocery stores in suburban Silicon Valley. You've lived with this your entire life and your constituents are feeling a lot and they don't get a lot of support, if any support from the state of California. And so just want to acknowledge that, but also want to, you know, I don't want anyone to be in that position. I don't want your constituents to be in that condition. I don't want my constituents to fall in to what your constituents are already facing. And I'm committed to working with your office and with others to ensure that this bill doesn't already negatively impact and already impact a constituency.
I really appreciate your thoughtfulness on it. How would a project developer demonstrate that a new housing development project does not reduce site capacity for a large grocery store? and how would they be able to determine that?
Well, so under my bill, AB 1674 would create the state grant program to bring grocery stores into underserved communities, keep existing stores open, expand healthy food options. You know what would happen if zoning doesn allow for these sort of grocery stores would require that cities must consider zoning or rezoning of these sites You know, at the end of the day, I'm willing to work with you on the issues that you're raising. But at the heart of what we're trying to do is work with the opposition. we want to continue to build critically needed housing in the, in the state of California, especially in our very high cost of living area in Silicon Valley, where the median house single family home is in excess of $2 million. It's something that I'm committed to working with you on.
Would a developer or the local government be required to pay funding for, to build a grocery store, or is that part of the grant program?
We don't anticipate to pass this along to local cities to mandate them. We are just seeking to remedy if you want to develop housing in an existing grocery store that you do so by ideally keeping the grocery and retail space on the bottom and building on the top.
Kareem, what is your reaction to the questions that I asked the author? Do you have anything you want to add? I would say and appreciate the questions. Thank you so much. And look forward to continuing to work with the author on Section 3 of the bill. Section 3 of the bill is a bit challenging the way it's currently drafted. But as the author indicated, we are continuing to work with his office just to ensure that because as all of us know, and it certainly is not in any of the districts of members on the dais, but certainly there are local governments that do wish to continue to promote no growth policies, which typically not only disproportionately impact working families in need of shelter, but also working families in need of shelter who are individuals and families of color. And so we want to avoid those unintended consequences. And so Section 3, as currently drafted, is problematic because it would require a housing project applicant. So if you're trying to build affordable housing, it would require that local government to basically condition the approval of that housing on whether or not they can preserve site capacity for a large grocery store, which is 15,000 square feet at a minimum, or pay into the fund created by the bill. And so that could serve as an additional barrier to entry for a lot of affordable housing developers who are simply trying to provide shelter to working families to your constituents. And so we see that as a challenge, again, is currently drafted. I know the author is, again, continuing to express a willingness to work on the bill. We want to continue to work on the bill with the author. So we hope that we're able to massage the language in Section 3 so that we can still achieve the goal of the bill while ensuring that we don't exacerbate our state's housing crisis. Do you want to add anything?
Yeah, I'll just say that I really respect the opposition's concerns. I think there's win-win solutions that we can all create together. Our desire is to build housing and build affordable housing, especially in my district, and not at the expense of eliminating grocery stores. And so if we can find incentives, density bonuses, or other incentives to protect and keep our grocery stores while being able to promote and spur affordable housing to be built, there are win-win solutions that I'm confident that we can try and reach.
I really want to thank you My concerns are very different coming from a rural lens It very hard to get any development in our areas so restricting that more And I always very sensitive to anything going back to my very small cities that already are struggling But I really want to thank you for our conversation early and for helping us get a rural carve out for it, for this bill and giving me your word that we can work on that and work on the opposition worries. I'm going to lay off of it today, but look forward to voting yes on the floor when you get all the amendments done. Thank you so much.
Assemblymember Gonzalez.
Thank you, Madam Chair. First of all, to my esteemed colleague, I want to thank you because you're always willing to work with everybody. Always. We had a situation where another bill came up and your commitment to work together is not just words, not just empty. It's truthful. And I really do appreciate that. So I want to thank you for being a leader in this legislature in doing that because we need more of it. Right. Thank you. I have a couple of questions specifically in my district. I have an area known as the city's called Needles and they have to travel three and a half hours for their nearest grocery store in one direction, two hours in a different direction or go out of state into Arizona or Nevada to to get grocery stores. So talk about food desert, right? One in four kids specifically don't know where their next meal is coming from in my area. In Imperial County, I have a 20% unemployment rate. Development is challenging, to say the least, when it comes to housing. I want housing. I want development. I want industry. All those things are very important, but I can also understand the complexity of your particular area. and your commitment to work with everybody, would you commit to working with me and the assembly district that I represent because it's vastly different? When we talk about three and a half hours for a grocery store, this hurts. When we talk about we're trying to get any type of development in, this hurts. But because I know your word of working together, would you commit to working and carving out for my area.
Yeah, I'm committed to working with you on this specific language. As I've mentioned, Assemblymember Hadwick, the bill is to simply protect and prevent more food deserts from occurring in your constituency and Assemblymember Hadwick's constituency. You feel these effects more than anyone and you have for quite some time. The goal is to prevent that to continue happening. And we've seen some of that already happen naturally. We've seen many grocery stores in Los Angeles. We've seen Costco's building affordable housing and other housing on top of their retail sites. This is no different. This is seeing what is already being done and wanting to encourage and spur that growth. How we do that is where we're going to negotiate and find that. But my absolute intention is a final version of this bill, as it will hopefully earn your support and committee today and head to housing, is to really tackle the building and the housing aspect and negotiations in that committee and with your offices to address the concerns. So it does no negative impact on your already underserved community.
