GO — 2026-06-24 (partial-shutdown)

Thank you. Thank you so much, Madam Chair, members, and thank you to my colleague, Assemblymember Lee, for allowing me to go first. Today I'm here to present AB 458, which is known as the Firearm Procurement Act. And as you know, Madam Chair, I've been involved in the gun violence prevention movement for quite some time. And in 2023, when a report came out by the Brady campaign showing that 90 law enforcement agencies up and down the state of California had been contracting with gun dealers that had violated federal gun laws. I actually did something about it at the Board of Supervisors when I sat on the board in San Francisco, and we passed a law there to make certain that our law enforcement agencies weren't contracting with bad actors because we know taxpayer funds going towards bad actors is not good for our communities. Now, here every year in the state of California, we spend millions of taxpayer dollars to purchase firearms, ammunition, and firearm accessories for our various state law enforcement agencies and departments. However, the state does not require law enforcement agencies to vet these firearm vendors or even ensure that they comply with local, state, and federal laws meant to protect the public. And in absence of such a vetting system, the state has purchased firearms, ammunition, and these accessories from irresponsible vendors who have failed to perform things like background checks on all gun bills, selling to straw purchasers, losing paperwork that's critical to law enforcement investigations, and numerous other violations. The law enforcement agencies have unknowingly done this because there's been nothing in the place to really vet these vendors. This bill will task the Department of General Services in consultation with the Department of Justice to develop model guidelines for departments, boards, and commissions of the state when they're procuring these firearms, ammunition, and accessories. When our state law enforcement agents are buying weapons and ammunition from dealers, we need measures in place to ensure they are not buying these items from irresponsible dealers. It's that simple. Today with me I have Jonathan Feldman with the Police Chiefs Association and Dylan Hoffman on behalf of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. When you're ready, you can commence.

Thank you, Chair and members. I be brief First I want to thank the author for her continuing work in this space around gun violence really appreciate all the measures that she put forward in the last year or so As stated it is important that taxpayer dollars go to responsible vendors especially when we're talking about firearms. And unfortunately, identifying responsible vendors hasn't been as easy as you'd think. So to the extent that Assembly Bill 458 actually helps use the state powers to identify who those vendors are will help inform local law enforcement as well. The reality is illegal gun trafficking remains a significant problem. Almost 60,000 firearms have been recovered related to crimes, demonstrating a continued flow of illegal firearms into our streets. And we don't have to talk about the damage that these firearms cause, everything from gang violence, domestic violence, homicides, robberies, assaults. We've made progress, but we need to do more. We thank the author one last time for our bill and respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Good morning, Madam Chair, members. Dylan Elliott here today on behalf of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in strong support of Assembly Bill 458. In an interest of just keeping my testimony brief as well, I think the author and Mr. Feldman have done an excellent job of laying out the challenge here. AB 458 aims to resolve that by directing the Department of General Services in consultation with the Department of Justice to develop model procedure guidelines so that state agencies are only purchasing from responsible law-abiding vendors, something that we see as a straightforward, common-sense measure consistent with the values of our state. It's for these reasons that the San Francisco Board of Supervisors is proud to support AB 458 and ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you, Assemblymember, for bringing this forward. Are we to believe that our agencies within the state of California are not vetting some of their vendors properly? And that's why the bill? Are we finding that some of the agencies that are working with some of these vendors have had problems in the past? because we have to have a good handle on everything we purchase, no doubt. Is that the problem that's erupted?

Okay, so they would have a checklist for their vetting process is what we're looking for and have more oversight.

I think it's a good bill. I'll move it when it's appropriate. Thank you.

Assembly member, I'm sorry, Senator Viadalia's vice chair. I understand what the author is trying to accomplish on this. Of course, we want, you know, any state agency to know that the company that they're hiring to purchase anything from is operating within state and federal law. I having a little challenge understanding exactly how the scoring system is going to work and how a dealer legal law abiding arms dealer or business is going to be able to kind of understand how to report their own scoring and how that going to be administered Through the chair Senator So the initial version of this bill explicitly listed procurement guidelines

So has there been conversations with them? I mean, do they this needs to happen through legislative policy or is it something they already have the power to do?

Okay, any other interest? So first of all, just thank you. I think it's very telling that we have before us public safety support and sponsors. So I'd like to defer to our public safety agencies. It is important if there is any indication that we are contracting with bad actors, as you said, and sometimes unintended. However, creating guidelines that are going to be clear and in consultation with all our police officers and, again, all the public safety officers, I think it's important. And would you like to close?

