Senate Standing Committee on Environmental Quality
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, let's call this hearing of the Senate Environmental Quality Committee to order. Thank you for your patience, Mister Vice Chair. And let's hear from Senator Wood, who's here to present AB 2902.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
Good morning, Mister chair and Members of the Committee. I'd like to start by thanking the Committee staff for their efforts and accepting the Committee amendments. SB 1383 established a statewide framework focused on redirecting organic waste to landfills, which reduces the amount of methane released into the atmosphere.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
While this framework can be readily adapted to dense urban communities, it's become increasingly clear that more flexibility is needed for rural communities to address implementation challenges, increase local benefits, and avoid costly rate increases for rural residents.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
AB 2902 extends the rural exemption for organic waste collection and procurement by counties with a population under 70,000 people for an additional 10 years, but maintains the requirement for those counties to participate in the edible food recovery program. The Bill also provides an organic waste compliance pathway for 12 smaller counties containing more than 70,000 residents but generating less than 200,000 tons of solid waste annually.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
By allowing those counties to submit alternative organic waste management plans to Cal recycle for approval, additional provisions in Navy 2902 continue the use of organics for local animal feed practices, promote carbon farming, adjust procurement targets to exclude populations covered by exemptions, and facilitate the development of smaller scale community composting programs.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
California is not a one size fits all state with many regional differences to consider. This Bill is about striking a balance, providing our rural communities with the flexibility needed to contribute to our climate goals and achieve SB 13803's organic waste diversion objectives. Here with me to testify in support is John Kennedy with Rural County Representatives of California, and they are the sponsors of AB 2902. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.
- John Kennedy
Person
Good morning. John Kennedy with RCRC here sponsoring AB 290. Two thank you to the author and the Committee for your work to improve the Bill. We really appreciate it. Local governments have been implementing 1383 for several years now, but there have been a lot of implementation challenges.
- John Kennedy
Person
What works well in denser urban areas really doesn't work as well in rural communities. So we've based this proposal on years of feedback from local governments.
- John Kennedy
Person
Tried to thread the needle with some rather non controversial but important programmatic changes that provide flexibility not only for us as local governments implementing the program, but also for Cal Recycle, whose regulations are pretty restrictive right now. So the author really covered many of the components of the Bill quite well.
- John Kennedy
Person
This rural exemption, extending that for an additional 10 years, is incredibly important. We're not seeking to exempt ourselves from anything else that we're not doing today.
- John Kennedy
Person
But we are looking to actually help the state achieve its organic reduction goals through doing some extra requirements, providing flexibility for another dozen smaller counties so they can develop tailored, innovative programs to address organic waste in unincorporated areas. We understand the Committee took some amends to the bear piece and the Bill.
- John Kennedy
Person
Look forward to continuing to trying to find a way to thread that needle. We want to avoid and minimize adverse human bear interactions in some higher elevation areas and really appreciate all the work that's gone into this. Look forward to any questions or anything else that you all have.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Anyone else who wants to voice their support for SB 2902?
- Catherine Freeman
Person
Good morning. Catherine Freeman, on behalf of the California State Association of Counties in support. Thank you.
- Melissa Sparks-Kranz
Person
Melissa Sparks Kranz with the League of California Cities in support.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
Taylor Roshan, on behalf of a variety of agricultural associations. Apologies. We're not in the analysis, but support thank you.
- Chris Zgraggen
Person
Good morning, Chair, Members. Chris Zgraggen, on behalf of Republic Services in support.
- Erica Parker
Person
Good morning. Erica Parker with Californians Against Waste with concerns. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, anyone else who wants to voice opposition or concerns, clarify their concerns? Okay. We'll bring it back to the Committee for questions. Thoughts? Senator Dahle?
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Well, I just want to thank the author for bringing this forward. I know that both of us represent a lot of these counties, and, you know, I don't want the perfect to get in way of the good in a lot of cases. We have counties where we have a huge land mass with very few people and very few businesses out there to be able to actually do what the original law intended us to do actually creates more of a carbon footprint and more of a problem than it does to alleviate.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
So giving this exemption or this pathway to getting there I think is great. So I'll be supporting the Bill when we get a quorum.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right. Thank you so much. Let's hear from Senator Garcia, who's here, and as he comes to the front, just a couple things I wanted to say.
- Jim Wood
Legislator
I just respectfully ask your aye vote when you have a quorum. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay. We're supporting it as well. Thank you for working with our Committee and we'll let you close.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
This is, of course, a very interesting and unique Bill. AB 2113 by Senator Garcia is the policy vehicle for the administration's mill assessment trailer Bill.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
And so I just wanted to note, I know this is unusual that the Chair makes comments in advance, but this is a special case, as I think you know, the Bill is still being negotiated with the concurrent with the budget process and those discussions are ongoing, and this Bill will continue to evolve through that process.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
And I want to thank this author, the author, for bringing this forward to give the public a forum for discussion today. This Bill in its current form reflects a great deal of stakeholder input work by the author and staff, a genuinely challenging set of issues at play.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
And I think it's testament to all that work and the collaboration among and between the environmental and agricultural communities that the Bill has no formal opposition today. So that being said, we all know there are some serious issues to address that we need to address, those to ensure that we get this right.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
The implications are pretty significant for the health of farmworkers, for agricultural communities, for consumers, for wildlife, for our economy, for our food security. Let me also just acknowledge that this proposal is now years in the making at the Department of Pesticide Regulation.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
It reflects a significant amount of work by departmental staff and the Department of Finance who are seeking to balance many competing priorities. So I know the department's here to answer technical questions, and with that, Mister Garcia, the floor is yours.
- Eduardo Garcia
Legislator
Respectfully, ask for an aye vote. I mean, I think you've done an excellent job in outlining the Bill 20 Years in really a discussion. The Department is in need of some policy reforms. The Department is in need of some efficiencies to be implemented.
- Eduardo Garcia
Legislator
All sides, all stakeholders find common ground that there is much to be done at the Department, perhaps for different reasons, but nonetheless, the Department needs to be more effective, efficient in how they use the resources, and the resources are needed to be able to do the efficiencies and implement the policies more effectively.
- Eduardo Garcia
Legislator
And so, as you mentioned, the Bill continues to be a vehicle to have discussions with the Administration. Very productive conversations have been had with all stakeholders and the Administration. Progress is being made.
- Eduardo Garcia
Legislator
This vehicle was introduced to be able to allow the public and the stakeholders to have some input versus just the budget trailer Bill having discussions there. There are a lot of people that I think want to come up and say they're two cent and I want to allow them to have that space.
- Eduardo Garcia
Legislator
So with that, thank you for your attention. The analysis outlines exactly what the policy Bill does. Respectfully asked for your aye vote.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
So folks who want to. So we've got folks who want to speak in support. Yeah, come on up. Yeah, yeah, we got, we got two primary witnesses and you can come up to the front tables here.
- Jane Sellen
Person
Great. Sure. I can go first. Hi, Jane Sellen, Co-Director, Californians for Pesticide Reform. Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for the excellent amendments taken so far on behalf of CPR.
- Jane Sellen
Person
I just want to say our top priority is a commitment by the Department to finish and not merely initiate a specific number of re-evaluations and mitigations of pesticides already prioritized by the Department, in many cases for more than a decade.
- Jane Sellen
Person
We strongly support the current language that commits DPR to initiate five re evaluations per year, finish them within two years, mitigate if necessary, within one year. The Department has stated that statutory requirements necessitate a process that takes a decade or more.
- Jane Sellen
Person
They have not provided any statutory evidence that that is the case without firm deadlines for reevaluation and mitigation. We will oppose this Bill. We support the existing language allowing any interested party to request review of approved permits for restricted material pesticides.
- Jane Sellen
Person
We also urge you to retain the provision that would expedite registration of reduced risk pesticides and also to include a strong definition of reduced risk. And finally, we urge you to codify DPR's plan in the SPM roadmap to phase out priority pesticides by 2050. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. That was a support with a warning.
- Nicole Quinonez
Person
Good morning. Cheering Members Nicole Quinonez, representing the Household and Commercial Products Association. Our Members include manufacturers of the non agricultural pesticides. So these are the products used in your homes, in hospitals such as disinfectants, pet care products like flea and tick collars, and lawn and garden products, to name a few.
- Nicole Quinonez
Person
Our manufacturers contribute roughly half of the total mill assessment collected by DPR each year, and we certainly want to thank the author for carrying 2113.
- Nicole Quinonez
Person
It has afforded a much more robust conversation around what is a very significant tax increase and as the Assembly Member mentioned, what reforms or efficiencies could be achieved through the Department in light of those additional resources. Our Members work with the Department daily and support a well functioning DPR and recognize that it will take those additional resources.
- Nicole Quinonez
Person
So that's why we're here at the table. AB 2113 has done a very important job of trying to balance all the different priorities from the various stakeholders. I'll just highlight a few of our priorities that were included, recognizing it wasn't everything, nobody ever gets everything, but certainly appreciate what was included.
- Nicole Quinonez
Person
We've advocated for registration timelines in statute and certainly support their inclusion in this Bill.
- Nicole Quinonez
Person
We have seen that it takes the time it has taken to register new products for use in the state or amend existing products, has continually increased over the past several years, and we believe these statutory timelines will drive improvements and provide more predictability for manufacturers who want to provide new and innovative products to the State of California.
- Nicole Quinonez
Person
Also, registering new products will lead to more mill fees being collected by the Department and helping their overall funding resources. We also appreciate the additional transparency measures related to reporting on registration timelines and believe these will help the Legislature understand whether the additional resources have improved operations.
- Nicole Quinonez
Person
And then lastly 2113 does not allow DPR to raise the mill in future years as the governor's trailer Bill proposed through a regulatory process. We strongly feel the Legislature should retain this important oversight function and allow for these robust discussions again when the Department needs additional resources in the future.
- Nicole Quinonez
Person
But in recognition of these key pieces, we have removed our opposition to 2113 and we're encouraged by the engagement with the Administration on this Bill and are hopeful that the appropriate balance will be achieved to provide DPR with needed resources and stakeholders with needed improvements. Thank you.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
Good morning, Mister Chair and Member Taylor Roshan on behalf of an agricultural coalition that's relatively large. Obviously, on this particular proposal, we would like to echo the comments of Miss Quinonez and really offer our appreciation for the author and staff in finding what is a very challenging and delicate balance between many stakeholders in this process.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
But the stark reality is California is behind 49 other states have access to products that are more effective, safer, softer than we have in California. And that's simply because our registration system is broken and the appetite to remove products is not met with the same appetite to add alternatives in their place.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
So even though the mill is a tax on farmers at a particularly hard time, at a time when farmers can't pass those costs down to consumers, we see this painful increase as an investment in our future. And it's also an investment in reevaluation, which we understand is important to others as well.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
So in that we believe that this proposal has something for everyone. It's uncomfortable, but it does have something that appeases, to some extent, every stakeholder group. And for that reason, we will move to neutral. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. All right, folks who want to come to the mic to voice their support for the Bill or complicated feelings?
- Jamie Fanous
Person
Perfect. That's where we're at.
- Jamie Fanous
Person
Jamie Finouse on behalf of the Community Alliance with Family Farmers, we appreciate the author, the author's staff, but we take a position of support with amended and hope that the amendments will utilize materials and technical assistance from UCAN R, as well as provide greater benefits to farmers that a portion of the mill fee goes to CDFA for the BIFS program, the biologically integrated farming systems program.
- Jamie Fanous
Person
Thank you.
- Abby Alvarez
Person
Abby Alvarez on behalf of the California Nurses for Environmental Health and Justice, the California Food and Farming Network, the Pesticide Action Network, Clean Water Action, and Routes of Change getting much closer, but also currently aligning with CPR support if amended position.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Dennis Albiani on behalf of the California Seed Association of Pear Growers and several other ag interests, we are enthusiastically neutral on this proposal. Thanks
- Chris Reardon
Person
Mister Chair Members. Chris Reardon, California Farm Bureau we also like Mister Albiani, are neutral on the Bill. Let me just say however, we appreciate the author taking those amendments and I concur with Miss Quinonez and Miss Roshan on their testimony. But I hope we continue to talk about Mister Chair.
- Chris Reardon
Person
Those outstanding issues regarding the way we view it is sort of what that mill number is okay? In terms of efficiency, effectiveness, and then secondly, timelines to make sure we can ensure we get product in the marketplace to sort of backfill some of the challenges we've had historically. So thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you.
- Matthew Allen
Person
Good morning Mister Chair Members. Matthew Allen with Western Growers Association. We would also align our comments with Miss Roshan and Miss Quinonez and appreciate the work of the author and staff and working in this important area. Appreciate it.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you.
- Jesse Cuevas
Person
Jesse Cuevas on behalf of the TriCal group, we are neutral if amended. General concern is over the size of the proposal. We'd like to see it. Conversations continue to talk about a more modest approach to increase in the mill, but appreciate the author introducing the Bill and having this go through the legislative policy process. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you.
- Erin Norwood
Person
Good morning. Erin Norwood on behalf of the Allman Alliance, I would align our comments with Miss Roshan. Appreciate the work of the author on this complicated issue and there's still things we would like to see, but happy to be in support. Thanks.
- Tricia Geringer
Person
Good morning Mister Chair and Members Tricia Geringer with Agricultural Council of California, also neutral. Appreciate the work of the author and the Committee. Thank you.
- Ariana Creed
Person
Ariana Creed with CleanEarthforKids.org. also in support is NCCA and we support the concerns.
- Brenda Bass
Person
Good morning. Brenda Bass with the California Chamber of Commerce aligning our comments with Miss Roshan. Thank you.
- Victor Torres
Person
Good morning. Victor Torres with Future Leaders of Change in support, if amended, aligning with California's for Pesticide Reform.
- Yanely Martinez
Person
Good morning, everyone. Yanely Martinez with Safe Ag Safe Schools, and in support if amended, aligned with Californians for Pesticide Reform. Thank you.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
Jonathan Evans, on behalf of the Center for Biological Diversity, supporting if amended, aligned with the California's Pesticide Reform, particularly regarding the reevaluation portion. Reevaluation of pesticides lasts decades currently under DPR, and it needs to be occurring at a faster rate. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay. Any other comments, thoughts, concerns from folks in the audience? Okay, we'll bring it back to the committee. Yeah. This is very much a negotiation that's underway, so we'll turn it over to you.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Well I just had a question. The first question I have is, so you are still working on amendments going to the next committee?
- Eduardo Garcia
Legislator
There are conversations that are ongoing. There were conversations as recently as yesterday with the Administration on finding some common ground on some things that they had concerns with, some things that don't align with their budget trailer bill, and so progress is being made and stakeholders are being engaged as well along the way.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Okay, if I may, then I just want to, as a farmer, a family farmer, and first of all, with all due respect to the author, I appreciate the fact that we're actually doing this in a bill and not doing it in a trailer bill where we don't have this opportunity, so I want to put that out in the open for first.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
And to all the folks who have been in my office and weighed in and have come to some sort of an agreement, which I guess is great for now, but I just want to say some things that I think need to be said as somebody who is in this industry and these fees and regulations affect my business very much so.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
And so I just want to say that, you know, over the years that I've been here, over the 12 years I've been here, this is not the first time we've seen, you know, a negotiation that really at the end of the day impacts family farms, and there are a lot of big operators in the state that can absorb that and the household products folks can absorb that and pass it on, but at the end of the day, in my farm, we compete against farms outside of California.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
And in California we have a lot of, not just this, but many other factors that cause our prices to go up and our cost to go up, and this is one of those. And so what I say is, you know, we negotiate our death every day here. That's what we do. We never win. We negotiate our death.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
And so when, when the agencies can't do their job and get it done in the, in the timeframe that we need, we just tax more people and give them more money and expect something to happen different than actually getting results. So I just want to put that all on the table.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
I won't be supporting the bill today because I am dying from a thousand cuts, and somewhere there has to be a line drawn in the sand that says, hey, we have to do something to help business stay in California and specifically family farms. I know the family farm folks that come up and testify.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
I don't know who they are, but my family's been farming here for 93 years and we are truly a family farm. It's my sons and a few employees and that's it, and so just wanted to put that out there. With all due respect to the author and the Chair and all of you folks who have been working, but I just want to say it.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
I'm dying from a thousand cuts and this is just another cut that will cause my farm to be less competitive against farms from Mexico who use all these products, don't pay any, and ship their food in here, and we're eating food with pesticides on them and we can trace that.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
We know that. That's because they're coming from other countries. So you're pushing the farmers out of California into other places and they're shipping their food in here. It's not as safe as what we can do here. So there's got to be some other solution besides just pushing us out of business. So I just want to say that. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Do you have any thoughts or comments on the--Mr. Vice Chair?
- Eduardo Garcia
Legislator
No, you know, we respectfully, you know, will acknowledge his comments. He speaks from a place that I don't have a direct, you know, experience. I can only just say that, you know, the Department of Pesticide Regulation has been asked to take on some responsibilities to be more effective, efficient in how they process, whether it be applications, whether it be how they deliver their services.
- Eduardo Garcia
Legislator
And for 20 years, you know, they've been saying and asking that they've been lacking the resources to do so, and there's been an unwillingness to maybe directly take on the issue of how do you do that, right? And if there has been a will, it's been an unsuccessful one thus far, and I know that parties have come together this year thanks to the trailer bill that the Governor put forward to try to find some common ground, albeit maybe not a perfect solution.
- Eduardo Garcia
Legislator
And as you mentioned in the prior bill, let's not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. We have a proposal before us that has allowed for stakeholders to have input and you know, the long line of neutral positions to me is a signal that we have a reasonable proposal thus far to continue to move through the process.
- Eduardo Garcia
Legislator
Perhaps when we get to a closer place to finalizing this proposal, you'll come to a conclusion that maybe this is the best approach to addressing the problems at the DPR agency and we can garner your support. That being said, respectfully ask for your aye vote, and we'll continue to work with the stakeholder.
- Eduardo Garcia
Legislator
We'll continue to work with those members of this body who want to remain engaged. I want to acknowledge the work of Josh and the team at the ESTM Committee who have been spearheading this work on our behalf, on behalf of the industry, the stakeholders.