Yeah for us the challenge isn an existing location and someone sitting on it It we don have it nor is there a physical building there It a whole bunch of sand wild land the whole nine yards So we don have that problem there which is why I asking for a carve out for the 36th district because that specific problem wouldn't, it wouldn't cookie cutter where I'm at. It would actually hurt us significantly. And I want to see you succeed in this. It's just, unfortunately, on my side, it's the complete opposite food desert. and we have a whole bunch of desert, which I hope you'll get a chance to see. So if I can get your commitment on that, then I'll lay off on this because I think we have a lot of conversation to do and I appreciate you.
Well, you still have time to consider.
Yes.
I have Assemblymember Conley, then Ramson.
Great. Thank you, Chair. and appreciate the author's effort to reduce food deserts in our communities. Just a couple lines of questioning. One picks up on Assemblymember Hadwick's exploration of kind of what is a food desert. I would add kind of for these purposes, what is a grocery store? What kind of type, size are we talking about, as well as the concept of healthy food? So, for example, is this effectively going to incentivize or open the door, let's say, for a Walmart superstore to come in or a Target superstore, which are kind of recreating themselves as de facto grocery stores, often either driving out existing other smaller groceries or precluding competition? and certainly not exactly known for their healthy food selection. So in many ways, kind of continuing a type of issue in communities. So just wondering, like, that's kind of come up in my neck of the woods, and I know it has in other areas. And I'm not passing judgment on it. There's pros and cons. but are we essentially kind of further paving the way for that kind of dynamic? And then if we can kind of resolve that, I am supportive generally of the grant aspect of the bill. I do have some concerns additionally about the provisions that might harm housing development in certain parts of the state. And it sounds like that was being discussed when I walked in. And so definitely looking forward to further discussions in the housing committee on that, on those provisions as well. But for purposes today, we're kind of dealing with the grant, all that. But I do have some questions in that regard.
Certainly, Assemblymember, I'm committed to working with you on that. I will say I'm glad you brought up the Walmart example because existing law is going to eliminate a critical grocery store in North Sunnyvale in my district. And the nearest other available grocery store is a Walmart superstore. And so the problem that you're describing is happening with existing law right now where that is the only option left for the residents of my district in North Sunnyvale. that's the nearest grocery store that they have because of the elimination of by the way all of these grocery stores that are being eliminated are Asian ethnic grocery stores Latino grocery stores the the big chains aren't can be absorbed aren't gonna be as affected as much these are the smaller ethnic grocery stores that are being affected the most and will be affected first. But I'm certainly committed to cleaning up language to ensure that the grocery stores that we are protecting are healthy options, are, you know, options that we can be proud of to protect in the state of California.
Assemblywoman Ramson.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to thank my colleague for focusing on food deserts. Just yesterday, I was in a conversation with a vice mayor in one of my districts, and this whole conversation was about food deserts. Everyone knows that I represent San Joaquin County, which is ironically really interesting to have food deserts and the place that produces a lot of agriculture and food. But I was able to point to this to say we are thinking about this and thinking about how we can begin to address this issue. And part of that issue has actually been caused by the big boxes that kind of move in, push out the little guys, and then when there's not enough income or whatever, then they are no longer serving those communities. So I really definitely support this, and I do understand that you're working on it. It does seem as if it would be important maybe not to do one-off carve-outs, but perhaps we need to consider having two different categories or a couple of different categories for this grant program so you're not doing a bunch of different carve-outs. But we do have a big and growing problem with food deserts that are already existing and also growing in our communities, and we definitely have the responsibility to adding on. I do appreciate, and I was really, I guess, perplexed to see, like, the Building Industry Association, the fact that they didn't like parts of it, because it's very similar to when we think about rooftops to feed businesses and how they go together. We talk about things like transit-oriented development and how those things work together. Having those rooftops to ensure that, and a grocery store together, kind of, they work hand in hand. So I do appreciate the spirit of this bill, and I know there is work to do on it, but I trust you to get it done. And I'm happy to work with you along with our other colleagues to figure out what kind of grant program that we can have that captures the needs that are varied throughout our states. because to hear that I have food deserts and then a colleague has an actual desert that has a food desert is completely different communities that we are trying to serve. So we need to make sure that we don't try to do a one-size-fits-all approach because that is not going to work. But I do want to just commend you for bringing your issue here. And it's really wild to think that Santa Clara County has food deserts with all of the tech money and all the things that we have there. So we really, we definitely need to do better for our communities. Thank you for bringing this.
Thank you. Majority Leader Ag Air Curry.
Thank you very much. I think we should also remind ourselves that access to healthy and affordable food should not depend on a person's zip code. And it's important that we incentivize and figure out these grants. So today, because we're in ag, it seems to me we should be talking about the food and this is going to be re-referred over to housing and we can have the housing fight over there. But based on that information, I'll be supporting your bill today.