I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you. At this point, we're going to have to hold the row open for absent members until we can establish a quorum. and we'll let you know. Thank you so much. We will now move back to item number one, AB 1729 by Assemblymember Lee. I would like to invite his witnesses to join us in the front. Okay, anybody else? Opposition? Okay, we will now move forward whenever you're ready. Assemblymember Lee, you may begin. Thank you. Well, good morning, Madam Chair and Senators. arise to present AB 1729 to update the telework policy for state agencies. This policy has not been amended or updated for over 30 years and does not reflect the technological opportunities or workplace realities of 2026. According to the state auditor report last year, if state workers teleworked three or more days weekly, the state could reduce office space by roughly 30 percent and save upwards of $225 million annually. Telework and hybrid schedules are the norm in many state departments, and return to the office requires planning. And according to the Sacramento Bee's own reporting, and continuous reporting, more than 70 state offices could not accommodate state workers ahead of Governor's RTO order for July of 2025. The RTO order did not acknowledge realities about office space, office leases, office equipment, or parking. The RTO order did not acknowledge employees that have been hired as remote workers and may not be able to relocate, given especially that we have been hiring folks for the last six years under these new innovative policies. And the RTO order coming up this year, basically a week, does not appear to be any better planned. And how do we know all this? Because the state auditor's report found that over two-thirds of state departments reported that productivity was improved or unchanged when employees were teleworking three or more days a week. And approximately three of local governments still offer hybrid schedules And if you look at Indeed the following companies still offer remote jobs like Amazon Cisco Humana Salesforce UnitedHealth Group or Wells Fargo Remote and hybrid workplaces are becoming the standard for a wide range of jobs. So this bill just updates state telework policy to require state departments to have a written, thought-out telework policy when a department wants to implement a return to the office plan. The department simply needs to identify the operational needs to spend the time and money to do so. And from 2020 to 2024, the state proudly displayed a dashboard of the savings and benefits of telework, though that was removed in 2024. The bill would bring that dashboard back so the public can see whether telework is working for the state. With me in support today are Lee Kennedy, representing the Work-Life Law, and Ted Toppin, who is representing the Professional Engineers in California Government and the Association of California State Supervisors. Thank you. As soon as you're ready, you may begin. Each one of you will have two minutes. Good morning, Madam Chair and members. My name is Leigh Kennedy from the Center for Work-Life Law at UC Law SF, where I run a legal helpline supporting thousands of pregnant workers and family caregivers. One-size-fits-all return-to-office mandates drive women from the workforce. Remote work, where feasible, isn't a convenience. It is a gender justice imperative. Between January and June of 2025, over 200,000 women left the U.S. workforce while 44,000 men joined it. A study of 3 million workers found female employees left their jobs at nearly three times the rate of male colleagues following return to office mandates. Our helpline confirms this. California state employees tell us they face an impossible choice, either keep their job or care for their family and their health. I've spoken with a woman who had done her job remotely for five years who was suddenly unable to coordinate going to work and having to choose between her work and her family. I've spoken with a man who has a child with an adult child, excuse me, with a traumatic brain injury who found himself choosing between his job that he had held for seven years or caring for his daughter. And strikingly, in most cases, the direct supervisor has no objection to the employees working remotely. The decision is simply out of their hands due to blanket mandates. This bill's transparency provisions would require that restrictions on flexibility be grounded in documented operational need, not blanket policy. Without it, California will lose women, caregivers, and people with disabilities from public service. And for these reasons, I urge your aye vote on AB 1729. Thank you. Go ahead. Good morning, Madam Chair and members. Ted Toppin for the Association of California State Supervisors, the Professional Engineers in California Government. Sponsors of the bill, thank you to Mr. Lee for taking on AB 1729. I want to build on a couple of things he talked about, the modernization of the workplace. And obviously, it was hastened by the pandemic. But for six years, state employees have delivered using hybrid telework. And its operational benefits are immense. He talked about the cost, $225 million annually that could be saved. That is money that could be sent. I mean, our budget problems are not getting any easier. That's money that could be spent on kids, child care, schools, health care, and not on office space. It is not necessary. He talked about whether telework delivers for taxpayers. It absolutely does. The administration's own department leaders in the state auditor report said that it delivered at higher or equal levels to pre-pandemic levels. And then we talk about our other important operational objectives as a state. climate change the goal is zero equal emissions by 2045 we can't do that only with clean energy. We're going to need telework for state employees and others to meet that if it's going to be an affordable transition. And then we talk about vehicles mild traveled. The state's policy is to reduce it by 30 percent by 2045. You can't do that with just transit and active transportation programs. You're going to have to take cars off the road, and telework is the easiest way to do that without passing on costs to Californians. So from our perspective, it's pretty simple. Save money, deliver services efficiently or more efficiently, and meet our climate change and vehicle miles traveled goals. That is the way – that's a win-win for state government and state operations, not just state employees but everybody who is a stakeholder in this state. We would urge your aye vote today. Thank you. Thank you. I would like to invite anyone wishing to speak in opposition of this bill to join us up front. Okay, we don't have anyone leading witness in opposition, but I will invite all those wishing to state your name and your position to come up to the microphone. Again, please just state your name and your position. Thank you. Good morning. Aaliyah Griffin with the American Federation of State and County Municipal Employees, proud co-sponsor of this bill and in support. Thank you. Anika Walls. I'm a disability evaluation analyst with the State of California Department of Social Services and the proud president of SEIU Local 1000, representing 100,000 state employees, requesting an aye vote. Thank you. Madam Chair and members, Matt Broad here on behalf of CASE, proud co-sponsors of the bill, and urge your aye vote. Thank you. Thank you. Morning, Chair and members. Elmer Lizardo with the California Federation of Labor Unions in support. Anke Schenning with CAPT UAW Local 1115, state scientist in support, as well as on behalf of UAW Region 6. Thank you. Good morning. My name is Julia Rose Pacheco. I work as a tax technician with the Franchise Tax Board. I am here in support of this bill, and I kindly implore you to vote aye. Good morning. My name is Hannah Hendrickson. I'm an office technician in the California Department of Aging. I support this bill and I respectfully request your aye vote. Thank you. My name is Christine Lucky-Acamine, and I am a legislative analyst with the Employment Development Department, and I strongly urge you to support this bill, and so do all my other coworkers in SoCal. Thank you. Good morning. My name is Skyler Waldeck-Meyers. I'm a fiscal analyst for the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, and I respectfully ask you to vote aye on this bill. Thank you. Good morning. My name is Talene Gazarian. I'm president of CASE, an attorney with the Department of Health Care Services. In the interest of time, I'll ask my BU2 colleagues that are here today to stand up. Collectively, we urge you all to vote aye for AB 1729. Thank you. Good morning. Francesca Januari. I'm an attorney with the Department of Social Services, and I strongly urge you to vote aye on this bill. Thank you. Good morning, Alyssa Carroll with the California Department of Social Services. I'm an attorney and I am in support of 1729 and encourage you to vote aye on this today. Simon Hyatt elected member representative of the California Working Families Party in strong support on behalf of the statewide steering committee of California WFP Thank you Thank you Senator Lee Hi good morning I Jackie Douglas and I an environmental scientist with CalRecycle and a proud CAPS UAW member. I stand in support of this bill and urge an eye vote. Thank you. Brian Leon Guerrero, Information Technology Specialist, one with EDD, and a member of SEIU Lugan 1000, urge an eye vote. Thank you. Good morning. My name is Marcus Worthington. I'm an enforcement attorney for the California Department of Social Services. I'm asking for your aye vote. Thank you. Good morning. I'm Adam Bentley, an attorney with the Department of Social Services, and I strongly urge you to vote aye on this bill. Good morning. I'm Justin Denton with the California Department of Social Services, and I'm asking you to vote aye on this bill. Good morning. I'm Sarah Lynn Adkins. I'm an attorney for the Department of Social Services, respectfully asking you to vote aye. Good morning. My name is Lauren Russo, and I'm an attorney with the California Department of Social Services, and I am here in support of this bill. Thank you. Good morning. My name is Damian Fan. I work for the Department of Housing and Community Development. I would just like to urge your support for this bill as well. Thank you. Okay, last opportunity. Anyone else wishing to state their supported opposition, please step up to the mic. All right, seeing no interest, I will now turn it over to the members of this committee, Senator Archuleta. Thank you, Assemblymember, for presenting the bill. Obviously, the new term is telework, and obviously telework has brought efficiency. It brought savings to the state of California, and it's also brought peace of mind to so many of the state workers that rely on their families, that tranquility, to be able to feel good about what they're doing and accomplish their mission at the same time. So I think that this bill is overdue. And I think that as we see in the audience, everyone in support, and I too am in support. So I move it at the appropriate time. Anybody else wishing to speak on it? All right. Well, first of all, thank you to everyone that came out. I know I recognize how difficult it is to get here to the Capitol with all those with babies out there. Thank you for making the trip. I know babies can be fuzzy and so thank you for your presence. And to all the workers for coming up here and stating your perspective. It's always important that we hear from workers and especially those impacted by this bill. So I want to say thank you to all of you that came and stated your position. But I also want to make just clarifying statements here. I know that telecommunication, I'm sorry, telework is more and more being recognized in our