- Eduardo Garcia
Legislator
We need to get this done this year, not only because of the budget circumstances of the Department, but because stakeholders from across the spectrum have agreed that there's a problem there and there's a common ground that we have some proposal before us that can solve some of these problems. So thank you for your attention on this.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right. This bill will go to Agriculture Committee, assuming it gets out today, so there'll be additional opportunities for public engagement on the issue as it moves along, but I'll certainly be supporting it today and when we have a quorum, and so appreciate your work on this. All right, let's invite Senator Connolly to come to the dais.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
He's here to present item 10, which is AB 1864. That was the date of Abraham Lincoln's reelection today, 1864. Oh, your birthday. Well, that's more, that's, you know, almost as important. All right. Happy birthday.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Thank you. Thank you, Chair and Members, good morning. I would like to begin by thanking the Committee and staff for their work and input on this Bill. I will be accepting the Committee amendments.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Children attending public schools and daycares in California are intended to be protected by a regulation that currently restricts the most drift-prone agricultural pesticide applications during the school day from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday to Friday.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
In practice, this regulation is often uninforceable. While notices of intent, and we'll call those NOIs this morning, must be submitted to county agricultural commissioners before using pesticides classified as restricted materials and must include the method of application. Often the information provided isn't specific enough to determine whether or not the method triggers regulations.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
For example, if the application method listed on the NOI is, quote, "ground," it's unclear whether that means a ground rig sprayer, which has a distance restriction, or a hand pump sprayer, which does not. Further, the exact location of applications cannot be verified under current reporting requirements, and exact start and end times are often inaccurately reported.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
AB 1864 seeks to make process improvements by requiring annual permits to include method of application and specific site identification, and for use reports to include method and timing of application to provide corroboration that laws are adhered to.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
This Bill requires, in addition to DPR's existing materials and distance restrictions and regulations, that, when pesticides classified by the US EPA as cancerous and harmful to the reproductive and nervous systems are going to be applied using drift-prone methods, agricultural businesses must provide notice in advance.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
The application methods restricted by this Bill and by current DPR regulations are aircraft, air blast sprayers, sprinkler chemigration equipment, and fumigants. The dangers of pesticide exposure and pesticide drift are well documented, to put this in context. Pesticide exposure is linked to a wide range of health harms, including cancer, autism, asthma, ADHD, brain tumors, and more.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
The National Pesticide Information Center and the Public Health Institute recognize children are more sensitive to the effects of pesticides exposure than adults. A study published in the National Library of Medicine recognizes pesticides are known to have disproportionate effects on Black, Indigenous, and people of color, as well as communities of low-income and wealth.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
This is a common sense, narrowly tailored Bill that seeks to increase transparency and awareness, protect public health, and does not ban the application of pesticides. Finally, AB 1864 also ensures equity by extending the same protections to children, teachers, and school staff in private schools that public schools and daycares are already afforded.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
So I'll now pass it off to my two witnesses, Jane Sellen, Co-Director for Californians for Pesticide Reform, and Victor Torres, representing future leaders of change.
- Jane Sellen
Person
Good morning, Chair and Members. My name is Jane Sellen, Co-Director of the Statewide Coalition Californians for Pesticide Reform. I thank Assembly Member Connolly for his leadership for authoring AB 1864, which is a critical step toward ensuring that all California children are protected from agricultural pesticide exposure at school.
- Jane Sellen
Person
This Bill is needed, because in the six years since the California Department of Pesticide Regulation implemented restrictions on certain pesticide application methods next to schools during the school day, ground truthing by our coalition has revealed some serious issues with enforceability. Those issues can be addressed by simple reporting changes.
- Jane Sellen
Person
Pesticide exposure at school is a serious and underreported issue, as you will hear from Co-Sponsor Victor Torres. Even an acute illness at school that was reported and resulted in a hospital visit was not included in the State Pesticide Illness Database, and we brought copies of that report and hospitalization. Glad to share.
- Jane Sellen
Person
We know that chronic exposure is an issue at schools because DPRs own air monitoring network confirms the presence of multiple pesticides in the air at each of its monitoring stations, most of which are located in schools.
- Jane Sellen
Person
Industry has expressed concern about the administrative burden of notifying the Agricultural Commissioner before applying pesticides known to cause cancer, reproductive or nervous system harm next to schools using aerial, airblast or other highly drift-prone methods, citing the sheer number of applications involved. This concern speaks to the alarming scale of exposure suffered by rural children every day.
- Jane Sellen
Person
To be clear, this provision imposes no restrictions on the use of these chemicals, but enhances the ability of agricultural commissioners to ensure that applications are in compliance with the regulation before they happen. Industry also claims that this requirement would affect hundreds of active ingredients.
- Jane Sellen
Person
In fact, the Bill adds only 54 hazardous chemicals out of over 1000 registered for use in California, only when used near schools, only when using the most drift-prone application methods. Industry has voiced concern about the potential cost and workload of identifying private schools.
- Jane Sellen
Person
We believe the number of impacted private schools is small and CDE has stated that they will provide school addresses at no cost, which can then be incorporated into the existing GIS mapping contract used to locate public schools and daycares. Thank you, Chair and Members, I'll pass on my testimony.
- Victor Torres
Person
Good morning, Chair and Members of the Committee. My name is Victor Torres and I am 17 years old and a new graduate of Greenfield High School in my hometown in the heart of the Salinas Valley, Greenfield. I am a Co-Founder, Salinas Valley. Sorry.
- Victor Torres
Person
I am a Co-Founder of Future Leaders of Change, based in Greenfield and Watsonville. I am here today to bring awareness about the danger of pesticide application near our schools. I myself was a victim of pesticide drift at the age of 10 at my local middle school.
- Victor Torres
Person
No child should have to worry about their health in a place of learning. No child should have to be rushed to the emergency room for something out of their control. We need better protections around schools, both public and private.
- Victor Torres
Person
It is important for us to know the exact location of each of the pesticide application, how the pesticides are applied, and more importantly, that every notice of intent, or NOI, brought to commissioners is examined thoroughly before approval.
- Victor Torres
Person
This would in fact, guarantee that no other 10 year old has to experience the consequences of having such dangerous chemicals applied near their schools. There are many hazardous pesticides that are not classified as restricted materials and so currently no NOI is required.
- Victor Torres
Person
When I was a victim of pesticide drift, there were eight different pesticides involved and not one of them was restricted, even though four of the eight are known to trigger asthma. Another of the eight also unrestricted was Dacthal, or DCPA.
- Victor Torres
Person
The US EPA now says allowable levels of DCPA are 1500 times more harmful to developing brains than is considered safe. Half of all DCPA use in California is in my county, Monterey County. There are 29 growers who plan to apply DCPA within a quarter mile of 65 schools in Monterey County in the current school year.
- Victor Torres
Person
We are the future leaders of change in the community, and I ask you all to provide an opportunity to us to not only learn, meet with peers, but to also enjoy our childhood in a safe environment. Thank you, Chair and Members of the Committee.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. And congratulations on what I assume is your first testimony here before the Legislature. Or maybe not.
- Victor Torres
Person
This is my third time here.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Wow. Wow. All right, well, you're a pro now. Thank you. Thank you so much. Really appreciate it.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, let's hear from folks who want to weigh in support of the Bill.
- Matthew Broad
Person
Mister Chair and Members, Matt Broad on behalf of the California School Employees Association in support. Thank you.
- Abby Alvarez
Person
Abby Alvarez on behalf of the California Nurses for Environmental Health and Justice, the California Food and Farming Network, the Pesticide Action Network, the Californians for Pesticide Reform and Clean Water Action, in strong support.
- Isabel Ramirez
Person
Good morning. My name is Isabel Ramirez and I support AB 1864. Thanks.
- Noemi Chico
Person
Morning. Noemi Chico. I'm a parent and educator and member of Safe Ag Safe Schools in support of AB 1864.
- Jakob Evans
Person
Good morning. Jacob Evans of Sierra Club California in support. Thank you.
- Nancy Buermeyer
Person
Nancy Buermeyer, Breast Cancer Prevention Partners in support. Thank you.
- Arianna Creed
Person
Arianna Creed with cleanearth4kids.org in support. Also those in support are North County Equity and Justice. NCCA, Ecosustainability Peeps, Activists San Diego, Facts, Beyond Pesticides, Yards Martin Marin, and Moms Advocating for Sustainability. Thank you.
- Bill Allayaud
Person
Bill Allayaud, Environmental Working Group, support.
- Unidentified Speaker
Person
[Translation needed].
- Yanely Martinez
Person
Yanely Martinez with Safe Ag Safe Schools, Greenfield City Councilwoman in full support of AB 1864.
- Melissa Romero
Person
Melissa Romero, California Environmental Voters in support.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. All right, thank you everybody. Let's hear from opposition, folks who want to raise concerns. Come on up. You can sit in the front.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
Apologies. I might be up here quite a bit, this Committee hearing. Taylor Roshan on behalf of a Coalition of Agricultural Associations, we'd like to thank staff for their thorough analysis and to the author for his availability to hear our concerns. And happy birthday. But unfortunately we are opposed at this time.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
1864 requires a grower to submit a notice of intent to their county ag commissioner in advance of an application of a Proposition 65 listed product using certain methods within a quarter mile of a school zone. This is problematic to our coalition for a variety of reasons.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
California has the strictest pesticide laws in the nation and has unique specific requirements on use near schools. Every April, growers within a quarter mile of a radius of a school give a school administration a list of products they may apply that year, as well as the Ag Commissioner.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
The law prohibits farmers from using certain methods of applications and pesticides between 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, or anytime children are present. It's because of these laws that there has not been a single documented instance of agricultural-related pesticide exposure to school children since the inception of the regulations. That's not our data.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
That's data from the Department of Public Health, the Department of Pesticide Regulation, and mandated reporters. And mandated reporters include ER doctors, teachers, pediatricians. If underreporting here is the issue, the Bill does not rectify that. Ironically, where pesticide illnesses of school children have been repeatedly found is on campus when they're used by untrained people without oversight.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
So it's concerning to us that AB 1864 is based on the premise that ag pesticide exposure to children is rampant and unregulated. The bills also predicated on the premise that Prop 65 listed products, which would be subject to notification, are serious threats to our children.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
The analysis does an excellent job highlighting the differences between hazard, which is the basis for Prop 65, and risk, which is DPR's basis for pesticide enforcement. Hazard is the potential for something to harm you, but risk is the likelihood of that hazard actually causing harm. Risk is the basis of our regulatory system in California.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
It's the same criteria that we use for air quality and water quality, sea level rise. Risk lets us drive our car to work every morning and drink coffee. Pesticidal products that actually have unknown risk are known as restricted use materials, which do require notice of intent to be filed with an ag commissioner.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
We believe 1864 applying the same paradigm over new products obligate unnecessary work on farmers using the same products that a quarter mile away that homeowners are using right next door or groundskeepers are using or teachers are using on campus.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
In short, our coalition objects to new permanent requirements that don't cause an actual risk without data to support that. But we do agree that use reporting can be improved and that data can be improved for the notice of intent requirement for restricted use product, including some of the items that the author mentioned.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
We'll continue to work with them on that portion of the Bill. And while we don't agree with the sponsors about the number of potential violations, we think greater information sharing in terms of notices of intent for restricted use materials can corroborate that the regulation is being properly enforced. So for these reasons, we're opposed.
- Stephen Scheer
Person
Good morning, Chair Members. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you on this important topic. I'm Steve Scheer, Yuba County Ag Commissioner. I also serve as the Pesticide Regulatory Affairs Committee Chair for the California Ag Commissioners Association, representing our 55 county ag commissioners and their work protecting people and the environment throughout California.
- Stephen Scheer
Person
AB 1864 simply creates extra paperwork for growers and county enforcement staff and does not further protect our schools, children or our communities. The main emphasis of this Bill is to require a notice of intent for materials that are already prohibited to be applied during school hours under the current regulations.
- Stephen Scheer
Person
Therefore, the ultimate outcome of the provision is simply increased paperwork for both the grower and for my enforcement staff, all our enforcement staff throughout the state, for applications that are already heavily restricted and must occur outside of school hours, as discussed earlier. It isn't just a matter of more work for our staff in the field, it's the matter of doing the right work.
- Stephen Scheer
Person
And having my staff in the office reviewing this paperwork takes them out of the field to do enforcement work where that's really the important part, where we're protecting the vulnerable portions of our communities, specifically schools. From the introduction of this Bill, we've asked for data to support the sponsors claim of hundreds of violations of the current regulations.
- Stephen Scheer
Person
We have not received that to date. Our inspection data from the ag commissioners includes 30,000 inspections by over 500 inspectors statewide, and we have not been noting those violations out in the field.
- Stephen Scheer
Person
We do not have data to substantiate the claims made by the sponsors or proponents of this Bill, nor have we received data to corroborate claims to the contrary.
- Stephen Scheer
Person
In conclusion, while the intent of this Bill is to prioritize and protect schools and children, all the Bill actually does is bury local enforcement staff in paperwork and place it additional restrictions on growers who are already complying with the strictest regulations in these sensitive locations.
- Stephen Scheer
Person
It removes our inspectors from the field and tasks local and state governments to foot the Bill, all while not increasing the safety to our schoolchildren. We encourage you to be realistic in your consideration of this Bill and oppose the Bill in its current form. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Folks who want to raise concerns or voice opposition to the Bill, if they can come to the mic and express their opposition.
- John Moffatt
Person
Good morning. John Moffatt, on behalf of the Milk Producers Council with opposed unless amended. Thank you.
- Matthew Allen
Person
Good morning, Mister Chair and Members. Matthew Allen with Western Growers. We also are opposed unless amended on the Bill.
- Margaret Lie
Person
Margie Lee on behalf of the California League of Food Producers in respectful opposition.
- Brenda Bass
Person
Good morning. Brenda Bass with the California Chamber of Commerce, opposed unless amended.
- Dennis Albiani
Person
Dennis Albiani, on behalf of California Seed Association, Pera Growers, several other agricultural interests, opposed unless amended. Thank you.
- Chris Reardon
Person
Mister Chair, Members. Chris Reardon, California Farm Bureau. We appreciate the opportunity to work with the, with the author both in the last house and here today, and we look forward to continued discussions on this Bill as well. But we're opposed unless ammended.
- Tricia Geringer
Person
Mister Chair and Members, Tricia Geringer with Agricultural Council of California, respectfully opposed unless amended. Thanks.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, we'll bring the Bill back to Committee. Just if the Bill does get out today, it's going to go to the Agriculture Committee where I know there'll be a robust discussion of a lot of the issues that have been raised by the opposition, but we're certainly happy to have it here too. So, Mister Vice Chair.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Well, thank you, Assemblymember. So I have a couple questions. There's been some, obviously some. First of all, I want to thank the ag commissioners for finally coming to the Committee. So I have an applicators permit in my farm operation. I work with my ag commissioner every day with notice of intent. We have continuing training.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
A lot goes on in this space. And thank God I don't have a school within a quarter of a mile of my fill. But with that being said, I want to thank you guys for showing up.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
I did get receive a letter from my ag commissioner's coalition saying how much work is getting pushed down on them from regulations that come from the state. And it is a difficult job. So, thanks for being here.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
So, let's talk about the differences between the witnesses' experience and what's been reported, because I think that's really the crux of this Bill. And then I want to also talk about the Prop. 65 space that we both talked in.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
So maybe the sponsors of the Bill could talk about the experience where you had some, somebody got sick, but there's no obvious reporting of that. So what's going on there?
- Jane Sellen
Person
So Victor was the.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
I don't care who answers it. I just would like to have an answer because there's.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Yeah, then I'd be happy to, with all respect, push back on a lot of the tests.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Yeah, well, we're gonna have that. Hopefully, if the Chair allows, we will have those conversations.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Why don't we hear from our witnesses first.
- Jane Sellen
Person
So I couldn't tell you why this. This drift incident is not reported in the Pesticide Illness Database. But I can tell you that's the tip of the iceberg. And that people, children that attend rural schools can testify that they're frequently, they are frequently exposed to agricultural pesticides during the school day.
- Jane Sellen
Person
Just recently at Modesto Christian School, 25 kids were taken to the hospital because of a pesticide drift that was not on campus. It was agricultural pesticide use. That's a private school, not protected by this regulation. This Bill will change that, at least. And as I said, we brought the reports from Victor's drift incident.
- Jane Sellen
Person
His parents did everything right. They went to the ag commissioner. It was investigated. He went to the ER. He was having a full blown asthma attack that could have killed him. And it was due to exposure to pesticides on campus, used in agricultural fields nearby.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Okay, now to the opposition.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
Well, I'd like to say that there are a lot of circumstances where people are doing a, using maybe a spray rig to spray alternative products, not pesticides, like water. Sometimes that's misinterpreted as a pesticidal incident. I can't speak to Victor's circumstances.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
What I can say is that every teacher, every ER doctor, every EMT, every pediatrician, ER doctors are all mandated reporters for pesticide illness. So I can't speak to why your circumstance wasn't properly reported. But I want to reiterate, nothing in this Bill fixes that problem. This doesn't better educate mandated reporters on what their standards are.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
It doesn't audit the pesticide illness and injury reporting system that's in California, which is what the data DPR uses to derive to create these reports. So, noticing does nothing for our ag commissioners to enforce when violations may be present. And I think that's our concern.
- Stephen Scheer
Person
Yeah, so as Taylor said, every time someone goes to the doctor and says they had a pesticide related exposure or illness, it is report. They're mandated to report that to the Pesticide Department, Pesticide Regulation.
- Stephen Scheer
Person
And as an ag commissioner, if that happened in my county, I investigate that, every one of those, it could be a household bleach, which is also a pesticide, right, to a child. We investigate those as well as any. So, Mister Torres' illness happened before our current regulate pesticide use near schools regulation was in place.
- Stephen Scheer
Person
That's been in place for about six years, right? Eight years. So anyway, his happened before our current regulations, and being Ag Commissioner before that, we already locally restricted applications around schools. From our perspective, if it was happening, we would be hearing about it.
- Stephen Scheer
Person
I personally would know about it, or my colleagues in another county would know that there was a drift out of school and it would probably make the local papers. And as we know, it's not making local papers.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
All right. The Assemblymember said that you wanted to, I'd like to get the crux of it. So we have obviously no data that says this actually happened. No doctor said this was a pesticide. This was pesticide.
- Jane Sellen
Person
Yeah, may I share the report?
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Who's it from, though?
- Jane Sellen
Person
This is the Ag Commissioner's report from Victor's drift incident, which was before the regulation, but it's not in the Pesticide Illness Database. So the problem is under.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
The question is, will this Bill change that?
- Jane Sellen
Person
This Bill, I mean, it's not going to restrict use. No, it's not going to restrict it in any way. But it will allow ag commissioners to know before one of these pesticides is going to be used rather than after, so that they can deploy inspection teams as appropriate next to schools, which are a highly vulnerable site.
