Assembly Floor Session

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. . Thank you. Thank you.

Can't be sure.

I can't really notice if there is an absence of a quorum.

Yes.

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.

Please join me in a moment of reflection. Some years ago, my nephew Trevor asked me, Uncle Bob, who is the happiest person you know? I smiled as I said, I've met many happy people, and they seem to know that the secret to happiness is when we begin to live uncentered on ourselves. Think about the times we went to a truly great movie, Broadway show, or concert. We left the event smiling happily, saying things like, that was amazing. I enjoyed that so much, telling friends I'd like to see that again. Why were we so completely enjoying that moment? Why were we smiling so fully, talking about it? I think it's because for the duration of the entire event, the movie, the play, the concert, we were totally uncentered on ourselves. Like the mother who explained, the chocolate tastes better in the mouth of my child. Her happiness was simply seeing her child happy, uncentered on herself. When we become uncentered on ourselves, feelings of happiness naturally begin to emerge. We are no longer judging, this is good, that is bad, this is right, that's wrong. Instead, we let go of our critical minds and become one with the experience. When we become uncentered on ourselves, feelings of happiness emerge. Every true teacher and genuine spiritual tradition recognizes this reality and has tried to share this awareness in so very many ways. The Persian spiritual poet Rumi beautifully shared, Beyond our ideas of good and bad, there is a field. I will meet you there. Rumi was saying, beyond our judgments of good and bad, mine and yours, self and others, there is a place, a place where we are no longer centered on ourselves and we realize we are one humanity. I will meet you there Namo Amida with kindness and gratitude beyond words

Thank you so much. Members, please place your right hand under your heart and ready to begin. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the Black Seas of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

request of the author please move file item 5 ab 1589 chen to the inactive file clerk will note

Assembly Bill 2393 by Assemblymember Addis, an act relating to damages.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I rise to present a vital bill, AB 2393, the Ice Out Abuse Act, that will make it easier for victims of false imprisonment and arrest to seek justice for the harm that they suffered by establishing fixed statutory damages for specific harmful actions. We all remember Alex Preddy and other victims of ICE who have been wrongly detained wrongly arrested falsely imprisoned and even murdered And AB 2393 will address this by simply adding alternative damages to existing claims for false imprisonment and arrest and adding extra damages if an officer is wearing a mask using a weapon, a gun, or other egregious actions that may happen. So this bill does exempt peace officers and custodial officers and public entities, and there is no state or government liability exposure. But what AB 2393 will do, importantly, is hold those operating outside the rule of law accountable, something that we desperately need, and it will also help prevent horrendous actions on behalf of ICE from happening in the future. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

You need to put your key in Ms. Wynn.

Assembly Bill 1994 by Assemblymember Alvarez and others, an act relating to victim rights.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Colleagues, I rise to present Assembly Bill 1994, which would require the Attorney General to design an Immigrants, Victims' Rights and Resources card that may be included with the existing Marcy Rights card that's provided to victims of crimes. Many undocumented immigrants are unaware of available relief options, such as a U non-immigrant status visa, the U visa, the T non-immigrant status visa, or the T visa, and protections that exist under the Federal Violence Against Women Act VAWA Undocumented immigrants are particularly vulnerable to serious crimes and that creates a threat to public safety Perpetrators are very smart and unfortunately take advantage of vulnerabilities that exist in our communities. That is the case with many of our immigrant community. They take advantage to discourage or prevent the reporting of crime that is happening in our communities. Informing crime victims about immigration relief, options that exist to them, and the available resources would help rebuild the trust that must exist between local law enforcement and the communities that they serve. Additionally, California would reinforce its commitments to protect all crimes of victims, regardless of their status, and support efforts to deter future criminal activity. For those reasons, I respectfully ask for aye vote on AB 1994.

Assembly Bill 1929 by Assemblymember Ortega and others, and I'm relating to health care coverage.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. This morning, I rise as a proud Californian and American citizen who has sent a clear message with my colleagues and our leadership to the rest of the country and to our current president. We will not stand for the reign of terror that this administration has continued to raise among our community members. I was a three-year-old little girl when my parents brought me to this country. But I was lucky. I was not separated from my family. Unfortunately, today we cannot say the same for hundreds of thousands of children who are being left without their parents. AB 1929 requires health plans to disclose all investments they make with subsidies and patient premiums they collect, including investments in for-profit prisons and immigration detention centers. As California families can no longer afford health insurance or are being kicked off Medi-Cal entirely, I ask you this. Should premiums and tax subsidies go to ICE detention centers where our neighbors and our kids are being held, where they eat rotten food and drink dirty water, where they are cut off from their families and legal aid, where they are at the mercy of armed guards with no oversight or accountability for abuse. AB 29 is a way for us to hold these health plans accountable and an opportunity for us to see who's paying for this destruction. Thank you, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Assembly Bill 1633 by Assemblymember Haney and operating to detention facilities to take effect immediately tax levy.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I am proud to present AB 1633, which will impose a 50% gross receipts tax on corporations operating for-profit private detention facilities in California. California is home to seven private immigration detention facilities operated by for-profit corporations. These facilities have a long and well-documented record of dangerous conditions, including inadequate medical care, health and safety violations, and inhumane living conditions. Despite prior efforts to increase oversight and accountability, serious concerns continue. Following inspections of a newly opened private detention facility in Kern County in 2025, the Attorney General reported dangerous living conditions and a lack of adequate medical care, including insufficient medical staff, hygiene products, and inadequate food and water. At the same time, private detention corporations generate billions of dollars through government contracts while Californians and immigrant families bear the human and community costs of detention. This bill does not regulate federal immigration policy. Instead, it uses California's longstanding taxing authority to assess business activity taking place in our state. California already applies industry-specific taxes and fees where sectors create significant public costs, including in health care, tobacco, and oil extraction. AB 1633 follows that same principle of accountability. It uses a gross receipts model to ensure companies contribute based on the full scale of their California operations rather than reducing liability through deductions or accounting practices. Revenue generated by this bill will be reinvested into the due process for all fund to provide immigration-related services and support communities impacted by detention and enforcement actions. AB 1633 is about accountability, protecting California communities, and ensuring laws do not reward private profiteering from human separation and suffering. With that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you Mr Speaker I rise in opposition to AB 1633 and I detect a theme by the majority party of this legislature and that is let demonize federal law enforcement agents Absolutely reckless. Who benefits from this attack on federal law enforcement agents? Certainly not our communities. It doesn't bring safety in our communities. it unfairly smears and defames the good men and women of federal law enforcement who are just doing their jobs they care about Californians they want to keep us safe and yet you are doing everything to make their jobs impossible and worse I believe bills like this put their lives at risk There are bills that you have put as part of this package of AB 1633 to dox them, to reveal their identity, to allow them to be targeted, to allow their families to be targeted, to have people show up in hotels and harass them. What is your design? I believe your design is to stand with the criminals, not with our communities. This bill in particular would force the release of criminals onto our streets because the author of the bill's purpose is very clear. He wants to close all of the federal law enforcement detention facilities that this bill is targeting, which means that all those criminals will now be roaming the streets. You know, when SB, the Sanctuary State Bill 1454 was passed, members of this legislature, past and present, said, we're not trying to interfere with the federal government's ability to enforce immigration law. Oh, no, heaven forbid. We just say that we're not going to work with them and cooperate. And what happened? And federal law enforcement then had to take extraordinary steps to go into the community and do their job with one arm tied behind their back. Now we find that the real objective was what it was all along, which is to absolutely eliminate the ability to enforce federal immigration law to get these criminals out of our communities. This bill would go much farther. not only are you not helping get the criminals out of these communities, you're going to release them back into the communities for them to recommit crimes. The author of this bill does not seem to respond to the basic legal criticism that the federal courts have already said that the state of California cannot interfere with ICE's ability to have detention centers. The courts have already ruled. So now you're trying to find a roundabout way through state tax law. to make it impossible for these facilities to keep these criminals behind bars. Let's be honest about what the intent is here. To undermine federal law enforcement for the benefit of criminals, and this is shameful, I urge a no vote on AB 1633.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Hello, Mr. Fellow members, I rise today in support of AB 1633 by Assemblymember Matt Haney. This bill is about accountability as much and values. Private detention corporations are making enormous profits here in California while repeated reports have documented dangerous living conditions inadequate medical care and serious health and safety concerns inside these facilities I have one of these facilities in my district in the city of Adelanto We all seen the reports from the Los Angeles Times, KBRC, LAS, The Guardian, and El Pais documented repeated deaths and dangerous conditions at this facility. Every person who died in this facility had a family, meanwhile the corporation operating facility keeps receiving a tax benefit. The deaths of Ismael Ayala Uribe, Gabriel Garcia Avila, Alberto Gutierrez Reyes, and Jose Guadalupe Ramos Solano are a reminder that behind these corporate profits are real human lives and devastated families. That is simply unacceptable. At the same time, the due process of people who continue to be detained are that there continues with no meaningful ends in sight. AB 1633 says that if corporations are going to operate detention facilities in California and generate massive revenues from them, they should help pay for the harm and public costs created in our communities. The bill reinvests those funds into immigration-related legal and support services. As legislators, we have the responsibility to stand for dignity, accountability, and the well-being of all Californians, regardless of where we come from. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I agree with everything my colleague from San Diego said, but I have another concern. If it wasn't for investments in private detention facilities, how else would a leading Democratic gubernatorial candidate make their billions of dollars to fund their campaign? With that, I ask for a no vote.

Thank you, members. I rise in support of AB 1633, in strong support and a proud co-author of this bill. I have the honor of representing the beautiful people of Oakland, Alameda, and Emeryville. But these are communities where people have been dragged from their homes at dawn, separated from their children, and shipped hundreds of miles away to detention facilities with their families left behind trying to figure out what happened and how to help. This has happened in my district in the same way it's happened in yours across the state. A 17-year-old boy taken from his East Oakland home transferred across to a juvenile detention facility. A 21-year-old man with Down syndrome and no criminal record swept up and detained, gone. And where do they end up? In facilities like California City in Kern County, the largest ICE detention facility in the state where a federal judge found detainees were suffering irreparable harm from deprivation of medical care. One of the detainees, a refugee with congestive heart failure, sat in a wheelchair, jaundiced, unable to urinate, bleeding inside his mouth while his sister, my constituent, drove six hours to try to see him, fearing he would die before she could get there. This is happening right now. Meanwhile, corporate detention officers are welcoming the surge in immigration sweeps to bloat their bottom line. Billion-dollar companies are treating human suffering as growth opportunity. California must demand better. The number of people detained in California private facilities has more than doubled since April 2025 from roughly 3 people to nearly 6 people on any given day Those people Ismail Avala Ukraine at the Adelanto detention facility died on September 22 2025 Huabing Shei at the Imperial Region detention facility on September 2029, 2025, died. Gabriel Garcia Avilas died on October 23, 2025, while detained at the Adelanto Detention Center. Luis Beltran Yanis Cruz on January 6, 2026, the Imperial Regional Detention Facility. Alberto Gutierrez Reyes on February 27, 2026 at the Adelanto Detention Facility. Jose Guadalupe Ramos Solano died on March 21st, 2026 at the Adelanto detention facility. AB 1633 does something straightforward. It says that if you are going to operate a for-profit detention facility in California, you are going to be accountable for the harm you cause here. I respectfully request your aye vote on AB 1633.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker and members. I rise today in support of Assembly Bill 1633. I want to thank my colleague from San Francisco for bringing this measure before us. At its core, this bill is about accountability. We believe that every person deserves dignity, safety, and respect, regardless of where they were born, where they were born, and their immigrant status. Yet across California, private detention operators are running prisons like facilities where people face civil immigration charges, are subject to dangerous and inhumane conditions. Assembly Bill 1633 say very clearly, if corporations choose to profit from detentions of detaining Californians and operate facilities that create serious health conditions and human rights concerns, they should be held accountable for the harm and the costs imposed on our Californians and our brothers and sisters. This bill imposed a tax on private detention operators and reinvest those funds into immigration-related services that support Californians and those in our community. And I heard individuals from the other side of the aisles, this bill would not close detention centers. What this bill would do is hold these detention centers accountable. I stood on this floor a few months ago and recounted a story about someone who was in a detention center, a private detention center. And this gentleman tried to get health care services because his stomach grew three times his size. And early on a Sunday morning, he died because inadequate care in the facility. And these are things that are taking place. And we just heard the sister, my colleague from Oakland, talked about and read names and said names out loud. and these facilities are being operating in inhumane facilities and they're operated by these private detention facilities. They should not be operating because they are like modern day slave holding facilities. And if they're going to hold these brothers and sisters, they should be operating, they should be paying a tax. And that's what this bill does. We should hold these individuals accountable. And that's what this bill does. And I think this is going and moving in the right direction, we should hold these individuals accountable and that's what this bill does. So let's make sure that we're not being caught up with the rhetoric and the noise. And we want to make sure that those who go to these detention facilities are treated humanely. I respectfully ask but I vote on Assembly Bill 1633.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members, and thank you to my colleagues for their comments. I want to be very clear about what is happening here. We have 7,000, more than 7,000 people in our state who are being detained in private, for-profit, corporate-operated detention facilities. Imagine that it was your grandfather who was taken to one of these facilities, who was taken away from his family or his job, Maybe he's somebody who's elderly, who's sick, handed over to a company that is making billions in profits, traded on the stock market, who now you have to believe has his best interest in their mind. that they're going to now somehow provide for adequate medical coverage for food when they operate and it gets hot and they're in danger because of the temperatures in that facility that they're going to look out for his well-being with no oversight, with no accountability, with no transparency. You would be terrified. You would be frightened. You would do everything you could to get him out of that facility. Nobody should be incarcerated, detained in a facility operated by a for-profit company with no oversight or accountability. That is happening in California. And these folks have not been charged with crimes. These are immigration-related offenses. These are civil offenses. Then they're being detained pending the next steps in the process. And in our state, this is happening, and they're making hundreds of millions of dollars off of it. That's what this is about. And it says nothing about shutting down these facilities. These are businesses operating in our state. Of course, we have the ability to regulate them and tax them. This is not about federal immigration policy. This is about businesses operating in our state, separating families, causing human suffering, no accountability, and doing it in an inhumane way. You would not accept that for your family member. And we should not accept that for any of the family members that we represent, the many thousands who are impacted by these facilities operating without any accountability, not paying at all for the harm that they're causing in our state. And with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

The clerk will read. Assembly Bill 1650 by Assemblymember Coloza and others.

for the opportunity to present AB 1650. The Trump administration has turned immigration policy into a tool of fear, directing ICE to carry out aggressive raids that have separated families and destabilized our communities. AB 1650 is about safety, transparency, and accountability. Since the summer of 2025, enforcement activities by ICE have intensified across our country, from Los Angeles, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, Minnesota, and Illinois. These operations have raised serious concerns about oversight and safety. We have seen growing concern on the use of unmarked rental vehicles and enforcement operations that have involved arrests, detention, and transport of members of our community. When vehicles used by government agencies lack proper identification, it becomes difficult for the public to distinguish between legitimate law enforcement and bad actors. Additionally, inviting potential abuses of power in government, given the absence of transparency or accountability in how these vehicles are being used. used. These practices create not just confusion, but fear. Fear for the public and fear for those who are being illegally faced with governmental force and violence. At the same time, rental car companies are finding themselves at the center of this issue. Their vehicles are being used in these operations without notification or consistent standards for safety and identification. AB 1650 ensures that any privately owned vehicle, rented or leased to a governmental agency for purposes of enforcement, is clearly identifiable with decals. It also establishes enforcement mechanisms to ensure compliance and accountability. Ultimately, no one should have fear that a vehicle simply approaching them could put their safety at risk and cause them harm. This uncertainty and fear has no place in California. And for those reasons, I respectfully ask for I vote on AB 1650. Thank you.

The clerk will read. Assembly Bill 1655 by Assemblymember Brian and others, an act relating to Cow Works.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and colleagues. I rise to present AB 1655. In January, a five-year-old boy was picked up in front of his home at preschool and used as bait to lure out his father. And then him and his father were subsequently shipped to a detention facility in Texas. where that little boy became very sick. If that little boy had been kidnapped by ICE here in California and it was a CalWORKS family and he was gone more than 30 days, that family would have lost the essential support they need to survive Our CalWORKS program has some exceptions when a child is outside of the home for an extended period of time and those include an extended hospital stay What this bill does is create an additional exception and that is if your child is kidnapped by ICE This is the kind of policy that I never thought we would have to craft. But when our federal government is actively targeting vulnerable families, using children as bait, and separating those families unjustly, even against court orders, we have to do everything we can to protect them. That's what this bill does, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I stand today in support of AB 1655, authored by my friend and colleague from Los Angeles. Over the past year, we have witnessed an openly hostile federal government whose domestic policy only seems to be driven by cruelty towards immigrants and cutting critical social benefits for the most vulnerable. As someone who's had to use California's social safety net and as a legislator who represents a majority-minority district, I must stand and speak out against the attacks coming from the federal government. I commend the member from Los Angeles' bill to ensure that wrongfully detained individuals are not disqualified from their social safety net services. In this historic cost-of-living crisis, the last thing a family should have to worry about while a family member is wrongly detained is losing part of their CalWORKS grants. To support immigrant families and communities across our entire state, I respectfully urge an aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I certainly strongly encourage support for AB 1655. What is happening to children in the state of California is inhumane. And this one thing, to be able to make sure that the family doesn't have to also worry about the CalWORKs benefits, is a small thing that we should do against a major problem that we have here in California. And so I strongly encourage an aye vote on 1655. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in opposition to AB 1655 because it is part of a dishonest campaign of fear-mongering.

I believe the arguments made in support of AB 1655 are dishonest. They're not tethered to reality. I mean, you'd have as much opportunity with a bill if you said that you were going to ensure that people kidnapped by aliens or gnomes on a shelf would get protection. Because the reality is this. You are demonizing federal law enforcement, making things up.

I believe the statement you are demonizing is impugning the character of my colleague from Los Angeles.

you may not want to hear my arguments but these arguments are shared by millions of Californians and you have the votes to shut me up to shut off my microphone in making my speeches against your bills but you know what that means You don have the ability to use facts and logic and evidence to support the divisive bill that you brought

Thank you. My opposition to this bill and several others is that the bills are designed for political theater, not good public policy. You are inventing a problem that doesn't exist. And this stunt puts fear in the hearts of so many Californians needlessly. And it divides Californians from law enforcement, which is a dangerous path to go down. We have disagreements on immigration policy, and that's okay. You could have a disagreement. There are some that believe that we should have an open border. There are some that believe we should have amnesty. Others, like the constituents I represent, and I would believe most Californians, We support law enforcement. We believe that we should have a vetting process.

Mr. DeMaio, Mr. DeMaio.

We're not talking about what the Supreme Court rules. We're talking about the rules that we have adopted as a body democratically.

That we have voted on, sir.

And so I'm asking you, and I'm asking you, I'm pleading with you. Please stay to the merits of this bill and the points that you're making are important points to make when we're not discussing the bill.

Thank you, Assemblymember DeMaio. Seeing and hearing no further debate, Assemblymember Bryan, do you wish to close?

Thank you Assemblymember Bryan. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes. Ayes 50, noes 14. The measure passes. We are skipping on to file item number 44. Excuse me, we're going to pass temporarily on file item 44. Apologies, Mr. Lee. We're going to pass temporarily on file item 56. I know I'm just jumping around on my own list. Sorry, folks. File item number 60 is AB 1851 by Assemblymember Gibson. The clerk will read. Assembly Bill 1851 by Assemblymember Gibson, an act relating to people health. Assemblymember Gibson, you are recognized.

Thank you Assemblymember Gibson. I'll debate having ceased. Clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the vote. Ayes, 56. No, 0. The measure passes. File item 64. File item 64 is AB 1896 by Assemblymember Mark Gonzalez. The clerk will read. Assembly Bill 1896 by Assemblymember Mark Gonzalez and others, an act relating to public employment. Assemblymember Gonzalez, you are recognized.

Thank you, Assemblymember Gonzalez. Assemblymember DeMaio, you are recognized.

Thank you, Assemblymember DeMaio. Assemblymember Gallagher, you are recognized.

i heard you know vote thank you assembly member gallagher assembly member brian you were recognized

Excuse me, Mr. Gallagher, state your point of order.

Thank you, Mr.

Excuse me, Mr. Bryan, just a moment. Excuse me, you are out of order, Mr. Gallagher. Just a moment, everyone. Take a moment. Thank you. Mr. Gallagher, your point is not well taken. That is not a transgression of the rules. Mr. Bryan, you may continue.

Thank you Assemblymember Bryan. Seeing and hearing no further debate, Assemblymember Governor Gonzales, do you wish to close?

Members, let me take this opportunity to remind everyone to not use indecent or profane language. Let's stay with acronyms as well, inclusive in that. Let's not make this part of our House business. Seeing and hearing no further debate. Clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Thank you Thank you Clerk will close the roll tally the votes Ayes 41, noes 19. The measure passes. File Item Number 84, AB 2230, by Assemblymember Abilafarias. File Item 84, that's AB 2230. Kirk will read. Assembly Bill 2230 by Assemblymember Abilafarias, an applicant to immigration. Assemblymember Abilafarias, you are recognized.

Thank you Assemblymember Abilafarias. Assemblymember Bennett, you are recognized.