Thank you so much Great I don think there any of the other members that have any additional questions or comments I just want to make some comments before I Assemblymember Erwin allow you to close First and foremost, thank you for meeting with me. I know we've had some robust conversation around the importance of eliminating food deserts and preventing food deserts from happening. And so I appreciate your efforts in trying to address an issue that impacts, I think, communities across the state of California. And so today, because we are in ag, you know, the main piece of this legislation deals with creating a funding mechanism to create those incentives and grant dollars to be able to, one, hopefully keep grocery stores, but also bring grocery stores to areas that don't have grocery stores currently. And so I do want to acknowledge your commitment that you've made here publicly. I know we've talked about it in the last few days about ensuring that you're working with the building community. I think that we all recognize we have two crises in the state. We have a housing crisis, but we also have a food availability crisis when it comes to communities, especially underserved communities. And so our committee is charged with the responsibility of overseeing these food issues. And I believe that it is important that we recognize that we do have to create a mechanism to incentivize and provide potential grants to, again, address this issue. But I do also am sympathetic to the issues highlighted about housing, and I'm looking forward to the folks in the room that express their concerns and oppositions to continue working with you so that we can figure it out. I think it's important for the state to do something and at the same time figure out how our local communities can also create incentives. When I was on the city council in Fresno, in fact, one of the things that I motivated my council to do at the time was to create an incentive of waiving some of the fees if the project included a grocery store, a clinic, like those essential services. And I think that we also have to look to our local partners to figure out how, in combination with the state dollars being created, that we also partner up and leverage the resources so that we are not creating additional barriers and additional costs that will make housing actually more expensive. And so I think that those are, it's a good discussion. I appreciate all the comments by my colleagues, but today I do feel comfortable making the recommendation of moving the bill forward to the next committee to continue having the discussion around the housing component, which it is an important component of also of this bill. So again, thank you for the conversation and your commitment to fixing Section 3, which is something that I also would like to see as this bill moves forward. But now I'll give you the opportunity, Assemblymember Ahrens, to close on this bill.
Thank you so much, Madam Chair. And I just want to emphasize one more time how much I'm committed to working out the details. I'm committed to working with the builders and the respectful opposition. committed to addressing my colleagues' concerns. I believe there are many win-win solutions here that we can find where we can spur more development, critical development that we need across the state of California and protect our retail and groceries And you have my commitment to continue doing that I respectfully ask for your aye vote.
Great. Thank you so much. So the motion for this bill, if there's a motion by Majority Leader Aguirre Curry is to move the bill do pass to the Housing and Community Development Committee. So we have a motion. Do we have a second? I'll second. Thank you, Assemblywoman Ramson, for seconding. Secretary, if you could please call the roll. On file item one, AB 1674, Aaron's motion do pass to Housing and Community Development Committee. Soria? Aye. Soria, aye. Hadwick? Aguirre-Curray? Aye. Aguirre-Curray, aye. Alanis? Not voting. Alanis not voting. Connelly? Connelly, aye. Jeff Gonzalez? Jeff Gonzalez not voting. Irwin? Irwin, aye. Ransom? Aye. Ransom, aye. The bill has five votes. It will pass this committee. We will leave it on call for the other members to add on. Thank you. Thank you. Before we move on to the next item on the agenda, I do want to take up the consent calendars. Members, there are five bills proposed today for consent. File item 2, AB 1594 by Hyerbidion. File item 3, AB 1551 by Krell. File item 7, AB 2588 by Hadwick. File item 10, AB 2326, which is an Ag Committee bill. And file item 11, AB 2685, also an Ag Committee bill. Are there any questions or concerns from the members of the committee on the consent? Move. So we have a motion and a second. Madam Secretary, if you can please call the roll. On the consent calendar, Soria? Aye. Soria, aye. Hadwick. Alanis. Aye. Alanis, aye. Aguirre-Curray. Aye. Aguirre-Curray, aye. Connelly. Connelly, aye. Jeff Gonzalez. Aye. Gonzalez, aye. Irwin. Irwin, aye. Ransom. Aye. Ransom, aye. We have seven votes. The consent will be approved, but we'll leave the roll call open for the absent members. Now we'll move on to our next author. We have, thank you for being so patient. File item, which one is it? Five by Assemblymember Lackey. Assemblymember Lackey, if you please come forward to present AB 2264. Proceed when you're ready.
Thank you. simply clarifies that the district agricultural associations many of which manage fairgrounds and other public lands so that they can use their property to help build affordable housing It updates at least terms from 55 years to 99 years to help make affordable housing projects financially viable for a longer period of time. This bill does not mandate housing. It simply gives local fair boards the option to partner with developers and communities if the opportunity makes sense. By unlocking the underutilized public land, we can create more homes for working families while maintaining local control. And I have here with me Alicia Arcidio-Cono on behalf of the City of Del Mar. Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members. Elisa Arcidiacona, and I'm speaking in support of the bill on behalf of the City of Del Mar. AB 2264 provides clear authority for district agricultural associations to develop affordable housing on publicly owned fairgrounds property, helping unlock potentially underutilized land for needed housing. Extending allowable lease terms from 55 to 99 years is critical to making affordable housing projects financially viable and ensuring long-term stability. The bill focuses on housing for low- and moderate-income households, helping address a key gap in California's housing market. The requirement for the Department of General Services to approve ensures projects move forward with appropriate state oversight and accountability. For communities like Del Mar, land availability is limited and development costs are high. The bill empowers agricultural districts in coordination with California cities to strategically plan for the future redevelopment of their property for uses such as affordable housing and provides a realistic pathway to increase housing supply without disrupting existing neighborhoods. By leveraging existing public assets, AB 2264 expands housing opportunities without requiring displacement or major changes to community character. This bill demonstrates how the state can partner with local and regional entities to deliver housing using land that is already publicly owned. For these reasons, the City of Del Mar supports the bill and urges your aye vote. Thank you.