state in not only private industries but in the state. And I want to just also make very clear that this bill does fall under the DILS Act. And I just want to make clarification that this bill does not amend the act or alter existing collective bargaining processes. I just wanted to make sure that we are aware of that. And, again, thank you for your testimony and thank you for bringing this forward. Would you like to close? Yes, I would like to thank the senator for collaboration on this bill and for the senators, of course, who spoke in support as well. This is just one of those modern realities where as we are now talking about affordability time and time again this is one of those things that is real quality of life and affordability for our state employees Cutting down that one hour or more commute time on the end of the day or beginning of the day is real savings of carbon emissions real savings of money and real savings of peace of mind with their family That is real, real savings and affordability that is important. But I think also as we are approaching a week before the governor's RTO order is supposed to take place, and hopefully he will see light and change his mind again, perhaps before or maybe a little bit after. as he did last year, I think it is important that we recognize that these are the – we have the great privilege and joy of seeing so many faces of our state employees that make our ambitions come true. You know, when we're in budget season and we're doing bills, we talk about these departments and big line items, but we don't often get to see the faces and the names of people that execute day in, day out for our ambitions to get everyone housed, everyone health care. So it's really a great privilege to be working on this bill with so many state employees. And when the time comes, I respectfully ask for your aye vote at the time. Thank you. Thank you, Assemblymember. Once again, we don't have a quorum, so we're going to have to place this item on call until we can establish a quorum. Thank you. Thank you very much. At this point, we're going to have to move over to Item 8. We don't see other. We don't see any other author. The next one I see is Assemblymember Pacheco on Item 8, AB 1754. so I would like to invite you to join me and your witness up front thank you I was afraid you hadn't seen me love to see you on this side of the house so anybody else speaking in opposition can also join us up here alright we will now begin when you're ready thank you and good morning Madam Chair and Senators. Today I'm here to present AB 1754 which will provide voters and lawmakers with information about whether bond funds are being spent as intended and achieving their desired outcomes. AB 1754 requires succinct tracking and reporting on bond funded programs after the programs are completed. Improved tracking will strengthen public trust and provide lawmakers with data to inform and improve future bond measures and programs. Current law requires some bond accounting and reporting primarily to prevent fraud, but does not require reporting on whether bond-funded programs achieve their intended goals. This gap in accountability has been identified for years. In 2014, the Legislative Analyst's Office highlighted the need for departments to collect data in a way that allows the legislature and the public to hold departments accountable for bond spending and outcomes. In 2020, a California Natural Resources Agency white paper reviewing its own bond investments found that most projects sampled lacked the monitoring and evaluation systems needed for succinct tracking. According to the LAO in 2024, California pays about $6 billion each year from the General fund to pay bonds, a major ongoing cost during a difficult budget period. As California becomes increasingly reliant on bonds to fund a variety of state and local needs, accountability and voter trust are more crucial than ever. Because bonds create financial obligations for future generations, voters want to be confident that these obligations provide measurable public benefits. Since AB 1754 introduction the bill has been amended to clarify the goals of reporting and limit the administrative burden for reporting agencies An exemption from the Administrative Procedure Act has also been added to streamline the implementation and avoid delays in the distribution of funds. AB 1754 is a straightforward transparency and accountability measure. The bill ensures that when voters approve bonds, we can demonstrate the results of those investments and also improve future programs. And with me today to testify is Kim Stone on behalf of Elevate California, who can testify and answer any technical questions. So I will go ahead and hand it over to her. You will have two minutes. You may proceed. Thank you. Good morning, Chair and members, and thank you very much to the author. Kim Stone of Stone Advocacy on behalf of Elevate California. Elevate California is a nonpartisan, proactive statewide organization working to make our state government more responsive and results driven. We support policies that improve the quality of life for all Californians through accountability, innovation and practical solutions to the state's biggest challenges. We're the proud sponsor of AB 1754 and pleased to work with Assemblymember Pacheco, who's done a lot in terms of good government and accountability legislation. This bill requires executive summary type outcomes reporting for state general obligation bonds, for future state general obligation bonds. You, we, the state of California, is increasingly reliant on bond funding for crucial projects in infrastructure. We currently spend between 3 and 6 percent of general fund dollars servicing bond debt, six to eight billion dollars annually. In order to maintain voter trust and confidence and in order to give agency and department heads the information and tracking data that they need about how the bond is doing, this bill requires future bonds to, one, have the bond state its own goals and objectives, have the administering state agencies provide an annual report on the Internet on how they're doing towards meeting those objectives. Thanks in part to feedback from the opposition, the author amended the bill to clarify that what we're talking about is broad, executive summary, one-page type overview, not overly burdensome reporting. Thanks also to opposition concerns, the author amended the bill to clarify that none of this reporting would be required to go through the Administrative Procedures Act. I do want to note nothing in the bill imposes any new reporting requirements on cities, counties, local governments, or water agencies. The Urban Institute, Elevate, and other good government organizations urge outcomes-based reporting and transparency to improve state governance. At least six other states, Colorado, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Mexico, Oregon, and Utah, require outcomes-based reporting for their entire budgets, not just bonds. This is a modest requirement that will provide helpful guidance and information to both policymakers and voters. We urge your aye vote. Thank you. You will also have two minutes. You may proceed. Good morning, Chair and members. My name is Charles Delgado, legislative advocate for the California State Association of Counties, speaking on behalf of California's 58 counties with a position of oppose unless amended on AB 1754. Before I begin, I'd like to thank the author and the sponsor for meeting with CSAC and other stakeholders and for the recent amendment adding an Administrative Procedure Act exemption to the bill's provisions. While we've made progress on 1754, there's still work to do. CSAC supports efforts to ensure that public funds are spent wisely Local governments share in the author's mission to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars and to make certain that voter-approved bond funding is used for quality projects that benefit Californians. But in seeking to establish accountability, we must ensure that we do not unintentionally create additional layers of bureaucracy with little benefit to the public that we all serve. The legislature is currently addressing just such an issue. The recently enacted Proposition 4, a $10 billion natural resources, wildfire prevention, drinking water, and climate resilience bond, contained language to unintentionally subjected state agencies and therefore project proponents to a heightened regulatory burden under the Administrative Procedure Act. After seeing that these provisions could delay urgent disaster preparedness, water, and climate projects for years, the legislature has acted to exempt prior year Prop 4 allocations from APA and is currently advancing the bipartisan AB 35 to ensure that the rest of the Prop 4 dollars are awarded expeditiously. As well-intentioned as it may be, AB 1754 would create similar barriers to all future bond funds across every significant policy area. Projects to create affordable housing, protect veterans, invest in health infrastructure, build new transportation projects, improve schools, construct more water storage, and many, many other works to benefit Californians, will be subject to new layers of administrative review for both state agencies and the builders who construct these valuable projects. AB 1754 would inefficiently task hundreds of agencies with complex and duplicative new reporting requirements. It would invite much more litigation, challenging each step of the bond funding process, beginning with the placement of bond measures on the ballot. It would divert public funds meant for public projects to state regulatory staff and attorneys. It would delay essential projects at a time where even brief delays expose builders to the punishing effects of inflation, driving up costs substantially. And unfortunately, it would be an additional hurdle to disadvantaged communities who already experience barriers to the project application process in the form of intensive project development, application, and compliance requirements. We have offered amendments to this bill beyond what's already been taken that would address the issues identified above. We need you to wrap it up. Okay. I appreciate this committee's time. I urge your no vote. Thank you. Thank you. I would now invite anyone from the public wishing to state your support for this bill. Please state your name, your affiliation. Okay. Seeing none, I would like to now invite the opposition to join us and do the same. Please just state your name and your position. Julia Hall with the Association of California Water Agencies. Just want to align our comments with our colleague from CSAC. Thank you. Thank you. Good morning, Eric. Will, on behalf of Rural County Representatives of California, also aligned with CSAC. Thank you very much. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak in support and opposition? Okay, I will now bring it over to our colleagues on the dais, Senator Bob Archuleta. Yeah, thank you, Assemblymember, for bringing this forward. The bond programs that we hear about constantly are for the betterment of the state of California. California, housing, veterans, you name it, it's out there. So disclosure equals trust. You know, there was an old saying that, you know, a rumor could just make everything fall apart. But the fact is that the data that would be shown in a report indicates that trust by the community, trust by the state, all of us that have a bond on the table is for the betterment of the state of California and all the agencies. So I think disclosure in business brings on trust. And the truth shall prevail. If it's a good bond, the voters will agree. If there an issues they come back into the boardroom I guess we call it and redo it and come back again But the voters will be able to realize what going on So I agree with the premise. I agree with the fact that truth is the right way to go. So I'll move the bill at the appropriate time. Thank you, Senator. Anybody else wishing to speak? No? All right. Well, thank you. Well, first of all, I just want to say I recognize and I'm sensitive to the water agencies and their concerns, but I do want to thank you. You've taken a lot of amendments based on the opposition, and I always hope that authors want to collaborate and get to a good place. But, you know, I will align my comments with Senator Archuleta. This bill really is about accountability and making sure that we're good stewards of public funds if we're putting it out for a vote. and we tell taxpayers that this money is intended to be used in a certain way. I think it's important that we have measurable goals and that we can see these reports and make sure that, again, that we're transparent. And I think that's what our residents, community, and Californians deserve. So thank you for bringing this forward. And definitely want to make sure that we have measurable outcomes where we can be proud of and make sure that we learn from that data. So with that, would you like to close? Yes, thank you, and thank you, Madam Chair and Senators, for allowing me to present on this bill. We have taken a number of amendments, and my door is always open to the opposition, and if we need to have continued conversations, we will. We're always willing to take any amendments to help get opposition to neutral, so I appreciate you coming here, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you, Assemblywoman. We're going to have to leave the roll open for absent members, and first establish a quorum, but thank you. We're now going to move over to item number 10. I see Assemblymember Rommels in the audience. He has two bills. We're going to start with item number 10, AB 1841. So I'd like to invite your proponents to join us. Any opposition may also join in the front. When you're ready, you may begin. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you so much. I'm here to present AB 1841 State Holiday for Native American People. California is home to more Native Americans than any other state in the nation, each with their own unique histories and culture. However, when the state of California was created in 1850, the mentality towards the state's first people was one that brought atrocities towards the California Indian people that moved forward with a bounty on California's Indian people that was paid for by taxpayers' dollars for killing Indian people here in the state of California and taking that land. And it was reimbursed by taxpayers' dollars, then reimbursed by the federal government. That type of treatment towards California's first people was something that the first legislature, the state, moved forward in, and how they look towards California Indian people. However, in 2026, we're in a different age. A diversity shows itself in the state legislature. And today we come together to move forward that beyond the history that there is a right place to honor this state first people with a paid holiday To overcome the violence that has impacted California first people not only from 1850 but all the way up until we at today even with the missing and murdered indigenous women's crisis that continues to plague the state. It's time that the state continues to move forward and to recognize and acknowledge and atone for a past that has had horrific treatment towards California's first people, a trauma that still exists today. By honoring California's first people with a paid holiday, we start to move the pendulum to where it is today to honor people, to see the resiliency that in spite, in spite of those atrocities, in spite of those killing machines that went into the state of California to shoot and kill Indian people, the resiliency of our ancestors still flows through who we are today as California Indian people, and that their voices are still crying out from the state of California, from the grounds. Tell them truly what happened to California Indian people. Tell them truly about the history and the culture of our people. It's time that we hear those voices. It's time that we do move forward on a paid holiday for California's first people. And with me today to testify on this bill is Calvin Hedrick on behalf of the California Native American Vote Project and Anika Walls, President of Service Employees International Union Local 1000. When you're ready, you may proceed. You will have both two minutes. All right. Good morning, Chair and members. My name is Annika Walls, and I'm a state worker and proud president of SCIU Local 1000 here today in support of AB 1841. Local 1000 is California's largest state employee union, and we represent nearly 100,000 employees across 10 different bargaining units who work over 1,400 work sites. I'm proud that Local 1000 has a Native American committee which strives to increase awareness of issues affecting our Indigenous Union siblings in the workplaces and in the communities of which they live. The struggle of California's first people is the foundation of every fight for fair wages, safety, and dignity on the job. Native American Day is a celebration of the resilience of California's first people, their struggle for survival, and serves as a reminder to all that there is still more work to be done to help heal some of those scars of violence and the discrimination that many tribes bear to this day. AB 1841 elevates the importance of this historic day, not just for Native people, but for all Californians. For these reasons, we support this legislation, are grateful to Assemblymember Ramos for his continued leadership on this issue, and urge an aye vote. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you. I would like to invite anyone wishing to speak in opposition of this bill to join us. Oh, I'm so sorry. Go ahead. My apologies. Hello, thank you, Madam Chair. Is this on? Thank you. Hazasaka, good morning. Good morning, Chair and committee members. My name is Calvin Hedrick, and I am the – sorry, I'm the Director of Policy Training and Tribal Relations for the California Native Vote Project. Is that on? Okay. Sorry about that. And we are the proud sponsor of 1841 authored by Assemblymember Ramos And thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of this important measure California has recognized the importance of honoring communities and histories through observances such as Juneteenth Lunar New Year and Genocide Remembrance Day These days create an opportunity for education, reflection, and understanding. Just last week, we celebrated Juneteenth, and my family talked about its history and significance. and my children gained a deeper understanding of its meaning. That conversation happened because California chose to recognize that day. Holidays like Juneteenth create opportunities for education, reflection, and understanding across generations. And Native American communities deserve that same opportunity. As the First Peoples of California, Native peoples have lived on these lands since time immemorial, yet our histories are often overlooked, our contributions minimized, and our stories left untold. AB 1841 helps address that by elevating California Native American Day and creating greater recognition for Native peoples, cultures, and histories. At the California Native Vote Project, I've worked with Native youth across the state, and we see firsthand how meaningful recognition can be. When young people see their communities acknowledged and respected, it reinforces that they belong, that their history matters, and that their future matters. AB 1841 is about more than a holiday. It's about education. It's about visibility. It's about ensuring that Californians have the opportunity to learn about the first people of the state and the enduring contributions Native communities continue to make today. We are grateful to Assemblymember Ramos and his leadership and commitment to Native communities, and we respectfully ask for your support on AB 1841. Thank you. So now I would like to invite anyone wishing to speak in opposition of the bill to please join us. Okay, seeing no interest, I would like to invite members of the committee, Senator Archuleta. Good. Thank you, Assemblymember, for bringing the bill forward. Your work in the Native American community is just amazing. Since the day I met you, you've been carrying that flag. And I acknowledge your witnesses for the work and leadership they have. in supporting the plight that the Native Americans have had for years upon years. But we have to realize that everything we do, we have to analyze it. Well, is there enough money? Yes, there is. Sufficient funds do exist for the state of California to allow this bill to happen. That is a very, very important factor. So can we afford it? Yes, we can. But we cannot afford to let the day go by without recognizing California's first people and their sacrifice. This is a great way, as one of your witnesses mentioned, because education to our children is so vital. You cannot talk about California unless you talk about discovering California and how it was done by killing Native Americans, how it was done by pushing them from one end of California to the other, establishing the reservations eventually that happened. But that history must be shown to everyone. And I think that by allowing this bill, AB 1841, to open the doors to education, knowledge, respect, and the dignity that the Native Americans deserve. And it's ironic that the bill is 1841. in 1841 California was pushing its way to becoming a state the union and has not fought yet as a divided union when it was over, 1865. But here it is, the history. It's got to be. If California is going to boast about its history, it's going to boast about being the fourth largest economy in the world, it's got to boast about its heritage, its people, and obviously California's first people. So with that, I'm honored to move the bill when at the appropriate time. Thank you so much. Thank you. I'm going to just take a little pause. I think I spoke too quickly. There was a few members of the audience that wanted to state either their position. Let's start with me, too, in support. Appreciate it. Thank you, Chair Elmer Lizardo with the California Federation of Labor Unions in proud support. Thank you. Madam Chair, members, James Jack on behalf of the Sant'Anez Band of Chumash Indians in support. Thank you. Thank you. Good morning, committee members. My name is Crystal Coles. I'm a state worker, and I'm also with SEIU Local 1000 in strong support. Thank you. Good morning. Chris Lindstrom, Executive Officer of the California Tribal Business Alliance, in support. Good morning. Cesar Gonzalez-Garcia with the California Rural Indian Health Board, in support. Thank you. Good morning. Skylar Waldek-Meyers with the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, and urging your support. Thank you. Good morning, Omega Bor-Gonzalez, Government Affairs Director for SEIU Local 1000, representing over 100,000 state workers throughout the state of California, standing in strong support. Good morning, Daniel Schurl, Legislative Advocate with SEIU Local 1000 in support. Madam Chair and Members, Frank Molina on behalf of Yahavia, the town of San Manuel Nation and the Shingle Springs Band of Milwaukee Indians in strong support. Good morning, Chair, members of the board. Kenny Kahn, the chairman of the San Inez Band of Chumash Indians in support. Thank you. Thank you. I will give the same courtesy to the opposition. Anyone wishing to speak in opposition, please come up to the mic. All right. Our apologies. We have so many committee hearings that we're trying to expedite a little, but thank you for your testimony. I'm sorry, anybody else wishing to speak on this dais? I know we took