Thank you, Assemblymember Bennett. Assemblymember Gallagher, you are recognized.

I urge a no vote. Thank you, Assemblymember Gallagher. Assemblymember Lee, you are recognized.

But aside from that point, this is another one of those ridiculous laws that we shouldn't have to be doing. We shouldn't have to be protecting our polling places and daycares from ICE agents from intimidation. But this is the reality. And why is it the reality? Is that President Trump himself and his advisors continually threaten to literally surround polling places for the midterms with National Guard or ICE agents. It's something Steve Bannon has said. And when asked directly the president was asked directly by the media would he send National Guard or ICE agents to the polls He said I would do absolutely anything necessary This is things that they literally threatening themselves because the playbook of authoritarianism is to intimidate the opposition and to secure power no matter what. But these are factually the words and threats that he has been broadcasting for years, and his inner circle have been broadcasting for years. So members, this is a law and a thing we shouldn't have to be talking about, but this is a reality. And I applaud the author for being forward-thinking because I don't want to be talking about this once ICE has stormed the polling places, once National Guard has been deployed to deter people from voting. So I strongly recommend an aye vote for this bill.

So let me be perfectly clear. There have been threats from this administration to deploy ICE agents to voting locations. So it is absolutely our duty to protect the right to vote, to make voting places safe for people to go and exercise this right. So I applaud the author on this bill. I support AB 2230. And we cannot wait until these events absolutely happen. We must be proactive, and we must make sure they do not happen, and we must respond to these threats.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Once again, I rise in opposition to AB 2230. Moments ago, in speaking against a similar bill as part of this ICE is awful, let's attack ICE bill package, I raised the question, are we actually dealing with a real problem? Or are the backers of these bills inventing, in a hysterical fashion, problems that do not legitimately exist because they have a different purpose. Not good public policy, but to defame, attack federal law enforcement officers. I think the record is quite clear. I mean, we have extra observers here from the media, and welcome. I always love the transparency that you bring to this chamber and our proceedings. But something tells me that this may be choreographed. I'll let you decide. A package of bills, all with the same theme, with hysterical undertones, with very little basis in reality. So this bill, AB 2230, would have us believe one of two problems are being addressed. option one we have a lot of illegal immigrants voting in our elections because ab2230 says hey we got to keep ice out of the polling centers but why else would ice be showing up at a polling center in california but for the fact there would be illegal immigrants there and you have not responded to that that is what apparently you are raising as a real probability with this bill are Are you saying the quiet part out loud? No wonder you oppose citizenship verification of our voter rolls, because you apparently are agreeing that it is a problem with AB 2230. Why else say we have to rush a law, enact a law, saying ICE cannot show up at the polling centers? Or here's the second option. maybe you don't believe that illegal immigrants are routinely added to our voter rolls and instead you're playing politics you're trying to create a hysterical narrative, hysterical narrative that doesn't actually exist. I actually think it may be a combination of both. And that is why I ask you for a no vote on AB 2230.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think that a couple things hopefully would be very clear to everyone that, on the one hand, may believe that we need to have the freedom to have immigration enforcement, and on the other hand, both safety and the sanctity of our voting system and protection of certain places where we believe that that immigration enforcement should simply be off the table. I would hope that child care centers would be off the table. And an actual trained police officer can very easily identify where licensed child care facilities are and are not. Now, if these federal agents aren't properly trained, that's a different story, and that's on them. That's on them if they can't figure out where a child care facility is, like every other law enforcement agency in the state is trained to do. And we're not going to wait until threats that have been made are followed through on. Trump's Department of Homeland Security has refused to rule out the possibility of sending agents to polling sites. Secretary Mullen specifically has refused to rule out that possibility. and Press Secretary Leavitt herself has said she can't guarantee ICE agents won't be around polling locations in November. And the simple sentiment that, well, if they're not doing anything wrong, what's the problem of having them there? It's the same thing that happened in the South during the Civil Rights Movement. well if they're not doing anything wrong why do they care if they're uniformed personnel that have traumatized them for years and decades what's wrong if they're around polling centers if they're not doing anything wrong we already know ICE has detained wide ranges of our residents from those that are documented citizens, undocumented children So the intimidation factor is a real one, and that's why we have to make sure that we protect the sanctity of the vote, protect these polling centers, protect our children and those that are caring for them. I hope we would all agree that child care centers should not be locations of immigration enforcement. If we can't even believe on that basic tenet, then what are we doing? If we can't believe in the tenet that immigration enforcement shouldn't be happening at polling places during an election, which is a fascist tactic. If we can't agree on that, then we have very definitions of what it means to have a fully free and functioning democracy. I urge a yes vote on AB 2230.

Thank you. I want to thank our colleague from Martinez for bringing forward AB 2230, which I am in certain strong support of I think it important for us to recognize that both Democratic and Republican presidents have historically ensured and discouraged enforcement of immigration enforcement around sensitive spaces and protected locations like schools and childcare centers and places where children gather. And it was only until executive action taken in January 2025 that all of a sudden, those sensitive places where our children were trying to learn, people were trying to vote, our children were being dropped off by their family members, did we reach a situation where those places were all of a sudden not to be protected? That is the reality that we are living in. It is not a hysterical reality at all. It is a fact. In my district, in Oakland, I had child care centers that had immigration enforcement vans parked where families were scared of dropping off their children. Now, our opposition and the other party might decide to declare that that is hysterical and that we are being hysterical, but in fact, we are being factual. If others want to be in complete ignorance and denial of the reality of everyday people trying to live their lives, that is on them. That is on them. If they want to actually create manufactured hysteria, coordinated efforts to be able to say that we are doing something incorrect, they should also look in the mirror because I'm pretty sure that's what happened around other legislation in this body. Very recently, in fact, where there was hysteria promoted around constitutional charges made against legislation that actually involved protection of immigrant service providers. We're not being hysterical. We're trying to make sure that people have the ability to live their daily lives. We are not trying to attack ICE agents. We are trying to protect people in being able to live freely with liberty, with the civil liberties that they are afforded under our Constitution in the state of California. With that, I respectfully request your aye vote on 2230.

I rise in support of AB 2230. I want to thank my colleague for bringing this bill forward. To my colleagues across the aisle, I often talk about being brought here when I was three years old. but my immigrant mother who traveled hundreds of miles by herself to reach the United States of America for that American dream. And today I stand here because a Republican president passed amnesty for millions, millions of us who work hard every day and pay taxes. Unfortunately, the party of then is not the party of today. the president your president in fact has called us rapists criminals has killed American citizens Alex Preddy he is ripping babies from their mothers He's using them as bait. And so, to hear you offended because we're using the words fascist, or we're now hysterical, is quite absurd. especially as we all stand here as colleagues and talk about how much we love this country how much we love the state of California and so yes this is personal for many of us and yes there is a theme here today Because this is a reality for us. It is not, we're not reading this in books. We're not finding out about this in history books. This is happening today, right here. And that is why we have this set of bills today. And that is why I'm standing up for AB 2230.

I don't think it gets more powerful than the lived experience of our colleague from the East Bay, who speaks for many on this floor and millions across our state and millions more across the country. To my colleague from Nicholas, who I love dearly, if you are more triggered by me calling ICE agents goons than these goons ripping babies from families, killing American citizens, and being threatened to use to terrorize polling places and other civic institutions where people are already afraid, then I'm not interested in being lectured about morality this morning. Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. and I rise in simple opposition to this bill. This is talking about law enforcement and law enforcement's ability to enforce the laws that are on the books in specific locations, whether it's polling places or daycare centers. Let us talk about the fact that we have here in California, in the city of San Francisco, illegal immigrants have the right to vote. There is an L.A. City Council member who is trying to do the exact same thing in the city of L.A., allowing illegal immigrants the right to vote. U.S. Code Section 1325 is the law of the land that says if you enter into the country illegally, you have committed a crime. U.S. Code Section 1326 is if you remain in the country illegally, you have committed a crime. This doesn't make us racist. This doesn't make us bad people. This doesn make us morally repugnant It makes us law enforcement Everyone in this room is a law maker If we would just make all laws, subjective laws, why should anyone listen to you? Why? Well, if you can't follow what U.S. Section 1325 from 1929, no new laws. A law that has been here for almost 100 years. How does that make us evil, repugnant? The same laws that President Obama used, the same laws that President Clinton used, the same laws that Democrats and Republicans have used are still the same laws on the books. And that makes us bad people? I don't think so. When we talk about why this enforcement is happening, it's because illegal immigrants have the ability to vote in the state of California. And that would be the only reason why law enforcement and immigration custom enforcement would be there. When we're talking about the daycare centers of, well, maybe we shouldn't have enforcement at daycare centers. Unfortunately, we know there's a lot of daycare fraud out there. The Somali Leering Center was a daycare center. The attorney for the Southern District of California found four people, four people committing child care fraud that were also illegal immigrants, bilking, bilking the state of California in their own statement. It says, child care benefit programs are designed to help parents who need the assistance of quality child care services. Fraud takes money away from the very communities that the programs are intended to serve. We know that the system here, not only in the United States, but in California, has been built on an honor system. And that honor has been stepped on by others who have no respect for the law, who have no respect for the system, and they are stealing from the Californians, the citizens, and those that we should help. And you would only appeal to emotion when you don't have logic and facts on your side. Because I can tell you this as a damn fact, that I care about immigrants. I sponsored my own mother's immigration, and I will not be painted as somebody who hates immigrants. I have worked to try to help and fit this system. But if you wanted to change immigration and enforcement, run for Congress. If you want to have respect for law as lawmakers, follow the law yourself. We can find a compassionate way to make sure that we're prioritizing our individuals and taking care of the system. And we should find a way to do so. But this isn't that. This is a game, a messaging play that hasn't worked. and for those reasons, we all care about immigrants, we all need to follow the law, and I respectfully ask for your no vote.

Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker and colleagues. I rise, of course, in support of AB 2230, and I'll be asking everyone to vote aye. I do want to make three observations, though, and I'm really glad the press is here today because I think every so often we can see how lawmaking should be done and sometimes how it shouldn't be done. Three points I'd like to make. First of all, I'd like to Thank my colleague from San Leandro for her courage and bravery and sharing that experience with all of us today. You have my profound respect. And I bring that up because it was raised both in this conversation and in earlier conversations that some of the legislation where the debating today is trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. And I would simply offer to all of my colleagues on all sides of the aisle that we have a responsibility to check our privilege at the door. And just because we have not personally experienced something as a problem does not mean it doesn't exist in our communities. The second point I would make is that there's been so much discussion about this bill, and I'm not going to question anyone's motivation, but I would say there's been a lot of misinformation about the bill. So I'd like to point out two things about what the bill actually does. Existing law, this is already the law of the state of California, prohibits the presence of the following individuals I'm about to name at polling centers. It's a wobbler, so it can be charged as a misdemeanor or a felony. So we have long said that if you're a person in possession of a firearm, a peace officer, private guard, security guard, or any person wearing the uniform of a peace officer, guard, or security personnel, and I'm just looking at the legislative digest. I'm not even reading the bill. This is like the second or third line if you look at the file. That's already the law in the state of California. And I wasn't here for the passage of that law, but I would presume it's because we believe that intimidation by any source of voters trying to exercise their right to vote is something that we want to guard against. Now, this bill, I would argue, at least this first part of it, is really just trying to make it exceptionally clear that that prohibition on the presence of peace officers should apply whether they're a municipal employee, a state peace officer, or federal law enforcement. And we can absolutely, to the point of my colleague from Nicholas, we can disagree on the policy, but that's what we're talking about, is extending the application of existing law. Now, the other thing I would point out is a second provision of the bill as it relates to child care centers. I'm not going to cover every point, but I would simply point out that this is actually mirrored off of legislation I believe we passed last year dealing with our educational facilities. And it quite simply says not that ICE agents, for example, can't come visit child care centers. What it says is they can't access non-public-facing portions of those centers without a judicial warrant. What that means is they can't come into my kid's child care center in the back where the kids are napping without a judicial warrant. And I can tell you as a former prosecutor, it's not that hard to get a judicial warrant based on probable cause if you believe the law has been broken. It's just not that difficult. And the last thing I would say is this. To my colleague from San Diego, I have not raised my mic today. I have not been trying to interrupt you. I believe every member of this floor certainly has a First Amendment right within the confines of decorum. I would simply offer this. The fact that we all have a desk on this green carpet, the fact that we all have First Amendment rights, does not give us license and liberty to lie. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to direct my colleagues to the lettering that's above the rostrum. and paraphrasing here, it says that it is the duty of the legislature to enact laws that are just. And on this bill and probably the five previous bills before this, what we keep hearing from my colleagues is that people are just doing their jobs, that they're just enforcing the law. And I think anybody who has studied history has seen a litany of examples where people were just doing their job and just enforcing the law without stopping to ask if it is moral and if it is just This legislature needs to enact laws that are just that recognize that we are the arbiters of what our communities need. We come up here to discuss the issues that are most impactful to the state of California. And what we have seen over the last year and a half, and if you want to go back to January 6th is a president who is willing to bend every law to do every unmoral and just thing to retain power. AB 2230 allows California to not be caught flat-footed to make sure that the wills of our own districts are adhered to, and this legislature has an opportunity to weigh in on what is just and moral. I urge an aye vote. Thank you. Assemblymember Rogers, Assemblymember Patterson,

whenever some people speak over here, like sparks 10 more mics to go up. It's like offended that we even say anything at all. But, you know, going back to the bill, if ICE is really as bad as is made out to be. Do you think there's any chance that this legislation is going to stop them from doing what they want to do to enforce the law? It's going to do nothing. So the security that you're trying to provide people by passing this legislation, you think ICE is going to say, you know what, we're not going to enforce the law because the California, the liberal California state legislature passed this bill right now. It's not going to do anything. It's not going to provide any security to the exact people that you're trying to provide security to. This is a total false bill. It's messaging the entire thing and say, hey, look, we did something. But it's not going to stop ICE from enforcing the law. With that, I respectfully ask for a no vote.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Colleagues, friends. Guys, this is a hard bill for some because there's some nuances. We live in a political era where division is easy, but division is also incredibly cheap. It takes zero political courage to stand on a partisan coastline, point across the aisle, and throw stones. That doesn't require leadership. It just requires a microphone. True leadership requires something far more difficult. It requires civility. Now, civility is not weakness. It isn't a compromise of core principles, nor is it a surrender of convictions. Civility is the tactical recognition that our mission to serve the people is larger than our desire to win a talking point. It is the understanding that a different perspective isn't a threat, it's an asset. When we approach our colleagues with mutual respect, we stop fighting for titles and start fighting for solutions. We don't have to look far to see tangible proof of what happens when we choose this path. Let me give you an example. Consider the California Problem Solvers Immigration Reform Working Group. is arguably one of the most volatile deeply partisan issues of our generation It an issue custom for gridlock Yet a dedicated group of leaders Republicans and Democrats chose to sit down, leave the hyperbole at the door, and focus on practical, real-world solutions. That local, civil collaboration didn't just stay in California, It built a blueprint. By proving that bipartisan problem-solving was possible here, we built a bridge to our federal counterparts.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My colleague has been speaking for some time. I've yet to hear him speak to the merits of the bill. Could you direct him to do that? Thank you.