Great. Thank you so much. Is there anyone in the room that is opposed to the bill if you want to come forward now? Seeing none. At this time, we will open it up to public comment. Do we have any members in the audience either support or oppose the bill? Great. Seeing none. Do we have any members of the committee with questions? Majority Leader Aguirre-Curry.
Assemblymember, I like this bill a lot. I don't know if it's necessary affordable housing, but it's been unused land for so long. And years ago when we had big farms and the fairs were thriving, there was always some kind of activity going on. But as time's gone on, we're not using that property, I think, as we should or we could. There's been thought of years ago when I was working with USDA on some fairground property issues is that why not have some little hubs out there you know AG hubs people could do some other work on the outside and during fair time they just are not working or something vacation time but I just really appreciate that you bringing this forward and I look forward to seeing what you guys do in housing but I really believe in the thought that what you're doing with it we can't waste that land it's in the prime spots of so many communities. Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you. Any other members of the committee? CNN, I do just want to make a couple comments.
Thank you, Assemblymember Lackey, for bringing this bill forward. I do believe that we do need every tool in the toolbox, and given that we have jurisdiction and oversee fairgrounds, that they may be a tool that various communities can use to address the housing challenges that we do have. So I'm happy to recommend to pass to, again, the Housing and Community Development Committee, where you guys will have another chance to discuss the benefits of allowing this to happen.
But again, we do already have a motion by Assemblywoman Ransom and a second by Assemblymember Alanis.
Assemblymember Lackey, would you like to close on your bill? I just respectfully appreciate an aye vote. Great. Madam Secretary, if you could please call the roll. On file item 5, AB 2264, Lackey, motion do pass to Housing and Community Development Committee. Soria? Aye. Soria, aye. Hadwick? Aguirre-Curri? Aye. Aguirre-Curri, aye. Alanis? Aye. Alanis, aye. Connelly? Aye. Connelly, aye. Jeff Gonzalez? Aye. Gonzalez, aye. Irwin? Aye. Irwin, aye. Ransom? Aye. Ransom, aye. The bill has seven votes. It will get out of committee. We'll just leave the call open for absent members. Thank you. We'll proceed with the next item, which is file item number four. We have Assemblymember Krell here to present Assembly Bill 2069. Assemblywoman Crowell, please proceed with your bill when you are ready. Hi, good afternoon everyone. Thanks so much for having me and hearing about AB 2069 today, the Fair Act bill. AB 2069 will help spur economic growth and job creation by catalyzing development projects at fairgrounds throughout the state through a targeted state sales and use tax exemption. California's fairgrounds are valuable public assets. They serve as hubs for community events, fairs, and agriculture, and they play a critical role as emergency response and disaster recovery centers. These properties span thousands of acres of publicly owned land and already have key infrastructure in place, like utilities, transportation access, and event facilities. But despite their importance, a lot of the fairgrounds in California are really struggling. Across the state, they face significant deferred maintenance and aging infrastructure. At the same time, funding has been limited and inconsistent, making it difficult to invest in large-scale improvements or to modernize and better use these facilities. These sites represent major untapped opportunities. They are often well-located. They're well-equipped to support commercial, industrial, and mixed-use development that could benefit the surrounding communities. However, under current law, there's no targeted mechanism to support private investment on fairgrounds. The high construction costs, labor, utilities, and taxes in California often make potential projects financially infeasible. As a result, projects that could create jobs, improve infrastructure, and generate long-term economic growth simply don't move forward. AB 2069 addresses this gap. It narrowly creates a tailored sales and use tax exemption to incentivize new development projects on fairgrounds. Beginning January 1st 2027 qualifying projects approved by a fairground governing body would receive a tax exemption on tangible personal property used in development and operations including construction and equipment materials This bill applies only to new developments or new phases of existing projects, ensuring that we're generating new economic activity, not subsidizing existing operations. It maintains local control by requiring approval from local fairground governing boards, and it's also limited in duration. It's up to 20 years to ensure accountability. Importantly, it explicitly protects local sales tax and its dedicated local revenue stream. By lowering upfront costs, AB 2069 helps make projects viable that otherwise would not pencil out. In doing so, it unlocks private investment, supports job creation, and generates sustainable long-term revenue for fairgrounds. This is about revitalizing critical community assets while driving economic growth in a smart and targeted way. I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Great, thank you. So we do have a motion and a second. We will now hear from those testifying in support. If you can please come forward. Good afternoon. Taylor Triff on behalf of the Western Affairs Association. We're working with the author. We really appreciate it. And we look forward to moving to support soon. Thank you. Is there anyone else in the public that wishes to express support, opposition, or any other comments? Seeing none. Perfect. At this time, members, if you guys have any questions or comments. I'd be at it as a co-author. Thanks. We'd be honored to have you as a co-author. You know me. I love the farms. I like the fairgrounds. Great. Assemblymember Gonzalez. I, too, would like to be at it as a co-author. This is a fantastic bill. Fantastic. I thank you for your leadership in this. I have areas that could absolutely benefit from this. So thank you so much. Great. Thank you so much. We'll add you as a co-author. Assemblymember Gonzalez. Please add me as well. Thank you so much. This is kind of dovetails with the bill I did last year, increasing the amount of fares get from revenues. Definitely. Thank you. We'll add you as a co-author. This has never happened to me in a committee hearing before, by the way. Great. Great. Thank you so much, Assemblywoman Correll, for presenting this bill. As you heard, there is a motion and a second. If you would like to close on your bill, the recommendation is due pass to Revenue