- Jane Sellen
Person
Would the sergeant be willing to hand this out to Members? Thank you so much.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Yeah. So let me jump in. And I, too, appreciate kind of the discussion that has been going on on this Bill. There actually has been a lot of agreement around it. So, let's set the context. Number one, we have agreement from the industry that there should be more specificity around notifications as to type of use and whatnot.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
So secondly, I think we do have agreement now, let's apply this to private schools with adequate notification to farmers about where those private schools are. So really what we're talking about is the kind of what is subject to the NOI requirement at this point. I would push back on analogizing these large scale spray methods which create aerial risk to someone, a neighbor nearby spraying their lawn, frankly. I would also push back, as I did in an earlier hearing on the main defense, seems to be the paperwork burden, that is unpersuasive in the face of public health risk here.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
We do have documentation. I was surprised to hear the testimony this morning that some sort of request has been made that we have not complied with. I certainly don't have knowledge of that. So, really what we're talking about is there's a set of restricted toxins right now.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
And what we're talking about is expanding that to fairly specific categories identified by the US EPA as carcinogens. As Miss Sellen testified, we're talking about approximately 54 new toxins here. This will go to the AG Committee. We're continuing the discussions, including one of your counterparts in the Assembly who's working with us.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
We're better understanding the concerns, and we commit to continuing to have those discussions as this hopefully moves forward to the AG Committee as well. So if we can answer any other questions at this time, we'd be happy to.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Okay. So I just want to make sure that I understand what you're saying. So the incident for, I believe it's Victor, was before the regulations were put into place. So that at this point, shouldn't happen. We should know where we're at, or we should have some good reporting. Those two things.
- Jane Sellen
Person
It shouldn't, but. And with the reporting fixes, I think it won't.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Yeah. The other question was about Prop. 65 or what's been added. So I'd like to get a little more clarification on what is in those. What is, where's that at? Because that's critical to knowing where the actual incident's coming from. So, yeah, go ahead.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
With the Chair's permission. While it is 54 active ingredients, each active ingredient is formulated into tens or hundreds of products.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
So we are talking about thousands of new products that we are requiring a farmer to put a notice of intent in 24 to 48 hours in advance for the same exact product that's being applied on campus or right next to campus. I think, once again, I'll go back to the commentary that Proposition 65 is a hazard categorization.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
DPR uses that hazard category and then applies label restrictions, like use restrictions, PPE, times of days that application can happen. So it's risk, or, I'm sorry, it's hazard plus exposure equals actual risk. Something like that's designated as a carcinogen by us EPA, I could have, it's potentially, it's a carcinogen.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
I'd have to douse myself in that product 10 hours a day, every day for 60 years to have a potential risk of cancer exposure. Every product has different types of exposures realistically.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
And so I think that's where this is a paradigm shift of the regulatory system that we have for public health and natural resource and environmental protection from a risk-based approach, which considers context, to a hazard-based approach, which does not, which is really the basis of what our opposition is about in this Bill.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Thank you.
- Jane Sellen
Person
May I just respond about the hazard versus risk? The Bill does address risks as well, because it only would require an NOI when applied next to a vulnerable site, a school with the most referral methods, aerial, air blast, those kind of methods.
- Jane Sellen
Person
So you take a hazardous chemical and you use it in a risky way, and it doesn't restrict in any way, it just requires notice to the Ag Commissioner, that's all.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
What do you say to the argument that these pesticides can be used by the school itself without any notice to the.
- Jane Sellen
Person
Well, they're not spraying them from an airplane. That would be one thing. They're not airblasting them. They tend to be spot treatments. I don't know if they're the exact, if all of these chemicals that we're talking about are used on campus, I kind of doubt it.
- Jane Sellen
Person
And actually would be subject to the Healthy Schools Act which requires notice in advance to parents before they're used. So it is a pretty different situation.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
If I may just, I want to make a last comment, so I won't be supporting the Bill today. I think there's a lot of work in this area. I actually have an applicators permit. I do this, and I've been very frustrated, and I've been on EQ forever, the whole time I've been here.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
I used to love this Committee, but I'm not liking it much today for sure. But here's the deal, at the end of the day, so I don't want to see anybody get sick. We have to do our NOIs and there's all kinds of restrictions. How much air movement is there?
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
There's a window of time that you can actually apply, and that window gets narrower and narrower and narrower and pretty soon you're out of time as your crops getting destroyed by aphid or something. So it is hard, very hard.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
At the same time, we have the custodians, the school going up, buying over-the-counter roundup and just going and doing. And there's nobody, no restriction for them at all. There's no timing, there's no anything. So it's been a very, I think it's more targeted towards the person who's trying to do it right, who's really regulated.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
At the same time, I have my Ag Commissioner who does all kinds of tasks and is required to. We're all trying to fit in those windows and they're, and they're also trying to go out and, and monitor at the same time.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
So when you, when you push back on the paperwork, look, they're overloaded, because we pass a lot of laws here. They have to go do it. We don't give them any more money to go do it. We don't give them any more staff, we just push it onto them.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
So they've actually written a letter pushing back to DPR and DSC finally, I'm happy for them because we're just burning them. And sometimes you can't get the job done, then we're going to end up with something really bad happening. So I can't support this Bill.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
I think there needs to be a lot of work in this area. And I think it's really unfortunate that the producer is always on the hook. He's somebody we can regulate. He's somebody we can fine. He's somebody we can target.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
But we don't target the tens of thousands of people who in their backyard are spraying all kinds of stuff, not on the label, not at the rate they should. And it's getting into our water systems. It's getting into all kinds of stuff.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
And it's like they get a pass, but we're gonna go after the farmer and we're gonna hammer him. Look, I don't want anybody getting sick. It's very difficult to do this because you have to, weather dictates a lot.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
And also, if you can't spray for three days because of weather, your crops getting destroyed at the same time, because we have kids at school and we don't want to hurt anybody, but at the same time, we have to get our job done. And we are regulated heavily. I want you to hear that. So.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
And little things matter, risk versus whatever, it matters. It matters hugely in what we're trying to do out there. So I just want to put it out there. And I want to say my last comment is they're shipping this stuff in from Mexico with all kinds of stuff on it because our farm farmers are leaving California.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
They literally are. And they're shipping those products in here. We eat every day. They look beautiful. But they're covered in pesticides and herbicides that are illegal in California.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
So we have to strike a balance here that is common sense that works, keeps people safe, but not just burden the guy that actually has the permit, because there's a whole bunch of people out there that do a lot of bad things that nobody even knows about, but we see it elsewhere. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right. Why don't we give the author the opportunity to respond to some of this in close? Yeah. Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah, of course. Yeah, please.
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
I didn't know if I wanted to ask after that beautiful speech there, Senator.
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
I just want to, if you could clarify, during, you started talking about some things that you agreed with in the opposition, and I know that was also in the analysis regarding some on the notification that what's being notified is really not addressing the crux of the issue.
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
And I just wanted to clarify, are you going to be adding that in your Bill related to the time that the application, the time that the pesticides is being introduced and so forth? Just wanted to make sure that's what you said.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Not clear I'm understanding the question.
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
So earlier you spoke about some of the things that you agreed with.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Yes.
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
The opposition, one of them was related to maybe perhaps changing what is included in the notification and the NOI. And I just wanted to confirm that's what you meant.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
No, I was actually commenting that the opposition, just to be clear, agrees with a lot of the Bill already. There's really one area of disagreement left, and that is over the scope of the products subject to the NOI.
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
Maybe a misunderstanding. Is your Bill changing what is going to be in the NOI?
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Yes.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Just doing, in effect, it's doing three things. One is requiring more specificity as to what, regarding, for example, the method as stated in the NOI, mine is saying is there's no disagreement on improving.
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
Okay.
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
That's what you're trying to say. Thank you so much.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Number two is applicability to private schools. I believe we have come to agreement on that understanding that it will not be farmers or the ag community that has to identify where the private school is. But once known, then it is. The third piece, and there's not agreement yet, at least, is the substances that will, this will apply to current law, it is restricted toxins. What we're trying to do is extend it to effectively include US EPA-identified carcinogens. We believe that.
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
Just the first ones that I. Yeah, I got it. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay. So why don't we give you the chance to, to respond to some of the Vice Chair's comments, and then as you close.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
Yeah. And again, what we're not talking about is we're not banning these substances. So whether or not products are coming in from a foreign country, we're not trying to tilt the balance on that.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
What we're talking about is giving the public informed decision making capability about what kind of toxins are being large scale, applied near schools, and just making sure that those are being identified and that people can make choices accordingly. So I appreciate some of the analogies. I don't think they're very applicable.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
We'll continue to discuss with the commissioners information they have or don't have. We have not had those conversations to the extent that has been represented here today. And furthermore, we'll continue to work with interested parties on what are the toxins that should be included. I mean, it sounds like there's different ways of looking at that.
- Damon Connolly
Legislator
That seems to be behind some of the claims of burden. Are we talking about 54 or are we talking about 10,000? That's a big spread. So we'll continue those discussions to try to better understand in the real world how that looks. With that, I'll respectfully ask for an aye vote today to continue that discussion.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Well, thank you. You had me at the number 54. We'll take a vote on your measure when we have a quorum. So thank you. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. I see Congresswoman Friedman here to present AB 1963 and AB 2552.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Yes, just let's keep talking. Pesticides. I guess this is why Vice Chair's not liking the day to day. All right, you may proceed when ready.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Good morning, Mister chair and Members, I will be accepting this suggested Committee amendment starting on page nine. Comment three of the analysis. I want to thank the Committee and the Committee staff for their work on this bill. Paraquat, first manufactured in 1962, is a highly toxic herbicide, or weed killer.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Used in almonds, pistachios and walnut orchards, and on grapes and cotton. Paraquat is sprayed to burn down or clear fields before planting and throughout the growing season to manage weeds between crop rows. Much of this chemical ends up in the soil for years, but it can eventually reach nearby communities via dust or drift when strong winds occur.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
This poses an increased risk to people living and working near fields who are exposed to paraquat. However, the people who are most at risk are agricultural workers who mix, load or apply paraquat and enter areas after paraquat has been applied.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Recent common peer reviewed science has confirmed that exposure to paraquat greatly increases the risk of developing Parkinson's disease. Paraquat is banned in more than 60 countries, including those with large agricultural economies like the United Kingdom, China, Brazil, and the Members of the European Union. California should follow their lead.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Why should we continue to use this pesticide that's been around since 1962? AB 1963 is structured so that the Department can complete its investigation of the current science on paraquat before any prohibition of its use would occur. That's over a year and a half from today. We can do better because alternatives to paraquat exists today.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
As the Committee analysis discussed in detailed findings that production data consistently failed to show any negative effects of banning paraquat on agricultural productivity. California's Department of Pesticide Regulation is emphasizing that we need to be using less pesticides and herbicides in their new planning effort titled Sustainable Pest Management.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Integrated Pest management is a strategy that focuses on long term pest prevention through biological controls, habitat manipulation and other approaches. I agree with DPR that we need to be the leader in eliminating highly toxic pesticides like paraquat.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Furthermore, the pesticide industry, always proud of their ability to innovate, should step forward and agree to stop producing this product and produce far less toxic weed killers. Testifying in support of AB 1963 is Bill Allayaud with the Environmental Working Group and Jonathan Evans with the Center for Biological Diversity. And I would request your aye vote. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. You may proceed.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
Good morning, Mister chair and Members of the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. My name is Jonathan Evans. I'm the environmental health Legal Director at the Center for Biological Diversity. There is robust science connecting Paraquat to Parkinson's disease.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
Serious human health harms significant risks to the environment, which is why in 2022, my organization, along with California Pesticide reform, requested that the California Department of Pesticide Regulation reevaluate the state's approval of paraquat and suspend and cancel its use, submitting a wealth of peer reviewed literature and science documenting the threats of paraquat.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
Unfortunately, to date, DPR has yet to provide a substantive response. Paraquat is acutely toxic and also has long term chronic effects. It harms people both when they're exposed to a single dose and repeatedly over time to lower doses. Ingestion of paraquat, even just a teaspoon, can cause illness, organ failure, and even death.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
EPA itself has a website entitled Paraquat one Sip can kill. Research published in 2011 found that farmworkers who sprayed paraquat were two and a half times more likely to develop Parkinson's disease, and the longer they used the herbicide, the stronger the connection.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
Earlier this year, a UCLA study found that people living or working near the most intense paraquat applications in our Central Valley were more likely to develop Parkinson's disease.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
And a 2019 meta analysis, the gold standard for summarizing the science on a particular topic, found that across 13 studies, occupational and environmental exposure to paraquat increased the risk of Parkinson's disease by 64%. The EPA and paraquat manufacturers claim that paraquat can be safely used with proper restrictions.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
However, EPA openly acknowledges that risks to farmworkers persist despite restrictions, respectively request an aye vote.
- Bill Allayaud
Person
Okay, I'm Bill Allayaud with Environmental Working Group sponsoring the legislation. First on the science, is it strong enough? We think it is. If you want to give rodents Parkinson's disease in the lab, you give them paraquat. It works. The opponents are saying there is no proof that paraquat causes Parkinson's disease.
- Bill Allayaud
Person
But do we have proof that smoking causes cancer? In lung cancer, everyone knows my grandfather smoked until he was 96. He didn't die of lung cancer. There's a strong correlation, same with Parkinson's and paraquat. It's a correlation, not proof that it causes on alternatives.
- Bill Allayaud
Person
We heard with chloropyrifos a few years ago, the industry came and said this is the end of industry for citrus and grapes and whatever. They're doing fine without chlorpyrifos. I think they can do fine without paraquat it's a highly restricted pesticide.
- Bill Allayaud
Person
That's what DPR terms it, and so therefore use restrictions, as Senator Dawley was talking about, are important about wind and location and all that. However, violations keep occurring nationally. We have a list of violations that this Michael J. Fox foundation submitted and that shows widespread places, instances where farmworkers were exposed.
- Bill Allayaud
Person
In California, EWG is in the process of compiling it in the counties where it's used most heavily. We're finding places where it ran down into the boots, gloves weren't used, goggles, et cetera. So even though it's highly restricted, accidents happen, and this is highly toxic.
- Bill Allayaud
Person
So if you get a little bit here and a little bit there, you may not get Parkinson's. You won't in a year or two, but 10 years from now, that's the concern. Finally, I want to say this isn't a permanent ban on paraquat. It suspends its use until the Department completes a scientific reevaluation.
- Bill Allayaud
Person
Then the bill, the author, we all will stand by what they do. They can put more restrictions on, continue a ban, make it permanent, or do nothing. It's up to what they do. So we'll have to trust the science that DPR does.
- Bill Allayaud
Person
I note that per the earlier bill on the mill fee, hopefully the Department goes a lot faster on reviewing this pesticide and all the rest and also getting alternatives that are safer. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, folks, who want to voice our support for the bill.
- Melissa Romero
Person
Melissa Romero, California Environmental Voters in strong support.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you.
- Abby Alvarez
Person
Abby Alvarez, on behalf of the Pesticide Action Network, California Nurses for Environmental Health and Justice, and Clean Water Action.
- Jean Sellen
Person
Jean Sellen, Californians for Pesticide Reform, in strong support.
- Victor Torres
Person
Victor Torres, on behalf of Future Leaders of Change, in full support.
- Isabel Ramirez
Person
Isabel Ramirez with us in support.
- Noemi Chico
Person
Noemi Chico, Safe Ag Safe schools, in full support.
- Nate Sullivan
Person
Chair and Members, Nate Sullivan, on behalf of the Michael J. Fox foundation for Parkinson's research and support. Thank you.
- Ariana Khalid
Person
Ariana Khalid with cleanearthforkids.org and support. Also those in support are North County equity and justice, NCCA ecosustainability peeps, Activist San Diego facts, Sonoma Sass, beyond pesticides yards Martin Marin and moms advocating for sustainability. Thank you.
- Unidentified Speaker
Person
Hello. My name is Torres in support.
- Yanely Martinez
Person
Yanely Martinez with Safe Ag Safe Schools. Also Greenfield City councilwoman in full support. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. All right. Yes, our friendly opposition witness. Come on up. Nice to see you both. Right. Yeah.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
Once again, good morning, Mister chair and Members Taylor Roschen, on behalf of Western Plant Health and a coalition expressing respectful opposition to 1963. Ensuring California's our workforce, environment, and communities are safe are of the utmost importance. Paraquat is one of the most highly studied active ingredients ever.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
USCPA has evaluated thousands of studies, including published toxicology and epidemiological literature on paraquat exposure and adverse health outcomes. Because of that data, paraquat is a restricted use product, meaning, as we discussed before, it's not available to the General public and is sold in limited quantities.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
Beyond that designation, it can only be applied by a licensed applicator with highly specialized training. A permit is required prior to use.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
Ag commissioners are present during types of applications, PPE is extensive, reentry into the field after an application is severely restricted, and the product is even contained in a closed loop system that prevents even the applicator from accessing the material.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
These are above and beyond what all of the restricted use and label requirements are set to protect public health and the environment. Cumulatively, these restrictions and more make paraquat one of the most highly regulated products in the world, and as our scientific discoveries and our capacities expand.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
As the sponsors have mentioned, federal and state regulatory requirements adaptation in 2019 and 2020 to address incidental ingestion, major new restrictions were put in place. And if any scientific data that's new is developed on paraquat, it can be submitted to us, EPA and DPR anytime.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
And if DPR finds them to be valid, DPR and USCPA have a mandatory duty to further restrict use. All of these is to say that there is a system that's in place and this bill does not use that system.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
The author and sponsors alleged a causal relationship between Paraquatin Parkinson's disease and while the sponsors in the analysis sign cite a meta analysis of 13 case studies to support their claim, USCPA has studied 1200 studies and found conclusively the claim is not accurate.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
According to a 2024 USCPA review released in response to a petition, quote after a thorough review, the agency has concluded that the weight of evidence was insufficient to link paraquat exposure from pesticidal use to Parkinson's disease in humans.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
This conclusion is supported by, among other things, a National Institute of Health sponsored study of 66,000 pesticide application applicators and their spouses over 25 years.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
Additionally, in March, a federal judge dismissed the plaintiff's expert witness testimony, citing the causal theory has not been adopted or independently validated in a peer reviewed analysis, and the expert's methodology was, quote, unclear, inconsistently applied, not replicable, and at times reverse engineered, unquote.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
Even with scientific debate pending 1963 doesn't direct DPR to review data and let science dictate if an action is warranted. It bans first and says study second. As we also discussed, Mister Garcia's bill just resourced the Department to do expansive work, and negotiations will absolutely include an annual target for reevaluations and mitigations.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
Our coalition believes in science and that our agency is full of toxicologists and biochemists. Endocrinologists and biologists are best suited to opine on the science, and it's the Legislature's purview to direct them to do that work. Even with the Committee's proposed amendments, 1963 is still, from our perspective, an unscientifically unsubstantiated ban.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
And for those reasons, we respectfully oppose.
- Chris Reardon
Person
Mister chair Members Chris Reardon, California Farm Bureau, in California paraquato is a very effective weed control and resistance management tool. She's done a variety of crops, significant crops including almonds, walnuts, citrus, cotton, corn, tomatoes, peppers and potatoes. The application of paraquatis is strictly regulated to ensure that the safety of applicators, bystanders, consumers and the environment.
- Chris Reardon
Person
Some of the key protective regular requirements and guidelines include restricted use material. Paraquat is classified as restricted use material in California. That means only certified applicators who have been trained and licensed can purchase and apply paraquat contained products. Applicators must follow strict guidelines regarding application rates and timing specified under product label.