I didn't know a minute was a long time, but I will continue. the reason why I'm bringing this up is a solution if I could just I think that there's a lot of members today that are speaking to other speeches that have been spoken to which is appropriate let's all try to bring this back down to the bill that we're about to vote on please which is what I'm trying to do I'll try and land a plane so we built this bridge as a solution. It's now called the Dignity Act. With this bill and other bills, it is very easy to put these up, but it's hard to work with our federal counterparts to find solutions. So my recommendation to the author and to others on this bill is, one, we should use the power of civility here. Number two, it will transform the gridlock into progress. And number three, we can actually make a change where change can be made in the federal government. Just like my colleague from across the aisle where we sat together and say, how can we be a model? This is one way we could do that. So I encourage my colleagues to take a look at this bill and use it, use our example to make a change in federal law. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I stand here in support of AB 2230. We've heard a lot of discussion on the floor. This type of legislation is difficult, and it can be very triggering for many of us. But this isn't just about today's legislation. This is about a theme of, yes, multiple pieces of legislation that have been put forth by this body for over a year. Last year, we were debating masks by ICE agents and other pieces of legislation. Today, this bill is about protecting our polling sites and child care. So we must ask ourselves why. Why are these bills put forward? One member mentioned this is a theme. Indeed, this is a package of bills, a package of bills to address what is happening in our communities across the state of California. And to gaslight us and to say that we being hysterical emotional and that even if we pass these bills they not going to be enforced as we have seen with the mask legislation It almost like laughing in our face. We know that in the past there were places, as we just heard from a member talking about civility, that Republicans and Democrats agreed. We agreed at one point that there shouldn't be enforcement at churches, at courts, at schools, and yet, since 2026, we've seen all of that eroded. We've seen families pulled from cars, dropping their kids off at child care centers. So when this bill is brought forward because of the direct language that there will be ICE agents at our polling sites, we know what that means. We have no reason to believe that won't happen. We have no reason to believe that somehow all of this will just disappear and we'll go back to being able to communicate as we always have. Our communities feel under attack, and some may think we're being hysterical, but for us that support this legislation, we have seen that fear. One of the members mentioned, just follow the law. follow the law. And yet all we have to do is look to our President of the United States that continues to break the law and have a blatant disregard for the law. So when we bring up other topics that aren't related to this legislation, I think fraud was brought up. I think the president just pardoned individuals who have committed fraud for many, many people. So members, for some of you, it's hard, the communication. We want to be friendly. We want to be civil. We want to get to a better place of common ground. And we should. We We should find places where we can agree. And that happens almost every day on this floor. If you look at the vote counts, you'll see many, many votes that fly off this floor with bipartisan support. Matter of fact, the majority of them do. The majority of members support each other's votes on the Republican and Democratic side. Watch the votes. But there's times where we stand our ground and this is a time to say, we can't agree on this. We can't agree. And until then, you'll continue to see packages of bills that are going to do everything we can to protect our public. With that, I ask for your support on AB 2230. Assemblymember Gallagher, you are recognized. That's a point of information, Mr. Spence. It was stated earlier that this bill just adds people to what were already prohibited and that previously law enforcement officers were a part of that prohibition. In fact, this bill does add law enforcement. I think you need to just state the point of information quickly, Mr. I want it to be clear what this bill does because it's been stated before that this this adds all law enforcement. enforcement officers. Okay, I understand your point of information. Just a moment, Mr. Gallagher. Thank you, sir. Mr. Gallagher, your point is not well taken. I don't think that this is a point of information, if I may. Point of information is really if you had a question specifically, what is printed on page 10 of this? If you really wanted to ask something like that versus making a second speech, which is more about an opinion of what the bill does, it doesn't do. And so that point is out of order, sir. Okay. Is it correct that this bill prohibits 100 feet, a law enforcement officer, any law enforcement officer from being 100 feet from those locations? Just a moment. Thank you, Mr. Gallagher. Just a moment, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, thank you, Mr. Gallagher. We're not going to be answering those points. Those are matters of debate. Those aren't points of information as it relates to process. Assemblymember DeMaio, you are recognized. Mr. Speaker, a point of information. State your point, sir. Don't we have to wrap up this bill in time for the governor's 1.30 press conference to feed the media? Your point is not well taken, Mr. DeMaio. Okay, continuing on. Assemblymember Berman. Okay. Seeing and hearing no further debate, Assemblymember Avi Lafarious, do you wish to close? Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this bill is about prevention. As I shared in committee, there was a time when people rode in cars without seatbelts, and today we all understand why that changed. This is the same idea, prevention. It may not resonate with those who move through this world with a level of privilege that shields them from being profiled, but for others this is about safety, dignity, and reducing harm before it happens I respectfully ask for your aye vote and this bill has no opposition Thank you Assemblymember Avi Lafari That all debate having ceased Clerk will open the roll All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes. Ayes 42, Nose 15. The measure passes. Madam Majority Leader, you are recognized. Members, we got a late start, but we have dispensed with eight items. After we break for caucus, we will meet back here at 1.30 sharp and be ready to take up your bills. We'll see you at 1.30, not 1.31. Members, Democratic caucus in the Members' Lounge, Republican caucus in Capitol Room 125. We remain under call you will not be able to leave the designated green carpet areas as majority leader Agar curry stated we will meet back here Exactly at 1 30 p.m Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Okay members we going to get moving Hope everybody had a nice lunch Okay, before I recognize, thank you members. The house is back in session. The house is back in session. We are going to be starting off with AB 2379 by Assemblymember Solache, but before I do that, will you join me in recognizing Congressman Pete Aguilar in the rear of the chamber? Welcome, Congressman. Okay, take your desk members. Thank you. AB 2379 by Assemblymember Solache, the clerk will read. Assembly Bill 2379 by Assemblymember Solache and others, an act relating to child care and declaring the urgency thereof to take effect immediately. Assemblymember Solache, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to present AB 2379 to safeguard the constitutional rights of family child care providers. I represent a large immigrant community in southeast Los Angeles. For nearly a year, communities like mine have been under attack and living in fear. Inhumane deportation rates have spread fear across our communities, disrupted our workforce, and threatened access to vital child care services for both families and providers. We must take legislative action to better protect our communities and access to essential services like child care. Child care providers responsible for taking care of our children statewide deserve access to tools and resources needed to protect themselves and our children. AB 2379 ensures license and license exempt family child care providers are informed of their constitutional rights when confronted by immigration enforcement. The bill requires the Department of Social Services to notify providers of the Fourth Amendment protections to coordinate accessible multilingual training. The training will ensure providers understand the rights regarding searches, seizures, arrests and detentions in their homes. The bill will help child care doors open and save from intimidation, misinformation and unlawful searches or arrests when confronted by immigration enforcement. AB 2379 builds on existing sensitive location protections by ensuring family child care providers have the information and tools they need to protect themselves and their children in their care. My parents came to this country from León, Guanajuato to build a better life for our family. stand here today honoring their sacrifices, honoring the resilience of our immigrant communities, and the contributions of hardworking immigrants, hence build our neighborhoods, and enhance the prosperity of our nation. We must stand firm in a commitment to the constitutional rights of all people led with our humanity. As communities like mine continue to live in fear, unsure of what will come next, we must do what we can to protect them. I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you, Assemblymember Salache. I'll debate having ceased. Clerk will open the roll. Members, this is a 54-vote bill. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. clerk will close the roll tally votes ayes 59 noes 10. on the urgency ayes 59 noes 10. on the measure the measure passes Boy, I love those late votes. File item number 110, that's AB 2460 by Assemblymember Celeste Rodriguez, presented by Assemblymember Gabriel. Clerk will read. Assembly vote 2460 by Assemblymember Celeste Rodriguez, an act relating to people health. Assemblymember Gabriel, you are recognized. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to present AB 2460 on behalf of our colleague, Assemblywoman Celeste Rodriguez. This measure will ensure that schools are prepared to respond when students exhibit trauma or instability due to immigration enforcement. AB 2460 would require the California Department of Education to update the model referral protocols for students' behavioral health to include guidance on supporting students affected by immigration enforcement measures. emergencies and family deportation trauma. It would also require local education agencies to update their policies accordingly. AB 2460 helps schools respond with care, clarity, and consistency by making sure students and families can be connected to appropriate behavioral health supports. This bill has received bipartisan support and on behalf of our colleague from the San Fernando Valley, I respectfully request your aye vote on AB 2460. Thank you Assemblymember Gabriel. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. all members vote who desire to vote all members vote who desire to vote clerk will close the roll tally the vote size 40 eyes 52 nose 8 the measure passes members can you put your votes in earlier please that be possible press your button thank you members we're going to skip to file item number 116 that's ab 2495 by assembly member cholera the clerk will read assembly bill 2495 by assembly member cholera and others an act relating to employment assembly member cholera you are recognized thank you mr speaker ab 2495 expands the scope of prohibited unfair immigration-related practices that employers use to intimidate and dissuade workers from asserting their workplace rights. Anti-immigrant national rhetoric has emboldened bad-faith employers to increasingly deter immigrant workers from complaining about violations of their workplace rights by making bail threats, chilling statements, or implicit warnings about immigration consequences. When such employer coercion succeeds, unlawful conduct goes unreported, workplace standards erode and law-abiding employers are undercut. AB 2495 simply amends existing labor protections to establish that all immigration related threats are unlawful. I respectfully ask for your aye vote on this API caucus legislative priority bill. Thank you. Assemblymember Callerall, debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the votes. Ayes 50, nos 15. The measure passes. File item 127, that's AB 2662 by Assemblymember Carrillo. Clerk will read. Assemblymember Carrillo, an act relating to state government. Assemblymember Carrillo, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. AB 2662 is a modest, common-sense measure that would establish a formal process for California to monitor and document federal enforcement actions, assess their impact on our communities, and issue public reports. It would allow us to recommend legislative responses to prevent the kind of rogue and dangerous behavior were increasingly seen from federal law enforcement agencies. There should be no place in this nation where such actions are considered acceptable and there must be accountability for those who violate the rights and protections our democracy guarantees. This bill has no All registered opposition. Members, I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you, Assemblymember Carrillo. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the vote. Ayes, 51, noes, 13. The measure passes. File item 130 is AB 2721 Also by Assemblymember Carrillo Clerk will read Assembly Bill 2721 by Assemblymember Carrillo and others an act relating to businesses Assemblymember Carrillo you are recognized Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Fellow members, I rise today to present Assembly Bill 2721, a Latino caucus priority bill to ensure workplace safety for hospitality workers, which is a timely concern given the upcoming World Cup we will soon host. AB 2721 is a common sense, balanced bill simply directing hotels to disclose via a public notice on site reservations the hotel knows or should know it has with U.S. Customs and Border Protection as well as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Compliance would be materially and intentionally simple. A printer, paper, tape, and visible wall space. Hotels already post notices when elevators are out of service, or some elements of the premises require notification. This bill simply applies the same common sense principle of disclosure to activities affecting the safety of workers, guests, and surrounding communities. This bill does not prohibit hotels from hosting federal agencies or under-cattle enforcement operations to combat drug and human trafficking operations. Federal agencies themselves use their massive budget increase to redirect thousands of enforcement personnel away from drug and human trafficking operations to expand their operations targeting immigration enforcement. The bill does not seek to expand or expose hotels to any further liability. That's not the point here. In fact, we see disclosure in prioritizing the safety of workers and guests alike as the best practice to reduce liability all around. Be honest about the situation on the premises and give the people the chance to be safe proactively. This bill's intent is not to identify individuals, but to inform workers about operational conditions that may affect their safety. Thoughtful rollout can ensure disclosure remain general and identify only the agencies without compromising anyone's security. This bill does not regulate the actions of the federal government or create long-term burdens over federal policies change. The notice it aligns is minimal and consistent with existing posting obligations. California has a long history of recording disclosure of public's interest from Prop 65 levels to real estate transactions that do not, like this bill, interfere with commerce. This bill reasonably applies to precedent to balance everyone's needs. After the deaths of two Americans and 14 detainees, including some in my district, I must turn the public's trust and at this point for communities to feel safe in their presence. The Latino caucus respectfully ask for your vote on AB 2721. Thank you. Thank you Assemblymember Carrillo. Assemblymember Alanis, you are recognized. Thank you Mr. Speaker. I speak with concerns of this bill. I have great respect for the author. He's my friend. but I have real concerns about this bill. I'm worried this bill brings hotels' rights. It brings them right into this nasty fight that we have between the state and the federal government. And it's not fair to the California hotels. Even if hotels are new, every time a federal officer checks in, making this information public can create a serious safety threat, not just to officers themselves, but I'm really concerned about the safety of the hotel employees and guests for potential civil unrest developing as a result. Many federal agents have reasons to stay at California hotels that are not related to immigration enforcement, things like human trafficking, anti-narcotics, and anti-terrorism operations. I just ask the author and my friend to consider these concerns as the bill moves forward. Thank you. Thank you, Assemblymember Alanis. Assemblymember Gibson, you are recognized. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker and members. First of all I want to thank our member for bringing this bill before us today I rise in support of Assembly Bill 2721 I think that this is a very simple bill about disclosures at the hotels And also, looking at what's transpired in his own district, all this does is gives those individuals a heads up what's going on. These are individuals who works in the hotels, that works in the hospitality areas. areas, giving those employees the heads up that ICE is one, staying there for their own safety. And also, even in his own district, two individuals who were detainees in his district was also threatened and also harassed just because they were hotel workers there. It's a reasonable request of making sure that this notice is provided. there are strongly asked for an aye vote on Assembly Bill 2721. I thank the author for bringing this bill before us. It's simple. It makes sense. Thank you. Thank you, Assemblymember Gibson. Assemblymember Hoover, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in opposition of AB 2721. Let's make no mistake. Nothing about this bill is going to be simple. This is going to be a very difficult bill for hotels to actually implement. It holds hotels liable for information that they do not and that I would argue they should not be required to collect. It also puts private businesses in the middle of a fight between our state and the federal government. And finally, in what seems to be a theme on this floor today, it also puts our officers at risk. And it actually raises a lot of concerns for me about the safety of the law enforcement officials that are doing their job. So with respect, I appreciate a no vote. Thank you. Thank you, Assemblymember Hoover. Seeing and hearing no further debate, Assemblymember Carrillo, you may close. Thank you. To my friend and colleague from Odesto, points well taken. We will continue to work on it should this bill move forward from this floor. and the concerns of having other law enforcements being attacked by what this bill would do, the idea, again, is to just simply post a notice, letting guests know and workers who the guests are going to be there, if they are ice-fail agents. It's about safety with what we've seen. I think that it's something that is intended to be safe for guests and workers at the same time. So with that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you, Assemblymember Carrillo. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. The clerk will close the roll, tally the votes. Ayes 43, No, 17. The measure passes. File Item 137 is AB 1537. File Item 137 by Assemblymember Bryan. The clerk will read. Assembly Bill 1537 by Assemblymember Bryan and others, an act relating to peace officers. Assemblymember Bryan, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker and colleagues. This is a very simple bill. It simply says that if you sign up to protect and serve our communities during the day with a local law enforcement agency, you cannot moonlight with ICE. We've been working with the opposition and we've removed the Coast Guard or other parts of DHS that they've been concerned about and are also still open to conversations. I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you Assemblymember Bryan All debate having ceased clerk will open the roll All members vote who desire to vote All members vote who desire to vote All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the vote, ayes 43, noes 15. The measure passes. File item 152. File item 152 is AB 1806 by Assemblymember Gabriel. The clerk will read. Assemblymember Gabriel, you are recognized. Thank you very much Mr. Speaker. I rise today to present AB 1806 which would require the California Attorney General to conduct an independent, transparent and thorough investigation into any incident involving a fatal shooting by federal immigration enforcement agents. Since the Trump administration began its immigration enforcement search, our Nate Nissen had witnessed an unprecedented increase in civilian shootings by federal agents. An investigative report by the Wall Street Journal identified more than a dozen incidents that have resulted in multiple deaths. At least five of those shot were U.S. citizens. Two of the most high-profile cases involved the deaths of Renee Nicole Good, a 37-year-old mother of three who was fatally shot by an ICE agent on January 7th, and Alex Preddy, an ICU nurse who was fatally shot by a CPB officer on January 24th. These incidents have occurred in California as well. In Northridge, Keith Porter Jr. was shot and killed by an off-duty ICE agent. In Patterson just last month, Carlos Yvonne Mendoza Hernandez was shot seven times by ICE agents. He was shot in the face and is still recovering. In these cases, the federal government not only failed to investigate, but also apparently attempted to thwart other agencies from doing so. When circumstances are highly disputed and unanswered questions persist, an independent investigation is not just warranted, it is necessary. In these circumstances, the state has both a moral and a legal obligation to protect its residents and uphold the rule of law. We must use our power and authority to protect our immigrant communities, push back on federal overreach, and safeguard our constitutional rights. AB 1806 does exactly that, which is why it is supported by a robust coalition of labor, immigrants' rights, legal aid, and civil rights organizations that includes SEIU California, the California Immigrant Policy Center, and the Latino Community Foundation. Thank you and respectfully request your aye vote on AB 1806. Thank you, Assemblymember Gabriel. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the votes. Ayes 50, noes 17. The measure passes. File item 169, 169. That's AB 2318. AB 2318 by Assemblymember El-Hawari. The clerk will read. Assemblymember 2318 by Assemblymember El-Hawari and others, an act relating to law enforcement. Assemblymember El-Hawari, you may open on the measure. Good afternoon, Mr. Speaker and members. I am proud to present AB 2318, a bill that would make it unlawful for law enforcement to deny, delay, or fail to facilitate access to medical evaluation or treatment for an individual under law enforcement control. if it is safe and reasonable to provide such access. This bill would also impose documentation requirements on law enforcement in instances in which medical access is denied or delayed. AB 2318 is a Latino caucus priority and is a critical step in increasing transparency regarding access to medical treatment at the scene of incidents. It will also make it easier for medical professionals to provide life-saving interventions. In doing so, it will protect the vulnerable communities that have been targeted by predatory immigration tactics, as well as those who encounter law enforcement. Thank you, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you, Assemblymember El-Hawari. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes. Ayes 44, noes 18. The measure passes. Okay, while we're waiting, Mr. Haney is asked to lift the call on file item 40. Clerk will post. Clerk will close the roll, tally the votes, ayes 54, noes 16. Measure passes. Mr. Gabriel, let's do file item 56, that's AB 1807. File item 56, AB 1807 by Mr. Gabriel. Clerk will read. Madam Clerk? The file item is 56 AB 1807. Clerk will read. Assembly Bill 1807 by Assemblymember Gabriel and others, an act relating to immigration. Assemblymember Gabriel, you may open. Good morning Mr. Speaker and colleagues. I rise today to present AB 1807, which would prevent state resources from being commandeered to advance the Trump administration's dangerous and chaotic immigration agenda. Since June 2025, federal agents have conducted sweeping indiscriminate enforcement operations across California and our nation. These operations have taken place in workplaces, near residents, and in previously recognized sensitive locations and, in some cases, on state-owned property, including CSU and community college facilities. They have often unfolded in front of children, families, and community members. The events in Los Angeles, the deadly violence in other parts of our nation, and the pattern of reckless federal enforcement activity across this country demand a response. California cannot stand idly by and support this cruelty, allowing our own property to become a base for operations that terrorize our communities. AB 1807 would prohibit the use of state-owned property, including parking lots, vacant lots, and garages for federal immigration enforcement operations such as staging, processing, or detention activities. The use of state-owned property to facilitate federal immigration operations interferes with California's authority over its own resources, property, and personnel, and undermines public trust and confidence. Simply put we cannot be complicit in federal actions which are inciting chaos and violence and harm our communities AB 1807 is supported by a robust coalition of labor immigrant rights legal aid and civil rights organizations For that reason I ask for your aye vote on AB 1807 Thank you, Assemblymember Gabriel. All debate having ceased, Clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the votes. Ayes 52, nos 13. The measure passes. We're going back to file item number 19. File item number 19, that's AB 1627 by Assemblymember Avila Farias. The clerk will read. Assembly Bill 1627 by Assemblymember Avila Farias and others, an act relating to public employment. Assemblymember Avila Farias, you may open. Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I'm pleased to present AB 1627, the Meltheist Act of 2026. Californians deserve the best qualified and trained peace officers. AB 1627 ensures that federal immigration enforcement personnel are disqualified from becoming peace officers in California if they have committed misconduct in their prior role. This bill is about restoring public trust and holding federal law enforcement to the same standard as any other peace officer in California. Public service requires integrity, restraint, and respect. When those values are abandoned, public trust is broken and entire communities are put at risk. Communities are safer when we are policed by people who are committed to protecting the public rather than kidnapping them. Thank you, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you, Assemblymember Robbie Lafarrius. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the votes. Ayes, 43. Noes, 17. The measure passes. Okay, members, we're going to go to the very beginning of the assembly third reading file. We're going to pass and retain on file item four. We've already dispensed with file item number five. File item number 6 is AB 1905 by Assemblymember Schultz. Clerk will read. Assembly Bill 1905 by Assemblymember Schultz and others, an act relating to juveniles. Assemblymember Schultz, you are recognized. Yes, good afternoon, Mr. Speaker and members. Today I rise to present AB 1905, which safeguards constitutional protections for young people in custody by establishing clear guardrails around undercover custodial interrogation. I'd like to note that our office has worked very closely with the California District Attorneys Association to address their concerns and have agreed to amendments that limit this bill only to apply those who are 26 years of age or younger in custody, similar to another section of the California Penal Code that defines youth by this age. This significantly narrows the scope of the bill while still addressing the unique susceptibility to deception and a manipulation among this population. I also note that we agreed with CDAA to include a retroactivity provision ensuring that active criminal cases will not be impacted and moving forward our office remains committed to further conversations with CDAA and opposition for final amendment agreements With these changes AB 1905 will create a consistent and clear statewide standard that better prevents inadmissible statements coming from uniquely vulnerable youth With that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you, Assemblymember Schultz. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Excuse me. Clerk will close the roll. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes. Ayes 41, nos 12. The measure passes. File line number seven is AB 2109 by Assemblymember Dixon. Clerk will read. Assembly Bill 2109 by Assemblymember Dixon, inoculating to attorney. Assemblymember Dixon, you are recognized. Thank you very much. Good afternoon, Mr. Speaker and members. I'll be very quick on a support support. I'm proud to present AB 2109 today. This measure would require the California State Bar to adopt the universal bar exam or any successor or replacement of this exam. This is a support support measure that received unanimous bipartisan support in the Judiciary Committee respectfully request an aye vote. Thank you very much. Thank you. Assemblymember Dixon, all debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the votes. Ayes 57, no 0. The measure passes. Passed to retain on 8, 9, and 10. File item number 11. That's AB 1821 by Assemblymember Pacheco. The clerk will read. Assemblymember Pacheco, an act relating to public records. Assemblymember Pacheco, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. Today I rise to present AB 1821, which makes a modest change to relieve the growing strain that time-intensive public records requests are placing on local agencies. Public access to government records is an essential part of a democracy. That principle does not change with this bill. Local agencies across the state are seeing a sharp increase in requests that are broad, time-intensive, and costly to process. Some requests span years of records, require the review of thousands of documents, and can take months or even years to complete. Public records requests should not overwhelm a city's ability to serve residents, especially when requests are abandoned, duplicative, or designed for commercial purposes rather than public accountability. The bill is still a work in progress, and I remain committed to working with stakeholders to address some of the most time-intensive and costly requests. I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you, Assemblymember Pacheco. Assemblymember DeMaio, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise at present in opposition to the bill AB 1821. I completely agree with the author's intention that there are a number of public records requests that are frivolous, and they tie up important taxpayer resources. But at the same time, we cannot police the public's right to know, and we want to err on the side of transparency in how government agencies operate. But you are on to a problem that could be addressed in a number of ways. My concern is the bill in the present form just blanket provides an ability for the agencies to make the determination on their own They may not make the right determination And so, while I'm not going to support it today, I would like to see the CPRA strengthened. And perhaps we can make some reforms to deal with the frivolous requests. If that is your intent, I would like to see that as a bipartisan effort and would look forward to working with you on a bill that would do both strengthening on one level but also providing some flexibility on another. Thank you. Thank you, Assemblymember DeMaio. Seeing and hearing no further debate, Assemblymember Pacheco, do you wish to close? Thank you, and I want to thank my colleague from San Diego for those comments. As mentioned, this bill is still a work in progress. We're doing everything we can do to help our cities who are being overburdened with public records requests. And I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you Assembly Member Pacheco. All debate having ceased. Clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes. Ayes 47, noes 10. Measure passed. Pass and retain on file item 12. We've already dispensed with file item 13. Pass and retain on file item 14. We've already dispensed with file item 15. File item 16. AB 2215 by Assemblymember Calderon. Clerk will read. Assemblymember Calderon and others, an act relating to water. Assemblymember Calderon, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to present AB 2215. This bill preserves the Department of Water Resources water rights to the State Water Project until 2046. DWR manages the State Water Project and provides water to 27 million Californians. Over the past several years, DWR has been working diligently to enhance their infrastructure in order to appropriate water up to their established limits. This important work includes mitigating against climate change and its effects on our water supply. Without the full development of the DWR's water rights, DWR will be capped at their capacity to appropriate water. This will eventually lead to unmet demand and subsequently increased water rates for the millions of Californians that rely on the state water project for their water needs. I want to clarify that this bill doesn't approve any future project, nor does it diminish the rights of members of the public to participate in future state water project permitting processes. This bill is simply seeking to protect water rate payers as affordability remains a top concern for our constituents. I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you. Assemblymember Calderon. Assemblymember Papin, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in strong support of AB 2215. The truth is we're not going to get a whole lot more of our water by way of the alpine snow melt that we used to get and were really used to. Now it comes through deluges of what? Atmospheric rivers. So this bill is about making the state water project a bit more nimble so that we can capture those deluges of water when they come. The time is now for us to be more flexible. So I applaud the author from L.A. for bringing this bill because it really does allow flexibility for us to make sure that we can fortify ourselves against things like flood or drought. Because I know that the public, when they see this rain coming, they're sort of like, why didn't you capture that? So I appreciate the bill. It's really essential to infrastructure that supports millions of California and hundreds of thousands of acres of farmland. Our economy and our quality of life are impacted by this very important bill. So I strongly request and respectfully request an aye vote on AB 2215 and thank again to the author. Thank you, Assemblymember Papin. Assemblymember Jeff Gonzalez, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to thank the author for this bill, the chair of Waterparks and Wildlife. As the vice chair of Waterparks and Wildlife, we've talked about this quite often. and I rise in support of this bill, and I encourage my colleagues to do the same. Thank you, Assemblymember Gonzalez. Assemblymember Flora, Leader Flora, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I have great respect for the author, but sadly I'm going to lay off this bill today. I think one of the frustrations a lot of us that represent the northern part of the state is 2014, then Governor Jerry Brown, we passed a bond to build Sise Reservoir, to build infrastructure, to build storage. So I think we really have to take this serious. We need to talk about storage before we talk about conveyance. And for those reasons, I'm playing off today. Thank you. Thank you, Leader Flora. Seeing and hearing no further debate, Assemblymember Calderon, do you wish to close? I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you, Assemblymember Calderon. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the votes. Ayes 51, excuse me, ayes 52, noes 1. The measure passes. Pass and retain on file item 17. File item 18 is AB 2033 by Assemblymember Pappen. The clerk will read. Assemblymember 2033 by Assemblymember Pappen, an act relating to public contracts. Assemblymember Pappen, you are recognized. Thank you so much, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to present AB 2033, which authorizes general law cities to have job order contracts for repairs, renovation and maintenance. This is a really efficient way for cities to proceed when they have, let's say, an emergency broken pipe. It's why the state has already authorized counties, school districts and community colleges to use job order contracts. This bill simply extends the right to use them to general law cities. I made a commitment in local government committee to address stakeholder concerns, and I'm proud to say that the bill has been amended with additional guardrails for existing city employees, and as such, AFSCME has removed their opposition to the bill. Thank you, and I respectfully request an aye vote. Thank you, Assemblymember Papin. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the vote, ayes 56, noes 1, the measure passes. We've already dispensed with file item 19. We're going to pass the return on file item 20. File item 21 is AB 2118 by Assemblymember Hoover. The clerk will read. Assembly Bill 2118 by Assemblymember Hoover and act relating to Helsing. Assemblymember Hoover, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 2118 makes technical changes to existing law and adds clarity to promote the development of new units and provide more opportunities for affordable housing. The bill has bipartisan support. Respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you. Assemblymember Hoover, all debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote Clerk will close the roll tally the vote Ayes 16 no zero The measure passes By item 22 is AB 2211 Also by Assemblymember Hoover the clerk will read Assemblymember 2211 by Assemblymember Hoover, an act relating to alcoholic beverages. Assemblymember Hoover, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. AB 2211 simply allows California craft distillers to operate a second tasting room separate from the craft distillers place of production and manufacture. The bill has received unanimous support. Respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you Assemblymember Hoover. All debate having ceased. Clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes. I-64, no-0. The measure passes. We're going to pass temporarily on file item 23. Pass and retain on file items 24, 25, 26. We've already dispensed with file item 27. Passing in tandem file items 28, 29, 30. File item 31 is AB 2433 by Assemblymember Alvarez. Clerk will read. Assembly Bill 2433 by Assemblymember Alvarez and others, an act relating to housing. Assemblymember Alvarez, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to present Assembly Bill 2433, the Affordable Homes Bonus Law, to modernize and strengthen California's most successful housing tool that we have, the density bonus law. The bonus law has produced over 140,000 entitled housing units across California in the past five years, more than every other housing streamlining law that we have in the state of California. More importantly, this bill provides additional incentives for projects that include deed-restricted units for families for purchase, not for rent, but for purchase. I support rental housing, but I think we also need to incentivize the construction of homes that Californians can actually buy to start to build equity and to build that California dream. According to a recent UC Berkeley study, the average Californian doesn't become a homeowner until the age of 49, and over 70% of California families cannot afford to buy a typical condo or townhome. This bill aims to help do that. I'll respectfully request your aye vote on AB 2433. Thank you, Assemblymember Alvarez. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the vote, ayes 53, no zero. The measure passes. Pass or maintain file item 32. File line 33 is AB 1732, also by Assemblymember Alvarez. Kirk will read. Assembly Bill 1732 by Assemblymember Alvarez and others, an act relating to environmental quality. Assemblymember Alvarez, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm proud to present Assembly Bill 1732, Student Faculty Housing Opportunity Act. California is home to the greatest public university systems in the world. I think we can all be very proud of that. But the hard truth is that too many students cannot find a place to sleep at night. A recent survey from the Legislative Analyst's Office shows that roughly 7% of UC students and 11% of CSU students face housing instability every year. And at community colleges, that's even worse, where the number is one in four have housing instability. We know the stories. Students are sleeping in their cars, couch surfing, or dropping out entirely because they cannot afford to stay housed while staying enrolled. This is a crisis that impacts faculty and employees as well. AB 1732 does one simple thing to address this problem. It extends our streamlining for housing projects at our public campuses an option that is already available for private builders through infill exemptions that were approved previously by the legislature I proud to have the support and sponsors of the Student Homes Coalition and the University of California Student Association, but also the University of California, the California School Employees Association, the Faculty Association, and we don't have any opposition, and for that reason, I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you, Assemblymember Alvarez. All debate having ceased. Clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the vote, size 63, no zero. The measure passes. Members, we're going to go backwards and just go through a bill that we skipped very briefly. File Item 23, that's File Item 23, AB 2224 by Assemblymember Hadwick. The clerk will read. Assembly Bill 2224 by Assemblymember Hadwick and others, an act relating to local government. Assemblymember Hadwick, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is a support bill, and I request an aye vote, please. Thank you, Assemblymember Hadwick. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the votes. I 60, no 0. The measure passes. Going back to where we left off, is file item 34, that's AB 1540 by Assemblymember Mark Gonzalez. Clerk will read. Assembly Bill 1540 by Assemblymember Mark Gonzalez and others, an act relating to mental health and declaring the urgency thereof to take effect immediately. Members, this is a 54-vote bill. Mr. Majority Whip, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Remember, today I rise because somewhere in California right now, there's an LGBTQ plus person, young person, scared, alone, and in crisis. This bill is an LGBT caucus priority bill. There's an invisible struggle that many of us in the community have faced. That strain on your heart, that spiral in your mind, the endless nights of tears and what ifs. And in a world that tells you that you are not normal, that you are not okay, it can take its toll. AB 1540 takes a stand. This bill reaffirms our support of our communities, youth, and it offers a hand-on-hand, a shoulder saying, you are okay, you are heard, you are valid. AB 1540 restores the Press 3 LGBTQ plus youth crisis hotline within the 988 suicide and crisis lifeline. A lifeline that was ripped away by executive order just under one year ago by the current federal administration. Prior to being axed, the Press 3 hotline routed 1.5 million contacts over three years to specialized care. And in the months leading up to the cut, rates spiked to nearly 70,000 contacts per month. California alone made up between 9 to 11 percent of those contacts. That doesn't just happen by accident. It was trusted support mechanism for thousands across our states. Research estimates that 4 in 10 LGBTQ plus youth have seriously considered attempting suicide. On top of that, the CDC reports that 20 percent of LGB youth have attempted to end their life. Not because they are broken, but because our systems are. Every day, every single day, we see and we hear the hateful rhetoric claiming that our LGBTQ plus youth children do not fit in, that they are sinful or that they don fit the norm Members this is our chance to offer a safe space a space where identities are validated where help can be offered where crisis services can intervene before the worst happens. Thank you, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you, Assemblymember Gonzalez. Dr. Sharp-Collins, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in strong support of Assembly Bill 1540. My colleague said a lot of wonderful things, and thank you to my colleague from Los Angeles for presenting this bill. California has a long history of leadership in mental health and suicide prevention, and this legislation is a bold step to continuing that leadership where it is needed the most. The LGBTQ plus youth face unique challenges, and tragically, too many lives are lost because of the support they need is just taken away from them. We are seeing an uptick of hate, homophobia, transphobia, and so much more throughout this entire country. And I'm a firm believer that it is our responsibility to fight back. This bill, in my opinion, it does just that. It fights back. It reminds us that our babies, and it actually just reminds the babies alone, that leadership refuses to leave them behind. And that we will take the necessary steps to actually protect them. The sad reality is that some of us like to pick and choose which lives hold a lot more value. We are pro-children, but yet we do so little to ensure that these children have a healthy and safe life when they are here. So we have the tools, we have the knowledge, and we ultimately have the responsibility to protect our most vulnerable children. And we must do everything we can to act now and to continue to save lives. So with that, I do urge a strong support of Assembly Bill 1540. Once again, thank you to my colleague for presenting the bill. Thank you, Dr. Sharp-Collins. Assemblymember DeMaio, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in opposition to AB 1540. It reminds me of the proliferation of all these call centers and contracts. Really, this is calling for a contract for an NGO to provide these services. About two and a half years ago, the governor announced in a related move the creation of a hate crime hotline. And he said he was going to set up a hotline. I thought we had a hate crime hotline. It was 911. But he was going to set up a brand new hotline. It would be staffed by a left-wing NGO under a government contract, and it would give people the opportunity to report hate crimes. Two years later, in one of two budget committee hearings that I was allowed to participate in, I asked for the records relating to this contract. And I said, how many crimes were referred by the hotline over a two-year period? Excuse me, Mr. DeMaio. Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan, you are recognized. I just want to make sure we're focused on 98 hotlines, as that's the subject matter of this bill. Your point is not well taken. Mr. DeMaio, you may continue. I think that you are staying at the merits of this bill. Please continue. So I asked, how many criminal referrals happened from this additional hotline that we set up? And the answer was zero. Excuse me, Mr. DeMaio. Somebody member of our can? Oh, I'm sorry. That's to speak on the measure. Thank you. Sorry, Mr. DeMaio. That's okay. Thank you. I then asked, how many contacts were there? were handled by the hotline over two years. And the answer was several thousand, but there was a catch. 95% of them were pranks. And so we ended up spending nearly $5 million on this contract for zero, zero, absolutely zero criminal referrals. I know that there's a good intention behind this bill, But rather than setting up another hotline, a duplicative bureaucracy, hot wiring potentially a contract to an organization, let's really look at our alternatives. There are a number of other suitable alternatives that can provide better suicide prevention for all members of our community than to go down and have a duplicative bureaucracy that will just waste funds. Thank you, Assemblymember DeMaio. Assemblymember Ward, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I definitely want to rise in strong support of AB 1540. I want to thank our colleague from Los Angeles for working on this issue for several years, because despite extensive evidence showcasing that LGBTQ youth continue to face disproportionately high rates of depression, suicidal ideation, and mental health crisis, the federal administration chose to eliminate the dedicated federal 988 Press 3 LGBTQ crisis line. It's a specialized evidence-based resource which connects young people with counselors trained to understand their unique experiences and needs. And since its launch, the federal service had handled more than one million crisis contacts from LGBTQ youth seeking life-saving support. One million contacts. This is such a benefit to our youth and their well-being. Now, AB 1540