care of Mr. Archuleta. Okay, seeing no other interests. Well, first of all, thank you, Mr. Ramos. You know, I'm always honored to join your causes. I know we've done work on missing and murdered indigenous women and my work with domestic violence and human trafficking and everything else. You've been quite, you know, just a wonderful addition to the legislative body. Yes, I believe the first Native American to serve on this body. And so also wanted to highlight everything that you said. I've taught California history for 10 years, in particular Native American history. So I recognize the importance that we're trying to do here. And I don't think we're going to, you know, make right what has been done to your people today. And I think we'll spend a whole lifetime trying to ensure that we make right what we did wrong in our history. And so I just want to say thank you. And again, to all those who are, you know, either related to someone that has dealt with atrocities, we know that trauma is generational. And with that, I'd like to be added as a co-author. And again thank you so much for your work Would you like to close Well thank you so much Senator Chair Rubio and thank you for offering to be a co on the bill It means a lot Certainly we're here today in 2026, and this legislature has the opportunity to create a paid holiday, reversing that mentality that has plagued this state from the creation. It's time that we break that mentality and honor California's first people. I ask for your aye vote when the time is appropriate. Thank you. Once again, I'd like to just leave it open for absent members. We don't have a quorum, so we're going to have to wait until everyone's here. But we are going to move over to AB 2115, also by Assemblymember Ramos. And Mr. Ramos, I'd like to invite your witnesses in support and those in opposition to come and join us. in the front thank you good to see you again and when you're ready Mr. Ramos you may begin well thank you so much again Madam Chair and and Senators AB 2115 represents an official apology from the state of California to California's first people acknowledging the state's legislature's role in historic injustices and atrocities committed against the state's native communities and affirming its commitment to healing and reconciliation. The bill also serves as an apology from the state courts for their participation and failure to prevent the systematic discrimination and violence experienced by California's First People. California joined the Union in 1850, and the state's legislature has yet to officially apologize for its own role in the early wars and massacres waged against California Native American people. In 1851, California's first governor, Peter Burnett, addressed the legislature, where he openly declared a war against California's first people. That war was paid for using taxpayers' dollars to eliminate the Native American people of this land. Legislation was enacted to destroy tribal nations all throughout the state, wiping out entire communities and condemning generations to a future marked by profound pain and suffering that still exists today. In 1852, the legislature deliberately voted to oppose the ratification of 18 treaties negotiated between the United States government and California tribes, agreements that would have secured tribal homelands and guaranteed basic rights and protection to many Native American people. In 1860, members of a select committee investigated the Mendocino Wars and called for the outright takeover of tribal affairs by the state government and called for the enslavement of remaining Native Americans by the so-called responsible citizens. This history of violence against California's first people created deep and lasting trauma that continues to this day and affects Native American communities across our state. Although the governor issued an apology on behalf of the state in 2019 this body this institution which enacted laws that facilitated the removal and destruction of Native communities has never issued its own apology for its direct role in these injustices While we cannot undo the wrongs of the past, the state has a responsibility to confront it with honesty and pave the way for the true account of history to be told. Highlighting the resiliency of California's first people is a step in the right direction. Madam Chair and members, I recognize that this legislature has made meaningful progress in addressing historic inequities, but without an official acknowledgement of wrongdoing and a formal apology from this body, we risk becoming complacent in silence that has persisted for more than 175 years. It's also a commitment to build a better and more just future for all Native people who call this state home. The bill further requests that a plaque commemorating this apology be created and installed at the Capitol. Joining me today is Chairman Kenneth Kahn of the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians to provide testimony on the importance of this apology. Welcome. You'll have two minutes. Good to see you. Two minutes. You may proceed. Chair Rubio and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify. My name is Kenneth Kahn, and I am the Tribal Chairman for the San Ynez Band of Chumash Indians. I appear here today on behalf of my tribe in strong support of AB 2115, authored by Assemblyman James Ramos. AB 2115 represents a necessary and overdue acknowledgement by the California legislature in its role in historical mistreatment of California Native Americans. Since California's admission to the Union in 1850, the state enacted and enforced laws that enabled violence against tribal communities, stripped Native peoples of basic civil protections, and made the survival of many tribes extraordinarily difficult. For tribes like the Chumash, whose ancestral homelands span the Central Coast, these policies were not abstract or distant. They resulted in dispossession from traditional lands, the erosion of cultural practices, and generational trauma that continues to affect our people today. These harms were the direct result of state-sanctioned policies adopted and maintained during California's early history. In 2019, Governor Newsom took an important step by issuing an apology on behalf of the executive branch and establishing the Truth and Healing Council. But as AB 2115 correctly recognizes, the violence and discrimination inflicted upon Native communities were not confined to executive action alone. The legislature itself promoted and permitted policies that cause profound and lasting harm. AB 2115 acknowledges the truth, the truth. by issuing a formal legislative apology and memorializing it with a plaque in the state capitol. This bill affirms responsibility, promotes healing, and signals that California is prepared to engage in honest, respectful government-to-government relationships with tribal nations. This acknowledgement is not only about the past. It lays the foundation for a stronger partnership today in areas like economic development, environmental stewardship, and cultural preservation. The impacts of those policies are not confined to history books. They are reflected in lived experiences of our elders and the challenges still faced by our communities today At a time when California is working more closely than ever with tribal governments it both appropriate and necessary that the legislature formally recognizes its role in this history For the Sandiness Band of Chumash Indians and for tribes across California, reconciliation must begin with acknowledgement, and it must be affirmed by all branches of government. We respectfully urge your yes vote on AB 2115. Thank you. Kakinash. Thank you for your testimony. I would like to invite anyone wishing to speak as lead opposition to join us. Okay, we don't have a lead. Now I'll go to all those wishing to state your name and your support for this bill to join us in the mic. Again, please just state your name affiliation. Thank you. Chris Lindstrom, California Tribal Business Alliance in support of AB 2115. Thank you. Thank you. Frank Molina on behalf of Yahavitam of San Manuel Nation and the Shingles Springs Band of Miwaka and Yusin support. Cesar Gonzalez Garcia with the California Rural Indian Health Board in support. Thank you. Noah Melroy on behalf of East Bay Regional Park District in support. I'm a member of the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma and Muskogee. I'm a Northern California Community Organizer with the California Native Vote Project, and we're in full support. Thank you. Calvin Hedrick from the California Native Vote Project in support. Thank you. Now I'll take my time to ask those wishing to speak in opposition to join us in the front. Seeing no interest, I will now turn it over to the members of the committee. I will start with Senator Blakespear. I'm so sorry. Thank you, Assemblymember, for bringing this forward. I appreciate the passion that you are bringing to this. And I just want to recognize how important a true and sincere apology is for real repair. And that is really the heart of this. And in some ways, it's curious that it hasn't happened yet, you know, that it's 2026. And I was looking at the prior and related legislation that's mentioned in the committee report. and there are three other related legislation, one of them from you. And then it was only in 2024 that Joan Sawyer had something that was similar in relation to the state's connection to chattel slavery and its enduring legacy. And then it was back in 2005 when there was Senator Dunn who was recognizing and the state expressing an apology about illegally deported and coerced related to the Mexican repatriation program of the 1930s. So, you know, it is in some ways I do find it interesting that this is the first time we've had this specific bill. And I want to recognize your insight in bringing it forward and thank you for it. Thank you so much. I will now turn it over to Senator Richardson. Thank you, Madam Chair. I won't repeat the comments of my colleague because they were very well stated and I concur with her. The only thing I would add is, for me, the reason why an apology, not only a verbal one, but one, a permanent fixture that all could read is why it's so important, is people need to understand history. And what we get in our history books are very limited. It may be a couple pages, it may be a chapter, but it doesn't speak to the true history. And so for the thousands of people that come through the Capitol every single day need to be reminded and known of our history. And the last point that I want to make about it is, and it's really disappointing to me to say, but I'm going to say it. I was here in this GO committee last year, and an issue came up, and a member actually said, well, why do we need to do that? The tribes are all doing very well. You know, they have casinos, and they're doing well. And I was like, here, even in this body, there was a lack of understanding that there are many communities that still don't have the full access of water, electricity, housing, health care. we're still continuing to do so much work. And the portion of the business is only one small portion, and that in no way could ever repay the fact that actually this land was not of the ownership of the government of which we now serve today. So thank you for your efforts. I completely concur. I'd like to move the bill when it's appropriate. and I just want to say that I think the permanency is so important that people will continue to be remembered and recognize and do better. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you. Now I'll turn it over to Senator Achilleta. Thank you once again, Assemblymember. It's such an important bill. I know the others was, I guess, equally as important, but history is important, and AB 2115 makes a statement. And to me, if we here in California and throughout the United States of America always look at a written word, whether it be the Constitution, whether it be something on a sign, something that's written, and the laws that are written are on paper. It's a document. And a document that gives a formal apology will be there forever for generations to come to see to look and even touch that document but equally is to be able to walk into our capital on the grounds and touch a plaque with every child that is being educated in california to see and read exactly why the apology was necessary and then to go back to school and actually get into the history of the Native Americans are California first people to see why the atrocities happen and to walk through the 1800s, 1700s, 1800s, and to realize when somebody says, go home, you already are. It's amazing. We've got to acknowledge that. And so bringing this forward is so very, very important. And I'd be honored to be a co-author. And I appreciate your time, your effort. And Chief, Thank you for being here as well. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you so much. Anybody else wishing to speak? Okay, but before I make my comments, I just want to ask members who have bills before this committee to join us. We don't have any other authors, and so we may have to recess. At this point, I just wanted to go back to what I was saying. First of all, thank you again. Assemblymember Ramos, again, 10 years of teaching Native American history as a teacher as an educator has given me a lot of insight and I don have the hour or the day to teach all of you everything that I taught And I know just based on how we treated the first people of California the atrocities and just the displacement And it continues in so many communities. So I do believe this is a small token. And I think someone already said it. We can apologize. But just really formalizing it in a plaque would go a long way. And it's still a little down payment on reparations. And thank you for bringing it forward. I also would like to be at it as a co-author. and you may close when you're ready. Well, thank you so much, and thank you for all the comments that are there. And thank you to the co-author request. I have Senator Dali, Senator Rubio, Senator Cervantes, Senator Archuleta asking to be added as co-authors. Any others? Senator Richards. And Senator Blakespeare. Thank you so much. Great way to pressure people on this dais. Seeing the importance of this issue moving forward and the prior bill, certainly in the legislature today in 2026, it's a stark difference to what the legislature looked like in 1850 and those years of atrocities towards California's first people. But the senator does bring up a good point. How much do we truly know about California's first people? went from being invisible, speaking for myself on the Simon Wellingdon Reservation, people didn't even know we existed until after a bingo hall came, and now all of a sudden people know that we're there. But they don't know the underlying issues of the atrocities, the trauma, the impact that still plagues our people today. Per capita-wise, suicide, murder rates are higher than anywhere else against any other people in the state of California. Yet we're fighting those issues along with all your support. on the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women's Crisis. And I am taking a longer time to close because there's no other authors that are here, but I will wrap it up. These are important issues. Certainly going through the analysis, why didn't it happen sooner? Could always be, I guess, a critique of the system. And then we got elected as the first California Indian person in bringing these issues forward along with support from tribal chairs along the way. But did it really have to take one of us to get here to start to change the mentality of the state of California? It's time that we move forward on this bill, do an apology, where we can take back to our communities and talk about the lives of Indian people from our own areas. It's time that the legislature moves forward. I ask for your aye vote. Thank you. So, again, we find ourselves without a quorum still and no authors. So I'm going to take a 10-minute recess to ensure that we give authors the ability to get here. So I hope that they're listening. We're looking forward to hearing your bill. So 10-minute recess. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Ramos. Yeah, you're not here. I would also invite members of this committee to join us if they're also listening so we can at least establish a quorum and take care of those bills on consent. Welcome back. We're back on record. We have an author, Assemblymember Hoover, who will be presenting AB 2211, item number 16. we have his speakers if we have anyone in opposition you may also join us up front And when you ready Assemblymember Hoover you may begin Thank you Thank you Madam Chair I appreciate the opportunity to present AB 2211 I would like to first accept the committee amendments. I appreciate the committee working with our office on this bill. Under current law, craft distillers are only permitted to operate one branch at the craft distillers' place of production, limiting their ability to reach customers across California. With committee amendments, this bill will simply allow California craft distillers to operate a satellite room separate from their craft distiller's place of production and manufacture. The bill also authorizes a craft distiller to purchase and use common alcohol modifiers of vermouth, amaro, bitters, and liqueurs to combine with distilled spirits for consumption on its premises. With California leading the nation with nearly 200 craft distillers, this bill will open up new economic opportunities. With me today is Ezra Chabon on behalf of the California Distillers Association. Thank you. Good morning, Ezra. When you're ready, you may begin. Thank you, Madam Chair and members. Thanks to the committee staff and the chair for the thorough analysis of the bill. Ezra Schaubon on behalf of the California Distillers Association, representing California's 200 craft distillers. This bill provides a really important opportunity for craft distillers to reach the market. It also provides parity for the authority that other alcohol manufacturers already have. Wine growers are allowed duplicate licenses, as are brewers. and this is an opportunity to continue to promote these California-made products as well as agricultural commodities that go into them. I'm here to answer any technical questions you may have and respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak in support of the bill, please register. Good morning, Mountedture members. Madison Dwelley on behalf of the Family Winemakers of California in support. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to register their support? we will now invite opposition to come and join us seeing none I will bring it back to the members of this committee anyone wishing to speak moved by Archuleta I just want to say thank you thank you for accepting the amendments and you may close when you're ready just respectfully ask for an aye vote thanks so much thank you I will continue to leave the row open for often members we haven't established a quorum thank you we will now invite Assemblymember Jackson to join us for item number 5, AB 1578. I will also invite your speakers to join us. Anyone wishing to speak in support? No speakers. In opposition? Okay, so you may begin. My gift to you, Madam Chair. I'm happy to present AB 1578, which seeks to require elected local and state officials to take anti-hate speech training by incorporating it into their existing sexual harassment training. Respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you. We don't have any main lead or opposition, but I would like to invite anyone wishing to speak. Oh, you may join us. Sorry about that. You may begin when you're ready. You'll have two minutes each. Thank you. Greg Burr California Family Council anti training for elected officials not the public the lawmakers themselves government deciding which views its own officials need to be retrained out of The bill targets speech that vilifies, humiliates, or incites hatred. But those words mean different things to different people. What humiliates depends upon the beliefs of the listener. At the last hearing, the author spoke passionately about his Christian faith. He said, the loving thing is to protect people who are hurting. I take Amanda's word, but notice what happened. He defined love. He defined what faithful Christian witness sounds like. And his bill hands government the power to enforce that definition on every official who holds a different one. When one person's convictions about what love requires becomes a standard for speech, every competing conviction becomes hateful by default. Two Christians can read the same scripture and reach different conclusions about pronouns, parental notification, and girl sports. This bill does not referee that disagreement. The bill picks winners and brands the other side as hateful. So let me ask you plainly. Is it hateful to say a child cannot be born in the wrong body? that girls' sports should be reserved for female bodies, and that schools should not change a child's name without telling the parents. Every one of those views can be called humiliating and hateful by someone. This is a censorship strategy dressed up as training. The question is not whether the author means well. The question is whether the government should have power over speech at all, and it should not. These officials were elected to represent their constituents' values. The bill tells them that those values can no longer be spoken out loud. Please vote no. Thank you. Good morning, Madam Chair and committee members. My name is Rochelle Connor. I'm an abolitionist and the past president of the Frederick Douglass Foundation of California. Frederick Douglass was born in slavery, and he knew what it meant to be silenced. He said, to suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as the speakers. Every freedom that my people have won was won through speech that the powerful tried to silence. What is hate speech? And who gets to determine what words constitute hate? AB 1578 is similar to the same historical strategy used by Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot, and others to ensure that no dissent is ever uttered or ever heard. Hate speech training can be used as a means to inflict self-censorship. It violates the rights of free speech as guaranteed by the California and the U.S. Constitution. Each elected official takes an oath of office to uphold the United States Constitution. This bill would violate that oath by violating the First Amendment. Since 2021, the California Commission on the State of Hate has doled out $200 million to so-called anti-hate groups. That incentivizes the manufacture of hate to fund their own related nonprofits. 800,000 went to the nail salon association to fight hate. Just another gripped like BLM and the Southern Poverty Law Center. I cannot sit silently and let the civil rights of my people be used to peddle government controlled speech. Frederick Douglass, Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X, they sacrificed. too much to be silent. I urge respectfully a no vote on this bill. Thank you for your testimony. I would like to now invite those wishing to again. Let me take my time. Those wishing to speak again in support. If there's anyone I missed, anyone else wishing to speak in opposition of the bill, you may also come and speak at the microphone. Please just state your name and your opposition. Nicole Young, opposed. Once again, anyone wishing to speak and support or opposition? I will now close. I will bring it back to the dais. Senator Richardson.