- Chris Reardon
Person
This includes ensuring that paraquat is applied only when weather conditions are suitable and when there is a minimum risk adrift. Buffer zones are also required to minimize potential exposure to sensitive areas such as residential areas, schools, water bodies, organic crops.
- Chris Reardon
Person
The size of buffered zones depends on a lot of different factors, including weather conditions, proximity to these sensitive areas. Personal protective equipment applicators must wear PPE as specified in the product label. This typically includes long sleeve shirts, long pants, chemical resistant gloves, goggles, or face shields to protect against potential skin and eye exposure.
- Chris Reardon
Person
Anyone applying paraquat in California must undergo specific training and obtain certification as a pesticide applicator. The training covers safety handling, application techniques, emergency procedures, and environmental stewardship. Also, applicators are required to keep detailed records of paraquat applications, including dates, locations, applications, application rates, weather conditions, any adverse effects observed.
- Chris Reardon
Person
It's also important to note Mister chair and members that integrate pest management, as many of you know, is a cornerstone of modern agricultural emphasizing the use of multiple approaches for pest control while minimizing environmental impact.
- Chris Reardon
Person
Paraquat, when used judiciously as part of this IPM strategy, contributes to this goal by reducing the reliance on more persistent herbicides and promoting biodiversity on farms. And then lastly, I just wanted to mention one of the concerns we have as well is, and we talked about in a previous bill is alternatives.
- Chris Reardon
Person
Right now it takes a significant amount of time in California to get a new registration to deal with some of these issues. And so let's make sure before we just throw out an effective product that it has enormous impact on California agriculture, that we alternatives that actually work. So thank you, Mister chair.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. All right, folks who want to voice their opposition to the Bill.
- Matthew Allen
Person
Hello, Mister chair Members, Matthew Allen with Western Growers were also opposed and would align our comments made by Miss Roschen and Mister Reardon. Thank you.
- Louis Brown Jr.
Person
Mister chair. Members of the Committee, Louie Brown, on behalf of the California Cotton Growers and Generators Association and Western Agricultural Processors Association, in opposition.
- Lindsey Carter
Person
Lindsey Carter, on behalf of the California Agricultural Commissioners and Sealers Association in opposition.
- Margie Lie
Person
Margie Lie, on behalf of the California League of Food Producers in respectful opposition.
- Brenda Bass
Person
Brenda Bass with the California Chamber of Commerce in opposition.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
Rob Spiegel, California Manufacturers and Technology Association in opposition.
- Kirk Wilbur
Person
Kirk Wilbur with the California Cattlemen's Association, in opposition.
- Dennis Albiani
Person
Dennis Albiani, on behalf of the California Seed Association, California Pear Growers, and several other ag associations in opposition.
- Tricia Geringer
Person
Patricia Geringer, Agricultural Council of California, respectfully opposed.
- Tricia Geringer
Person
Erin Norwood, on behalf of the Allman alliance, also respectfully opposed. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay. All right. The items back before the Committee. You. Know, this is one of these, well, one of these things where there's obviously an ongoing investigation at the EPA, and they had an interim decision where they found that there wasn't a strong enough connection between paraquat and Parkinson's to prohibit the use of the product.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
But they're coming out with a final decision in January. You know, this is one of these. There's certainly a lot of scary evidence that we've been presented, but we also know there's a real impact on the agricultural community.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
And I know that's going to be a big topic of conversation at the Ag Committee if the bill passes out today. But this is a hard bill, actually, in many respects, because I think you want to. Because of how tenant. Well, because of the situation at the EPA.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
But the flip side is, I guess this bill would sunset at the completion of the DPR process. So if they decide that they want to go ahead with continuing use of the pesticide, then the state's policy would revert back to the EPA's decision. All right, questions? Thoughts?
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Oh, let me establish a quorum since we see Senator Nguyen here. Do you want to please call the roll?
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, so we have a quorum, finally. Took us an hour and a half, but let's. Let's open up the floor to questions, comments, thoughts?
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Yep. Obviously, it's, you know, ag zero today so far. I think probably gonna be zero again. But this bill, first of all, there's some discrepancy on whether it really causes Parkinsons disease or not. I think that in analysis I looked at, there's been several different studies. And so, you know, I know Michael J.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Fox may think that, but the science hasn't determined that yet, at least from what I see here. Also, this is a ban until. It's up on the wall. This is a ban until reevaluated, if they ever reevaluate it.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
So I think that's pretty aggressive, pretty strong, to take something away that, you know, and then there's going to be some action, maybe by EPA, you know, later this fall. So I think it's premature. Number one, I think we should wait.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
So I'm not going to be supporting the bill today, and I think that we should just wait and then see what happens.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
And also, then I think on top of that, if the bill before passes, and we know there's going to be some action with DPR and funding, and then they'll have some resources to maybe take on some of these. So for me, it's a no. Yeah. Okay.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thoughts or questions from the other Members? Okay. You know, I do share some of the concerns. The Vice Chair, I'm gonna support the bill today.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
I know it's gonna go to agriculture, and they're gonna have a real robust discussion of the impacts on the industry, and they're gonna have to weigh the health concerns that have been raised and will continue to be raised. The science is still being investigated.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
And I guess, let me just turn to the author to just kind of make the case for us as to the urgency of this now with the EPA investigation pending.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
I think it's. We have seen over the years how easy it is to throw doubt on evidence that we see of correlation. The tobacco industry did it for many years. We see this commonly with chemicals that are in dispute.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
But what we do know is that farmworkers who use paraquat have more than twice the amount of Parkinson's than farmworkers who don't. We know that the EPA banned the use of paraquat on golf courses during their last review, I guess, implying that it's too dangerous for golfers, but it's okay for farmworkers. This bill is
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
It takes a very measured approach. The ban doesn't start or the moratorium doesn't start until 2026. And if EPA acts before then, this bill might become unnecessary.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
But if you're going to air on one side or the other, if you have a dispute, do you act the way that is the most protective to the people who are most heavily impacted, which is those farmworkers?
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Do you err on the side of protection, given the enormous impacts of Parkinson's disease, of that kind of neurological damage, or do you err on the side of allowing the use? Remember, this product's been banned in over 60 countries, countries that have robust agricultural sectors that are healthy. So we do know that there are alternatives.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
And my feeling is that given that there is a scientific dispute and a lot of scientific evidence showing harm, and by the way, the fact that some of the testimony was not allowed in one case really didn't have to do, it had to do with one particular witness.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
And we can show that that was one witness whose evidence wasn't allowed, but many, but hundreds of cases were allowed to go forward and many, many other witnesses as well. So it's not at all conclusive as to the evidence that's out in the scientific literature.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
If you do a look, this material has been heavily studied, showing a very large link. That's why there is so much protective gear that has to be used with this. So it's a dangerous chemical. Everybody admits that. The question is, are we using it safely enough to be protective of farmworkers?
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
The fact that they're getting Parkinson's right now at high rates.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
When we did this bill a few weeks ago, a few weeks back in the Assembly, we had an owner of a farm who came in who has Parkinson's, who said she regretted not knowing how serious this was, that she now has Parkinson's, and she believes it's from the use of this product on her farm. So I just.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
I feel very strongly that, given that there is this dispute and the gravity of this illness, that we should allow for this pause, which doesn't take effect for another couple of years, maybe it'll push EPA to work. So I would urge an aye vote.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
And your point? I mean, given the fact, fact that they're expected to finalize their decision in January of 25 or perhaps earlier, your bill doesn't even kick in until January of 26. So assuming that actually gives a lot of Runway. So there won't be any, there won't be any impact.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Assuming that the EPA is on track if they do decide to not prohibit. Is that right? So, yeah. Okay. Yep.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Yep. Sorry, Mister Vice. I just want to say, you know, with that logic, why don't we just ban everything? Everything. Why don't. By 2026, why don't we just say, hey, we know no farm worker is going to be exposed to any pesticide.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
But some pesticides are more dangerous than others
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
There's a reason we don't do that, because we actually do really need some of these things. Most of them.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Some pesticides are more dangerous than others
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Huh?
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Yes but we have, in California, we have Prop 65, which is nobody pays attention to anymore because everything's labeled, really, at the end of the day. I mean, I think this has probably got a label on it somewhere. It's water, for God's sakes. There's a reason for these things. It is.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
And we have to have some common sense to our approach here. Look, I don't want any farm workers to get sick or damaged. We have very strict protocols in California more than any other state, and we also produce more than the other state. But we're losing that. We're losing that edge in California because we are so regulated.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
So I just want to say, you know, it's like, for example, it's the minimum wage battle. Why don't we just make it $100 an hour? Because there's a reason we don't make it $100 an hour because everybody go out of business.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
There's a reason we need these products to be competitive, to do the right thing, to not push again, all of our Ag people to a different country where they use all these things. Now, I know that 60 countries are banning this stuff, but wait on. We need some more time. This is, I think, very aggressive. There is.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Obviously, the EPA is doing some stuff. So I just want to push back a little bit and say, you know, if that's the methodology, then we should just ban everything and see what happens.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
I'd like to take, if we could just look ahead six months, if we banned all this stuff and see what happens in California, it would be disastrous. We need these products. We need to do it in a safe way, and we do that already. So I just want to make that for the record.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
I mean, obviously, we're not seeking to ban every product with this bill, but we'll. Yeah. Is that on the record? All right, so Senator Dahle is in support of banning all pesticides. You heard it here. All right. So when I leave, you'll probably do it all. Senator Menjivar, I think, has moved the Bill.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Let's give the author the opportunity to close. Thank you.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Well, this is a chemical that has already been banned in many, many countries. And, you know, in other countries, they have processes where their regulators try to ensure that products are safe before they're brought to market. And this country doesn't work that way.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
In this country, we allow for the use of a lot of chemicals that do a lot of harm, and it takes action, legal action, from people like Erin Brockowich and others, to sometimes to show proof and then to get things taken off the market.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
And we have seen over and over again the result of that with all of our water being more expensive because we're now going to have to pay to filter out chemicals and pfas and lots of other things that we know have an effect on human health because we did wait a long time and people said it's too expensive and we need these things.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
If we had processes that really ensured that products were safe before they got to market, we wouldn't have to be sitting here in these hearing rooms over and over again trying to look at these materials one by one.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
So I do think that there's a failure of federal regulators, and I do think that it is upon us many times to be protective of our community because we have seen in many cases where people have gotten very sick because of things that federal, EPA and federal laws have allowed to be put into our product stream.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
And I will use that as my close. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you, Senator. Secretary, please call the role. You want to stay up here for the Rodenticide side one. Yeah. Okay. You might as well stay. All right. Please call her the role
- Committee Secretary
Person
The motion is do pass as amended to Agriculture Committee. [Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, we'll leave that open for the members out on. Okay. All right. It is pesticide day here in EQ Committee. So let's next here. This is a rodenticide. Of course it's different.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Another bill to make my good friend Senator Dahle happy. I am going to pass some photos around, if that's okay with you, to the members on the dais. So I'll start with Senator Dahle.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
So this is a map, a buffer map.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
There's a buffer map as well that shows in Senator Hurtado's district what this would look like in terms of the buffer zone so that people can understand the impact. And so let me explain what this Bill does.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
First of all, exposure to anticoagulant rodenticides, which is basically rat poison, a certain class of rat poison can result in both lethal and sublethal effects on nontarget wildlife, including severe skin diseases and decreased immune system responses. Anticoagulants work by stopping clotting, and so animals that are poisoned with anticoagulants basically bleed out internally.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Now, these chemicals are used widely. They continue to result in unreasonable number of public health incidences, with over 3000 human poisonings in 2021, and at least 2300 of these involving children under six years, according to the American Association of Poison Control Center.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
AB 2552 adds the two remaining first-generation anticoagulant rodenticides, known as FGARs, Chlorphacinone and Warfarin, to the existing rodenticide moratorium to better protect wildlife from unintentional rodenticide poisonings while maintaining exceptions for its use in public health, water supplies, and agriculture. So I want to be clear.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
This Bill does not impact agriculture except in one instance, which is if you have a farm that is next to a designated wildlife habitat zone. So not just some forest, but a forest that is a publicly owned forest, like a state park, that's a wildfire, that's a wildlife habitat. So it has to meet those two criteria.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Then you have a buffer between where you can use these chemicals on your farm and where the critters from that wildlife area are sort of moving into your farm a bit.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
The reason we brought this map is to show you what it looks like in an area that has both a lot of agriculture and a lot of these state parks. We're talking about rings around the park. That's the buffer area where in an agricultural area, you couldn't use the chemicals.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
So it's not huge amounts of farmland, it's that buffer. And that's only in an area where you have those wildlife areas already sort of in law.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
So the Bill requires that the Department of Pesticide Regulation enact stronger, permanent restrictions on FGARs to limit unintended wildlife poisonings, making these chemicals a restricted material so that your average, you can no longer get them at Home Depot, which is a real problem, given how toxic these are.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
And yes, us EPA is undergoing its periodic review of rodenticides, but unfortunately, that process is again too slow and behind schedule. Now, I live in an urban area with a lot of a wildlife urban interface zone. A lot of big cats, bears, coyotes.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
People constantly complain about the presence of these animals who are visibly poisoned, often dying around their communities. We see dead owls and dead hawks frequently in my neighborhood, coyotes with what looks like mange, that is, rodenticide poisoning.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
When P 22 was captured, they tested his blood, and he had extensive amounts of liver damage from rodenticides, from eating poisoned rats. We also have the famous photo of him with the rodenticide-induced mange where he looked so sick. Our wildlife is already at the breaking point in many of our areas, and now we are poisoning them.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
And there's really no reason, because the best way of preventing vermin in these areas is actually apex predators like hawks and coyotes. And if we poison them, we throw the whole system out of balance. And we have seen evidence from studies that were done.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
There was a study, I believe, in Irvine, where they tested rodenticide in a water dam against putting in some owl and hawk boxes. And guess what won? The owl in the hawk box area, the rodents were much lesser than in the area where they were using the poison because they were a better way of killing the pests.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
As the LA Times recently highlighted, a new mountain lion was just found in Griffith Park. We welcome him or her, and we have the opportunity to give that big cat a better life than P 22 endured through our constant poisoning of him.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
There are a wide range of safer, more sustainable, and cost-effective alternatives to these dangerous rodenticides available for use today. And these are chemicals. I'm not even talking about the owls and the hawks. I'm talking about actual poisons that are safer, that don't bioaccumulate in the secondary, in the rats, and poison other animals.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Testifying in support this afternoon is Dr. Rebecca Gooley, a Smith fellow and postdoc at UC Davis, and Jonathan Evans, an environmental health legal Director and senior attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity. And I would urge an aye vote.
- Rebecca Gooley
Person
Good morning, Chair Allen and Committee Members. My name is Dr.1 Rebecca Gooley. I am a conservation scientist investigating the sub-lethal impacts of rodenticides in California wildlife. The California Ecosystem Protection Act of 2020 restricted second-generation anticoagulants. However, necropsies performed by CDFW in 2023 showed ongoing widespread poisoning of anticoagulants.
- Rebecca Gooley
Person
Over 73% of wildlife tested positive for second-generation anticoagulants, and over 57% tested positive for first-generation, including Chlorphacinone and Warfarin. When these poisons don't directly kill wildlife, they make them sick and weak. Sublethal doses of anticoagulants have been associated with lower immune function, increased parasite and pathogen load, lowered egg hatching, and lowered fledgling success.
- Rebecca Gooley
Person
For most wildlife, natural habitat is where they nest and reproduce, and offspring are particularly sensitive to these poisons. The habitat buffer zone is science-based. It correlates to the home ranges of commonly affected wildlife such as great horned owls, barn owls, gray foxes, and red-tailed hawks.
- Rebecca Gooley
Person
This is crucial as despite the restrictions, we are still seeing widespread exposure to all anticoagulants. The use of these anticoagulants also pose a public health concern. In a 2021 study by Murray and Sanchez, it was found that poisoned rats were significantly more likely to be infected with leptospira than non-poisoned rats.
- Rebecca Gooley
Person
Rodent fertility control successfully reduces rodent numbers, but it does not disrupt their immune system like poisons do. In a 2022 study by Ray and Pizena published an 18-month-long study that showed rat birth control at a California agricultural facility used this and they had a reduction of over 94% of rat activity.
- Rebecca Gooley
Person
This was noted by the farm managers to be something they had been unable to achieve prior. The addition of rodent fertility control to exclusion and better sanitation practices will aid in a more secure food supply. There are alternatives to poison, and with this Bill, California will continue to move towards a more biodiverse future. Thank you.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
Thank you Mr. Chair and Members of the Committee. Jonathan Evans, Environmental Health Legal Director at the Center for Biological Diversity Anticoagulant genocides, including those covered by the Poison Tree Wildlife Act of 2024, are some of the most scientifically studied and widespread wildlife poisons.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
Anticoagulants have a unique mode of toxicity that makes them particularly lethal to other animals higher in the food chain because they bioaccumulate and create a cumulative body burden in wildlife higher up in the food web. The poisoning is widespread, as Dr. Gooley alluded to.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
In 2023, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife studied all of the necropsies it could obtain in terms of poison. Wildlife and anticoagulants are found in over 88% of birds of prey like hawks and owls, 80% of large game mammals, 86% of bobcats, including the vast majority of mountain lions, and over 90% of gray foxes.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
The Poison Free Wildlife Act works stepwise with previous bills to add the remaining anticoagulants to the existing moratoriums of AB 1788 and AB 1322, allowing industry to innovate and more fully adopt sustainable approaches over several years and reducing the cumulative threats to non target wildlife.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
Some of the arguments we saw with AB 1788 and AB 1322 that removing these anticoagulants would, would result in public health threats and plagues of rats have proven untrue, and we'll hear the same arguments today. Importantly, we don't need these dangerous rodenticides. That's why we haven't seen the issue arise with rodent infestations that are causing problems.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
Safer, cost effective alternatives are readily available, necessary and frequently used already in birth and pest control. Sealing buildings and eliminating food and water sources are a necessary first step. Fertility control has proven highly effective in reducing rodent populations and is already in use by municipal governments. In California.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
Lethal rodent control strategies that involve snap traps and electric traps can then be implemented for underground rodents. You can also use carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and importantly, there are over 100 different rodenticide products, some discussed in this Committee analysis of acute toxicants that would still be available and don't pose as great of a threat to California ecosystems if the Bill passes.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
There are alternatives that are safer. We should be using them in California and reducing anticoagulants. I urge an aye vote. Thank you.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
And I just want to reinforce that agriculture is exempted. It's just a 25-foot buffer zone only if you're next to a designated wildlife habitat area, not all parks. It has to be a wildlife habitat area.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Let's have, let's hear from folks who want to voice their support for the Bill.
- Melissa Romero
Person
Melissa Romero, California Environmental Voters in support.
- Sosan Madanat
Person
Good morning Chair and Members of the Committee, Sosan Madanat here on behalf of Animal Legal Defense Fund, a proud cosponsor in support. And I've been asked to give a courtesy me too for Social Compassion in Legislation in support. Thank you.