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. And I rise in strong support of this bill and just want to clarify, since our colleague from San Diego is not speaking about the 988 call centers. These call centers, which I want to be clear, have had bipartisan support on this floor because it is not a partisan issue to save people from mental health crisis. Democrats, Republicans, we have always agreed that this service is one that is fundamental to Californians. In fact, we passed off of this floor in a bipartisan way the 988 funding because we all understood the value of the care that is provided through the 988 call centers. And the people who staff these call centers, and I've met many of them, are incredible human beings. They spend all day and all night talking to people who are in the middle of crisis who without their voices would otherwise potentially die by suicide and they save lives And I wanna note that since the 98 suicide crisis lifeline went into effect 4 young people lives have been saved by the 98 rollout 11% more young people's lives were saved by 98 than before we had that number. So this is an incredibly important program, and until recently, we had Press 3. If you called 98 and you wanted culturally competent care and you were an LGBTQ plus person, you could get that culturally competent care. To be clear, in order for a call center to answer that Press 3 number, they had to be a 90-day call center. And this is to the point that was made earlier by a colleague. 90-day call centers have some of the highest certification standards in the country overseen by the federal government. They have to respond with an understood amount of time. If they're not, it gets rolled over to another call center. And so we shouldn't be worried about the quality of care because that is overseen by the federal government. We make sure these are well-spent funds. And people need this life-saving care. And so I want to thank the author of this legislation for making sure that we're meeting every Californian where they are when they are at their moment of crisis. I want to thank the call center operators for doing this challenging and incredible work in saving the lives they do every single day. And I look forward to a future where we don't have to ask questions about why we're saving people who need it. With that respect, I ask for an aye vote. Thank you.

Yes, Mr. Speaker. Thank you to the member from Orinda. I know we've worked heavily on this particular issue, but making sure that we got to a point where it made sense, especially under the 98 call centers. I want to thank my two colleagues from San Diego on my side of the aisle for their words and their wisdom and their passion and understanding what this means. And I'm sorry to my other colleague from San Diego who identifies as LGBTQ+, but just doesn't get it. And who's voting against the own merits for what he says he is and stands for, but yet is in favor of voting down a measure that is literally here to save lives. I want to talk about, and I don't have permission to say this, but a friend of mine, someone that I met on April 11th, had told me a story about how they called the 988 helpline, someone answered, and it saved their life that day. I mention that because on April 14th, in health committee, I talked about this gentleman's story and how he called 988. And we were at a music festival talking about this, And he was sharing with me, coming out, being non-white individual, how culturally it was wrong for him to do that. He called 98. Someone answered the phone. He took the call. Saved his life. I talked about that in health committee, how using the 98 helpline helps people and saves lives. On April 19th, I saw him again. I said, hey, thanks again for sharing your story with me. I shared that in the health committee. and people were moved by that because it was a story in which they heard your story and about dialing that phone number because you had no other avenue to turn to and you chose to dial it in. Someone answered that call and they saved your life. Unfortunately, the evening of May 11th, he took his life. I don't know if he called 988 at all, but I do know that he wanted to not have any more suffering and pain because when he did come out, he was outcasted. He was treated like a second individual And I haven shared this story with a lot of other people other than my staff but it really hurts that somebody would have to get to this level where they have to take their own life. And so I don't necessarily know if they call 9-8-8, but this is what this bill is about. It's about saving the lives of many people that we will never meet. It's why we got elected to serve. It's why we are here today on this green carpet. but I know we have 100 and something bills that we got to get done today, and I get that. But this is one of those bills that really matter because it saves lives. And so I want you to take into consideration when we do these policies and we say those words, it's not just about policy, it's personal. And with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Mr. Speaker, a point of personal privilege.

Under the human resources rules of the state assembly, under the state assembly's human resources rules, is it not unlawful and not acceptable for any colleague in the assembly, whether they are a member or a staff member, to refer to someone's immutable characteristics such as gender, religion, sexual orientation, skin color, when discussing their position or their ability to do a job.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. So I bring to you AB 1542 because Californians are more vulnerable to digital exploitation than ever before. As you all know, our mobile devices are ubiquitous in our daily lives, with most consumers keeping their phones with them at all times. And these devices have an incredible power to be able to track every aspect of our personal lives. They generate a shockingly accurate detail and record of a user's day-to-day activities. So in the past six years, the Federal Trade Commission has raised the alarm and filed multiple complaints against major data brokers, exposing how they collect and sell billions of data points that map people's lives out in disturbing detail. In their complaints, the commission alleged that data brokers collected billions of data points and timestamps that could offer insights into people's movements. This information is then repackaged and resold to their clients. And this kind of surveillance doesn't just violate privacy, it really puts real lives at risk. It opens the door to stigma, discrimination, and even violence amongst the most vulnerable among us, immigrants. the LGBTQ community, survivors of domestic violence, and people simply trying to access health care or practice their religion. And this is no more evident than the immigration raids conducted last month in Los Angeles, where federal agencies use vast quantities of geolocation data to detain dozens and spread fear through our communities. So AB 1542 is the California Data Privacy Act, which would safeguard the privacy of Californians by placing a clear ban on the sale and sharing of sensitive data by updating the definition in the existing CCPA, including but not limited to a consumer's precise geolocation, immigration status, race or ethnic origin, religion, health and genetic data, sexual orientation, and social security number. The FTC has made it clear in their reports that this conduct undermines our civil rights and puts all consumers in danger from exploitation. However, with the change in federal administration, it has become clear that action must come from the state level to safeguard consumer privacy and ensure the safety of all Californians is made a top priority. I respectfully request your aye vote.

Mr. Ward moves a call.

Thank you, Madam Speaker and members. AB 1556 is my four-year in a row attempt to strengthen and clarify California's approach to drug-free recovery housing. Recovery housing is an evidence-based model that provides stable, supportive environments for individuals working to maintain sobriety and rebuild their lives. It's received unanimous support in both policy committees and has its support recommendation I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Ms. Wilson, you are recognized on the matter. Thank you. Madam Speaker, good afternoon, members. I'm pleased to present AB 1613. This is a bill that would create a California off-highway vehicle safety and stewardship course as a self-guided certification of knowledge of safe operating practices of OHVs and require operators of OHVs to take this course in order to access off-highway lands beginning in 2029. Both federal and state statute have standards for the safe operation of OHV. However, there is no requirement that operators know these existing or other safety standards. Additionally, there is no requirement that they have the ability to demonstrate their knowledge through a certification program. Because of this gap in law, misuse, property damage, accidents and injuries and even deaths have become a problem in our state parks and other public lands that allow OHV recreation. AB 1613 is a culmination of years of work amongst the community and is not only modeled after similar programs in other states like Utah and Arizona but it's modeled after California's own successful voter ID card that the legislature approved over a decade ago. It's time that we take responsibility and move forward on our OHV lands in order to improve safety and enact the change the community the OHV community has been asking for with that I thank you and

me Gonzalez yes Jeff Gonzalez I apologize thank you Madam Speaker I rise in respectful opposition uh to this to this bill I have the largest OHV area in all of California. I also have the third largest OHV area as well. One of the pieces in my area is culturally a lot of people have to go to the store or get something for their loved one. And they have to travel sand dunes to get there. And they're underage. This is a part of how transportation happens in the very remote areas of my district. It is huge, huge, vast land areas. So as we go through this, I would ask the author and others to consider that this will impact current families that are operating to go to schools, to stores, to different areas, just to take care of their own. So I respectfully ask for an opposition, a no vote.

Thank you. Madam Speaker, I would like to note the comments from my colleague across the aisle who brought up some of these concerns when we were in the committee. And we know that the current law for minimum operation without supervision is 16. So we started with that. But under 16, it just requires supervision and, of course, taking this course. And so good for safety especially those who are under the age of 16 knowing how to properly operate the vehicle With that I respectfully ask for your aye vote Clerk will open the roll All members vote who desire to vote All members vote who desire to vote

Mr. Maritsucci, you are recognized on the matter. Thank you very much. I rise to present AB 1644, a bipartisan bill to establish a bell-to-bell smartphone ban for TK-8 in California schools. Research continues to show that excessive smartphone use negatively impacts student learning, mental health, and social well-being. Schools that have implemented bell-to-bell restrictions have reported improved academic outcomes, fewer classroom distractions, and reductions in cyberbullying and other disciplinary issues. This bill is building on the first law that I authored in 2019 and the 2024 law that we all passed to help schools address the growing impact of excessive smartphone use at schools. AB 1644 is building on these efforts with common sense exceptions for smartphone uses for educational purposes, safety, and health. This bill has received bipartisan support, represents, is a support support bill, and respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Rise in strong support of AB 1644. A few years ago, the author and I put forward the Phone-Free Schools Act in 2024, which really got our state moving in the right direction when it comes to limiting and restricting smartphone use in our classrooms. I think this bill, the results are in, by the way. It is, in most school districts, working very well with the best practices that have been established across the state. I think this bill moves the ball further in the right direction and happy to support, would request an aye vote.

No?

Mr. Hart, you are recognized on the matter. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I am pleased to present AB 1682, which expands access to scalp cooling for patients undergoing chemotherapy. Each year, more than 30,000 Californians are diagnosed with breast cancer, many of whom will undergo chemotherapy treatment. Hair loss is one of the most visible and emotionally distressing side effects of chemotherapy, impacting a patient's confidence, mental health, and sense of privacy. FDA-cleared scalp cooling devices are a proven way to help reduce chemotherapy-induced hair loss and support patients' sense of normalcy during an already difficult time. AB 1682 will require California health plans and insurers to cover scalp cooling devices for patients undergoing chemotherapy, expanding access to supportive cancer care at a minimal cost. I respectfully request an aye vote.

Mr. Carrillo, you are recognized to open on the matter. Thank you, Madam Chair. I rise to present Assembly Bill 1710. AB 1710 is a bipartisan effort to address California's unprecedented housing crisis. the grasses that have left too many people without a home, struggling to pay rent and unable to achieve home ownership. This bill builds on proven success of SB 330 in 2019 by ensuring that once a housing project begins the entitlement process, it isn't subject to certain regulatory changes. Except for essential updates related to health and safety concerns or to mitigate significant sequence of environmental impacts, among others, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Ms. Dixon, you are recognized to open on the matter. Thank you. Thank you. Good afternoon, Madam Speaker and members. I'm proud to present AB 1749 today. This bill would help our first responders during their response to wildfire emergencies by limiting unauthorized drone operation. This is a support support and received unanimous bipartisan support in committee. I respectfully request your aye vote. Thank you.

Mr. Rogers, you are recognized on the matter. Thanks so much, Madam Speaker. This bill will bring greater transparency into the power charge indifference adjustment methodology that will allow for our community choice aggregators to better plan for and address potential impacts on rate payers. It is a measure that will reduce the cost for our electricity providers, and I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Mr. Garcia, you are recognized on the matter. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise today to present AB 1770, a bipartisan bill that restores faith in the arbitration process, which was inspired by Linda Lee Iverson, who unfortunately passed away due to her misdiagnosed battle with breast cancer. Private health plans require binding arbitration to resolve malpractice claims. Arbitrators can make factual and legal errors, and those errors go unchecked. unchecked. The state currently lacks the legally required data to oversee the private arbitration process, making this an unfair process. AB 1770 would make arbitration proceedings and outcomes involving health care service plan subject to the oversight by the Attorney General under DOJ authority. This bill is about restoring faith in the arbitration process because Californians deserve a just and equitable path towards resolving health care claims. I respectfully ask for an

Ms. Pappin, you are recognized on the matter. Thank you, Madam Speaker. We've got another golden muscle bill here, folks. We know how invasive the species is. So this bill relates to California lacking a coordinated framework for aquatic invasive species. So AB 1772 creates that framework by establishing, A, a statewide decontamination standard for watercraft. watercraft that boats going from lake to lake creating reciprocity so certain certifications are recognized across the various water bodies and identifying broader long funding sources This bill is about coordination and consistency Without it, the state will remain very reactive instead of proactive as it relates to invasive species. With it, we can stay ahead of emerging threats, and I respectfully request an aye vote.