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak? Senator Orchelbel.

Anybody else on this day wishing to speak Senator Archuleta

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak on this item? Senator Weber.

Thank you. Sorry to put a little pause on this. I don't want to lose members. We're going to take a pause just to establish a quorum, if I may. Madam Secretary, please call the roll. Rubio.

Alvarado Gil. Archuleta.

Blakespeare.

Cervantes.

Dali here. Furtado. Ochoa Bogue.

Padilla.

Smallwood Cuevas. Wahab.

And now if I may, because I'm going to lose members, I'd like to go through consent calendar really quickly and vote on that item. I'm going to read the items that are on the list. I'm going to miss directly. I made the motion. But the items that we will be voting on are 13 items. I'll go really quickly. Item number 3, AB 744 by Rodriguez. Item number 4, AB 1334 by Assemblymember Wallace. Assemblymember Wallace, item number 7, AB 1652 by Assemblymember Patterson. Item 12, AB 2187 by Assemblymember Ramos. Item 13, AB 1947, Assemblymember Ta. Item number 17, AB 2272 by Assemblymember Colosa. Item number 18, AB 2360, Arambula. Item number 19, AB 2375, Assemblymember Blanca Rubio. Item number 20, AB 2536 by Assemblymember Rubio. Item 21, AB 2644 by Assemblymember Rubio. Item number 22, AB 2507 by Assemblymember Wynn. Item number 23, AB 2792, Geo Committee. Item 24, AB 2793, Geo Committee. At this point, those are the items. Madam Secretary, please call the roll. Rubio?

Valadares? Alvarado Gil? Archuleta?

Ashby? Blakespeare?

Cervantes?

Dali?

I Hurtado, Ochoa Bogue, Ochoa Bogue I, Padilla, Richardson I, Smallwood Cuevas, Wahab, Weber Pearson I, Weber Pearson I, we'll hold that open. We're going to continue to hold that open for absent members and thank you for allowing us this time to establish a CRM before we lose any other members. So any other members wishing to speak on this item? So well thank you for bringing this forward. I am very sympathetic to all the comments that were made not only by my colleague on this day is by yourselves. I know that this item had considerable debate in the GO committee in the assembly. I also know that there was more opposition and you worked to get to a good place where we can get some people off the opposition. But I know that in appropriation, they took great care in making sure that there was a clear definition of in-tight speech that everyone can get behind. I know it It doesn't satisfy everyone. But essentially, and I don't want to belabor the point and add to the comments already made, but I think as elected officials, we set the tone. We really invite others to follow our lead in our communities and just getting those reminders of how important it is that we measure our words because it has real-life impacts. I'm just reminded of all the reports that I hear constantly, not only in adults but children that are committing suicide because someone said something to them online on the playground. It's happening more and more. And any time we take the opportunity just to remind adults that it's important that we understand the power of our words, I think it's a good thing. I know the burden is minimal. There is a burden, but the potential benefits are significant. And I know this bill takes the finding of the commission on the state of hate and turns that into action. So it's not just a random statement, but it came from somewhere where it was vetted. And there's real information and data behind this. And with that, would you like to close?