and Taxation Committee. Respectfully ask for your aye vote. Great. So we do have a motion and a second. Madam Secretary, please call the roll. On file item 4, AB 2069, Krell, motion do pass to Revenue and Taxation Committee. Soria? Aye. Soria, aye. Hadwick? Aguirre-Curri? Aye. Aguirre-Curri, aye. Alanis? Connelly? Connelly, aye. Jeff Gonzalez? Aye. Gonzalez, aye. Irwin? Aye. Irwin, aye. Ransom? The bill has five votes. We will leave the roll call open for absent members. Thank you. Thank you. Assembly member Irwin, if you want to present, you have file item number eight, AB 2143. Proceed when you're ready. Well you going to do it Yeah Afternoon Madam Chair and members I pleased to present AB 2143 today As many of you know the impact that noxious weeds have on our agricultural lands is devastating These invasive plants overrun crops, damage soil health, disrupt ecosystems, and kill the biodiversity of our native plants. They are a scourge that costs our state millions of dollars. The Department of Food and Ag maintains a list of noxious weeds and has banned the sale of these weeds through restrictions. Despite these efforts, though, many weeds continue to be sold without restraint through online e-commerce sites. The ease of purchasing one of these illegal plants is staggering. Any one of us could go into an e-commerce website right now and buy one within minutes. And I know because my staff has spent the last few weeks, well, not quite buying the noxious weeds, but getting right to the point that he would have been able to. Additionally, many consumers may not even realize that the plant they are ordering is designated as a noxious weed. Online marketplaces have a responsibility to ensure they do not facilitate the sale and shipment of these plants. AB 2143 addresses this issue by banning online marketplaces from accepting payment for noxious weeds that would be shipped to a delivery address within the state. This ensures that online marketplaces take the responsibility for the role their platforms play in the spread of noxious weeds. Preventing online marketplaces from selling noxious weeds will cut off a key contributor to the spread of invasive plants at the source, saving our state millions of dollars down the line. With me to testify in support of the bill today are Professor Mohsen Meskura, a weed sciences professor from UC Davis, and Taylor Trefio, representing California Citrus Mutual and a series of other ag clients. Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members. Thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of AB 2143. Weeds are plants out of place that harm agriculture, natural ecosystem, and waterways. California is, as a global leader in agriculture, is especially vulnerable. The cost of wheat control in just 12 major crops in California, out of 400 crops that we're growing, exceed $700 million annually. While growers and land managers spend millions to manage these threats, we found a major and modern pathway for their spread online marketplace. My lab at UC Davis systematically evaluated the sale of all listed nutrous weeds in the US on Amazon and eBay. What we found is deeply concerning. More than one-third of these highly harmful pests are readily available for purchase. With just a few clicks, anyone can buy and ship invasive plants from from outside the US or across the states. Among the species we found were some of the most destructive globally, such as weech wheat, which has contributed to famine in West Africa with costs exceeding $10 billion. Pampas grass, which poses a serious fire hazard in California. We have developed a database that these online marketplaces, they can use it, so there is no longer such an excuse to continue what they're doing. Prevention is the most effective and economic strategy for weed management. Once these weeds established, eradication is costly and often impossible. As Benjamin Franklin wisely said, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Restricting the online sale of these harmful pests is a critical and necessary step and AB 2143 directly addresses this issue For this reason I strongly urge your support of AB 2143 Thank you. There is a motion and a second. We may continue. I'm still gonna talk, yeah. Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members. Taylor Triff on behalf of a variety of agricultural associations. As both the Assembly Member and the Professor noted, eggs on the front lines of new and long-standing invasive species threats. They are absolutely an environmental impact. They are absolutely a cost impact to farmers and ranchers with millions of dollars in control management required, lost productivity, and long-term degradation. Pests and diseases do not respect property boundaries or legislative districts, which is why statewide coordination and responding to the expansion of goods movement in California for our consumers is really critical. E-commerce has become the standard in California, where consumers can buy anything from anywhere and have it shipped to them. Whereas in the past, we've got things like border protection stations where we look at medium and heavy-duty trucks. That still happens, but there are goods being traveled all over California in passenger vehicles with people doing side jobs, and that can easily spread on a much more pervasive level than our traditional routes of exposure. So AB 2143 is an important step in adapting our pest management system we have to our current technologies and realities, and without sustained attention, invasives and noctuous species will continue to reduce yields, increase costs, increase pesticide use, and threaten our farms and families. So we appreciate these members' attention and support. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Is there anyone in the audience who is here on the opposition? If not at this time, we'll open it for public comment. Please come forward, state your name, the organization, whether you support or oppose the bill. Please excuse our lack of a letter, but Dennis Alviani, of you off the California Seed Association we support. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Members, do you guys have any questions or comments? Seeing vice chairwoman. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to thank you. This is not a subject that a lot of people will take the time to write a bill about. So as a farmer and a person that has a shovel in their truck that my husband stops and digs up weeds along the road, I just want to say thank you. I also live, I'm the only district that borders two states, so we have all of those border stations, and it's a very, very important part of agriculture that I don't think people think about all the time. So I just want to thank you for your leadership on this issue. Majority Leader Aguirre-Curry. Thank you for bringing this forward. This bill I remember seeing about a year ago and trying to find someone that might run it. Thank you for doing it. there's nothing more frustrating for me and being a farmer as to see some of these noxious weeds in this beautiful container that everybody should purchase, and I can just see what's going to happen. It just multiplies like no one's business. So thank you very much for bringing this forward, and everybody should be aware that this is really an important bill for our farmers and landscapers as well. They all need to know about it. So thank you. Great. So there is a motion and a second. Assemblywoman Erwin, would you like to close on your bill? The motion is to do pass to Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee. You know, obviously technology has changed a lot of the way that we deliver products, and this has become a problem recently. We also know that when you have non-native plants in mountain areas, in streams, there can be all sorts of issues from fires to droughts. too much water being used. So I think it's really important that we are addressing the issues that ag has, but there are a lot of issues with non-native plants and specifically noxious weeds in other natural areas. These online marketplaces have the ability to ban all sorts of things, and so we think that since there is a list now that exists, exists, it should be very easy to make sure that these noxious weeds don't get in the hands of consumers in California. And with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Great. Madam Secretary, please call the roll. On file item 8, AB 2143 Irwin, motion is due passed to Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee. Soria? Aye. Soria, aye. Hadwick? Aye. Hadwick, aye. Agriar Curry? Aye. Agriar Curry, aye. Aye. Alanis? Aye. And can I be a co-author, please? Thank you. Alanis, aye. Connelly? Connelly, aye. Jeff Gonzalez? Aye. Gonzalez, aye. Irwin? Aye. Irwin, aye. Ransom? Aye. Ransom, aye. Oh, I'm sorry. Ransom, aye. Thank you. Great. Your bill has eight votes. It will get out of committee. Thank you. Thank you, Assemblywoman Wilson. You have file item six, which is Assembly Bill 1731. Please proceed with your bill when you are ready. Move the bill. So you already have a motion and a second. People are excited to support. So please proceed when you're ready. I will make sure that I am brief to give more time for those providing witness testimony today. So I'm pleased to present AB 1731, the California Healthy Food Procurement Program. This bill will help address critical gaps in California's food safety system by supporting both farm viability and access to healthy school foods. By strengthening our regional supply chain, providing farmers with stable markets, and improving student access to nutritious meals, this bill delivers a practical solution that aligns agriculture, public health, and climate priorities all in one. With me today is Kat Soltamorad, the Director of Food and Nutrition Services at Tahoe Truckee Unified School District, and Al Corchesney with Frog Hollow Farm, which if you haven't been there and had his delicious stone fruit, you should go. if that's allowed to say. Thank you. My name is Al Pershane. I'm a farmer at Frog Hollow Farm in Contra Costa County. As some of you may know, farming is not easy, and it's getting harder to stay in business these days because there's this expectation that food should be cheap, even though it's not cheap to grow it. This is leading over 7,000 farms lost in California for the past several years. Right now we have a real opportunity to help farmers like me stay in business by creating an on into the school lunch program As a law passed last year it requires schools to stop serving ultra foods anyway We have to make sure that local farms are the ones providing the fresh food schools will need. But the systems schools use is still set up for large national distributors bringing in food from out of state. through farms like mine, even though farms like mine are growing it nearby. That's what AB 1731 is aiming to fix. It creates a simple state-approved vendor program that connects schools with farmers like me and provides funding so schools can actually buy from California farms. When I first started trying to sell to schools about five or six years ago, I found the system extremely challenging to navigate, and I quickly realized I couldn't do it without help. This program is about building a system that actually works for farmers, one that's easier to navigate and designed to support California farmers, not out-of-state food being sold to schools. When I visited my local school and saw kids begin to eat my peaches, they were excited. They were joyful. The cafeteria staff told me that often the food that they're serving currently is not very appealing, and a lot of it gets thrown away. So how cheap is that food if you're paying for it twice? Who wants to buy it and then again to throw it away? AB 1731 helps make it possible for the children in our communities to eat fresh fruit and vegetables from local farms instead of a cup of canned peaches from far away. I respectfully ask for your support on AB 1731. I'm Kat Soltan-Mirad. Great job on my asking. A lot of vowels. I am the Director of Food and Nutrition at Tahoe Truckee Unified, although I'm here at personal capacity. I'm also a board member for Tahoe Food Hub. We're a small rural school district serving about 4,300 students on a good day. We're proud to be represented by Assemblymember Hadwick. And currently, our district is 32% of its students are eligible for free and reduced meals and rising. For the past 14 years, our district has made it a priority to source foods from local and California farmers. We started working with the Tahoe Food Hub in 2013. We were actually their first commercial customer. Since that time, we've worked with approximately 50 to 80 farmers locally sourcing healthy, nourishing ingredients for school breakfasts and lunches. Students say the flavor, texture, and overall quality of produce sourced from California tastes better. These ingredients are grown and served in season rather than stored, held for long periods of time, and then delivered to a school site. I mentor other food service directors in small and large districts throughout California. They are interested in buying from local farms as well. Unfortunately, far too many of them, this is a very challenging task. This is why I'm here to ask for your support of AB 1731. The approved vendor program and the accompanying procurement fund would unlock barriers that many schools face now. I'm lucky to have a thriving, robust food hub in our community. It gives us access to fresh produce that our chefs turn into scratch-cooked meals for students daily. Our district has been fortunate to receive the Department of Food and Ag Farm to School Incubator grant twice now to help offset the cost of shifting to a local sourcing model, but we know that this program is oversubscribed. Too many districts struggle to find farmers and vendors that are set up to work with schools and at times California foods are more expensive than out commodities This bill will give many more districts a chance to help farmers like Al provide healthy California foods to kids every single day Thank you for your testimony. We'll go to the public. If there's anyone in the public who wishes to come up to support or oppose the bill, please state your name and the organization you're with. Thank you. Thank you. Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members. I'm Lena Brooke with Fullwell, and we are proud co-sponsors of AB 1731. I'm also speaking on behalf of Californians Against Waste, as well as the Chef Anne Foundation, and urge your support today. Thank you. Hi, good afternoon. Leticia Benador with California Certified Organic Farmers. We're a proud sponsor of AB 1731 and in strong support. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair and members. Rebecca Marcus on behalf of the California Climate and Ag Network, the Tahoe Food Hub, and the California Food and Farming Network in strong support. Thank you. Hello, I'm Rebecca Krushane from Frog Hollow Farm, and I'm here to offer support for the bill. Thank you. Hi, Lael Gerhardt from Frog Hollow Farm. Also support the bill. Thank you. I'm Madeline Kershane from Frog Hollow Farm, and I support this bill. Thank you. Good afternoon. April Robinson with a voice for choice advocacy and strong support. Good afternoon. LeAngela Reed on behalf of the California School Nutrition Association. We will be taking a formal position at our board meeting this week, but we recommend the bill moving forward. Thank you. Great. Thank you all. at this time members of the community do you have any questions or comments Vice Chairwoman I just want to thank you for your leadership on this I love the bill I would love to be considered for a co-author and you picked great representation for witnesses as well thank you great thank you so much Assemblywoman oh sorry Assemblymember Gonzalez I missed you You can go ahead. It's okay. Thank you, Madam Chair. You know, I'm looking through this list of supports, and that's a significant number. And I was looking for the California Farm Bureau, which I don't see on here, but my assumption is they're pretty good with this. Hopefully, right? Yeah. They are. The comment that I have is, what took this so long? I don't understand. It's not a complex process. We're the breadbasket of the world. Why aren't we mandating we take care of the home team first before we go outside? So am I missing something? Well, really, it came from the school bond, the previous school bond. where we did the farm to school program. And through that process, what we found was it wasn't just about capital outlay, right, to do this, because we wanted them to use local. It was there was this administrative burden and procurement process that each district had with trying to go to each farm and creating separate contracts. So if we had not had the school bond that allowed farm to school, we wouldn even know that there was this type of issue And so when you know better you do better right And so now that we know it not just about giving schools capital resources to build their facilities to accommodate getting local produce versus just masks come in on a truck and drop it off It is really about how do you then reduce the administrative and bureaucratic burden as well. And so that's what this bill does. But this bill only exists because we did that first step and then learned that, oh, wait, there's what's the barrier? What's still the barrier? And then we saw that this was still a barrier. Yeah. You know, I just again. Sometimes we put our own barriers in front and I'm thankful that you're you're opening up the barriers. Moreover, I believe that every school across all of California should have California-grown food and access to that food, every school across the board. We need to take care of our farmers and take care of our kids by having good food. And our California-grown farmers, they do it the best in the world. So thank you for what you do. Thank you for your leadership. And I'd like to be a co-author. Thank you. Glad to have you. Assemblymember Alanis. Sure. Yes. So we actually have programs like this also in my district that are needing help as well. So I appreciate this also. I'll echo my colleagues here and also ask to be a co-author. I appreciate you. Glad to have you. Majority Leader Aguirre-Curry. You know, this is one of the foundational things. We've been here long enough to see why this took so long to get here. and I'm really glad we're here because I think it's going to be really sustainable because when we first started doing these farm to school things, we had a lot of things we had to clean up first and I think right now is the right time for this bill to go through because we have seen it grown. We see the program grow. We see people being able to invest in what we're doing now. So I want to thank you. I thank you for your patience. A lot of my farmers wanted to move this along faster but they also understood that we had certain steps If we just jumped in like this years ago, it would have never gone anywhere. So I want to just acknowledge the hard work that many of the people here in this room have done for years. And it's a nice extra step and look forward to seeing where we go with it to make sure our children are fed. Thank you very much. Great. Thank you. I just want to thank you, Assemblywoman Wilson, for your leadership on this issue. I think it's a very critical issue. I know that there's a number of school districts also in my district that are trying to pave the way. And Fresno Unified has been leading on this issue. And so I'm grateful that we're continuing to build on what we've learned, the lessons learned, and the challenges that do exist, especially for the small local farmers that are in our own local backyard and that haven't had the opportunity to really access these types of programs. And so I'm super excited about the future of building upon, you know, what the work that many have have done to get to this point. So thank you for that. I'd also love to be able to be a co-author of your bill. So with that, if you'd like to close, Assembly Member Wilson, the motion on the bill is to pass to Appropriations Committee. Thank you so much, Madam Vice. I mean, sorry, Madam Chair. AB 1731 establishes a targeted procurement fund and approved vendor system to connect California schools with local farmers, enabling the purchase of fresh, minimally processed, climate-smart foods, all without increasing costs. or administrative burdens on schools. With that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.
Great, so is there a motion and a second?
Yep, so there's, sorry, there is a motion and a second.
Madam Secretary, please call the roll.
On file item six, AB 1731, Wilson, Soria? Aye.