Ms. Wilson, you are recognized to open on the matter. Thank you. Madam Speaker, good afternoon, members. I'm honored to present AB 1798. Today, more Californians than ever are turning to genetic testing to better understand their health and pursue preventative care. But many are concerned that genetic information could be used against them when seeking insurance coverage. That is why my bill, AB 1798, prohibits life and non-health disability insurers from using non-diagnostic genetic information to deny coverage or increase premiums. At the same time, AB 1798 is carefully balanced. Insurance may still consider medical history and family history. What they cannot do is rely on genetic information that is often predictive, uncertain, and non-diagnostic. California already prohibits the use of protected characteristics like race or sexual orientation, even where statistical correlations may exist, because we recognize that some factors are simply inappropriate basing for pricing risk. we prohibit their use because fairness and civil rights outweigh purely actuarial considerations so members if we agree that people should not pay more or be denied coverage because of who they are then we must also agree that they should not be penalized for what's written in their dna ultimately this bill is about balance ab 1798 ensures that genetic testing leads to better health, it protects privacy, promotes early detection, and reinforces trust in both our health care and insurance systems. We are standing at the intersection of innovation and policy, and the choices we make today will shape how Californians experience the future of medicine. AB 1798 ensures that that future is one of trust, access, and protection, not fear. With that, I thank you and respectfully ask for your aye vote.

It deals with the destruction of problematic weed products and deserves your support.

Ms. Correll, you are recognized to open on the matter. Good afternoon, Madam Speaker and colleagues. I present you Assembly Bill 1854. This is an important bill that closes a loophole in current California law, making sure that patients and providers' confidential information is protected when they're seeking health services. I respectfully ask your aye vote.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, I rise today to present AB 1930, sponsored by Attorney General Rob Bonta and Equality California, which will defend health care access and enforce California's protected health activities laws for all who provide and receive care in California. Across the country, we are seeing efforts to intimidate patients, to target providers, and to attack abortion care and gender-affirming care. Last year, the United States Department of Justice issued a subpoena to Children's Hospital Los Angeles seeking information that could identify thousands of transgender youth receiving care. That action didn't just raise alarms, it put privacy and safety at risk, and it contributed to the closure of the hospital's Center for Trans Youth Health and Development, cutting off access to care for young people who need it most. AB 1930 will protect patients and providers by requiring business entities in California to notify the office of the California Attorney General if they intend to respond to a subpoena or summons regarding abortion care and gender-affirming care, and make reasonable attempts to notify any individuals whose subpoena pertains to. This bill also gives the Attorney General authority to both intervene and to enforce the provisions of the bill, including through civil action and civil penalties. Abortion care is health care. Gender-affirming care is health care. And health care decisions involve patients, their parents, and health care providers. That's it. California will not buckle under to threats to intimidate our communities We are going to stand firmly on the side of patient privacy dignity and access to care We are going to protect our providers and we going to make sure that California remains a safe haven for those who need it. Members, I respectfully ask for your aye vote on AB1930.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. This bill is a support support with no opposition. I respectfully ask for your eyes to vote.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise today to present AB 2142, a bill that ensures classified employees that are employed for longer than 75% of a school year are given the benefits and protections they are entitled to as permanent staff. While existing laws are intended to help schools and colleges hire temporary staff during times of need, it has led to the abuse of these employees. These short-term employees are defined as anyone who does classified work for up to 75% of the school year. Although these positions are deemed, quote, not needed on a continuing basis, end quote, in theory, they are in fact utilized continuously for many years. Some examples of these employees include being kept at short-term for 10 years or more without access to basic benefits such as sick leave. The practice of maneuvering within the loopholes of this law denies employees the status and benefits provided by regular employment even though they are working effectively a full-time job. AB 2142 ensures that employees hired and work repeatedly done for longer than 75% of the school year are given the benefits and protections they are entitled to as permanent staff. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I am pleased to present AB 2026, a bill to help California recharge more groundwater and adapt to our new water reality. California is facing more extreme storms, deeper droughts, and less reliable snowpack. Just look at this year. We have no snowpack and summer is on the way. If we can capture and store more water in waves years, we will be better prepared to support our communities and the environment during dry years. Groundwater recharge is one of the best ways to do that. Our largest water storage reservoirs are naturally formed aquifers, which provide a cost-effective and natural way to store water. Groundwater recharge also helps prevent land subsidence, reduces flood risk and supports communities who are working to meet their SGMA goals. But today, groundwater Water recharge permitting is expensive, complicated and too rigid to work when water is actually available. Even when permits are approved, less than 4 percent of the permitted recharge actually takes place. This bill makes common sense changes to streamline permitting while maintaining protections for water rights holders, the environment and tribal cultural resources. This bill allows applicants to secure permits in advance and use them when high-flow conditions actually occur instead of missing the opportunity because of rigid permit timelines. It also codifies CEQA exemptions that have already been used for groundwater recharge projects under executive orders for more than a decade while preserving tribal consultation requirements. These changes will help California capture more water during wet periods and better prepare for drought while maintaining important protections for the environment. I have appreciated all the stakeholders who have come to the table to work on this complicated issue with me and I will continue to work with him. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in strong support of AB 2026. I appreciate your leadership on this issue. This is an issue that impacts my district significantly. We have a lot of rural areas and they've had a devil of a time trying to navigate the bureaucratic landmines. Water policy is another area where I believe there's so much bipartisan potential for us to work together and really provide meaningful solutions for Californians. Thank you so much.

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, AB 2158 encourages LEAs to integrate outdoor learning into instruction and requires the Department of Education to develop and maintain on their website statewide guidance on outdoor learning. At a time when our students are spending more time than ever on their phones, this bill gives schools a practical way to help students reconnect with the natural world while strengthening their focus and academic success. Would greatly appreciate an aye vote.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. This bill has no opposition, and its support, support, respectfully, I request an I vote.

on the matter. Thank you, Madam Speaker, members. Since time immemorial, Indigenous communities have been the stewards of this land, developing a comprehensive understanding of its many eco-cultural systems, including its life-giving water resources. However, Western colonization deprived tribes of their traditional water resources and laid the groundwork for a water rights system that continues to exclude tribes to this day. Although state agencies have worked to engage tribes on water issues, their impact has been limited by a lack of statutory authority to respond to water related inequities. AB 2218 addresses this problem by establishing a state policy of recognizing and addressing water related inequities perpetrated against tribes by state sanctioned actions. This bill will also require certain state agencies, including CNRA, to implement this policy when they revise, adopt, or establish policies to address inequities. Amendments taken in Policy Committee respond to opposition concerns by clarifying certain sections of the bill and removing language that could have disrupted existing water rights. I want to thank the chair of our Native American Legislative Caucus and his staff for their support and guidance as this bill has made its way through policy committees. And I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. On behalf of Assemblywoman Celeste Rodriguez, I present Assembly Bill 2195, the Work to Support Families Act. This bill builds on previous legislation efforts to modernize California's child support laws. It ends the actual practice of suspending professional licenses for late child support payments if the noncustodial parent earns below 70% of the county's average median income. This bill helps prevent parents and children from falling deeper into poverty by ensuring parents can keep working. The author's office worked in collaboration with the opposition, the CalCSA, who has changed its position to now neutral. So on behalf of Assemblymember Celeste Rodriguez, I respectfully urge your aye vote for Assembly Bill 2195.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, AB 2222 is the Community News Act and it creates a targeted journalist's employment tax credit to help local news organizations hire and retain reporters covering California communities. We all know that local journalism is in crisis. Thousands of newspapers have closed nationwide, newsroom staffing has collapsed, and too many communities are losing access to reliable local reporting. This bill invests directly in local journalism jobs, supporting reporters who are covering schools, local government, public safety, and community issues that Californians rely on every day. This is a content-neutral, bipartisan approach focused on preserving local civic infrastructure and strengthening access to trustworthy community news. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise today to proudly present another geothermal bill. I really believe that geothermal is one of the waves of the future as it relates to renewable energy. And so all this bill does is it changes the definition of geothermal exploratory projects so that it takes into account a more modern way of exploring for geothermal energy. It's really good stuff. Thank you, Madam Majority Leader. So in any event, this bill has unanimous bipartisan support, and I respect the request and aye vote.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. AB 2258 addresses California's child care affordability crisis by redirecting underused and underutilized funds to alternative payment program. Approximately 1.8 million income-eligible children across the state do not have subsidized child care. Too-often funds have already been appropriated to serve families and go unspent, while eligible families remain ever-growing on wait lists. Gaps in child care access result in workforce that cannot fully participate and businesses that cannot operate a full capacity and an economy that falls short of its potential. When families cannot access care, parents are unable to work, employers face instability and broader economic impacts. By ensuring that every available dollar is used to serve families, AB 2258 moves California closer to more responsive, efficient, and equitable child care systems. Thank you, and I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Madam Speaker and members. California's farm workers are essential to our state's economy and to its food supply, and yet they face some of the most severe housing instability in our state. Because farm worker housing must be located near agricultural fields, They oftentimes are lacking some of the amenities such as public transit, libraries, or pharmacies. And these projects have been routinely penalized in our current scoring process for affordable housing projects and are less competitive for funding. To provide farmworker communities with better access to low-income housing credits, AB 2270 creates scoring parity in the C-TAC scoring criteria and recognizes the geographic realities of agricultural communities. With that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. members. I rise today to present AB 1609, sponsored by the Communication Workers of America, District Council 9. This bill restores a basic expectation. When Californians need help, especially with essential services, that they can reach a human being in a reasonable amount of time. Technology should make life easier, not block people from getting help. During the COVID pandemic, I spent more than four hours on hold at one point, trying to get medication for my 98-year-old mother and of course did not want to drive into the store because doing that would expose me and potentially her to COVID. After going nowhere, I reluctantly ended up having to drive to the store to deal with the situation myself and actually showed them how long I'd been on hold that day as they were not doing anything to answer the phone. Today, too many people are trapped in phone trees, AI chatbots, and endless hold times when dealing with providers of goods and services, health care, utilities, housing, and travel emergencies and others. Being able to reach a human customer service agent can at times be critical or life-threatening. Customers need to be able to promptly fill a medication to prevent their utilities from getting shut off and access sensitive information for scheduling purposes. AB 1609 ensures meaningful access to live assistance by requiring that large businesses offer access to a live human representative during business hours, limiting hold times after a telephonic call or online customer service inquiries answered, requiring transparency, including clear disclosure of AI use and prohibiting AI from being presented as human, and prominently displaying a phone number if one is made available for live assistance. AB 1609 does not ban automation. Under this bill, businesses may continue using AI and automated systems. However, automation cannot replace real and vital workers or be used as a barrier that prevents people from reaching prompt help when they need it. This bill not only provides needed customer protections when customer service is needed, it also recognizes the critical importance of human workers. I amended AB 1609 significantly in policy committee to address the first round of concerns that were raised with the prior version of the bill and to show that I have been and am willing to continue to work in good faith with all of the stakeholders should this bill come off the floor today. We have shared with numerous stakeholders additional numerous amendments to the bill that address, I think, almost every single issue that has been raised and will continue working with those stakeholders as the bill moves forward. I want to thank the California Chamber of Commerce, the various business entities who have worked cooperatively with my office. I think they will tell you that we have been working diligently to try to make sure that the goal of this bill which is to make sure that people can get the help that they need is fruitful This bill is simple. Given the accelerated deployment of AI and the increasing difficulty in trying to reach an actual person, this bill ensures that we can talk to a human being when we need customer service support help. That's what it's about. With that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote on AB 1609.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. AB 2301 will help address our health care workforce shortage and improve the access and affordability of a nursing degree by establishing a pilot program allowing up to 10 community college districts to establish nursing bachelor's program. California is projected to be short over 44,000 registered nurses by 2030. This shortage is felt the hardest in rural areas like the Central Valley, where we've already seen the impacts it had on the Madera community hospital closure, in part due to its lack of available medical personnel. While our exceptional community college system has provided many students with an associate's degree in nursing, our healthcare system more frequently demands a bachelor's. With our rural students, while our rural students would love to complete their education at a CSU campus, they don't always have the transportation to reach the schools and when they do, there may not be any slots available. It is all too common for our most promising students to uproot their lives to go to schools in other parts of the state or out of state and never coming back or attend a closer private university where they are burdened with huge amounts of debt. Our community college are the most affordable and accessible higher education option for California students and are already and they are ready to help us meet this challenge if we let them. AB 2301 does this by directing the community college chancellor's office to select up to 10 community college districts to participate in the pilot project. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

I want to thank the author on this bill. Once again, we're thinking outside the box when it comes to higher education, especially in the most rural areas. Absolutely applaud the author. I've been saying this from day one that we need to rethink higher education. With that, I ask all my colleagues to vote in support of this.

Thank you. I also rise in support of AB 2301 and want to thank our colleague from the Valley for bringing this forward. We had an opportunity to visit across the state of California during the interim and one of the things that was resoundingly clear was that people really wanted to be able to grow their own be able to identify the places particularly our community colleges and make sure that they get leveraged and used to be able to make sure that we have the health care workers that we need to support our health care system With that, I respectfully request your aye vote on this very important bill.

I want to thank both my colleagues from Oakland and the Imperial Valley. Did I get it? Thank you for the support. I appreciate the bipartisan support on this issue, and I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Assembly Bill 2343 by Assemblymember Patel and others, an act relating to substance use disorder.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, I rise today to present AB 2343, which requires private licensed alcohol and drug treatment facilities to participate in DHCS's designated treatment directory and consumer protection platform. This ensures that treatment is readily accessible for all Californians, even during their most difficult moments. This receives unanimous support in Policy Committee, and I respectfully ask your aye vote. Thank you.

Assembly vote 2346 by Assemblymember Wilson and others. An act relating to vehicles.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Good afternoon, members. So alongside joint author Assemblymember Berman, I'm proud to present AB 2346, a measure aimed at modernizing California's e-bike safety laws and protect our communities while ensuring we preserve access to this growing mode of accessible and sustainable transportation. As e-bike technology continues to rapidly grow, our laws must keep up the pace to ensure that we have safety on our roads, bike paths, and sidewalks that are for our communities to utilize them. California is currently experiencing a sharp increase in serious e-bike-related injuries. Physicians across California are also raising alarm about the growing number of preventable injuries tied to high speeds and lack of safeguards, particularly among children and teenagers. These devices are often marketed like toys, but can operate at high speeds and are legally available for young children to use. Utilizing the Internet and other social media apps, e-bikes, can also be easily modified to exceed legal speeds. putting riders and the public at risk, with some modifications ramping up to speeds, higher speeds such as 30 or even 40 miles per hour. So AB 2346 implements targeted and practical solutions such as, but not limited to, requiring speedometers on class one and two e-bikes and integrated lights on all e-bikes, establishing clear speed limits, including 15 miles per hour for minors and limits on sidewalks, providing local government authority to set speed limits where needed and requiring clear consumer education at the point of sale so riders understand the law. These changes focus on behavior to reduce speeds and improve awareness, not to restrict user access. It's a balanced approach that improves public safety, empowers local communities, and supports the continued growth of sustainable transportation. With that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Yes. I rise as a proud co-author of AB 2346 and want to thank the author for bringing this bill forward. As a longtime champion for e-bike safety in the legislature, I appreciate the chair's efforts to ensure that California is being thoughtful about safety for e-bike riders across the state. AD 77 is home to many e-bike users, including myself and my family. It's important that we ensure that there are safeguards in place, especially when it comes to protecting our children operating e-bikes. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Assembly Bill 2329 by Assembly Member Fong and others, a act relating to surplus residential property.

Thank you so much, Madam Speaker. Members, Assembly Bill 2329 is a district-related bill. In 2018, the decision was made to abandon the completion of the 710 freeway in the greater LA area. As a result, all the homes purchased by Caltrans to make way for the freeway became surplus property. Current law under Roberti Act maps out the process for Caltrans to sell the homes to former owners, current and past tenants, the cities where the homes are located, and private housing entities for affordable housing. However, the sales process for tenants has taken a long time, not just months, but years. AB 329 is an attempt to expedite the sale of the homes to current and former tenants and require more transparency. If an agreement is not reached, the bill allows the city of South Pasadena to facilitate the sales. I would certainly ask for an aye vote.

Assembly Bill 2353 by Assemblymember Pacheco and others, an act relating to health care.

Thank you, Madam Speaker and members. Today I rise to present a very important bill, AB 2353, which provides independent, data-driven analysis on the cost and impact of healthcare legislation This bill mirrors a framework you all supported last week AB 2124 the Ratepayer Protection Act That bill requires an independent body to evaluate the efficacy and cost impacts of proposed legislative mandates on electric and natural gas customers. The bill passed this floor 71 to 0. The bill I'm presenting today does the same thing, But rather than evaluate fees to utilities, it requires an independent analysis of how proposed legislative mandates affect our struggling hospitals. Members, hospital care in California is under threat. Nearly 45% of our hospitals operate at a deficit. In 2025 alone, financial strain forced hospitals and health systems to lay off 3,500 workers. Three hospitals closed in the last three years, and dozens more have slashed services. Between federal health care cuts and the state's budget deficit, California's health care system cannot withstand additional strains without sacrificing patient care. Our constituents trust us to evaluate the many health care-related legislative proposals. But when we make decisions about these bills, we often vote on these proposals without comprehensive and independent analysis data about the downstream impact on patient care and costs. Recently enacted hospital mandates have added billions of dollars in costs, costs that are ultimately shouldered by patients, families, and employers. While we have an entity that evaluates proposed health insurance mandates, no agency is tasked with reviewing the cost of mandates imposed on health care providers. AB 2353 fills that gap by directing the Department of Health Care Access, in partnership with the University of California, to establish the Center for Health Provider Policy Impact. The center will provide independent analysis of proposed legislation, regulations, and other policy actions affecting hospitals, giving us the data we need to protect healthcare access and affordability. This bill has come a long way from its first iteration and I am committed, I promise you, I am committed to continue to address the remaining concerns as the bill moves forward. Members, we face complex policy decisions every day. AB 2353 provides a critical tool to assess the cost of health care legislation and safeguard the future of patient care. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Assembly Bill 1776 by Assemblymember Aguirre-Curray and others, an act relating to business regulations.

First, I want to thank all of my colleagues who took the time to connect with me and discuss this bill. From the bottom of my heart, thank you. And you all know those of you that have spent the time on this bill. You know, I know many of you have heard I have this small district bill, but in all seriousness, this is a complex but critically important issue. California Cartwright Act is our state's primary antitrust law, but it contains a major loophole. If two businesses conspire to undercut competition, that's illegal. That kind of anti-competitive conduct hurts competitors, consumers, and workers. It hurts everyone except the companies who rig the system. But if one dominant company takes the same actions and causes the same harm, the Cartwright Act does not cover it. That does not make sense. And federal law in 45 states agree. Both federal law and the vast majority of other states recognize that one dominant company can be just as harmful as two companies acting together. This conversation is especially important now because consolidation has touched nearly every part of our economy. More than 75% of U.S. industries have experienced increased market concentration. That means higher prices, fewer choices, fewer opportunities for job creators to start small businesses, and suppressed wages for working families. I took on this issue because one of my proudest accomplishments as the mayor of Winters was helping build a thriving Main Street full of successful and engaged small businesses. Today, many of those businesses are struggling to compete as suppliers disappear and markets become more concentrated. I hear from restaurant owners facing higher supply costs and fewer choices. I see it on my family farm when suppliers no longer exist. This issue is economy-wide, and the legislature recognized that when we passed a bipartisan resolution directing the California Law Revision Commission to study the Cartwright Act. The Commission spent more than three years studying this issue with eight working groups of legal experts, economists, and stakeholders. They held 18 public meetings, receiving thousands of public comments, and drafted a proposal that works within California's existing antitrust framework. This bill does not punish success. It does not punish corporate growth. AB 1776 is about making sure that when a dominant company abuses its power to shut out competition and harm consumers, workers, and small businesses, California has the tools to respond. This bill protects free and fair competition and helps ensure that California marketplace works for everyone. I know, I know we have much more to do, but without a single proposed amendment from the major opponents, we have already taken significant amendments to the bill based on your feedback, colleagues. Your feedback. I exempted small businesses and added strong guardrails. And I am committing to you today to remove Section 3 from the bill and move a narrowed-down version from statutory to intent language in Section 1. I ask that you let me continue that work. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm hearing from essential services in my district, like waste haulers, about the fact that they have exclusive franchises with cities and counties that are concerned about liability exposure as a result of this bill. If a city or county grants an exclusive agreement or franchise to a business, I don't believe these types of businesses should have liability here. It's my understanding that it's not the author's intent to capture these types of businesses like waste haulers, but my question to the author is, are you planning on fixing this issue?

Question?

I will be addressing that in the Senate, absolutely.