- Kayla Robinson
Person
Hello. Kayla Robinson on behalf of the Mid Peninsula Regional Open Space District in support. Thanks.
- Matthew Robinson
Person
Good morning, Mr. Chair. Matt Robinson, on behalf of the California Product Stewardship Council as well as the Humane Society of the United States in support. Thanks.
- Paul Gonsalves
Person
Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the Committee, Paul Gonsalves, on behalf of the City of Thousand Oaks, in support.
- Bill Allayaud
Person
Bill Allayaud, EWG in support.
- Katie Jones
Person
Katie Jones from Jelly's Place Animal Rescue and Adoption. Strong support.
- Melinda Yu
Person
Melinda Yu on behalf of the Raptors on Solution and co-sponsor of this Bill in strong support.
- Yuri Forgas
Person
Hi, good morning. My name is Yuri Forgas. I'm a passionate birdwatcher and I'm speaking on behalf of Wisdom Good Works, and I'm in strong support of this Bill.
- Julia Saxby
Person
Good morning. Julia Saxby concerned citizen and law student representing the Animal Law and Advocacy Program at Berkeley Law. Strong support.
- Carla West
Person
Carla West on behalf of Yeagersville Wildlife Refuge and strong support.
- Ariana Creed
Person
Hi, Ariana Creed with cleanearth4kids.org in support. Also those in support are North County Equity and Justice, NCCCA, Eco-sustainability Peeps, Activist San Diego, Facts, California Nurses for Environmental Health and Justice, Sonoma SASS, Beyond Pesticides, Yard Smart Marin, and Moms Advocating for Sustainability. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. All right, opposition witnesses. See, I told you you could have stayed. All right.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
I work on other issues. I'm figuring the more I'm here, maybe you gotta give me one.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Yeah. Yeah.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
Once again, good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. Last time, Taylor Roschen on behalf of the Rodenticide Task Force and a series of agricultural associations in opposition to AB 2552. Our opposition is based on a series of factors.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
Firstly, because we have robust administrative penalties and enforcement procedures for illegal sale, use, and possession of pesticides, including anticoagulant rodenticides and reporting with Ag commissioners DPR Instructional Pest Licensing Board. We believe imposing additional civil penalties as proposed in this Bill is unnecessary.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
We also believe that state and local officials are better versed in pesticide enforcement and equipped to handle and verify complaints versus local city attorneys. Secondly, we object to the Bill as an abdication of the process in place for pesticides to be prohibited or use limited.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
DPR has a procedure in place to review wildlife and environmental impacts, including on non target species. And when legitimate information is presented, DPR is obligated to review and mitigate or cancel products. The sponsors are well suited to avail themselves of that process. But here we have legislation which seems to be the theme of today's hearing.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
I want to correct the record. All pesticides are banned for use in California until they're registered for use and deemed safe.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
And rather than present a Bill that obligates GPR to re-review that data or new data and issue a new determination to the Legislature or the public by a certain date, which has been done on rodenticides historically and yielded results. AB 2552 bans these products outright.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
Once again, we believe our agencies are best suited to opine on science, and it's the Legislature's prerogative to direct them to do that work. Finally, we'd like to highlight serious concerns with the agricultural exemption that has been eroded from our perspective in this Bill.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
When the original second-generation ban was contemplated and even the author carried a Bill last year on diphacinone, the agricultural exemption was maintained in those circumstances. This is because keeping our farms and our food facilities free from rats is not just good business sense, it's a public health necessity.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
Rats destroy infrastructure, spread feces and urine, and care uncommunicable diseases that we can't otherwise control. And to be clear, the Bill specifically states, and the Bill analysis confirms that the agricultural exemption is for all anticoagulants. So we're not just talking about warfarin and chlorophastanone.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
We're talking about all of the other anticoagulant rodenticides that are there as well, which would no longer be eligible for use on your farm, ranch, cold storage, or food processing facilities within a half a mile of a park or a wildlife refuge.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
We've provided your offices our version of maps that are statewide that show where prohibition would be limited to.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
And while we can understand that there may not be many national forests in Senator Hurtado's district, there definitely are in Senator Dahle's and the entire county, from our perspective, in Senator Dahle's district would be banned for use from these products.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
The alternative methods, like rat fertility control, removing debris, restricting rodent accents, that has been suggested, are not in the realm of reality in farming or already has happened. And even the noncoagulant chemical alternatives aren't all registered for agricultural use and come with significant trade-offs, which, the analysis notes, neurotoxicity, nontarget species exposure products without antidotes.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
And as evidenced by the history on this issue, we have no confidence that even those products won't be taken away by this Legislature next year. We request a stop to the whack-a-mole approach of removing products, one active ingredient at a time, that keep us safe and let the science lead us.
- Taylor Roschen
Person
So for these reasons, we request a no vote.
- Dennis Albiani
Person
Thank you, Dennis Albiani on behalf of the California Seed Association, California Pear Growers, but also the California Warehouse Association. California Warehouse Association is the rice dryers and handlers of rice products.
- Dennis Albiani
Person
And so one of the things that's inconvenient about being in agriculture and being in rice country is one example is that we are actually in the park nature interface, and that's where we go. And we actually feed quite a bit of the habitat and endangered species in California.
- Dennis Albiani
Person
So the rice industry has been, you know, very well praised for their environmental transformation over the last two decades, and yet there's obviously still an in the interface.
- Dennis Albiani
Person
And so when you look at these rice warehouse dryers, which would be exempt by the Bill except for the half mile around a wildlife situation, and that's where there are refuges all over Northern California, we promote them. There is duck hunting facilities that are owned and managed and operated by the state and the Fish and Wildlife entities.
- Dennis Albiani
Person
And so that's where it starts to become very significant into the impact on those specific entities using rice as an example.
- Dennis Albiani
Person
The other issue I'd like to bring forward is the further we restrict the materials outside of agriculture, for instance, the less available they're going to be, and the less available that entities will come in and try to get more benign products registered that may have a smaller dose or a different formulation.
- Dennis Albiani
Person
Because if they can only use it in these two little narrow sectors of the industry, that's their entire market. And California has significantly more restrictions and barriers to entry into the market for new products.
- Dennis Albiani
Person
And finally, I'd just like to bring up that there is a difference and that's why they're categorized between first generation and second generation. And Mr. Bloom carried this and we worked with him closely. And his political corpse is not even an entire session through. And we're back to the other ones that come forward.
- Dennis Albiani
Person
And so there was a lot of discussion went into those previous ones that man, one element of anticoagulants. And so again, we need to look to the science, look to DPR. That's what they're there for. That's why they have science persons and follow that lead. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. Hopefully his corpse isn't suffering from mange. Fair enough. Just an overburdened court in Northern LA County. You can stay up here if you want. Let's just hear from folks who want to weigh in in opposition, express their...
- Louis Brown Jr.
Person
Chair and Members of the Committee, Louis Brown here today on behalf of the California Rice Commission, in opposition.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
I'm not going to let you guys escape this time.
- Matthew Allen
Person
Mr. Chair and Members, Matthew Allen with Western Growers, also opposed. Thanks.
- Kirk Wilbur
Person
Kirk Wilbur with the California Cattlemen's Association, in opposition. Thank you.
- Tricia Geringer
Person
Tricia Geringer, Agricultural Council of California, respectfully opposed.
- Michael Miiller
Person
Good morning. Michael Miller, California Association of Wine Grape Growers, respectfully opposed.
- Margie Lee
Person
Marge Lee, on behalf of the California League of Food Producers in respectful opposition.
- Unidentified Speaker
Person
Mr. Ruden, California Farm Bureau, oppposed.
- George Covinta
Person
George Covinta with the Almond Alliance, also respectfully opposed.
- Lindsey Carter
Person
Lindsey Carter, Ag Commissioners and Sealers Association, opposed.
- Dominic Di Mare
Person
Dominic Di Mare here on behalf of the Pest Control Operators of California. Disrespectfully. No, just kidding. Respectfully opposed.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Yes, respectfully.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, discussion from the Committee. This is, I just want to ask one question. I noticed when the assertion was made that this was going to impact nearly all of Senator Dahle's county. I saw some of you shake your heads. I just wanted to get some clarity on. Obviously, this map is interesting.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
It's a very particular part of the state, but I'd love to go ahead.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
To clarify, you know, state law can't control federal lands. Federal government has control over federal lands. This, we cannot, as a Legislature, say to California, control what happens there. We have no authority over that. So that's clearly patently wrong.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
But how, but when you talk about refuges, I should probably know the answer to this, but...
- Jonathan Evans
Person
I can clarify what those wildlife habitat areas are defined under the Bill.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
Wildlife habitat area under the Bill means a park or wildlife refuge managed by a state agency, regional government, or quasi-governmental agency, or by a special district. Only thing the State of California has jurisdiction over, national wildlife refuges, national parks, Bureau of Land Management areas, national forests are not covered by this Bill.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Sure.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
So the wildlife habitat area is just things that the State of California has control over and its sub-agencies. And also the buffer zone would only be around those wildlife habitat areas themselves.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
So there would not be buffer zones, as the Bill is, is drafted now around those federal lands, because that's not the appropriate level of oversight the state can provide.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Let me just push back on that. Why isn't it, we still have regulatory power over the land that's near federal land.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
Correct. And that is a discussion we've had and that's ongoing with the committees. But to date, the Bill as draft, that does not have that language of buffer zones around federal areas. It's a large area. We recognize that there were a lot of concerns raised, and so that's part of the negotiation.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
So in Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area, we have. There's National Park Service land or state land. So you're able to apply the rodenticide next to the National Park Service land in the mountains, but not the state park land?
- Jonathan Evans
Person
As drafted under this Bill. I mean, the wildlife habitat area depends on whether there may be overlap and what specifically the jurisdiction is. So if there's a local special district, you know, adjacent to the Santa Monica Mountains, California has the control over that.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
But just as the Bill is drafted right now, it does not have the buffer around federal lands.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
I also want to clarify that, just to be clear, there's 114 other pesticides that can be rodenticides that can be used in these buffers. The Bill only is banning the anticoagulants. So it's not like we're saying you can't use rat killer in these buffers.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
We're saying don't use the rodenticide because we know it's particularly harmful to nontarget wildlife. So I want to be very clear, this is not a ban on rat poison in these buffers. Only on rodenticide rat poison, only on anticoagulant rat poison.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay. Yes, Senator Hurtado.
- Melissa Hurtado
Legislator
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm really interested in learning a little bit more. I mean, this map seems very targeted. And actually it's majority of my Senate district. And so I know that the argument was made that it was more so Northern California, but this map tells me that it's a lot of my district.
- Melissa Hurtado
Legislator
And I heard from testimony today that a lot of the issues that you're facing come from communities that are not in this area. So I'm just, I've never heard from my constituents of these similar concerns that you're trying to alleviate here. And so I'm just trying to understand why the need here. What have you heard?
- Melissa Hurtado
Legislator
Have you heard, I mean, because it just, it seems a little...
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
We just wanted to show what the buffer looked like in an agricultural area because agriculture is exempted. So if we had done a map for our area, we don't, you know, my district, we don't have much agriculture, so it wouldn't have given there's no buffer. I mean, there's no buffer around a farm in my district.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
We were trying to show a typical agricultural. We have done the mapping for Senator Dahle's district. We can show you that it looks the same in terms of the amount of area that it's covering, because in previous hearings, people wanted to understand with the buffers how much agricultural land is actually in the buffer.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
That's why we picked an area that was heavily agricultural. It's your district. We can provide this to Senator Dahle. We can provide for anybody. But the issues are the same. Any place that you're going to have wildlife encountering anticoagulants, you're going to have the same level of poisonings.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
And what is around these buffers is, are these wildlife habitat areas around them? So what's around this is the wildlife habitat area. So you have wildlife there, you're going to have big cats, you're going to have owls, you're going to have a high preponderance of wildlife because they are habitat areas.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
So we're just trying to show how much land is, how much agriculture, what the buffers look like in your district.
- Melissa Hurtado
Legislator
But the impact is different from your district, for example? Well, the impact from anticoagulant rodenticides is the same anywhere there's wildlife. Yeah, I mean, I've never heard a complaint from any constituent in my district.
- Melissa Hurtado
Legislator
So that's, I guess that's what I'm trying to get at is that if you've heard any, any concerns coming out of, you know, this particular region.
- Rebecca Gooley
Person
So we have county by county data that I would be happy to share with you. I think. Bakersfield, is that in your district? Yeah. We do have a lot of poisoning necropsies coming in from CDFW. They get reported every year. And I have a huge spreadsheet that I'm happy to share with people.
- Rebecca Gooley
Person
So I can give you the exact numbers. I don't know it off the top of my head, but we definitely have wildlife getting poisoned in Bakersfield.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
And confirming that, the same with San Joaquin Kit Fox, isn't it? San Joaquin Kit Fox is a lovely endangered species in your district. We have confirmed necropsies of mortality to Kit Fox from anticoagulant rodenticide. So it is something that's occurring everywhere.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
The difference here is that, you know, Senator Friedman's district doesn't have as much agriculture and all the commercial and residential uses are prohibited with under this Bill as well. So that would be in your town as well as in the town that you represent as well as other towns.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Yes. In other words, in my district it's more of a ban because we don't have as, except for water infrastructure is exempted. We're trying to, but agriculture is exempted from our Bill. So the farms can all still use the anticoagulants in your district. This is showing you the areas where they couldn't use it.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
So we're trying to show that it's not a huge amount of property, you know, given the amount of agriculture in the area.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Just want to make a quick comment.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
I obviously won't be supporting the Bill from all the things I said before, but one thing I did want to say is when we did the Bill came through last time with Assemblymember Bloom, one of the things was that I know is very prevalent in my district is illegal Marijuana grows where they use a ton of this stuff that is not legal.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
So we have, for our agricultural storage facilities that we have, we get a permit, we go do all the same things we did with our applicator's permit for anticoagulants.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
But the use of illegal anticoagulants is huge throughout the state and there's really no way to know until you. Till they go out and enforce, which is a county person that does code enforcement violation, typically. But in many of our cases, we found really, I mean, bags of anticoagulants that weren't even sold in California.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
They're coming from somewhere else because they're using it. They're in our watersheds. And so I just want to, for the record, go. We're not going to this. This is going to go after people who have to go to get permits, not people that do it illegally.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
We should go after them, too. Okay. Yeah. Well, there's a lot of enforcement we need to do up in Marijuana grow company. Yeah. Yeah. Seriously. Okay, well, any additional comments or thoughts or motion from Members? Okay, so move by Senator Menjivar. This is a do pass to Senate Natural Resources and Water, we'll let you close.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
Thank you. And the reason for this Bill is because even though we have been doing work on rodenticide, we are still seeing a lot of poisonings, unintended poisonings through necropsies. And we think that we struck a really good balance by exempting agriculture. Really, the fight is over these little rings that you see on there.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
And given that there's 114 other lethal rodenticides that can be used, we think that this is very reasonable, very sensible. Not going to drive anybody out of business. This shouldn't be a hardship, but it could, given that we're abutting habitats where we've told animals, come and live here, here's your habitat.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
And then we're bringing this really toxic poison in where these rats stumble into the forest now and they're sick and they get eaten, and they poison these other animals. And we know that through necropsies, through blood tests.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Don't go anywhere Phil. Okay. All right. Sorry.
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
That's okay. This is, you know, this is. We believe that this is unnecessary. It's sort of low-hanging fruit of animal protection. And I would request, and aye vote.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
But not if the Federal Government tells them to go live there. Then that's a...
- Laura Friedman
Legislator
You know, we are very open to do, you know, to putting a buffer in around the federal forest. We'll continue to discuss that, but, you know, as of now, it's not covered under this Bill.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Yeah, I'd love it if we could just also look at some of the national recreation areas where there's mixed ownership.
- Jonathan Evans
Person
There's very limited use on federal lands. They have to go...
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Of course. But the adjacent to federal lands, I mean, I care about those lands, too. So, anyhow, it's been moved. Secretary please call the roll.
- Committee Secretary
Person
AB 2552. Do pass to Senate Natural Resources and Water. [Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, thank you. So we've got a couple more Members to add on. All right, Assemblymember Ting. Sorry to rope you back, but you're our next author, so.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
Well, I learned something today about pesticides, so it's helpful. If it's okay with you, Mr. Chair, I'd like to present AB 347.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Mr. Vice Chair is very anxious to vote on the consent calendar, so. Okay, good. All right. It feels good sometimes. Let's just call a roll on the consent calendar with your forbearance or something.
- Committee Secretary
Person
The consent calendar consists of file items number 7, 8, 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 19. [Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, so Senator Dahle is on the record voting aye. Here we go. Let's go to item two. That's AB 347. More toxics.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
There we go. That is this committee, right? So first, let me thank you, Mr. Chair, your committee staff, for your committee amendments. We are expecting all of them, except for the amendment on cookware, which we will continue to work with you and the committee on. And we appreciate your patience on that issue.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
So AB 347 will require the Department of Toxic and substance control to test, enforce, and ensure compliance with all existing laws regulating the use of PFAS, chemicals and food packaging, cosmetics, juvenile products and textiles. We passed numerous laws on PFAS and getting PFAS out of products. As well as regulating pfas.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
We want to make sure that the DTSC has the authority and the ability to actually test products and make sure there's compliance. This bill specifically establishes a registration and testing process for the covered products with the fee requires DTSC to publish a list of accepted methods. It permits DTSC to test products for compliance.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
It also establishes an enforcement process, establishes a PFAS enforcement fund and a PFAS fine account. And also, lastly, it asks DTSC to submit a report to the Legislature. We've been working very closely with the department, as well as stakeholders, appreciate everyone's patience with this bill.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
And again, this bill is merely taking all the good work that we've done for a number of years, making sure there's a clear enforcement mechanism, and that the agency is empowered to actually do the work that we have tasked someone in the state to go do with that respect for aye vote on AB 347.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
No witnesses, just moving on from there.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Great. Anyone who wants to express their support for the bill at the microphone.
- Erica Parker
Person
Erica Parker with Californians Against Waste. No concerns this time. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
No concerns this time. Okay. Support I assume.
- Arianna Creed
Person
Arianna Creed with cleanearth4kids.org, in support. Also those in support are North County Equity and Justice, NCCA, Ecosustainability Peeps, Activist San Diego Fax, California Nurses for Environmental Health and Justice, Sonoma Sass, Beyond Pesticides, Yardsmart, Marin and Moms Advocating for Sustainability. Thank you.
- Kayla Robinson
Person
Kayla Robinson on behalf of the California Compost Coalition, in support. Thanks.
- Jordan Wells
Person
Jordan Wells on behalf of the National Stewardship Action Council, in support.