Oh, sorry, the motion was due pass to Appropriations Committee.
Soria, aye. Soria, aye.
Hadwick?
Hadwick, aye.
Aguirre-Curry?
Aye.
Aguirre-Curry, aye. Alanis?
Alanis, aye.
Connelly?
Aye.
Connelly, aye. Gonzalez?
Aye.
Gonzalez, aye. Irwin?
Irwin, aye.
Ransom?
Aye.
Ransom, aye. Great. Your bill has eight votes and it moves on to the next committee. Thank you so much for being here. And I'll let you know that Farmer Al from Frog Hollow has been sent, it will be sent to your office now that we voted on it. Jams and fruit from his farm. To all the committee members. Thank you, folks.
Yes, tell your staff.
It's being delivered to your offices. Make sure it's on.
I know, that's why I said it after.
Assemblywoman Ransom, file item 9, whenever you're ready, AB 1848. All right. So there is a motion and a second. So folks are eager to support your bill.
Heard. Okay. Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members. We all know that California is one of the most agriculturally productive regions on the planet, but the strength of our entire agriculture sector starts with just one seed. Every crop we depend on begins as a seed, as farmers stake their entire livelihoods on the knowledge that the package of seeds they buy will grow what it says in the bag. It's up to the Department of Food and Agriculture's seed law to make sure everyone from major industrial farms to home gardeners get the seeds that they pay for and nothing more. This program ensures that seeds are weed-free, contain the correct seeds, and that they will grow. But the funding to support that important work is drying up. Assembly Bill 1848 is a fix to that problem. This simply makes a moderate increase to the fees paid by seed manufacturers to fund this work. When the California Seeds Law was established back in 1973, we created a simple fee structure. Every company offering seeds for sale must pay $40 to CDFA. Since the initial fee was created 53 years ago, inflation, as we know, has increased, and the number of seed manufacturers has decreased. What that means is there are fewer companies that are able to pay a fee that's been significantly diluted by inflation, and the safety of the farmer fields is at stake because of it This bill will help keep our fields healthy our farmers happy and our kitchens full So with me today to testify is Dennis Albiani on behalf of the California Seed Association Thank you very much.
I appreciate the opportunity. As the Assemblymember mentioned, Dennis Albiani on behalf of the California Seed Association. We are sponsors and supporters of this bill. She did a great job laying it out. that the seed bill and act is actually a consumer protection act. Make sure that we do not, that the consumer gets what is on the label and what is in the package. And also we just had a bill on noxious weeds. Make sure there aren't weed seeds and those kind of things in the product itself. So they inspect, ag commissioners do that locally. And so this will help provide some additional funding for the program and then hopefully enforcement through the ag commissioners as well. I know there's some oversight and balance there. Any future increases up to it has a statutory cap, would be, has to go through the seat advisory board. They make the recommendation to the secretary. Then the secretary can act, take the recommendation or not, and act from there. So put in a balance there as well, and we appreciate your consideration of this bill. Thank you.
Great. Thank you so much. We'll now go to the public at this time. We'll open it up for public comment. Is there anyone in the room who wishes to register your support or opposition?
I have a few more. I have a couple that I'm authorized to speak for that weren't able to make it here. California Association, Wheat Growers, and the Pacific Coast Seed Association as well. That's support.
Thank you. Great. Thank you so much. Seeing that there's nobody else in the public, do we have members of the committee that have questions or comments?
Vice Chairwoman. I just want to thank you for bringing this bill forward. In the first assembly district, we provide a large percentage of the seats for California. And I don't think people realize how important the regulatory body over that is. So I just want to thank you. 1973 is a really long time to wait to increase your fees. I'm not usually for increasing fees, but this one is very much needed. And I was told the Seed Association actually wanted the fee increase. So I'm happy to support your bill today. Thank you.
Great. Thank you so much. Assemblywoman Ramson, would you like to close on your bill?
I'll just close by saying, again, this program ensures that seeds are weed-free, contain the correct seeds, and that the seeds will grow. I'm happy that it is supported by the seed growers, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.
Great. We have a motion and a second. and the recommendations do pass to approves. Madam Secretary, if you could please call the roll.
On file item 9, AB 1848, Ransom. Motion do pass to Appropriations Committee.
Soria?
Aye.
Soria, aye.
Hadwick?
Aye.
Hadwick, aye.
Aguirre-Curray?
Aye.
Aguirre-Curray, aye.
Alanis?
Aye.
Alanis, aye.
Connelly?
Aye.
Connelly aye Gonzalez Aye Gonzalez aye Irwin Aye Irwin Aye Ransom Aye Ransom Aye Great Your bill has eight votes and it out Thank you. So we will go down the, to do roll call on those folks that were absent on the bills that we heard today. Madam Secretary, if you want to go through them. On the consent calendar.
Padwick. Aye.
Hadwick, aye. Consent calendar is out, 8-0. On file item one, AB 1674, Ahrens. Hadwick?
No.
Hadwick not voting. The bill is out with five votes. It goes to housing. On file item five, AB 2264, Lackey, Hadwick?
Hadwick aye.
This bill has eight votes and it's out. And on file item four, I believe AB 2069, Krell, Hadwick?
Hadwick aye, Alanis? Aye.
Alanis aye, Ransom?
Aye.
Ransom aye. Great, that bill has eight votes and it's out. That is all on the calendar today. Thank you so much for joining us this afternoon. And the meeting is adjourned at 2.53.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you.