It is a monumental task to take this on, but not one that is not needed. There have been certain segments of our economy that have been so anti-competitive that they have literally eviscerated small business. And I say that with a lot of passion because it has been painful to watch. Now, what we've seen at the federal level is that there's been a lot of difficulty with enforcing antitrust laws so that some of this anti-competitive behavior is brought or can be prevented. So I first want to start by saying there is tremendous need for the bill, and I don't think anybody can dispute that. The second thing I want to talk about is the actual content of the bill. In its current form, I think it's a start, and I want to thank the majority leader for taking amendments and working with us to get to the point where we are so that we can get some help against what has been some very ruthless anti-competitive conduct. And I look forward to working with the author in the Senate so that we can create perhaps some additional parameters and get some additional guidance as it relates to what the conduct will consist of and perhaps where these laws should be applied. So I thank you, and I am happy to support the bill today and continue working.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I rise today in strong support of AB 1776. AB 1776 is necessary to fix long overdue issues, and many of us who have practiced in antitrust have been well aware of these issues and inequities created by California antitrust law. This would help support our small businesses, consumers, and workers. At a time, and my colleague mentioned this, when we are witnessing big corporations dominate markets and further strengthen their monopolies, this bill is critical towards increasing competitiveness and offering consumers, workers, and small businesses a chance to see the benefits they have produced. As the affordability crisis grows, big corporations are increasing their profits. and the working class is being left behind, struggling to provide for their families. By holding big businesses accountable, we will instill free and fair competition in our markets and encourage fair and stable economic growth. Thank you again to the author for introducing this important measure, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to thank our Majority Leader for bringing this bill forward, more importantly for all the work that has been put into this over many, many months to ensure that California updates its laws to reflect the modern economy. The Law Revision Commission in January of this year released the proposal to reform the Cartwright Act to address single-firm conduct. And this bill would enact those recommendations and use somewhat of a hybrid approach which will really honor many many years of case law recognizing that California anti laws are and should continue to be even stronger than federal regulations But the reality is that even when you think about the two-party conduct rule, that was made during a time prior to e-commerce, prior to how we conduct our business these days, and prior to the ability that exists now for one company to have so much power over our market that these revisions are so critical in order to ensure that California consumers and small businesses have an opportunity to have a fair shot of participating in the current modern economy. And by ensuring that, by allowing this bill to move forward, we're making it very clear that California, first of all, is not going to fall behind so many other states that have already taken action, but that California honestly should be a leader. on this. Much of that new economy is being created here in California. And I think this puts some guardrails and some definitions to how we want that new economy to look like. And so I'm incredibly grateful to the author for bringing this forward. I think it's really not that complicated of a piece of legislation. And it's pretty straightforward in what it's trying to achieve in ensuring that we don't allow any actors to have such inordinate influence over our markets that not only does it have an anti-competitive impact on other businesses in the market, but it also doesn't shut out the opportunity for consumers to have a genuine, real choice when they're making their decisions on quality of life issues. So I respectfully ask for an aye vote, and again, I commend the author for her stalwart work on this.

Thank you, Speaker. Members, I rise in support of AB 1776, and I want to thank our majority leader for taking on such a tough bill, such a tough issue, and making sure that we have an opportunity to really wrestle with the contents of this bill and also see it here on this floor. California's Cartwright Act has been our state's antitrust law for over a century, and this bill builds on that legacy, in fact. This is a common-sense update that most states and federal law already have on the books. Since 1990s, roughly 75% of U.S. industries have seen significant market consolidation. Big companies and private equity have won while workers have faced suppressed wages, consumers faced higher prices, and small businesses can't even get a foot in the door. We see this most in the area of health care. The level of consolidation that we see is directly impacting patient experience, the quality of care, and the cost of that care at rates that are doubling and tripling and are, quite frankly, out of control. Currently, a single dominant company can engage in anti-competitive conduct with no clear accountability under California state law, and that needs to change. The opposition to this bill believes perhaps that big money can stifle the needs of our constituents Corporations not people benefit from the status quo and the people are suffering with the wages decreased and prices increased AB 1776 supports lower costs and competition, which is healthy for our economy. I'm a proud co-author of this legislation, and I urge an aye vote.

Mr. Speaker, members, I want to rise to thank the author for taking on such a difficult bill. This is something that is a sweeping change to our antitrust laws, and I want to acknowledge that this is needed. We have monopolistic and anti-competitive behavior by some of the biggest companies in the world that I acknowledge that the author is trying to address. It is also no secret that I've had significant heartburn about this bill because of undetended consequences of such a sweeping change. We need to make sure that our laws are protecting California consumers, making sure that prices are going down, that we're actually advancing competition and not thwarting it. And this is a very difficult thing to do when you're doing something that is sweeping the entire economy. I know that I've met, obviously, I've read every single document. I want to thank the author for meeting with me and her staff so many times and with folks from the various industry segments and from the various labor unions. and I continue to have concerns about how this will operate in the life sciences industry, in the motion picture and television industry, with retailers. I think just removing Section 3 alone is not enough to make sure that we are actually advancing competition and not thwarting it. So there does need to be guardrails that are developed, and they need to be sort of specific. I acknowledge that one of the things I've always said about this bill is that by removing the federal guardrails, that is a lot of sort of the basis where people actually have safe harbors so that reducing prices alone is not going to cause a lot of litigation. So when we would take out, you know, there are some things we don't like about the federal jurisprudence, right, because they're not strong enough to protect what we want. But there's also things that are in the federal jurisprudence that are really important to make sure that we're advancing competition. So I know we've had many conversations about this. I am going to vote for this today because I trust the author to do the hard work to look at what's going to happen in each of these segments and really tailor it. But I do ask you that as we move forward that you look at each of these segments and some of the fact situations that are presented and look at the language carefully so that we make sure that we are advancing competition. But I also want to say in closing, this is a needed bill. And so I really want to thank you. This is so tough. It's such a sweeping thing. And I want to thank you for taking this on. And with that, we'll be voting for the bill today.

Yes, I want to rise today in support. And I want to thank the Majority Leader for her hard work to protect consumers. because at the end of the day, we all stand here on this floor to protect our constituents. And much like some of my other colleagues have said, this is a work in progress. It's a big bill. We've done big things here before. And I trust our majority leader to continue that work in the Senate. I think when I look at it for myself and my district, I worry about the issues industries that have deep long-term investments and what does this mean for their uncertainty? And I know the Majority Leader and I have had a lot of conversations and we'll continue to have those conversations at Moose to the Senate. But when you have uncertainty in industries that are vertically integrated and that need that long-term certainty, I know that's not your intention to undermine that certainty that is so important for the innovation in California. We had one company in my district, in the biotech sector, that moved out of California, and they moved out of San Diego. 5,000 people had to get jobs. It took some of those people, because they're highly trained and highly specialized, over a year to get a new job in San Diego. We saw what happened when the biotech sector collapsed in the Great Recession. I know that's not your intention, and I know you're going to continue to work with us to make sure that we protect the businesses that make AD77 and San Diego a thriving place. So with that, I'll support the bill today and look forward to our continued work together.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I rise in support of AB 1776. And I do so because I don't know how many times we on this floor have said that our top priority, as it should be at this moment in time is affordability. And so much of what we focus on this floor is around the edges of affordability. It's not doing enough. But what is clear to me right now is the consolidation that is happening amongst businesses is driving cost up for Californians. that a strong enforcement of antitrust law here in California can honestly make more competition in the marketplace and drive costs down. I've unused the example of my local independent gas station. For those of you that have an independent gas station in your community, and there are very few of them in California, the prices can be almost a dollar lower per gallon. And we have driven those small independent gas stations out of California for a whole host of reasons, but it has resulted in consumers paying more. Competition is critical, and that is fundamentally what this bill is about. And I want to thank the author, because as many of you know, she has accepted amendments that will strike Section 3 of the bill. I, as a former litigator, was frankly very concerned. I didn't understand how that would even apply, but she sat with us. She listened. She did the work. She removed Section 3 with the concerns that many of us raised. And so I trust that she will continue to work on this bill until the end of the legislative cycle to get it right. But what I'm confident of is when we have the ability as Californians to make sure that companies can thrive in our economy, and when there is more competition, our constituents will be better off and California will be more livable. So with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

I was going to make this look fast, but I want to thank you for all the thoughtful conversation that I've had with all of you. And at the end of the day, this bill is about protecting competition so that California's economy works for everyone. It's about making sure that the success comes from building the best product, offering the best service, and competing on the merits. It is about making sure that no company, no matter how large, can use its power to shut others out and limit opportunity. This bill reflects years of careful study extensive public input and a unanimous recommendation from the California Law Revision Commission But I know that even after three and a half years our work is not done

Thank you, Mr. Lee. Mr. Hoover, you are recognized on the matter.

Thank you, Mr. Hoover. Ms. Rubio, you are recognized on this matter?

Thank you, Ms. Rubio. Oh, Mr. Tongva, you are recognized on this matter.

for your aye vote on this. Thank you, Mr. Tongafa. Ms. Macedo, you are recognized.

Thank you, Ms. Macedo. Ms. Krell, you are recognized on the matter.

Thank you, Ms. Krell. Mr. DiMaio, you are recognized on the matter.

Thank you, Mr. DeMaio. Ms. Quirk-Silva, you are recognized on the matter.

Thank you, Assemblymember Quirk-Silva. Assemblymember Ortega, you are recognized.

Thank you, Assemblymember Ortega. Seeing and hearing no further debate, Assemblymember Lee, do you wish to close?

Thank you. Assemblymember Lee, I'll debate having ceased. The clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. This is a 54 vote bill. All members vote who desire to vote. We'll close the rule, tally the votes. Ayes 55, noes 5 on the urgency. Ayes 55, noes 5 on the measure. The measure passes. We're going to go back to where we had left off, which is file item 160, AB 2152 by Assemblymember Mark Gonzalez. Clerk will read. Assemblymember 2152 by Assemblymember Mark Gonzalez and others, an act relating to environmental quality. Assemblymember Gonzalez, you are recognized.

Thank you, Assemblymember Gonzalez. Assemblymember DeMaio, you are recognized.

Thank you, Assemblymember DeMaio. Assemblymember Bryan, you are recognized.

Thank you, Assemblymember Brian. Seeing and hearing no further debate, Assemblymember Gonsaltz, do you wish to close?

Thank you, Assemblymember Gonzalez. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the votes. I's 62, no zero. The measure passes. Passed or retained on file item 161. Passed temporarily on file item 162. The file of 163 is AB 2202 by Assemblymember Muratsuchi. Clerk will read. Assembly Bill 2202 by Assemblymember Muratsuchi and others, an act relating to people's achievement. Assemblymember Muratsuchi, you are recognized.

Thank you, Assemblymember Moritsuchi. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the vote, size 61, no zero. The measure passes. File item 164 is AB 2225 by Dr. Patel. Clerk will read. Assembly Bill 2225 by Assemblymember Patel and others, and I'm relating to people's achievement. Dr. Patel, you are recognized.

Thank you, Dr. Patel. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the votes. I-64, no-0. The measure passes. File item 165 is AB 2227 by Assemblymember Connolly. The clerk will read. Assembly Bill 2227 by Assemblymember Connolly and others, an app relating to farm labor contractors. Assemblymember Connolly, you are recognized.

Thank you Assemblymember Connolly. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the vote. Ayes 41, noes 15. The measure passes. File item 166, AB 2254 by Assemblymember Addis. Clerk will read. Assembly Bill 2254 by Assemblymember Addis and others. And I'm related to coastal resources. Assemblymember Addis, you are recognized.

Seem to recall somebody on the floor dressed as a butterfly once. all debate having ceased clerk will open the roll all members vote who desire to vote all members vote who desire to vote all members vote who desire to vote clerk will close the roll tally the vote size 58 no zero The measure passes. File item 167 is AB 2296 by Assemblymember Pappin. The clerk will read. Assembly Bill 2296 by Assemblymember Pappin, an act relating to land use. Opa! Assemblymember Pappin. Sorry about that. Okay, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Assemblymember Pepin. All debate having ceased, Clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the votes. I-62, no zero. The measure passes. File item 168 is AB 2302 by Assemblymember Celeste Rodriguez, presented by Assemblymember Lee. The clerk will read. Assembly Bill 2302 by Assemblymember Celeste Rodriguez and others, and I'm leaving the food. Assemblymember Lee, you are recognized.

Thank you, Assemblymember Lee. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the votes. Ayes 53, no zero. The measure passes. We've already dispensed with file item 169. File item 170, AB 2335 by Assemblymember Valencia. This is a 54-vote bill. The clerk will read. Assembly Bill 2335 by Assemblymember Valencia, an act relating to unclaimed property and making an appropriation, therefore. Assemblymember Valencia, you are recognized.

Thank you, Assemblymember Valencia. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. The clerk will close the roll, tally the vote, I-63, no zero. The measure passes. File item 171, AB 2352, also by Assemblymember Valencia. The clerk will read. Assembly Bill 2352 by Assemblymember Valencia and others, an act relating to Medi-Cal. Assemblymember Valencia, you may open.

Thank you, Assemblymember Valencia. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. members, Assembly Bill 2405 addresses an issue that has become one of the statewide's concerns as hospitals throughout California faces an epidemic of overcrowding. This is a simple bill that would require law enforcement to transport patients to the geographically closest hospital rather than a hospital they choose. This bill seeks to ensure that vulnerable Californians receive timely medical care by establishing clear, concise standards for law enforcement transport. Additionally, it would establish a statewide reporting framework enabling the emergency medical service authority to monitor compliance, publish data and enforce standards. Recently, amendments allowed exceptions for emergent and trauma-related circumstances, situations if hospitals are on diversion status. status. Assembly Bill 2405 addresses inequities and strengthens overall emergency care systems while supporting long-term stabilities for safe net hospitals and improve outcomes for patients across California. I want to thank stakeholders for their thoughtfulness and considerations for this proposal, and I have had conversations with law enforcement and emergency service communities, and I am committed to working with other stakeholders as this bill moves through the process. This bill is a thoughtful bill. Respectfully ask, but I vote.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. a bill that I am very passionate about, AB 2409, prohibits California public officials from issuing crypto meme coins and bars digital asset exchanges from listing any meme coin that uses the likeness or image of a public official for sale, like our current president is doing. With that, I respectfully ask for a yes vote.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, California relies on after-action reports to capture critical lessons learned from disasters and to improve future emergency response and recovery efforts. However, Cal OES often completes after-action reports 180 days after an emergency declaration ends, which can postpone reports for over one year due to lengthy recovery efforts. As a result, state and local emergency managers are left without timely access to information that could strengthen preparedness and response. This bill brings clarity, accountability, and timeliness to the after-action reporting process by separating the response and recovery components into two distinct after reports with clear deadlines Also at the request of local emergency managers represented by the California Emergency Services Association this bill codifies existing local after reporting regulation and provides additional time for local managers to complete their after-action reports. This bill strengthens our ability to learn from past emergencies and to better protect communities in future disasters, so I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. AB 2510 strengthens the CalWORKs Family Reunification Program by ensuring that families have the support they need to bring their children home safely and successfully. CalWORKs provides critical supports to families working to reunify with their children who have been placed in foster care, including family reunification funding for families who have had their children removed from the home. Successful reunification requires stable housing, food, child care, and transportation. However, under current rules, all CalWORKs-eligible children must be removed from the home to qualify for family reunification funds. Cutting off support during this critical time undermines reunification efforts and creates unnecessary hardship that jeopardizes family stability and delays reunification. This bill aligns policy with the goals of keeping families together whenever safely possible and increases the likelihood of timely reunification. AB 2510 ensures that families have access to these critical services by allowing families to continue receiving cash aid and child care during the reunification process. This bill is about stability, equity, and better outcomes for children and families, and I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. California's longstanding issues providing public defense to individuals accused of crimes has a real cost to some of the state's poorest and under-resourced counties. Though the Sixth Amendment enshrines the rights to counsel for defendants in criminal prosecution, the state does not currently collect data on how this public defense is provided at the This has created a system where some defendants have never even met their attorney and repeated failures to investigate the accusations which are made against them AB 2605 addresses this issue by establishing reporting requirements on the nature of public defense services provided across the state. Amendments and appropriations have removed all opposition and I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and colleagues. I rise on behalf of Assemblymember Rodriguez to present AB 2635. The Just Transition for Landscapers Act is a Latino Caucus priority that creates a practical pathway for landscapers to transition to zero emission lawn equipment. The bill provides a realistic path to compliance, protecting livelihoods while keeping us on track to achieve our climate goals. I respectfully ask for your aye vote on behalf of Assemblymember Celeste Rodriguez.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I rise to present AB 2679. This bill is a unanimous support and has no opposition, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Tell me member when you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker this bill line state law with federal law support support. I respectfully ask for your aye vote

Assemblymember Lee, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to present AB 1675, the No Tax Breaks for ICE Contractors Act. This bill simply says that if you are a corporation that does business with ICE, we will cancel your tax breaks. These corporations, especially multinational corporations that benefit from California's generous business tax breaks, have to make a choice. Do they side with the deportation machine or do they side with the American public? This is a very simple bill in that sense. But we're encouraging companies to stop aiding and abetting ICE in the reign of terror, whether it be Palantir, providing them deportation software or weapons and vehicles. This is a very straightforward bill. And I respectfully ask for – oh, before I say that, I'll also say that if this bill should move to the Senate, I will be addressing concerns from affordable housing folks to make sure that nonprofit housers are able to receive LIHTC credits. and I will also be taking amendments to ensure that it is very specific that this bill is about ICE, CPB, and the Management Directorate, not any other aspect of DHS, and also about procurement specifically. I appreciate all the concerns I heard from members, and I will respectfully ask for aye vote. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, members, I rise to present AB 1887, sponsored by the California Chronic Care Coalition. This is a targeted bill to remove unnecessary insurance barriers that delay or interrupt access to life-saving treatments for Californians living with rare diseases. I'm very proud to chair the California Rare Disease Caucus, and this bill is the direct result of a rare disease patient roundtable that we convened in December that several of you attended. When we asked patients what single change at the state level would most improve their lives, the answer was strikingly consistent. After years of fighting for a diagnosis, they face a second battle getting their health plan to authorize the medication that their specialists prescribe. While seeking a diagnosis families are draining savings taking second jobs and choosing between a rent payment and a child test or travel to a distant specialty center Denying or delaying an FDA treatment could drive patients into hospital beds operating rooms, and intensive care units. This doesn't reduce costs. This shifts them onto families and onto the rest of the system. AB 1887 is deliberately narrow and targeted. It requires accelerated prior authorization and prohibits death therapy requirements for rare disease treatments when prescribed by an appropriate specialist based on medical necessity. Specifically, this bill automatically and immediately certifies a prior authorization request that is submitted to a health care plan if that request is not approved within a 30-day period. and second, requires that the pre-authorization process cannot take more than 30 days and that if it exceeds those 30 days, it's automatically approved. Even the most innovative and effective rare disease treatments are only as valuable as they are accessible. This bill ensures faster access to life-saving and life-altering therapies and supports accelerated access to treatment for one patient in a million cases. This is a bipartisan bill, has received no votes, And I want to say, this is about health care for kids with rare diseases. Sometimes there's only a handful of these kids in our state. The treatments they require are hard to obtain. And most of the rare disease patients are children. So with that in mind, I respectfully ask for your aye vote on AB 1887.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just want to thank my colleague from West Hollywood for bringing this very enlightened bill. AB 1887 ensures that rare disease patients are not an afterthought and that processes such as step therapy do not delay necessary treatment to those who really need it, including our most vulnerable children with rare diseases. I think it's a great bill and I respectfully request an aye vote.

Thank you Mr. Chair. I just want to add my support as a co-author to our good friend, our colleague from Santa Monica. He fights so much for people with rare diseases and we're all in it together. It's so important and this bill is so important and this is what the families and the caregivers want and the medical community. It is really important to simplify this process so these children and adults can get the treatment that they need as quickly as possible. And thank you so much, Assemblymember, for carrying this bill. It's so important. Thank you.