- Bill Allayaud
Person
Bill Allayaud, Environmental Working Group and they're either between support and opposition, we still have some concerns, but we certainly appreciate the need for getting enforcement and DTSC getting it together, and we appreciate that. We're still a little concerned about the way cosmetics are handled in terms of enforcement. We're working with the staff for several months now. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, let's hear from opponents. Anyone who wants to raise concerns about the bill, come on up.
- Mandy Lee
Person
Good morning, Mr. Chair and members. Mandy Isaacs-Lee, Omni Government Relations here on behalf of the Personal Care Products Council or the national trade for the personal care and beauty industry.
- Mandy Lee
Person
First, I want to thank the committee for an excellent and thorough analysis on this bill and the time that the author and his staff has taken to discuss our issue.
- Mandy Lee
Person
And while we appreciate the committee amendments to remove the non PFAS ingredients from being in scope and AB 347, we are still continuing to be concerned about the inclusion of cosmetics in this regulatory and enforcement structure. I just want to give the committee a little bit of context on why it is that we have this position.
- Mandy Lee
Person
Back in 2022, we negotiated in good faith with NGO's Assemblymember Friedman, and the ultimate construct in AB 2771 was one that our Members could work with. We agreed to phase out the use of intentionally added pfas in cosmetics, and that ban is effective January 1, 2025.
- Mandy Lee
Person
And what is implicit in this is the agreement that trace and technically unavoidable PFAS was sort of going to be in our products regardless of what happened.
- Mandy Lee
Person
And so the intentionally added verbiage in 2771 was critically important, important for that reason, to ensure that a primary ingredient in our products, such as water, which as we know, you know, unfortunately contains PFAS, would not trip us up from a compliance standpoint.
- Mandy Lee
Person
And the author, a couple of years ago, when committee testified to that effect, she actually said, and I quote, I don't want the manufacturers to be held liable simply for the inclusion of water in their products. So we can't be held liable for things beyond our control, which is what the ultimate construct of 2771 acknowledged.
- Mandy Lee
Person
It's also been well documented that PFAS is persistent and ubiquitous and ever present everywhere. It's in our water sources, it's in the air. And absent a way to completely eradicate PFAS, there will always be trace levels of PFAS in our products.
- Mandy Lee
Person
I would also welcome anybody on this dais in the committee to go back to their offices, pull out your lotion, turn it around, look at the ingredient list, and water will be the top, if not the first 23 ingredients on that product.
- Mandy Lee
Person
So absent a way to eradicate PFAS from our products, we will always have trace levels in it. Furthermore, unlike the other product categories as acknowledged in page nine of the committee analysis, you know, our PFAS band was different. All the other product categories, with the exception of cookware, had a deminimis level of allowable PFAS in there.
- Mandy Lee
Person
100 ppms was the standard, as you can see. And so without that parts per million applicable to cosmetics, we're really unclear how DTSC is going to determine intentionality if we actually added the PFAS intentionally, and how they're going to determine compliance without that deminimis parts per million prescribed in our statute.
- Mandy Lee
Person
And because our statute is only intentionally added PFAS that's prohibited from our products, it's unclear how the department of manufacturer or department or manufacturers is going to prove their compliance with this specification. Test results will not prove if the PFAS was added intentionally. This is actually a direct quote from the from the committee analysis.
- Mandy Lee
Person
So for these reasons, we remain opposed. Unless cosmetics is removed from the structure, it creates a great level of uncertainty for our products, and for these reasons, we'd ask for no vote.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, bet she knows that.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
Good morning, members. Rob Spiegel, California Manufacturers and Technology Association let me just start by saying CMTA and our core, our coalition partners, excuse me, are currently opposed, unless amended to this bill.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
For CMTA and our coalition partners, we have long said in all of these one off PFAS bans that we need regulatory oversight and guidance provided by any number of regulatory agencies in California to provide some very direct, meaningful clarity surrounding the regulatory enforcement mechanisms as well as testing protocols surrounding each one of these covered products.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
So 347, we can certainly say, is an attempt at getting there. It's definitely covering the bills as mentioned in the committee analysis being AB 1817 related to textiles 2771 to cosmetics, AB 652 to juvenile products, as well as AB 1200 related to cookware and plant based food packaging.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
While we appreciate the amendments from committee, I will say that our coalition as of this morning and just recently, we're disappointed with the author not accepting the cookware labeling requirements or the cookware amendments as provided by the analysis. AB 1200 was two parts.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
It was a PFAS prohibition on plant based food packaging with an acceptable level of 100 parts per million. The cookware provisions in that bill are not a PFAS restriction, which is how it is characterized and classified under AB 347. It is a labeling requirement.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
It was providing customers in California the right to know what ingredients may have been used in the manufacturing of that particular piece of cookware or bakeware.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
So now what we have is a problem in 347 in which, while the bill should be focused on PFAS and the presence of it, the legal presence of it and various consumer products, we're now enforcing a labeling requirement that can only be proven and determined under AB 1200 for not what is only on the label or identified by a manufacturer, but the list in and of itself itself also references the DTSC's Canada chemical List, which is over 3000 chemicals long.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
So the only way bakeware or cookware in this bill can be thoroughly proven or justified by the Department of Manufacturer for not containing one of those ingredients is to test for both what is listed on the label and for the others that are not.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
And that is why that particular amendment, that particular consideration, was so important to this particular bill. Beyond that, we have concerns as well regarding enforcement provisions. We still have arguments and concerns related to the notice of violations. We do believe that the bill is headed in the right direction.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
We feel that the scope of it, however, needs to be narrowed. We need to ensure the viability and availability of cosmetic products. Given the considerations that my colleague has just raised, we have significant concerns, but are willing to work with the authority on a pragmatic solution that controls costs of enforcement.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
We do not have an enforcement mechanism in California to do this.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
So through the legislative, through the legislature's prerogative, we have to provide clarity to the department of what is intended to be put together to create enforcement mechanisms surrounding potentially tens, if not hundreds of thousands of covered products covered, any covered under each and every one of of the four bills this bill intends to cover.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
We also don't yet understand how this particular legislation will deal with future bans on PFAS restrictions for consumer products. We feel the scope of this is too large at the present time. We definitely believe that cosmetics should be stricken from this bill.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
We also would like to see the cookware or bakeware provisions reinstated through the committee amendments and focus purely on the PFAS restrictions and covered products under the previous legislation. Senators, with that, our coalition is asking for a no vote today. We do intend to continue working with the author. Appreciate the consideration. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. Okay, let's hear from other folks who want to weigh it.
- Faith Borges
Person
Faith Borges on behalf of the Cookware Sustainability Alliance, we'd like to align our comments with those of CMTA, particularly on the subject of cookware. Thank you.
- Silvio Ferrari
Person
Good morning. Silvio Ferrari, on behalf of the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, also aligned with the comments on cookware. Thank you.
- Lauren De Valencia Y Sanchez
Person
Good morning Mr. Chair and members. Lauren De Valencia, representing the International Sleep Products Association do support a regulatory process, but to continue to remain opposed to the bill. Thank you.
- Lauren Aguilar
Person
Thank you chair and members. Lauren Aguilar, on behalf of the American Apparel and Footwear Association, the affirm group and the Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association also and opposed unless amended position. Thank you, Mister Chairman.
- Randy Pollack
Person
Randy Pollack, on behalf of the American Chemistry Council, in opposition.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, the item is before the committee for questions, thoughts and comments. Sorry, Senator Menjivar.
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
Sorry, I'm just getting clarification, assembly member, because I was under the impression you were taking the amendment of the cookware. So just.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
No, no. I clarified in my opening statement that I. We're taking all the amendments except for the cookware amendment. And then we are, with the chair's indulgence, we're going to continue to.
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
Sorry, I mean, coming into this hearing, I was under the impression I have a lot of concerns, and I think I agree with the opposition on the cosmetics part especially, and I know it's going to be referred to health as well. Maybe that's what you're focusing on. Could you just share a little bit more?
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
Someone in the background is shaking their head. So can you just clarify the commitment? Maybe that's where you're looking to focus more.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
Yeah, that's what we're focused on is moving into, as we move into senate health to focus on that cosmetics portion. We completely understand the industry's concern, especially about the intentionally added part.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
We believe that also within the amendments taken, that it is a good first step around the statement of compliance, certifying that the registered products in compliance with the applicable PFAS restriction. And so we think that's a good first step in terms of AB 1200 and the cookware. I'm very familiar with AB 1200. That was my bill.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
And we want to make sure that there is an enforcement mechanism around the labeling happy to continue to work with opposition on what that is. We don't think that leaving the whole point of this Bill is actually to enforce legislation.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
So I think it would be irresponsible for us to leave out legislation that I authored and not have some enforcement mechanism. I appreciate the opposition's comments and concerns about having something that's not onerous. Happy to figure out how we can still have enforcement without making it onerous.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
But again, we have, we're committed to continuing to work with both groups.
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
And this is a question maybe, well, I'll start with you, assembly member, on the amendment. Do you look at that as a self attestation from each manufacturer on the state of compliance?
- Philip Ting
Legislator
I mean, that's the way that we interpreted it.
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
And question to the opposition with the self attestation and compliance, at least for the cosmetics, if cosmetics attest that there's none intentionally, would that satisfy.
- Mandy Lee
Person
Through the chair? Thank you for the question, senator. I think our concerns would still be outstanding because all the other three other product categories have 100 ppm. So under the bill, DTSC could test random, randomly test these products, and there's a very clear way for them to determine compliance.
- Mandy Lee
Person
So if they test a piece of clothing, for example, and the test results came back to be higher than 100 ppm, the testing of that clearly indicates that that piece of clothing is out of compliance and therefore, you know, they'd take the enforcement action, remove the products from the shelves, et cetera.
- Mandy Lee
Person
Same thing for the food packaging provision, same thing for the juvenile products provision. We do not have that certainty. So the provision in 347 that allows for DTSC to test our products, we are very, very unclear how they're going to determine noncompliance without that same parts per million structure in this Bill.
- Mandy Lee
Person
And actually that was discussed when we were originally discussing ABC 2771 with Assemblymember Friedman. And we all determined that because of the uniqueness of our products and the fact that we do use a significant amount of water, which can have varying levels of PFAS, that they wanted to acknowledge that trace amounts were allowable.
- Mandy Lee
Person
So given all that, and just to take a couple steps back, we are not sure how DTSC is going to determine compliance with our products without that ppm. And as was mentioned, it was discussed at 1.0 during the deliberations in 2771 about including a parts per million deminimis level.
- Mandy Lee
Person
And that we all determined and we all agreed and we went neutral on the bill that that was not a feasible thing for our products in particular.
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
Thank you. Assembly member were any I don't know if you wanted, you don't need to respond to that, but if there's anything you wanted to counter to.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
No, again, you know, you stated, my understanding was in hopes that we got on this committee and the next committee is really where we were going to be focused on that particular piece. We believe that certification of compliance was a major first step in that direction.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
And so we're going to continue to work with opposition on that and we feel like we can get there.
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
And on the cookware part, is that what you're going to, you shared in the beginning that you.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
So with the cookware part is. We heard his comments, happy. If he, if the opposition has amendments for us outside of a blanket exemption, I think we're very open to discussing them. You know, what they think would be reasonable enforcement that would not be overly onerous or expensive because we.
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
Okay, because our proposal was a complete exemption, correct?
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Yeah, this is a regular.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
I would say. It just seemed to me, it would just seem odd to again have a bill around enforcing legislation and to leave that part out even though it was just a labeling piece.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Yeah, please. Yeah.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Appreciate the added opportunity. So for our coalition, we did in good faith put together a series of amendments quite substantial to the bill in print. And what we attempted to do was provide the structure and the guardrails, the guidance to, from the legislature to DTSC, as a mechanism to enforce.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
Now within that, the concepts from surrounding notice of violations, the testing protocols, etcetera, gets further diluted and complicated as you add mechanisms and other bills like 2771 that doesn't have a threshold to include then a labeling requirement that doesn't have any testing protocols.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
You're essentially then designing a program, one for testing for PFAS, another one strictly for enforcement. And it doesn't make sense to me or to us as a coalition as to why we would bifurcate the bill.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
If it is truly focused on consumer, consumer products and the presence of PFAS, let's focus on that and leave the labeling provisions and other elements out of it. AB 1200 would still be enforced with the exception of cookware.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
It would still consider the plant based food packaging elements of the bill that Mr. King authored a couple years ago to accomplish that portion of it. But again, the focus of this Bill has always been testing and enforcement for the protocols that are there in statute and why I can understand the labeling provisions of it.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
I would argue that that is a separate and distinct conversation that needs to happen outside of this bill.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Yeah. Okay. Let me go to Senator Hurtado. And I know Senator Dahle's questions, too.
- Melissa Hurtado
Legislator
Yes, I like to express the same concerns as my colleague, Senator Menjivar. And I too, also happen to sit on the Senate Health Committee as well. And so it sounds to me like there's a commitment coming from you to work with opposition to address the issues in that committee.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
Yes. Now regarding the, with cosmetics in particular, right now regarding cookware, I won't be accepting their proposal to strike it out. I think, you know, I think the department could figure out a way to comply with layer labeling. Again, labeling is the most minimal amount of compliance that's needed.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
So I think we can work on a way that they could enforce that mechanism without making it overly onerous.
- Melissa Hurtado
Legislator
With that. I'll be supporting your bill today.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you, Senator.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Senator Dahle.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
The question is that you're not taking the amendment. So why don't we just strike it out here then and say that it's not in there. What is the process here?
- Philip Ting
Legislator
Zero, we're going to continue to work with the chair, especially as we go into the next committee.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Okay. So just this is about, I totally think we need to work. First of all, back to, I asked for a hearing on PFAS and then we're doing one offs and here now we're trying to get some regulation there. It's a frustrating thing for me. Look, we want to get PFAS out of our system.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
We understand the health risk to it, but it's very frustrating to see a manufacturer. We have PFAs in astroturf, for example. And when it rains on it, it gets into our water supply and ends up in a manufacturing plant somewhere.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
And we have parts per billion, parts per million make a difference to those folks who are manufacturing and we're trying to pin them down. That's what this bill's doing, trying to pin them down. So it's critical. Those numbers matter and liability are where on the manufacturing part of it. So that's what this is about.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
I think it's frustrating that we need to have some clarity in that. What is that amount for the manufacturers? Unintended amount.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
There is an amount for all the other products. Cosmetics does not have that because that was not part of their negotiated. So every other, every other item in the bill there already has, all the bill does is enforcing previous bills. So again, this has been working on for two years now.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
So this is not something I thought up last month. I'm presenting to you. This has been a two year process, working with the department, working with stakeholders, trying to find a way to, again, not present a new bill, but just to regulate previous bills that have been signed into law.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
So again, there is a line for everybody else but cosmetics, which is why we're going to continue to work with them. That was not something that was negotiated into their bill. It wasn't my bill. It was Assemblymember Friedman's bill.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
So again, we're just trying to, again, make sure that there is a mechanism to actually, I know we don't always do the best job of follow through at the State of California, but this is our effort to actually try to do that. And now you can see, Senator, how damn hard it is.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Appreciate that. But still, we need to have some ability for the manufacturer not to be held liable for something they have no control over.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
But that ultimately comes down to. Yeah, so this is this sort of question of intentionality or supply chain issues. Is that the point you're making, that.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
If you have water that's contaminated with PFAS and you manufacture something and the PFAS gets in there, you're held liable? Right. So that's the problem.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
So again, that's. It's. Yeah, but that was already. It's only an issue with cosmetics. That's why we had this. We work with the committee on the statement of compliance. We'll continue to work with them. Everybody else, they have a line in the sand.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
What about feminine products?
- Philip Ting
Legislator
That's not in the bill.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Right. It's coming next. That's why I said we need to have a PFAS hearing, but we didn't.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
Yeah. Food packaging, cosmetics, juvenile products, textiles.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Yeah. Because you're basically enforcing the existing laws. On the existing law right now. That problem that you just described as already exists. Yeah.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
Thank you, senator. Again, appreciate the added time. Specific to cosmetics, whether it's a self attestation or the certificate of compliance.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
The challenge here is even though as a manufacturer, if you don't intentionally add anything to cosmetic, which is the law under AB 2771 do not intentionally add, should a test be done at any time and it register a part per trillion, a part per billion, or a part per million threshold, that test does not determine intentionality.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
I guess. So with that, quite literally a one part per trillion, which is almost practically impossible, test for these products would trigger a violation under AB 347. That is why the threshold consideration for the other bills makes so much more functional sense in the construct of what we're providing.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
And so for a manufacturer to defend itself against, did you allegedly add or not to that particular product is the question. And so if a test or a challenge is brought to that self certification or that assessment from the manufacturer, that manufacturer then would have to prove, essentially that they didn't do it.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
But how do you do that? Like, that is the structure that we're trying to work in for a bill that doesn't have a threshold continuation of part of it.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
But that's exactly why this committee added the amendment around the statement of compliance, because that is exactly the whole point of intentionality. Right. So if you had the. It's like. It's like saying, I'm stating I'm trying to follow the law, and I have every intention to follow the law.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
And if I had, and if I used water with PFAS, as the senator and the opposition have talked about, that, it was not my intention to put fest in the product.
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
But if then they get tested, then at that moment, they're in violation regardless of what they attested to. Correct with your bill.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
So, again, that's, I think, where we have to fine tune it, because unlike the other bills that had a particular measurement, that the Friedman bill did not have a particular measurement. So that's what we're. Again, that's what we absolutely promise to work on that in Senate health for.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay. That's an important thing to address.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
Absolutely.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay. All right. Thank you for the discussion. I know several of you. Are you in health as well? Yeah. Okay, great. So, yeah, yeah. I love it. So you'll. They're all gonna hold you?
- Philip Ting
Legislator
Absolutely. As is their job, too.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Yes. Okay.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right. Well, with that understanding, I'll entertain a motion. I'll entertain a motion from one of you to. Okay. And then as soon as he gets out, you'll do this work before Health Committee. Let's give you the opportunity to close again.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
Appreciate the robust discussion. Discussion, absolutely. We'll continue working on the bill, appreciate the committee's amendments and guidance and respect for an aye vote on AB 347.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay. Secretary. Please call the roll.
- Committee Secretary
Person
AB 347 do pass, as amended, to Health Committee. [Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay. More work to come. And you have two more bills.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
I have two more bills that are much simpler. So first, let me thank you. And the Committee for the Amendments on AB 2244. Happy to take the amendments. AB 2244 would prohibit the use of intentionally added BPA or bisphenol A in PPA paper receipts by January 2025 and all intentionally bisphenol chemicals and paper receipts by January 2026.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
Actually, the very much concern with bisphenol is that actually, it's not when you, when you actually come into contact with that receipt. So when you grab that receipt, you're actually being exposed to that toxic chemical. We think there's no reason for that to be in paper receipts.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
I have Nancy Buermeyer from Breast Cancer Prevention Partners to give testimony respectfully ask for an aye vote.