Thank you. Madam Secretary, please call the roll. We have a motion by Richardson. Thank you. Item 5, AB 1578, motion is due passed to Appropriations Committee. Rubio. Aye. Rubio, aye. Valadaris. Alvarado-Gill. Archuleta. Aye. Archuleta, aye. Ashby. Blakespeare. Aye. Blakespeare, aye. Cervantes. Aye. Cervantes, aye. Dali. No. Dali, no. Hurtado. Ochoa-Bogue. No. Ochoa-Bogue, no. Padilla. Richardson. Aye. Richardson, aye. Smallwood Cuevas. Wahab. Weber Pearson. Aye. Weber Pearson, aye. Hold that open. we will hold that open for absent members thank you thank you for your testimony at this point we will invite assembly member Aguirre Curry to join us

her supporters as well lead witnesses in support to join us we have Anna Ferreira from the Wine Institute Tim Lynch from Napa Valley Vintners and I don't see any lead opposition but if there's any that I missed yes I apologize we've been waiting for people to come in and we do have some members that need to leave so if I can pause for a second so we can vote on the bills that we've already presented thank you for your patience and we are going to start with We're going to start with item number one, AB 1729 by Assemblymember Lee. Please call the roll. Make sure we get a motion. Oh, Archuleta did a motion.

Motion is due pass to Appropriations Committee. Rubio.

Valideras. Alvarado Gill.

Ashby.

Cervantes. Aye. Cervantes, aye.

Hurtado.

Padilla.

Smallwood Cuevas. Wahab.

Oh, I'm sorry. Item number 2. I did skip over that. AB 458 by Assemblymember Stefani. Senator Archuleta made the motion. Please call the roll. Motion is due passed to Public Safety Committee. Rubio.

Hurtado. Ochoa Bogue. Padilla. Richardson. Aye. Richardson, aye. Smallwood Cuevas. Wahab. Weber Pearson. Aye. Weber Pearson, aye. Wahab, aye. We just voted on item number five. That one is, item number two will remain open for absent members. We just voted on item number five by Assemblymember Jackson. Item number six was pulled at the request of the author. It will not be heard. Item number eight, AB 1754 by Assemblymember Pacheco.

Please call the roll. Motion is due pass to Appropriations Committee. Rubio. Aye. Rubio. Aye. Valadariz. Alvarado-Gill. Archuleta. Aye. Archuleta. Aye. Ashby. Blakespeare. Aye. Blakespeare. Aye. Cervantes. Aye. Cervantes. Aye. Dali. Aye. Dali. Aye. Hurtado. Ochoa-Bogue. Aye. Ochoa-Bogue. Aye. Pavia. Richardson. Aye. Richardson. Aye. Smallwood Cuevas. Wahab. Aye. Wahab. Aye. Weber Pearson. Aye. Weber Pearson. Aye. Weber Pearson. Aye. That's eight. We'll hold it open. That's eight votes. We're going to hold that open for absent members. We will now move over to item number 10, 1841 by Assemblymember Ramos. I believe it was Senator Archuleta who made the motion.

Motion is due passed to Appropriations Committee. Rubio.

Balladeres. Alvarado Gill.

Ashby.

Cervantes. Aye. Cervantes, aye.

Hurtado.

Padilla, Richardson, aye.

Smallwood Cuevas, Wahab, aye. Wahab, aye. Weber Pearson, aye.

We will now move over to item number 11, AB 2115, another one by Assemblymember Ramos.

Please call the roll. Motion is due passed to Appropriations Committee.

We will hold that open for absent members. We will now move over to file item 16, AB 2211 by Assemblymember Hoover. Please call the roll. Motion is due pass as amended to Appropriations Committee.

Rubio?

Valadares? Alvarado-Gill?

Ashby?

Cervantes? Aye. Cervantes, aye.

Daly I Hurtado Ochoa Bogue Ochoa Bogue I Pavia Richardson I Richardson I Smallwood Cuevas Wahab Aye Wahab aye Weber Pearson Aye Weber Pearson aye That 10 We hold it open That has 10 votes. We will hold that open. For clarification purposes, we have three items to present left. File item number 9 by Assemblymember Gabriel that will be presented by a member of this committee. File item 14, AB 1991 by Assemblymember Aguirre-Curri, who is currently here. And file item number 15, AB 2017 by Assemblymember Huber. Thank you, everyone, for your patience. We are just, you know, we have to navigate a lot of committees happening. So my apology, Assemblymember, and you may begin when you're ready. And just for the record, we are now on item 14, AB 1991 by Assemblymember Aguirre-Curri.

Thank you. When you're ready, you may proceed, and both of you will have two minutes each.

Thank you. You may proceed, Tim.

Thank you. I would like to invite anyone wishing to be the lead opposition on this bill to join us up front. Okay, seeing none, I'm now going to invite those that wish to speak in support to state your name and your affiliation, please.

Thank you.

Gavin McHugh on behalf of the Distilled Spirits Council in support and want to thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Once again, I know we're moving kind of fast. Anyone wishing to speak in support or opposition, you may come up. Seeing none, I would like to invite members of the committee if anyone has any comments. Oh, go ahead. I'm sorry. We have one more person.

Thank you. Thank you. Sorry about that. So moved by Mr. Archuleta, and I will just wrap it up by saying thank you for taking the committee amendments. I know there were important safeguards that we wanted guardrails to ensure that, number one, it makes it clear that participants and interviewers have to be 21 years of age. We talked about making sure that they're not providing more samples than reasonably necessary to ensure that they actually can give their opinion. And of course, this is important to make sure that there's a sunset because we want to assess if it's working, opportunity to expand. But if it's not, then we have the opportunity to fix what's not working. And with that would you like to close I respectfully ask for your aye vote Thank you Madam please call the roll Item 14 AB 1991 motion is due pass as amended to Appropriations Committee

Rubio, aye. Valadares? Alvarado Gill? Archuleta? Aye. Archuleta, aye. Ashby? Blakespeare? Aye. Blakespeare, aye. Cervantes? Aye. Cervantes, aye. Daly? Aye. Daly, aye. Hurtado? Ochoa Bogue? Aye. Ochoa Bogue, aye. Padilla? Richardson? Smallwood Clavis Smallwood Clavis aye Wahab aye Weber Pearson Weber Pearson aye Thank you very much

Thank you so much So as I am inviting Senator Weber Pearson To present on behalf of Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel On AB 1807 item 9 As he is stuck in His committee and won't be able to present We want to thank Weber Pearson for moving this forward. But before we move forward, we will have one last person that needs to present. That is Assemblymember Haney. So we encourage him to join us so that we can wrap up this committee. Any other witnesses in support or opposition, please join us in the front. Thank you, Senator Weber Pearson, for taking this on. And you may begin when you're ready.

Thank you. Both will have two minutes each. Whoever likes to start, you may proceed.

Thank you. You may proceed.