I'd like to thank my colleagues for the support here. I want to thank the other members of the Rare Disease Caucus and those who participated in the roundtable that led to this disease. Again, this is about protecting the health of children with rare diseases. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Mr Speaker at the request of the author please move file item 32 AB 2525 Ward to the inactive file Clerk will note Okay we are going to go to file item 95 AB 2304 by Assemblymember Lackey

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Colleagues, for my entire time here on this floor, I've been trying to pass legislation revolving around this horrific tragedy. I know there's not many people here and they're all eating, but I would like your attention, please. This is a big deal to me. We had a young man named Gabriel Fernandez who was tortured by his own family. his biological mother and her boyfriend. They tortured this young man. He was eight years old. Our system did not protect him. And I've been trying since I've been here to try to bring remedy to prevent this kind of tragedy from happening. And guess what? We've had four others. Four! By their own family. This is ridiculous. And it's heartbreaking. And I understand the hesitation because we definitely don't want to accuse somebody who's not guilty. But we've got to protect these people that deserve our protection. For heaven's sake, think of the tragedy of these young people being tortured by their own family. there are holes in our system, folks. And this bill, all it does is try to bring remedy to that. Please understand how important this is. I'm not going to belabor the point, but I hope that you will act in the interest of these innocent kids. I guarantee you there's more of these crazy families that are engaging in this kind of conduct. And we need to make sure that when there's injury involved and there's professionals there, that they take action and they don't falsify reports. That's what's happened in these cases. People aren't acting in the interest of children. What kind of despicable act is that? We need this kind of remedy, folks. This is very reasonable. Please help us protect these children and vote yes.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also rise to support AB 2304, a tragedy that happened in the Antelope Valley. We both represent the Antelope Valley, the author of the bill, and myself. I do remember those days, and knowing that now it happened four times to four different families, I urge your aye vote on Assembly Bill 2304.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I'm pleased to present AB 2716. AB 2716 delivers the cleanup legislation that the governor called for when he signed AB 1167 in 2023. In his signing message, he cautioned that the increasing financial assurance required for oil well transfers could cause more operators to desert their wells. Historically, CalGEM processed an average of 3,500 wells per year. Since the passage of AB 1167, there has been one well transfer and as a result, no decrease to the state's liability. As amended in the Natural Resource Committee, AB 2716 gives oil and gas well operators reasonable alternative financial assurances options while simultaneously increasing bonding amount cap with a tiered system, requiring additional financial information to be periodically provided by CalGEM. and made this bill contingent upon the passage of AB 2461, Hart Bill, AB 2716, along with AB 2461, strikes the right balance and will reduce the occurrence of orphan wells protecting California's environment and public health. I thankfully and respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This bill authorizes the State Council of Developmental Disabilities to award an annual grant over three years for a coordinated effort statewide coordinated effort to be able to train parents of students with disabilities in special education to learn how to advocate for themselves and also be able to know their rights. This bill has enjoyed bipartisan support, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

I appreciate my colleague on this. This is something that we had to learn firsthand with our kids. This is a vital bill, colleagues. This is absolutely necessary that you do this. I can't tell you how many parents we run across all over California that just don't know how to traverse the system. So I thank you to my colleague for being a leader in this space, And I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

I want to thank my colleague for standing up and speaking in support. I felt like I was one of the only ones that would come out and speak about this. And I wholeheartedly appreciate you and really appreciate the fact that we both get to be on this floor here advocating for not just our kids, but all the other kids that get left behind and all the other parents that get left behind. So this is going to be a game changer for us to start, like you said. And I think between us here and here on the floor, we're going to be able to do so much more. So thank you. And I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

And December 22nd of 2022, less than three weeks from the day I was sworn in, as many of you know, I learned that the Madera Community Hospital was intending to close. By January of the following year, the hospital had closed its doors and created a health care crisis in the heart of my district. To address this crisis and numerous looming financial crises at other hospitals throughout the state, many of us worked hard to ensure and to create the Distress Hospital Loan Program. This program today will infuse $300 million into 15 desperate hospitals that our community is dependent on,

Thank you, Assemblymember Soria. Assemblymember Rogers, you are recognized.

Thank you, Assemblymember Rogers. Seeing and hearing no further debate, Assemblymember Soria, do you wish to close?

Thank you, Assemblymember. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the votes. I-63, no zero on the urgency. I-63, no zero on the measure. The measure passes. Assemblymember Petrie-Norris, we are going to take up file item number 58. File item number 58 is AB 1830 by Assemblymember Petrie Norris. Clerk will read. Assembly Bill 1830 by Assemblymember Petrie Norris and others. Assemblymember Petrie Norris, you are recognized.

Thank you Assemblymember Petrie-Norris. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Kirk will close the roll. Tally the votes. I 62, no zero. The measure passes. Thank you Thank you Members Mr Gibson has asked to lift the call on file item 172 AB 2405 Clerk will post. We'll close the roll. Tally the bow ties. 45. Noes. 18. The measure passes. Okay, we are going back to File item 155 File item 155 This is AB 1883 By Assemblymember Brian The clerk will read Assembly Bill 1883 by Assemblymember Brian and act late in employment. Assemblymember Brian, you were recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker and

Thank you, Assemblymember Brian. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. clerk will close the roll tally the votes ayes 43 nos 12 the measure passes assembly member gabriel we are going to do a a grip of your bills when you're ready Okay, we're going to start with item 59, everybody. File item 59. AB 1836 by Assemblymember Gabriel. The clerk will read. Assembly Bill 1836 by Assemblymember Gabriel and others in the state government. Assemblymember Gabriel, you are recognized.

Thank you. Assemblymember Gabriel, all debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the votes. I 63, no 0. The measure passes. File item 70 is AB 2020. Also by Assemblymember Gabriel, the clerk will read. Assembly Bill 2020 by Assemblymember Gabriel, an act related to housing. Assemblymember Gabriel, you are recognized. Decorum members. Decorum. Assemblymember Gabriel.

Thank you. Assemblymember Gabriel, all debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Tally votes. I 65, no 0. The measure passes. File item 81 is AB 2204, also by Assemblymember Gabriel. The clerk will read. Assembly Bill 2204 by Assemblymember Gabriel and others. Assemblymember Gabriel, you may open.

Thank you so many member Gabriel all debate having ceased clerk will open the roll All members vote who desire to vote All members vote who desire to vote Clerk will close the roll tally votes. I 63 no zero measure passes Finally, for Mr. Gabriel, file item 105, that's AB 2378, also by Assemblymember Gabriel. The clerk will read. Assembly Bill 2378 by Assemblymember Gabriel and others, an accolade and criminal justice. Assemblymember Gabriel, you are recognized.

Thank you, Assemblymember Gabriel. Debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll, tally the votes. I-60, no-0. The measure passes. We going to skip to file item 121 by Assemblymember Ward It AB 2564 The clerk will read Assembly Bill 2564 by Assemblymember Ward and others faculty in the Consumer Protection Assemblymember Ward, you are recognized.

Thank you, Assemblymember Ward. Assemblymember Zabor, you are recognized.

Thank you, Assemblymember Spores. Assemblymember Wilson, you are recognized.

Thank you, Assemblymember Ward, for that response. response and seeing and hearing no further debate, do you wish to close on the measure?

Thank you. Assemblymember Ward, all debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote. Who desire to vote? All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Thank you. Thank you Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Clerk will close the roll, tally the vote. Ayes, 41, noes, 21. The measure passes. Assemblymember Bauer-Cahan, you are recognized.

State your point.

Your point is well taken. File item number 88. File item 88. Quorum, everybody. We've got bills to do. Let's go. File item 88. That is AB 2253 by Assemblymember Berner. The clerk will read. Assembly Bill 2253 by Assemblymember Berner, an act relating to solid waste. Assemblymember Berner, you are recognized.

Thank you, Assemblymember Berner. All debate having ceased. Clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes. Ayes 42, noes 19. The measure passes. Members, Mr. Lee has asked to lift the call on file item 44. Clerk will post. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the vote. Ayes, 54. Noes, 20. Measure passes. Moving backwards in the file to file item 75 to quorum members. Maybe 2108 by Dr. Sharp Collins. Clerk will read. Assembly Bill 2108 by Assemblymember Sharp Collins and I relate to the version. Dr. Sharp Collins, you may open.

I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. and while I have great respect for the author on this, this bill I think is, you may say the words that it doesn't take on Prop 36, but that is clearly what this bill is. Adding a diversion program for retail theft when 70% of the state of California said that they want tougher on crime laws. 70% of California, something that every single county in the state of California asks for. We want tougher on crime laws, especially when it comes to retail theft. And while I come from one of those communities that have been in extreme impoverishment, that is no excuse to steal from the businesses that are around. I just got done speaking to a large coalition of business owners. They are saying that they cannot stay in the state of California. And when the governor a couple years ago made the mention that these businesses that were getting robbed over and over and over again, from consistently the same people robbing them, what did the governor say? Well, at least they have insurance. Well, their insurance quotes are now over $40,000. Who else pays for that? The rest of Californians who want to follow the law. Prop 36 was a mandate on the state of California and its legislators to add tougher on crime laws. laws. And yet this body still refuses to fully fund Prop 36 and now brings a law forward that will also usurp the enforcement of it, of forced DAs to give them diversion programs. 70%. So, while I encourage a no vote on this bill, I look forward to watching who wants to disrespect the people of California when they made a mandate that they want safety. I look forward to the votes being casted today so that way we can show the rest of California exactly what is coming out when it comes to enforcing and respecting Prop 36 and when it comes to adding a diversion program which disrespects a lot of their ability. I respectfully ask for a no vote.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in strong opposition to AB 2108. At the outset, I was going to speak in opposition to the bill because it does overturn the clear mandate of California voters in the last election in favor of Prop 37. the Make Crime Illegal Again initiative. We had a wave of crime that gripped our state, and we're still combating it. But the voters did that. They gave law enforcement and prosecutors back the tools to push back against these criminal acts. We were the laughingstock of the nation with all the videos of smashing grabs and people literally walking into stores and openly stealing. It's being caught on people's cell phones. It became, you know, no big deal, no big surprise. But Californians knew better, and they said enough is enough. This is wrong. There's no justification for it. And that is why every one of our 58 counties, including San Francisco, You know there's a supermajority when San Francisco even is voting to make crime illegal again. AB 2108 negates that vote in so many ways. But worse, what we heard from the author is something just breathtakingly unhinged, I believe, from basic reality of where Californians are. she said in her remarks and in support of this bill that the reason why we need to pass it is that individuals committing these crimes are committing quote crimes out of necessity crimes out of necessity the author is trying to paint a picture as though people are so hungry they're stealing food and that these are the people that will be covered out of this get-out-of-jail-free, get-out-of-punishment-free program. This is such an inaccurate depiction of reality. Stealing Nike shoes or a PlayStation is not a crime of necessity. And that is who will be protected under this bill. These are going to be repeat offenders. We saw that with Prop 36. These are not people who are hard up and hungry. There are a number of programs available to help individuals who are hungry. We are a very generous welfare state. That is so offensive to suggest that these are crimes of necessity. This is not what a bipartisan consensus of voters determined we need to do in the last election. And if any of you support this bill, then you are adding your name next to the argument that we need to go light on these criminals because these are crimes of necessity. nothing could be further from the truth. I urge a no vote.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise because I want to provide some perspective on this bill. Those of you who have had an opportunity to work with me or to watch me have kind of heard some of the frustrations that I have about how we pass bills and how we address public safety and how we address restorative justice without thinking about victims. This is a rare case where we actually have the victims, which are the retailers, standing up and saying that we agree, as the victims of organized theft, that there has to be an opportunity to provide people with job training and skills. I come from a county that has a program that stands against retail theft I have stood personally against retail theft especially after being in a business I was in Dick's Sporting Goods store, and a car pulled up, and groups came in, and as I was picking out items for my husband, they took all the clothes off of the shelf and walked out the door, and all the staff could do was film it. and I felt terrible for the staff because you don't know if those people are going to come in armed or how those people are going to come. And law enforcement does not have capacity to continue to respond to these situations because they don't have enough officers and there's not enough tools. But what does happen is when people are caught up in the system and they do get arrested and they do go to court, we now through this bill would have an opportunity for the judges to use discretion in alignment with Prop 36, which already says that it refers to three offenses. Diversion can be eligible if the judge says so, if they have less than three offenses, if they are nonviolent offenses, and if they don't have any additional pending theft. So the fact that the retailer said, look, we want to support giving these people an opportunity if the judge sees fit, because not every person is going to be the same, to actually give them a job, get job skills training. I think that that is something that really looks at a true diversion program. It's not one-sided. It's not just the author saying we want to give everybody a free pass. It's the retailer saying the data, if you read their letters, they're saying the data shows that people who are given these opportunities are doing better. And so if we want to be a place that makes emotional decisions, then we're going to ignore data. But if we want to make decisions that are based on restorative practices and data, then I do think that that is more in alignment with what we are supposed to do as a legislature. I also want to say that as we are looking at Proposition 36 and where we come, the voters did speak very loud and clear. And part of the things that they were told is that there are going to be services in addition to, that it's not just going to be about going back to what the previous status quo was. And so what better service than to provide people who've had a first offense, a nonviolent offense, an offense that does not include any other crimes, an opportunity to get job training. Now, when they come back, if you want to come and say, hey, they went through that diversion program, they did it again, I don't really have that much sympathy. but to be able to give people what we said we're going to give them and what the retailers, the victims are saying that they need, I do think that it is the right side of the equation. And so I want to thank the author for being thoughtful in all of the concerns that were brought to her. She and I had a very robust conversation because we do need to listen to the voters. We do need to listen to our districts, and we do need to do all that we can do to ensure that we are not giving people the free pass to victimize our communities. And so I do think that she has worked hard to find the balance And so with that I going to respectfully request your I vote and support this bill Thank you Assemblymember Ransom Assemblymember Bryan you are recognized

Just in listening to this conversation, I read a half dozen stories about mothers stealing diapers here in California and being charged for that. I'm not sure if you're aware how much six months in L.A. County jail costs. If you get hit with a Prop 36 misdemeanor and you do six months in L.A. County jail, that costs $75,000. You do a year, that's $150,000. That's a whole lot of Nikes and PlayStations, which is wildly offensive, but I'm going to leave that alone. This bill is smart. It is thoughtful. It's always funny to me that the party of fiscal responsibility will spend an unlimited amount to lock up poor folks and lock up black folks and lock up people who have needs. They're not just crimes of desperation. They're crimes of struggle, crimes of poverty, crimes of inequality. They are all of these things because of the design failures that have happened in this building. Things like Prop 36, which, by the way, did not pass in Assembly District 55. I want to thank the author for her courage to step up and remind us that people are struggling and judges should have the discretion to decide that struggling people who make mistakes, what that accountability can and should look like, and also be conscious of the impact of broader society at a time when we don't have the resources to lock everybody up who's struggling. I also want to be very clear. we talk about accountability for theft none of this compares to the hundreds of millions of dollars of insider trading by the president of the United States right now he doesn't even have to ask for diversion but the struggling mother who stole diapers from a target

excuse me Mr. Gallagher

Yes, the gentleman needs to stick to the merits of the bill and tell the truth and not make up things on the spot.

Absolutely. I also want to be clear. It's absolutely true that the president of the United States has made $100 million in office, and it looks like theft. This is a smart bill. This is a thoughtful bill. This is California, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of AB 2108. This bill is about smart accountability. It's about making sure our justice system has the tools to address retail theft in a way that actually reduces repeat offenses and improves public safety. AB 2108 creates a structured diversion process for certain nonviolent theft offenses while still requiring prosecutors to carefully review eligibility, criminal history, and whether violence or threats were involved. Violent offenders are not focused, violent offenders are not the focus of this bill. Members we cannot arrest and incarcerate our way out of every challenge If someone is struggling with substance abuse mental health issues poverty or instability and they're willing to participate in restitution, counseling, education or rehabilitation, we should want the cycle to stop before it escalates any further. This bill says accountability matters, rehabilitation matters, victims matter, Public safety matters. AB 2108 requires court to dismiss charges only, only after individuals successfully complete the diversion requirements imposed by the court. And let's be honest, my friends. When someone successfully completes a diversion program, gets treatment, pays restitution, and avoids reoffending, our communities are safer. Businesses are safer, families are safer. California has already taken strong actions against organized retail threats, smash-and-grab crimes, and professional theft rings. AB 2108 complements those efforts by focusing on prevention and reducing recidivism before low-level offenses become lifelong criminal patterns. Members, smart justice is not soft justice. Smart justice is effective justice. AB 2108 creates pathways to responsibility, restoration, and rehabilitation while preserving accountability and public safety. My district, AD 61, did not vote for Prop 36, so I'm legislating as per my district. And with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. and I think it's once again an opportunity for us to focus on fact over fear. And it really doesn't matter how your county voted on Prop 36 because this in no way undermines Prop 36. If you actually look at the concerns of the opposition that states the bill attempts to preserve Prop 36, it doesn't attempt to preserve it. it actually does preserve Prop 36 by excluding individuals charged pursuant to Section 666.1. That is the repeat offender section under Prop 36. So it literally, in the text, excludes folks charged under Prop 36. And opposition says, well, that those exemptions are actually illusory because it depends on if they're charged with it or not. Well, yeah, that's up to the DA. The DA has the discretion to charge under Prop 36. And so if they decide to, they do. If they don't, they don't. But that is the power that's been given to DAs under Prop 36, not to judges. Judges do not decide if someone is charged pursuant to Section 666.1. And so ultimately, if you actually look at the text of the bill, it gives an opportunity for someone that has a single offensive theft to have a diversion program, to get training, to get counseling. Whatever it is that the judge determines will be appropriate for them. And so if we actually care about reducing retail theft, we would want those first-time offenders to get the help they need, whatever that looks like. I live in Santa Clara County, one of the safest large counties in the nation. I live in Santa Clara County. in San Jose for over 20 years, one of the safest large cities in the nation. Our district attorney strongly opposed Prop 36. And our district attorney has busted numerous retail theft rings using the legislation we passed on the floor that was a package of retail theft legislation, not using or not needing to use Prop 36. And so this is not about retail theft rings. This is not about, well, it shouldn't be about fear-mongering. This is about the fact that when you have someone, most of whom are young, that are first-time offenders, what is the best thing to do in that moment in time under the discretion of the courts? The best thing to do is ensure they never commit that crime again. And you don't do that by throwing them in jail and slapping a misdemeanor on them. You do that by ensuring they have the support they need so that they never do that again. That's the idea behind diversion. And so I urge folks not to fall for the fear-mongering, to focus on the facts of what this bill does, and vote yes on AB 2108.

Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker and colleagues. I really wasn't planning to speak. I know we all say that, but I really wasn't. There are a couple of points I'd like to make. Obviously, I'm speaking in support of AB 2108, and I'm asking everyone to vote aye for it. To my colleague from San Diego, not the author, but my other colleague from San Diego, I would just reiterate that crime always has been and continues to be illegal in California. Always has been. We can have a fair debate about enforcement tools and the consequences that carry, but crime is crime. The other thing I would say is we often talk about Prop 36, and it's not a proper framing of the conversation. Certainly, one can make the argument that there were enhanced penalties that were contemplated in Prop 36, but I think my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would even agree that Prop 36 also included alternatives to incarceration. And we can certainly talk about a lack of adequate funding there, but let's be very, very clear, Prop 36 isn't some monolithic issue. It's a bit more nuanced than that. Now, why am I rising in support of this bill? Well, when I hear some of my colleagues say that diversion is a get-out-of-jail-free card, I'm not going to disparage you. I'm just going to say, to me, that speaks as if you don't have an actual understanding of how diversion really operates. Maybe you haven't interfaced with it personally. Maybe you haven't seen it in a professional setting. It is not a get-out-of-jail-free card. Let's be extraordinarily clear about that. You have a number of terms and conditions that you must meet to hopefully earn the erasure of your criminal conviction. But the last thing I'll say, and I think the most important thing is this. If there is any point of common ground on this floor, I think it's that we all want to live in safe communities. I have yet to meet the Californian that doesn't want to live in a safe community, and we can certainly disagree on how best to get there. But if we think we can simply lock away the problem and that's going to work every time, that's misguided and it's not going to work. Tools like this, giving courts the discretion to grant this tool, can improve public safety. Because is the goal, and I think this is a fundamental question we all have to ask ourselves, Is the goal to send a message and look tough on crime? Or is it to actually solve the root cause of the behavior that is leading to criminal activity? I not saying diversion is appropriate in every instance but it is a tool that should be available to the courts And for that reason I strongly support it and encourage an aye vote on this measure Thank you Thank you Assemblymember Schultz Assemblymember Gallagher you are recognized

Excuse me, Mr. Gallagher.

Okay. Folks, we are almost done tonight. Assemblymember Bryan, you were recognized for your point of order. I ask that the member from Nicholas keep to the merits of the bill, and while I don't believe he's lying because that's not a transgression of the rules— Excuse me, Mr. Bryan. Your point is well taken. Mr. Gallagher, let's wrap up.

State of the merits of the bill.

Thank you, Assemblymember Gallagher. Seeing and hearing no further debate, Dr. Sharp-Collins, do you wish to close?

Oh, boy. Thank you.