- Nancy Buermeyer
Person
Thank you. Good morning, Members and Chair. Nancy Beer Meyer on behalf of Breast Cancer Prevention Partners. Thank you for the opportunity to testify and thank you Assemblymember Ting for your continued leadership on AB 2244 to ban all bisphenols from thermal receipt paper.
- Nancy Buermeyer
Person
BCPP is a science based organization working to prevent breast cancer by reducing exposures to chemicals linked to the disease. Bisphenol A, or BPA, is, for good reason, one of the better known hazardous chemicals. And today you will see BPA free stickers on numerous products.
- Nancy Buermeyer
Person
Unfortunately, all too often BPA has been replaced with an alphabet soup of bisphenol substitutes, BPS, BPF and so on. That's exactly what has happened with thermal receipt papers. A 2023 report found that BPA has largely been replaced with BPS, a case of regrettable substitutions.
- Nancy Buermeyer
Person
Of the receipts that were tested, less than 1% contained BPA and nearly 80% contained BPS.
- Nancy Buermeyer
Person
While these substitutes are often less well studied, the more we learn, the better we understand that the entire class of bisphenols has implications for health, including increased risk of asthma and hyperactivity in children and cardiovascular disease, fertility problems, obesity, diabetes, and an increased risk of breast and other cancers in adults.
- Nancy Buermeyer
Person
BPA and BPS are both listed on California's Prop 65 as reproductive toxicants. Bisphenols are absorbed through the skin when handling thermal paper receipts. This exposure is concerning for all consumers. However, the risk greatest for cashiers, over 70% of which are women. Occupational studies have confirmed that BPA and BPS levels are significantly higher in cashiers.
- Nancy Buermeyer
Person
The good news is that the report I referenced earlier also showed that 20% of receipts tested were free of all bisphenols. Clearly, alternatives are currently available and in use. It's time to remove this entire class of toxic chemicals from thermal receipt paper by passing AB 2244 I ask your aye vote. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. Other folks who want to voice support for the bill.
- Bill Alio
Person
Bill Alio for Environmental Working Group we were sponsors of the Baby Bottle Bill in 2011 by Betsy Butler that started this we're really glad to see the regrettable substitution issue being addressed. Thank you.
- Kayla Robinson
Person
Hello. Kayla Robinson, registering support for Californians Against Waste. Thanks.
- Arianna Creed
Person
Hi, Arianna Creed with cleanearthforkids.org in support. Also those in support are North County Equity and Justice, NCCA, Eco-Sustainability Peeps, Activists in San Diego, Facts, California Nurses for Environmental Health and Justice, Sonoma Sass, Beyond Pesticides, YardSmartMarin, Moms Advocating for Sustainability, Center for Environmental Health and Grandparents Acting Together. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Great. Thank you. All right, opposition to the bill. Folks who want to raise concerns? No? Okay, let's turn back to the Committee for questions, thoughts, comments? Yeah.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Yes, Mister Vice Chair. So my one concern with this bill is the penalty. It's signed in law January 25. It goes into effect, and then there's a penalty phase. So for those folks that are trying to rotate out, $10,000 violation.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
But again, the penalty phase would be really January 2026 because it's the intentionally added BPA January 2025.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Right.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
That's why we did the January 2026 for the, the unintentionally added. So if they knew that there's.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
Yeah. So according to the companies that produce it, they've attested that for the most part, they already do not have BPA in their receipts. For the most part.
- Unidentified Speaker
Person
They've shifted to BPS.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
So the consumer, though, that has it in there, has a stockpile of it, how's that going to affect them? So do they have--
- Philip Ting
Legislator
My understanding, according to the receipt paper manufacturers, is that they've already, for the most part, transitioned out of BPA. So this is really focused on the January 2026 enforcement mechanism. See, we anticipated your question.
- Unidentified Speaker
Person
It's not about--
- Philip Ting
Legislator
We've been working too long together, Brian. Senator. Sorry.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Additional questions, thoughts? I'm glad you didn't make a staffer wear a receipt this time. I always felt bad for that guy. Okay, well, thank you. Thank you for all your work on this, and you've been on this issue for a long, long time, as you have on PFAS and many other things, so I do appreciate your leadership, and I'll entertain a motion when--yeah, okay. Moved by the Vice Chair. Thank you, sir. And I give you the opportunity to close.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
Respectfully ask for an aye vote.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay. Secretary, please call the roll.
- Committee Secretary
Person
AB 2244: the motion is: do pass to Judiciary Committee. [Roll Call].
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay. I believe they're all open. I know Assembly Member Ting has one more bill on Clean Cars 4 All. It's SB 2401.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
Thank you. AB 2401 is regarding Clean Cars 4 All. It makes three primary changes to our Clean Cars 4 All Program. Clean Cars 4 All is really a program to encourage adoption, especially for many more moderate-income families. It codifies the recently expanded statewide program.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
It requires data collection to allow for more targeted outreach to the lowest income Californians driving the most miles in the oldest, most polluting vehicles. It also allows an increased incentive to help move more of these drivers to transition into zero-emission vehicles. So, quite simply, what we really want to do is focus a large-- try to get a larger incentive to lower income working families who are driving longer distances.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
We have many super commuters who commute from Sacramento, the Central Valley, into the Bay Area, or people who live far outside of Los Angeles into LA. It's really trying to find ways to incentivize many of our super commuters into--and give them higher incentives to transition into zero-emission cars. I have Michael Canales, who's with the Union of Concerned Scientists, and Tom Knox from Valley CAN. I guess--no. I don't have Michael.
- Michele Canales
Person
Michele.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
I have someone much better than Michael.
- Michele Canales
Person
Good morning, Mr. Chair and Senators. My name is Michele Canales, Western States Policy Advocate.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
Michelle, I'm sorry. Excuse my--excuse my--this is why I need my reading glasses. I apologize, Michelle. I'm sorry.
- Michele Canales
Person
And sponsor of AB 2401. California has reached this goal of 1.5 million zero-emission vehicle sales two years early, and significant state investments has played a large part of that growth. However, the majority of these vehicles have yet to reach those that would benefit the most.
- Michele Canales
Person
Low-income and disadvantaged communities continue to face significant barriers to EV adoption and bear the brunt of air pollution. Given the state's budget deficit, using program funding in a more targeted and intentional manner could maximize these limited state resources for California's leading clean vehicle incentive program, Clean Cars 4 All.
- Michele Canales
Person
For instance, a report UCS and Greenlining Institute conducted last year found that passenger vehicles manufactured before 2004 emit almost three times as much slog forming NOx pollution as do all post-2004 vehicles combined.
- Michele Canales
Person
These older vehicles make up only 19 percent of light-duty cars on the road, but are responsible for 73 percent of all NOx emissions from passenger vehicles. Additionally, a recent Kaltura report found that just nine percent of all private light-duty vehicles consume a third of the state's gasoline, spending upwards of 1,000 dollars monthly on fuel.
- Michele Canales
Person
The distribution of emissions is not equal among light-duty vehicles, and retiring higher emitting cars that are driven the most will lead to greater air quality and public health benefits. And that's why it's imperative that we modernize the Clean Cars 4 All Program with AB 2401.
- Michele Canales
Person
Even though the program already targets low-income households in DAC zip codes, this bill updates and improves the guidelines by having CARB prioritize low-income households within DAC Census tracts that drive a pre-2004 vehicle and drive long distances.
- Michele Canales
Person
The focus will ensure that we provide much-needed air quality and economic benefits to the communities most in need. Union of Concerned Scientists along with our partners, Coalition for Clean Air, Kaltura, Greenlining, and Valley CAN respectfully request your aye vote. Thank you.
- Tom Knox
Person
I'm Tom Knox of Valley CAN. I'm just here to answer technical questions. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
There--folks who want to voice support for the bill?
- Kimberly Stone
Person
Thank you, Chair and Members. Kim Stone of Stone Advocacy, on behalf of Kaltura, proud co-sponsor, in enthusiastic support.
- Julee Malinowski-Ball
Person
Yeah. Julee Malinowski-Ball on behalf of the California Electric Transportation Coalition, in support.
- Jonathan Cole
Person
Jonathan Cole with Climate Action California, also on behalf of 350 Humboldt and 350 Sacramento, in support.
- Erin Taylor
Person
Good afternoon. Erin Taylor with Political Solutions, on behalf of Southern California Edison, in strong support.
- Jakob Evans
Person
Hello. Jakob Evans with Sierra Club California, in support. Thank you.
- Margie Lee
Person
Margie Lee, on behalf of the California New Car Dealers Association, in strong support.
- Melissa Cosio
Person
Good afternoon. Melissa Cosio with Pacific Gas and Electric Company, in support. Thank you.
- Melissa Romero
Person
Melissa Romero, California Environmental Voters, in support.
- Arianna Creed
Person
Arianna Creed with Cleanearth4kids.org, in support. Also those in support are North County Equity and Justice and CCCA, Eco-Sustainability Peeps, Activist San Diego, FACTS, Moms Advocating for Sustainability, and Grandparents Acting Together. Thank you.
- Alejandro Solis
Person
Alejandro Solis, on behalf of Comite Civico del Valle, in support. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. All right, opposition? Anyone who wants to voice concerns about the bill or opposition? I don't think we have any registered opposition. All right, we'll bring it to the committee for questions, thoughts. Senator Menjivar.
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
I love this bill. I think about, you know, I'm always talking about the accessibility. We have all these goals, but how feasible is it for our working class community, low-income community? Thought about my district. I'd love to be added as a co-author and move when--and I'd like to move the bill.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
Absolutely. And, Senator, there's going to be more work on this issue afterwards, so next year it's all yours.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right. I'm seeing no other further comments. The bill's been moved. If you have any--
- Philip Ting
Legislator
Just ask for your aye vote.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. All right, Secretary, please call the roll.
- Committee Secretary
Person
AB 2401: the motion is: do pass to Transportation. [Roll Call].
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, fantastic. Thank you.
- Philip Ting
Legislator
I just wanted to--I got Senator Dahle to vote twice from my bill, so I appreciate it.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Yes. Yes.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Yes. Yeah. Two out of three. Yeah. Two out of three. See? Yeah, it's not bad. Good batting average. All right, let's hopefully send, Tina Curry's on her way. Why don't we lift some? Yeah, let's have some votes. Let's do some votes. So we started the hearing before the quorum was met with a couple of bills.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
One of them was Senator Garcia's AB 20113 on the mill. So if anyone wants to move that, that's a work in progress negotiation. It's moved by Senator Menjavar. Secretary, please call the roll .
- Committee Secretary
Person
AB 2113. The motion is do pass to Agriculture Committee. [Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, two to two. We'll leave that on call. So let's. Now we've done all the Ting bills together as a group. Has everybody voted?
- Committee Secretary
Person
1860.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
One yes, let's. Sir. So let's go to the Connolly Bill. Yeah, that was AB 1864. Who wants to move that? Senator Menjivar.
- Committee Secretary
Person
AB 1864. The motion is do pass as amended, to Agriculture Committee. [Roll Call] two to two.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, why don't we. I see that our esteemed author is here, majority leader. Why don't you come on up, and we'll start with item five. That's AB 863. Sorry. Well, this is a Rorschach test that really says a lot about your character, depending on where you sit. Yeah. Okay. Interesting. All right. You may proceed when ready.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
I need my tennis shoes on today. Just letting you know. Good afternoon, Mister Chair and Members. Since July 2011, California consumers have paid a carpet stewardship assessment fee when purchasing carpets sold in California. This fee funds a statewide carpet recycling program known as the Carpet America Recovery Effort.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
In other words, CARE, which is a producer responsibility organization designed and implemented by carpet manufacturers with CalRecycle oversight. We need to reform this program to prevent more carpet in landfills, foster more responsible use of consumer fee resources, lessen mitigation with the state, and promote a more robust recycling infrastructure.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
Four major processes in California are no longer in operation, in part because we need to improve management of the system. One of those closed down in my district. Opponents here today will say that their recycling rates are going up and that they are meeting their goals.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
But CARE's current claims of success are based on recovery of carpeting compared to the declining carpet sales, which inflates the recovery numbers and poorly depicts how the current market shift to other types of flooring is really affecting the carpet recycling program.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
I have spent over two years learning about the State of carpet, the current carpet recycling program, and where different flooring entities are at with recycling efforts. My staff has had dozens of meetings with stakeholders in that time, including double digit meetings with CARE and its representatives.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
Should this bill make it out of Committee today, I will continue to work with stakeholders and the Committee. I have amended AB 863 to what I can confidently propose as a way to fix the way of the carpet recycling program is run.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
But just as importantly, this bill will add other recyclable products as requested by the actual recyclers, and address recyclability for other flooring projects that are the most popular products on the market today. This bill will create a true Extended Producer Responsibility, EPR program for carpet, Carpet Pad, and artificial turf, eliminating the assessment charged to consumers.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
The bill will also require a needs assessment for resilient flooring before being added to the PROs plan and EPR program. And AB 863 will improve accountability for CARE or any other carpet recycling program by increasing civil penalties for violating relevant laws and making repeat offenders ineligible to run this program.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
With me today to testify in support of the bill is Heidi Sanborn, Executive Director of the National Stewardship Council, Val Chestohin, Director of Instruction for the Joint Apprenticeship Training for flooring with the International Union Painters and Allied Trades District 16, and Mike West, legislative representative of the State Building and Construction Trades of California.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
Great. Thank you so much. Chair and Members, my name is Heidi Sanborn.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
I'm of the National Stewardship Action Council, a nonprofit that advocates for an equitable circular economy. And we are proud to sponsor AB 863 to create an Extended Producer Responsibility program for carpet, carpet pad, artificial turf and, following the completion of a needs assessment, resilient flooring.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
Since July of 2011, consumers have paid a carpet stewardship fee which started at $0.05 and now is up to $0.70 for broad loom and $0.99 for carpet tile when purchasing a carpet sold in California, which funds the statewide recycling program.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
Because of the current Advanced Disposal Fee program and the subsidy for recycling, virtually all broad loom carpet can be recycled now in California and only certain carpet tile cannot be recycled but often can be reused.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
However, even using CARE's data claiming 31% recycling rate in 2023 and apparently projecting 41% in 2024, if all carpet is now recyclable, one might ask why we're still landfilling over 120 million pounds of carpet in California, and my answer would be that it's due to the way the program is run.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
We're charging people at end of life to dispose of their carpet and we're not paying the collectors of that carpet for their labor, resulting in carpet getting disposed of instead of being sent to recycling, that and more is why AB 863 is here to fix.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
For example, the Conservation Corps of North Bay reported that they must charge $35 per residential vehicle and $125 per commercial truck to collect carpet because CARE does not pay them for the labor to collect it. Hence they don't collect much.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
Conversely, the Mattress Recycling Coalition does pay them to collect mattresses and they collect a lot of them and they don't charge the customers to drop them off. And that's what works. And they like that program. The North Bay Conservation Corps has told me that the other 13 cores will not collect carpet until this program is changed.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
So we're very much hoping that the other 14 cores in the future should this bill pass, collect the carpet, which would expand options for consumers in California. The progress made by CARE since 2010 to increase the recycling rate has been relatively slow because when you start a program, that's the low hanging fruit.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
Recyclers like Aquafil have literally closed plants like the one in Woodland, which I worked personally very hard to get here into California. It was heartbreaking to lose that 50 jobs, and they moved that consumer funded equipment out of state due to not receiving enough carpet to recycle.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
While more than 60% of carpet is still being landfilled, 14 years after the original bill passed, and with the four remaining carpet recyclers all desperate to get more carpet, they're literally poaching each other's carpet supplies at this point. That's how desperate they are to feed these plants.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
AB 863 eliminates the visible consumer fee and requires the producers to pay, which further incentivizes the producer to achieve the goals and design products with cost effective management systems and eliminates the hassle to retailers to collect the fee.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
It also reduces the problem that we have at retailers where they're being asked a lot, what is this fee? What is this fee? I've personally asked this question. The response I got from the Clerk was, it's just another government tax. I don't know what it's for.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
So that's another problem when you put that on there, it really doesn't educate the customer about much. AB 863 also provides new tools to ensure Californians get the program that they deserve by authorizing CalRecycle to remove the producer run organization from managing the program should they fail to comply three or more times.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
The fines are going to go up to $25,000 per violation, up to based on the type of violation. The other bills are actually at 50,000. This was something that we had talked to them about in negotiations.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
On par with national trends, the carpet sales are declining while the sale of products such as resilient flooring is going up. In fact, it even says that on the Mohawk website because they sell both Shaw and Mohawk sell both flooring, the resilient flooring and carpet.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
And the needs assessment will be required in AB 863 to evaluate what will be required to collect and recycle the resilient flooring to inform the addition of resilient flooring to the Stewardship program.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
And I do want to say that New York did pass a carpet legislation that is an internalized cost and does include the artificial turf, so we're not the only ones now that have done this.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
We have had at least six meetings with the opposition dating back to June of 2023 and they have had the RN, that includes the changes which added the EPR and the flooring types since September of last year.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
Unfortunately, despite numerous attempts to find middle ground after over a year of discussions, we ultimately disagree on several points, including the need to fund the collectors that work on their behalf to collect the carpet and get the recycling numbers up, and that they should pay for the program.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
There's very few states who allow public money to be collected and then just given to another industry group that's especially out of state, especially when they continue to fail to perform. And there's a long list of enforcement actions as recent as in April where they failed to complete. Let me see.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
CalRecycle did a conditional approval on their revised contingency plan in April of this year. Back in December, CalRecycle disapproved their contingency plan amendment. In January. CalRecycle found them non-compliant on their 2022 annual report, and that's just the most current things on their website.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
So we hope that we can get your support for this bill and fix this program once and for all. Thank you.
- Val Chestohin
Person
Good morning, Mr. Chair and Committee. My name is Val Chestohin. I am the lead floor covering instructor for Northern California and Nevada. I'm representing District Council 16 and the IUBAT. As you know, the carpet's made of most of the carpet we're installing today is synthetic. It's plastic. We by properly training installers to install the material.
- Val Chestohin
Person
The material has a much longer lifespan and there's less of it going into the landfills. Also, if the carpet is installed incorrectly, there are situations where you cannot even recycle it. For instance, using the wrong adhesive, if it's glued down, putting too much adhesive, open times, working times. The students need to learn that.
- Val Chestohin
Person
They also need to learn how to handle it and what is expected of them when the material is to be recycled. Thank you again for this opportunity to testify today. I appreciate it.
- Mike West
Person
Mr, Chair and Members. Mike West on behalf of the 450,000 men and women of the State Building and Construction Trades, including over 65,000 men and women in our state-of-the-art apprenticeship programs. Many of these are disadvantaged, formerly incarcerated, emancipated youth and military veterans.
- Mike West
Person
I don't have a lot to add on the technical aspects of this bill, but I'm continuously impressed by the by Val and the other instructors on new products and state-of-the-art systems being taught in our apprenticeship programs
- Mike West
Person
I would like to add that it is more than inconvenient when one of these systems fails and a company has to move all the furniture out the cubicles, relocate the employees in order to fix a faulty installation. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. All right, other folks want to weigh in support of the bill. Yeah.