Thank you, Dr. Sharp-Collins. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. all members vote who desire to vote all members vote who desire to vote all members vote who desire to vote Thank you. Thank you. Clerk will close the roll. Tally the votes. Ayes 41, noes 20. The measure passes. File item 139, everybody. File item 139 is AB 1603 by Assemblymember Schultz. The clerk will read. Assembly Bill 1603 by Assemblymember Schultz and I have no pesticides. Assemblymember

opposition to fine-tune this measure. But I do rise to present AB 1603, and I'd like to note that should the bill pass off the floor today, I commit to amending the bill in the Senate to remove any language that bans a certain set of PFAS pesticides in 2030, as well as a ban on any remaining PFAS pesticides in 2035. Therefore, and this is the operative part, the bill will no longer ban any PFAS pesticides used in the state of California today. After amendments are made, AB 1603 will prohibit state approvals of new pesticides containing PFAS starting in January. However, this would not prohibit approval of applications that are in possession and being processed by DPR before that deadline. In addition, the bill would designate all PFAS pesticide as restricted materials and therefore require use of those pesticides decides to be publicly disclosed and permitted by county agricultural commissioners starting in 2028. Those are the amendments. Why did I bring this bill forward? Well, for those of you who don't know, PFAS is a large class of chemicals that are used in many consumer products and industries because they are long-lasting and waterproof, and especially in the agricultural context, I understand that those properties can be very helpful. However, there are also associated with those products a number of serious human health effects that can not only impact our bodies, but build up in water and soil, and they are perpetual. They don't go away. Because of PFAS's very problematic properties, the California legislature, as you all well know, has acted in recent years to prohibit their use in many consumer products, including textiles, food packaging, and cosmetics. And state officials have limited the use of PFAS in carpets and upholstery and are about to regulate PFAS and cleaners. But I was shocked to learn that the state, in my view, is not doing anything about PFAS containing pesticides that are regularly used on California crops. And I was more shocked to learn that PFAS pesticides are present on the fruits and vegetables that we feed our families. For example, strawberries, a fruit known for heavy pesticide use, can contain the residue of 10 different PFAS pesticides. And according to a recent environmental working group analysis, California currently allows 53 PFAS pesticides to be used on California-grown crops, and more than 2.5 million pounds of this PFAS is deposited on California agriculture and urban lands every year. California, simply put, is not adequately addressing the use of PFAS. I would argue that many farmers are not told that they're even applying those PFAS chemicals, which could be very well contaminating their soil and their groundwater for generations. Prohibiting new PFAS in California will begin the slow reduction of this pollution from entering our bodies and our waterways and ultimately our food supply. And making PFAS pesticides restricted materials will provide pesticide users and the public more generally with more information regarding their use in California. Colleagues, I know that this bill is a work in progress. I also know that this is a tough vote. All I can ask is that you allow me the opportunity to work with the opposition, to educate myself, and to hopefully land the plane on what I think is a critical investment that we all need to make in consumer health and safety. With that, I respectfully ask your aye vote. Thank you, Assemblymember Schultz. Assemblymember Papin, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just a few remarks in support of AB 1603. This is a tough bill. Agriculture has raised what I would argue are very fair concerns that this bill did create a short timeline to phase out PFAS pesticides. So I thank my colleague for Burbank for tailoring back the bill. I don't believe that most farmers that have dedicated generations of working their lands would be using pesticides that contain harmful ingredients, such as PFAS, unless the market was limited on affordable, better alternatives. As we continue to legislate in this space, we should work with our regulators to ensure They're working with industries to fill gaps in a timely manner that bolsters our industries and doesn't hinder them. However, I want to connect this conversation just a tad with the work that's being done by our water managers, which kind of falls under the purview of what we do as it relates to water in this state. Behind the scenes in treatment facilities and along conveyance channels, our water agencies are working tirelessly to monitor clean water and transpire water into our homes and workplaces, such that when we took on the spigot, most of us have very clean water Treating water is no small feat and if we can limit the time and the large expense of treating PFAS that getting leached into our waterways we really should do so But taking this on isn't easy. Eliminating heart of the source is definitely key. So I applaud my colleague for trying to take this on. I look forward to working with the author to ensure that California ag continues to thrive. Californians really do deserve both. They deserve healthy produce and clean water. So let's forge ahead. Thanks for your work. Thank you, Assemblymember Pappin. Assemblymembers Boer, you are recognized. Mr. Speaker, members, I rise in very strong support of AB 1603, and I want to thank the author from Burbank. I think this is the most important environmental bill that we are acting on this year in the Assembly. A lot of you don't know, but I was raised on a farm south of Albuquerque, New Mexico, the same community where my mom's family had lived for generations. They were farmers. My grandfather had a dairy, and my uncles and aunts and cousins all lived in that farm community, and many of them came down with illnesses and cancer due to contaminated water that was contaminated with chemicals that were used in the agricultural context. PFAS is one of the most ubiquitous chemicals that we have in our communities. It's long-lasting, it's toxic, and it's something we need to do everything we can to phase out. We look at the PFAS that's being used in our pots and pans, and the fact that I look at every pots and pan that I use, and I look at whether there's scratches in it, and I wonder whether there's PFAS in that, and we know how sort of harmful that is. These things are being sprayed in our communities in ways that is long-lasting and is going to have toxic impacts to those communities. It's getting into our food and our water supplies. So this has to be one of our highest priorities, and I do believe that this is only a beginning. We do have to make sure that the agricultural community actually has substitutes. And so I understand the need that that part of moving out of PFAS has to contemplate having adequate substitutes that are usable and that can be obtained and contained at reasonable prices. And so this is something that I think is a first step. But I want to thank the author. This is such an important bill and strongly urge an aye vote. Thank you, Assembly Members Borer. Leader Flora, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Calling sadly, I rise in opposition to 1603, and I respect the author and his intent in this. Most of you probably know my family came to Westside Stanislaus County, Modesto, in 1925, and he mentioned something about not screwing up the land. My nephew lives in the house that my great-grandfather built. We still have the red barn. It's now our corporate office. We farm the same dirt that they farmed in 1925. And I think this idea that farmers are not responsible is interesting. And my colleague from – this is what I'm bringing in, Hollywood. We'll go with that. He mentioned something as well because DPA, EPA have not approved a new pesticide or a new approval process for anything new. All we do is ban. And I think at some point we're going to have to understand what it actually is. So I would encourage as we move forward – I mean, there's no doubt in my mind that this bill is going to get out today. I understand that. But I respect you enough to please bring ag in. Ag is the original environmentalist And I think we lose sight of that And I really get frustrated every now and then because and you mentioned it yourself 1925 we started farming as land We still do it today We don want to do anything to screw up that because it generations And so as we move forward with these processes, the urban area is very different than rural. And sometimes the rural communities feel left out. And we feel like these policies are being dropped on our souls with very little input from us. And I think that your heart is in the right spot, and I would just ask that you continue to work with the ag community to make sure that there is opportunities, and maybe collectively we could put pressure on some of these bureaucratic agencies that aren't doing their job and start approving some things we can move forward with. So I appreciate your time. Thank you. Thank you, Leader Flora. Assemblymember Ellis, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. I respect very much the author and where he's trying to grow with this. Tell you a quick story. I bought this ranch and it was loaded with tumbleweeds and I couldn't get a burn permit. So I bunched up these tumbleweeds and I'll get here. And I found out that livestock won't eat tumbleweeds because they're loaded with organic acids. So I bought a baler and a grinder and a reactor, and I extracted these organic acids, and I made an organic pesticide. I called the FDA, and I said, I want to apply for an organic pesticide permit. And they said, it's going to take about three to five years and probably $100 million. So we're faced with coming up with new pesticides, could not agree more. I'd also like to address the fact that all PFASs are not bad. For example, you mentioned Teflon. It's insoluble. It will not go into solution. You cannot digest it. There's 15,000 fluorine carbon bonds. For example, I did some research after committee, and I found out that some PFOSs are actually surfactants. It's the surfactant portion of the pesticide that will actually smooth out on the leave for dispersing that is not hazardous at all. So I don't want us to confuse PFOS as making a pesticide hazardous. It's actually the other way around in these cases. So although I do respect the author, I'm going to oppose this today, but I really would appreciate the science and finding out. Let's find out what portion of what we want to ban is hazardous. Is it the pesticide? Is it the PFOS? And I respect your time. Thank you very much. Thank you, Assemblymember Ellis. Assemblymember Patel, Dr. Patel, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I rise today in support of AB 1603. And I want to thank the Assemblymember from Burbank for all of his efforts really digging into this important issue and collaborating with stakeholders. As a research scientist, I care deeply about mitigating the harmful impacts of PFAS on our food system and also our bodies. But I also recognize the need for appropriate timelines to carry out this critical work. The recent amendments that my colleague from Burbank has committed to move this bill in a thoughtful and more pragmatic direction And I appreciate that They provide researchers with the runway needed to develop safe alternatives for the products our farmers rely on to bring food to our tables. At the same time, the amendments ensure that we are not opening the door to new harmful PFAS pesticides that would exacerbate existing negative health impacts. For those of you who don't know, PFAS does cause endocrine disruption. It's a known problem. I urge my colleagues to support this bill today to allow these important conversations to continue in the Senate so that the author can land a policy that protects environmental health while maintaining an affordable food ecosystem. It's important that we get this policy right, and I hear my colleagues across the aisle. PFAS is a forever chemical and exposure can lead to a host of adverse health impacts for children, women, and farm workers working tirelessly every day to feed our state With that, I respectfully request your aye vote Thank you, Dr. Patel Assemblymember DeMaio, you are recognized Thank you, Mr. Speaker I rise in respectful opposition but hopeful constructive feedback for the author of AB 1603. Let me start out first with the bill that was similar last year that would ban the sale of pots and pans. My colleague from West Hollywood referenced pots and pans, but the governor correctly vetoed the bill because of the disruption it would have to consumers. Here we have a similar bill on the same topic, PFAS, and I don't believe that this bill, as currently written and structured, can be implemented without significant negative impacts to agriculture. Yesterday, this chamber took up a bill that I believe will have a devastating impact on farm workers and agriculture, and that is raising the cost of labor. And as part of my remarks in opposing that bill, I said, agriculture is on the ropes and we keep adding mandates. The jobs are going to be destroyed. And then what do we have left? We might have a higher minimum wage, but no jobs. And so here comes this bill that would add to those mandates. I take you at your word that that's not your intent. And so my hope is that you will work, if this bill does get to the Senate, with the ag community to get their support. A few weeks ago, I think I shocked folks by referencing a bill by Mr. Gonzalez that was great on the issue of CARB. It recognized that some of the rules applied by this chamber were too aggressive, too costly, too many negative impacts would come with them. And we said to CARB, no, you cannot implement this unless the technologies are available to implement these standards without avoiding a cost impact to consumers. My hope is that you can take perhaps a similar framework for this bill if it gets to the Senate to put some guardrails around this. And the way that I will judge whether those guardrails are workable is if you come back with the support of our agricultural communities. And so I wish you well in that. I know that you're well intended on the issue of PFAS. I do recognize some of the issues here. But we have to make these changes. is realistic and manageable. So with that, I will be voting no on the bill. And if it does come back, I will be looking for the support of the ag industry. Thank you, Assemblymember DeMaio. Assemblymember Soria, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. Today, I rise in respectful opposition to this measure. I do want to thank my colleague for his initial comments and the work that he has committed on this floor to ensure that he gets this bill right. I do also just want to share that I applaud the efforts to reduce and eliminate harmful PFAS exposure in pesticides and to ensure our food supply is safe, that our environment is protected, and that our farm workers and communities remain healthy. I think that by the comments that you've heard on this floor tonight, that we share that common goal. But I also want to remind my colleagues that California farmers, and when I think about farmers, I'm not thinking about big corporate farms, right? I'm thinking about the small farmers in my district, the small Hmong farmers that don't even speak English, the Latino farmers that were farm workers and now own their own farms. They are increasingly being asked to do more with less. We ask them to produce safer food, use fewer tools, adapt to climate pressures, conserve water, comply with some of the strictest regulations in the nation, and remain competitive in a global market. And so I've said it again, and I will sound like a broken record, but if we're going to continue placing additional restriction on agriculture, then we also have a responsibility to equally advocate for investments, research, innovation, and support necessary to ensure this industry can survive and thrive here in California. California already has one of the most rigorous science-based pesticide review systems in the nation through the Department of Pesticide Regulation. Believe me, I've advocated to improve the process and to make sure that those tools that our farmers need can get approved, tools that are safer. I shared my initial concerns. I'm glad to see that there are some amendments that may be taken in the Senate. But I do caution us about unintended consequences for agriculture and food production in California. In the Central Valley, I have seen firsthand what happens when growers face major infestations without effective approved tools available. For example, in 2023, when I first was here in the legislature, we had a ligus infestation with cotton with no tools that were effective to deal with the ligus infestation. We worked very closely with DPR when we finally were able to get TRANSFORM approved. And in fact, in the original version of that bill, TRANSFORM would have been eliminated from possibility to be used. And that was the only tool that helped mitigate that ligus infestation that we may continuously see because of the wet seasons that we may see in our community. And so those kind of outbreaks create economic harm that really will impact and devastate communities like the ones that I represent. So we should continue investing in safer alternatives and strengthening the oversight I do believe that that important but we must also ensure we not creating policies that unintentionally harm the very communities and the workers we are trying to protect And so for those reasons, I cannot support the bill today, but I look forward not only to the conversations that will happen over the coming months. I invite any of my colleagues from urban areas that don't have agriculture in your community to come and visit my district so that you can hear directly from these farmers and the challenges that they're having on a daily basis struggling with the California regulations. And so I want to, again, thank my colleague for the conversations. And I look forward to the continued debate that we will have over the coming months. And I hope that we can get to a place where I can also support something that will work for all of us and help ensure California agricultural thrives. Thank you, Assemblymember Soria. Assemblymember Jackson, you are recognized. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I want to thank the author for listening to my concerns from those farmers who are actually in my district as well. And understanding that we have to make sure that we are setting our farmers up for success. And so we have to make sure that whatever we do, and understanding that different farmers, depending on what they're cultivating, depending on what their products are, may use different pesticides. So we need to make sure that we are providing them with opportunities to use something that can continue to allow them to protect their produce or whatever else that they may be growing. So I trust that the member is going to continue to engage with us, and as the member has committed to engage with me, as whatever amendments that you are sending our way, I'll be sending to my farmers to get their feedback, because we need to make sure that whatever we do translates into what's going to happen on the ground. So as this bill comes back, I trust that it will be something that we can all be supportive and proud of and still set up our farmers for success. So with that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you, Dr. Jackson. Assemblymember Alvarez, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think this debate and this conversation is absolutely worthwhile. And I am glad to hear the opposition who's raised their concerns, which are completely legitimate. And the version that is before us is a bill that I think is not something that works for California. However, I know that the author in his opening remarks mentioned some of the changes that he's looking into. into and I ask that he reminds of that at the end but I do think they're significant because I've had the opportunity to have a conversation about what those are the use of the pesticides that in the current version are banned that what the current version says would no longer be banned under the proposed amendments That is quite significant It would force us I think in a good way over the course of time to identify better chemicals utilizing the research and the data and the process that so many of you who spoke against this bill should be utilized in order to identify a better, cleaner, effective product that works to protect the farming that happens in California. So I rise to acknowledge that the work that some of you are asking and I think believe that this author will engage in will occur. I too, as I've shared with him, in looking to ensure that the version of this bill, when it returns back to us, if it gets out of this House and out of the Senate, will include language that ensures that future products, which may be needed, as was given by our colleague from Merced just earlier, as a result of some pest, that there is a process in order for that to occur. because the last thing you want is to not ensure that we have a product that is able to protect the agricultural community. So there's definitely work to be done. I want to thank the author for the time. As an urban colleague of some of you who are much more familiar with the ag industry, I want to say I think this is a good opportunity for all of us to learn about the issues of agriculture, which are significant and important. to all of us and at the minimum this debate has served as that and so I want to thank the author and absolutely want to thank those in opposition who have raised not only legitimate but productive feedback that I also expect like you do to be taken into account by this author as it moves forward. Thank you very much. Thank you Assemblymember Alvarez. Seeing and hearing no further debate, Assemblymember Schultz, do you wish to close? Yes, briefly, Mr. Speaker. Colleagues, I'm going to be brief, but I have three quick points I want to make. First of all, to all of you who have engaged with us or given us commentary on the floor, I know it's sort of a blind trust you're putting in me to continue the process, but our office has listened. The changes in the bill weren't thrown upon us by anyone. It's because of my conversations with many of you and listening to the opposition. And if anything, I point to that as a sign that we are, as an office, and I personally am intentional and thoughtful, and we want to get the policy right. The second thing I would say, and I think you all say in your own remarks, is that we're all in this together. I, earlier today, talked about checking your privilege, and I'll be the first to acknowledge I'm from an urban area. I don't understand all of the issues in a district like my esteemed colleague from Merced, but I commit to educating myself and working with you. And at the end of the day, this is one supply food chain, right? We are all in this together. The folks of my district need agricultural and rural parts of the state to thrive and to be successful. And, yes, we have to talk about investments in those communities as well. Because when you're thriving and doing well, when the product that you're sending to urban areas is high quality and affordable and healthy, we all benefit. And the last thing I would say is this. to any colleagues that are still on the fence in this moment about to cast a vote, all I can ask one more time is that this bill will hopefully, if it gets out of the Senate and out of here today, come back on concurrence. And if I don live up to every commitment I made today then don vote for it then But what I would say is this As my colleague from San Diego mentioned this is an important conversation And all I can ask is let's not end the conversation today. Give us a chance to move this conversation forward and have these conversations and land the policy the right way. With that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you, Assemblymember Schultz. Drop the mic. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. I'll members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. Thank you. Okay, members. File item 122. Thank you, members. I know you want to go home, don't you? Members, this will be our final item of the night. Let's give our respectful attention to the author, please. File item number 122, that's AB 2575 by Assemblymember Ortega. The clerk will read. Assembly Bill 2575 by Assemblymember Ortega, an applicant in health care services. Assemblymember Ortega, you are recognized. Members' decorum, please. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I had a very long speech prepared, but I know we want to go home. So AB 2575 is built around a simple principle that in healthcare, AI should support clinical judgment but never replace it. AI may offer a promise, but in real world settings, these tools can often be biased and get it wrong. Now, I've heard a lot of concerns from the opposition of this bill, and I wanted to commit that if this bill gets out, I'm striking out the provision that requires a 90-day notice on updates to an AI tool. In addition to the many other amendments that I've taken, and I want to personally thank Assemblymember Bonta, Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Cahan, as we work through this bill together to ensure that we get it right. But I recognize that I will continue to work as I'm hearing other concerns about AI in the healthcare space. With that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you. Thank you, Assemblymember Ortega. All debate having ceased, clerk will open the roll. All members vote who desire to vote. All members vote who desire to vote. clerk will close the roll tally votes ayes 42 or 43 noes 15 the measure passes members we are going to pass and retain on all remaining items all motions shall be continued on the assembly third reading and on the Senate third reading. We're going to move on to announcements here. Please remember to show up to session on time. We still have many bills to dispense with. Expect a busy day tomorrow. Our session schedules as follows Thursday, May 28th, floor session at 10 a.m. Madam Majority Leader, you are recognized for your announcement. We'll see you here at 10 tomorrow morning, not 1030. Thank you, Mr. Lackey. Members, we have dispensed with 125 items. We have 55 assembly bills left to work on. Let's be ready to start at 10 o'clock so we can get everybody to their flights. Thank you. Senior hearing, no further business. I'm ready to entertain a motion to adjourn. Madam Majority Leader moves and Ms. Sanchez seconds that this House stands adjourned until tomorrow, Thursday, May 28th at 10. 10 a.m. Please be here at 10 a.m. Quorum calls lifted. We are adjourned. Vote changes from the dais. Thank you. I'll see you next time. Vote change AB 2118, aye to not voting. Assemblymember Addis, Assembly Bill 2118, aye to not voting. Davies, vote change AB 2270, aye to not voting. Vote change, Assemblymember Davies, Assembly Bill 2270, aye to not voting. Gibson, AB 1776, from aye to not voting. Vote change Assemblymember Gibson Assembly Bill 1776 aye to not voting Vote change Zuber AB 2253 yes to not voting Vote change, Assemblymember Zuber, Assembly Bill 2253, aye to not voting. vote change AB 2318 no to yes we hope change assembly members of birth some people 2318 no tie and I had one other yes yes vote change AB 2253 yes to not voting vote change assembly members of birth simply bill 2253 I to not voting Oh, he had 2353. He had 2253. I know. The numbers. DeMaio, vote change. Assembly Bill 2353. Aye to no. Vote change. Assembly Member DeMaio, Assembly Bill 2353. Aye to no. Vote change, Jeff Gonzalez, AB 2254, from no to yes. Vote change, Assemblymember Jeff Gonzalez, Assembly Bill 2254, no to aye. Ready? Vote change, Castillo, AB 2318, no to not voting. vote change assembly member castillo assembly bill 2318 no to not voting vote change ab1627 no to not voting vote change assembly member castillo assembly bill 1627 no to not voting Connelly vote change AB 2433 I tonight voting vote change assembly member Connelly symbol 2433 I tonight voting our or very 2353, aye to not voting. Agriar-Curry, AB 1603, aye to not voting. Vote change, Assemblymember Agriar-Curry, Assembly Bill 1603, aye to not voting. Vote change, Colosa, AB 2353, aye to not voting. Vote change, Assemblymember Colosa, Assembly Bill 2353, aye to not voting. Vote change Rubio AB 2108 from I to not voting Vote change assembly member Rubio, assembly bill 21 0 8 I to not voting. vote change Pappin AB 2716 from aye to not voting vote change Assemblymember Pappin Assemblymember 2716 aye to not voting vote change El Huari AB 1830 Aye to not voting. Vote change. Assemblymember El-Hawari, Assembly Bill 1830. Aye to not voting. vote change Mckenner AB 2253 I to not voting vote change assembly member Mckenner assembly vote 2253 I to not voting Thank you. Thank you. vote change assembly bill 2716 from aye to not voting vote change assembly bill 2716 aye to not voting vote change Bonta AB 2296 from aye to not voting vote change assembly Assemblymember Ponta, Assembly Bill 2296, aye to not voting. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Salache AB 1542, from yes to not voting. Vote change, Assemblymember Salache, Assembly Bill 1542, aye to not voting. Thank you. Thank you. . Thank you. Thank you. Zabur, vote change AB 1666, yes to not voting. Vote change Assemblymember Zabur, Assembly Bill 1666, aye to not voting. 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.