- Lifton Wilson
Person
Lifton Wilson, on behalf of the San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors, Western Placer Waste Management Authority, Stop Waste and the California Product Stewardship Council, all in support. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you.
- Jordan Wells
Person
Jordan Wells expressing support on behalf of Zero Waste, Sonoma, CALPIRG, Aquafil, Marin Sanitary Service, Circular Polymers, Mojave Desert and Mountain Recycling Authority, Families Advocating for Chemical and Toxic Safety, Sacramento Splash, Russian Hill Neighbors, RISE Building Solutions, National Waste Recovery, Broadview Group, Arizona Alternatives, Apex Manufacturing, Reterra Corporation, Transportec Logistics, Clover Plastics, Circular Strategy, Frankfurt Plastics, Better Image Recycling, Sea Hugger, Product Stewardship Institute and Repurpose Earth. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. That's a lot.
- Nicholas Mazzotti
Person
Nicholas Mazzotti on behalf of the California Association of Local Conservation Corps in support of the bill. Thank you.
- Kayla Robinson
Person
Kayla Robinson on behalf of Rethink Waste in support. Thanks.
- Bill Alio
Person
Bill Alio, EWG. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. All right, now let's hear from opposition, who's coming up. Yeah.
- Unidentified Speaker
Person
There's four of them, so maybe hiding.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right. Proceed when ready.
- Robert Peoples
Person
Proceed?
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Yeah, please.
- Robert Peoples
Person
Good morning, Mister Chairman and members of the Environmental Quality Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Dr. Robert Peeples. I'm a physical organic chemist by training with 40 years of experience. I'm one of the founders of care and have served as the Executive Director since my return in 2012.
- Robert Peoples
Person
My goal as a scientist is to share facts, experience, and information to help you and others make the best decisions that you can make. My work is driven at this stage of my career by my two grandchildren. In the hope of providing them a better world to grow up in.
- Robert Peoples
Person
I am, in fact, proud of the work that's been done in California. Have we had bumps and bruises along the way? Absolutely. Have we learned from those and made adjustments? Absolutely. Did we start with a blank sheet of paper? Yes, we did.
- Robert Peoples
Person
And what I mean by this is that we had no infrastructure, collections, reporting system, products into which to put these materials. The dedicated team of CARE has worked with the recyclers to deliver unparalleled progress despite the winds of COVID and the turmoils of the marketplace that we have to operate in today.
- Robert Peoples
Person
We've also enrolled the best consultants in business who help guide our work. In particular, Cascadia Consulting and Crowe here in California. These are consulting firms known to the state of California and do a lot of work with CalRecycle. They've helped provide information and guidance on our plans. In addition, we do communicate regularly and often with the staff over at CalRecycle.
- Robert Peoples
Person
I believe the facts speak for themselves. And I do have a chart here that I'm happy to share with the Committee. Excuse me. A recycling rate in Q1 of this year at 42% now equals the overall recycling state rate for the State of California. Our target for 2024 is 34%.
- Robert Peoples
Person
In 22, we hit all of our goals except for one and we missed that goal by 12%, so the world is not black and white. In 23, we met or exceeded all of our targets with the exception of one, and that one we missed by only 5% because the markets in Q4 just collapsed.
- Robert Peoples
Person
Nobody would buy the materials that we were trying to move. CARE recyclers have diverted over 1.2 billion pounds from the landfill since the program started. And our microgrants program has been a major success for small businesses and municipalities. We do use a CalRecycle-approved formula as we calculate our recycling rate.
- Robert Peoples
Person
Are there still opportunities to grow and approve? Absolutely. And CARE works on those every single day with all of our stakeholders.
- Robert Peoples
Person
Unfortunately, I do want to point out for you that the briefing paper you hold, which is meant to inform your decisions does have some factual errors that have been acknowledged, and I'm happy to share my thoughts on what those are with you if you're interested.
- Robert Peoples
Person
One particular concern that we have is that an element of H.63 around the union funding. We have tried to work diligently with DC16 and 36 and I'm happy to provide you the long list of efforts that we've done. However, we have done frequent trainings with both unions.
- Robert Peoples
Person
We have all of the training materials and place, including videos in both English and Spanish which are readily accessible online, and we've done multiple train the trainer programs to prepare the union trainers. We've met with a lot of resistance from the unions. The unions represent about 15% of all the installers in California.
- Robert Peoples
Person
There's just no justification for millions of dollars, up to 10% of the budget where we could use those funds to better support the collections infrastructure that we continue to build.
- Robert Peoples
Person
Recycling carpet, from a collections and transport point of view, is not rocket science, and it just doesn't require that much money to train when all of these materials are in place. In conclusion, I'd like to just acknowledge that care is working by looking at the metrics over the past few years.
- Robert Peoples
Person
Why would this body want to dismantle a program that has created hundreds of jobs and recycled hundreds of millions of pounds of carpet into innovative and new products with a new program starting from scratch, with no proof that it will work?
- Robert Peoples
Person
So again, I'd like to thank you for your time and just leave you with one last thought. Systems logistics analysis tells us that when you try to change something faster than a system can accommodate the change, it leads to chaos and lack of efficiency.
- Robert Peoples
Person
In many cases, there's been efforts to try to change what we're doing faster than the system can absorb those changes and respond to those changes. So thank you for your time this morning.
- Anthony Samson
Person
Good afternoon, Mister Chair and Members. Anthony Samson here on behalf of the Resilient Floor Coverings Institute. RFCI is a trade association comprised of resilient floor covering producers and manufacturers that manufacture vinyl composition tile, luxury tile, solid vinyl tile, sheet vinyl tile, rubber tile and other types of resilient flooring.
- Anthony Samson
Person
Let me first start by thanking the Assemblymember Aguiar-Curry and her staff for reaching out after the bill was introduced and expressing a willingness to meet with RFCI to discuss their concerns with this measure.
- Anthony Samson
Person
While we look forward to engaging in that dialogue, I would be remiss not to raise some process related concerns with how this is all unfolded. I typically shy away from raising those types of concerns because late stage amendments are just a reality of the legislative process.
- Anthony Samson
Person
But in this case, it would have been RFCI's hope and expectation to have engaged in some level of dialogue before a bill of this magnitude was put into print.
- Anthony Samson
Person
Specifically, AB 863, as amended just last week, now requires CalRecycle to prepare a needs assessment for resilient flooring and gives CalRecycle authority to complete and approve a producer responsibility plan that includes resilient flooring.
- Anthony Samson
Person
We understand the Committee's proposed amendments will now require CalRecycle to consider whether or not resilient flooring should be included in its own PRO or part of an existing one. But either way, AB 863 presupposes that resilient flooring will be part of this massive new program in some way, shape or form.
- Anthony Samson
Person
RFCI understands and appreciates the importance of conducting a needs assessment before establishing a program, but keep in mind that resilient flooring encompasses several types of flooring products with a broad range of physical properties and applications. Indeed, different types of resilient flooring face distinct challenges in terms of the technical and infrastructure needs associated with recycling.
- Anthony Samson
Person
For this reason, we believe that upon completion of a needs assessment, CalRecycle should instead issue recommendations to the Legislature as to how to establish the most effective program possible to address end-of-life management of resilient flooring.
- Anthony Samson
Person
RFCI would stand ready at that time to work with Assemblymember Aguiar-Curry and this Committee through the course of a full legislative session to establish a program that works for manufacturers, consumers, recyclers, and other entities throughout the supply chain. RFCI and its members have decades of experience and technical expertise in this area.
- Anthony Samson
Person
Establishing a new program of this magnitude on a new product category will require extensive dialogue between the Assemblymember and our technical experts, but we are concerned that doing so within the short time frame that we have left will be extraordinarily challenging and will lead to the establishment of an unnecessarily flawed program.
- Anthony Samson
Person
Thanks for considering our comments and we look forward to the continued dialogue with the Assemblymember and with this Committee.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Yes, sir.
- Greg Hurner
Person
Greg Hurner on behalf of the Synthetic Turf Council, we represent the manufacturers, installers, all the companies up and down the state that handle and install synthetic turf.
- Greg Hurner
Person
I'm also very familiar with the extended producer responsibility programs, having helped draft some of the bills that have gone through this Legislature and I work on compliance with the calorie cycle on plans as well.
- Greg Hurner
Person
I'm really confused, though, because first we have the supporters saying the carpet program doesn't work, and then we have the industry saying it does. Well, if the carpet program's not working, why do you want to add us to it, especially without any discussion? And I would like to echo some of Anthony Samson's conversations.
- Greg Hurner
Person
We were offered a three-hour block of time the day before this hearing as the only opportunity to have a consultation on this. If there was an RN floating around from September, we never saw it. We never saw the bill until it was in print. Synthetic turf is used in different applications. It's not swappable for carpet.
- Greg Hurner
Person
It's made out of a different chemical component, polyethylene instead of polypropylene. When they recycle, they have to break it down into its component parts. The largest carpet recycler in Los Angeles has stated that they can't recycle synthetic turf.
- Greg Hurner
Person
The industry is not opposed to working on recycling, but we don't, haven't even had an opportunity to find out whether we should be in the carpet program or set up our own program, and we've never given the courtesy of that discussion. So we also have a significant reuse component.
- Greg Hurner
Person
One of the largest companies that does turf reuse is in the author's district. That reuse is not even accounted for in this bill. So there's other components on this that's going to increase costs, such as like saying you have to have dry storage, synthetic turf, it's in athletic fields.
- Greg Hurner
Person
One of the purpose of it, it's made to get wet. Why do you have to build extra infrastructure and cost into a program for something that doesn't need to be kept that way? There's so many different aspects of this program that are just picked up and dropped in from other programs without looking at the unique nature of the additional types of flooring, both resilient flooring and synthetic turf, that there's not time-- You can't just do that in these programs. There has to be a more thoughtful, deliberative process.
- Greg Hurner
Person
As a Chairman knows who spent years working on SB 54, it takes that much effort to work through some of these issues that are unique to different components and make sure it works. I actually have been consulting with a company that wants to start a recycling facility in Northern California.
- Greg Hurner
Person
They are, now with this bill being introduced, they're like, concerned about should they make those capital investments or not, because they don't know what this program is going to look like for additional years. That's going to delay opportunities in the turf industry to do recycling. Plus we also have the infill and other components that we recycle.
- Greg Hurner
Person
It's not just the turf. And so when the industry's talking about recycling, we're talking about it holistically and so respectfully, we see no reason-- Especially cause we're not even included in the needs assessment. Like why you're just adding this to this program without a needs assessment or even looking at our industry.
- Greg Hurner
Person
So with respect, we'd ask to be withdrawn from the bill.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. Okay. Both sides were over time, now we have a fourth person. So if you could keep--
- Randy Pollack
Person
I'll be one minute. Thank you, Mister Chair. And thank you for indulging. Randy Pollack, on behalf of The Carpet and Rug Institute who are participating in this program. I just want to say, you know, goal is to find the success of a program. It shouldn't be the structure. And let's look what's happening here.
- Randy Pollack
Person
CARE has a plan that goes through an Advisory Committee that then goes to CalRecycle that is approved. So everybody has input. That was approved on April 1, 2023, their last five year plan. They are meeting goals of that plan. So for some of the proponents of this bill saying, well, you aren't meeting goals.
- Randy Pollack
Person
You need to do other things. You're switching the rules on us. We are abiding by what's in our plan, what has been set out. And as Mr. Peoples indicated, we met 12 out of the 13 goals and we missed the one by 5%. And I can tell you every year, every program, you aren't going to meet all your goals. I mean, you would like to, but economic conditions.
- Randy Pollack
Person
Lastly, I'll just add, when they talk about the recycling rate, if you want to debate how the recycling rate should be calculated, understandably, but look at the way it's been going over the last few years. It continues to increase every year. That's what should be looked upon.
- Randy Pollack
Person
And if you compare us to the mattress program, our 41% would be at 75%. So please, just don't look at saying we aren't recycling enough. Look at the scale of the way it's happening. And for those reasons, we oppose this bill.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right. Okay. Let's hear from other folks who want to weigh in opposition in front of the mic.
- Silvio Ferrari
Person
Hello. Silvio Ferrari, on behalf of the California Building Industry Association, opposition.
- Robert Spiegel
Person
Rob Spiegel, California Manufacturers and Technology Association, in opposition.
- John Moffatt
Person
John Moffatt, on behalf of Shaw Industries and the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, in opposition.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Carpet in the cars. All right. Gosh. Well, let me, first of all, thank you to the audience for giving us extra time for everyone to have a discussion, which I know we're going to continue to have. This is a big bill that is brought to us very late, and that does create a challenge.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Now, I do want to thank the author for bringing-- This is an important issue. I certainly appreciate all the input from the stakeholders that are here ready to engage. We do know that carpet sales are going down as more offices and businesses switch over to resilient flooring, as they call it.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
So, you know, we know there are needs for changes given changes in market trends.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
And I will say that, you know, I do, at least conceptually, very much appreciate the author not just looking to reform the current EPR program for carpets, but also looking ahead to challenges coming down the road by including other flooring types in the bill. I know that's not without challenge.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
You know, there's a lot of issues that I think have been raised by the opponents today. The process, as Heidi knows very well and the author knows too because she was able to-- We talked many, many times over the years as I was trying to get SB 54 across the finish line.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
These things take a lot of work, and there are a lot of unique challenges associated with every different industry and every different product.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Now, so, you know, I know we basically, by allowing this building before we ruined a whole bunch of people's summers, because it's going to take a lot of work over the recess, quite frankly, to see if you can pull something together that's going to meet all of the challenges that have been addressed.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
And I just don't know what the answer is to that. I'm certainly willing to give you that opportunity from my perspective. I will see with the colleagues. But it's going to be a tough negotiation, and that includes a lot of different factors.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
I mean, it includes how do you ensure that we adequately fund the labor programs, but also keep those costs within reason, given all the other things that we're looking to fund within the program? So I do, I think that there is a decent shot that we can figure out something good here. We know there's a need.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
I'm a strong believer in EPR, obviously, and I have a lot of confidence in Ms. Sanborn's work. We worked very closely together on 54, but I also know how challenging every individual new product and new program is. So those are my thoughts on this.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
But I know I hope-- Thankfully the majority leader lives close to Sacramento because she'll be here for lots of meetings. Mr. Vice Chair.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Thank you, Assemblywoman. So I have maybe a little different take. I actually have the-- I don't know the new district lines, but I went and toured the recycling plant in my district, which is right out of Sacramento here. So they do the turf, I believe we saw turf there as well.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
So that was maybe 15 months ago, I think I went through the plant, looked at the process, was happy to see it.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
So first of all, just my concern, first number one, is this is very late in the game, gotten them in like for me seeing it and I know that I heard that from the opposition as well. Maybe have some conversation about timing. The other thing is that I know that was a plant moved out.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
I still believe they're in Arizona or somewhere and they're taking California recycles and still recycling maybe because it's really hard to do business here. Yeah, well, I'm not happy about that. But that's for another discussion on how we do business in California, unfortunately.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
So, but the real point I want to get out in this bill, I think, is with those concerns out there is that we're going to a producer pay situation and so that gets incorporated into the carpet and the consumer. It's expensive to do anything in California.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Housing is going up, everything's going up and inputs, and this is going to cause those inputs to go up. At the same time, I'm not convinced that we're really doing that bad of a job yet. I think that the opposition's point is that we may not hit the target you want.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
And then on top of that, we're adding other products that haven't been vetted out on how we should get there. So those are the things that I'm concerned about with this bill at the pace and scale we're trying to move. So that I think needs to be looked at.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
And the other thing I'm really frustrated with is that, no offense to my friends in the union world, but this is like a grab again. They're going to get money that nobody else gets to train and do it. But the union's got a powerful influence here.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
And unfortunately, I don't think that's fair to all the people out there that work and remove carpet. This is a carve out for unions. So those are the things that-- I won't be supporting the bill today.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
I think it needs a lot more work and I think that just pushing it through gets us to an end where we don't really get good. Look, we worked on 54 and it took a long time and we got bipartisan support on that. It was a huge deal.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
And just this year we saw people coming back and messing with that process and legislation, and I was frustrated about that. Look, we want to do the right thing. We want to keep the jobs in California. We want to recycle. But at the end of the day, you can't--
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
I think it's unfair to move in this type of fashion. So for those reasons, I won't be supporting the bill. And I hope this bill, it needs a lot more work. I think it needs, you know, I won't be here next year, but, and I don't know if you'll be here. I think you'll be here next year.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
But anyway, I think we need to really take a look at this, slow down and do the right thing here. So for those reasons, I won't be supporting the bill.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. Other questions? Thoughts? I mean, obviously we're going to be-- our Committee has a lot of experience in this space. Less on carpet obviously, but a lot on EPR.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
And if the bill does pass out today, there's going to be an abiding interest by the Committee following and bird-dogging the negotiations, which I think will be robust and intense.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
I mean, I'd love to actually just ask you, Madam Majority Leader, about how you see-- given all the challenges and concerns and the timeframe here, how you see these negotiations going over the next few weeks.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
Well, I'm not going to lie about it, but we've been, this is a two-year bill, so wasn't it getting them in? We've been working on this nonstop. We've met with our stakeholders. We've met with industry. For two years, we've met.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
So people being surprised that some amendments are going to come out there should not be very surprised at all. So am I frustrated? Absolutely. Because if you haven't been to a landfill lately or you talk to recyclers, this is still an issue. Now, maybe we're moving to other products out there. Absolutely. But you know what?
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
I need to look at everything as a vision because it was taken this many years to get this far. Can you imagine how long it's going to take to add the other products? So let's put it in there. Let's do it right. Let's move on. But this has been two years that we have had this conversation.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
So I'm frustrated that it's not a gut and amend at all. This was going right through. We've had people in and out of my office trying to figure this out. So with all due respect, I just want to say, of course we're going to continue to work on it.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
But the fact is, this is nothing new to anyone. You know, I just-- The CARE program has failed us many times. And you can go out to the recyclers and they will tell you the same thing. Let's not look at consultants. Look at the people that are doing the work that are out there.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
So, I mean, due respect to the opposition, but this, I mean, how long are we going to let this happen? We're trying to clean up the landfills every single day. And this is just one of the many pieces. And I think there are some good projects that we've done with the mattress recycling, that worked.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
So do we build off of that? So I think that telling me that it's like gut and amend and that we're not thinking about it is far from the truth. But that's not my close. I'll close it.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Right, right. But how do you see the negotiations proceeding next month?
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
Yeah, I mean, we're all in to negotiate with everyone to get this thing done this year. This is our third and last attempt at cleaning up this program. We've cleaned it up twice in 2017 and 2019. We couldn't get the Legislature to go with the EPR. We ended up in non-compliance. We ended up losing a facility.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
We ended up losing jobs. We literally, we have this right at the edge, and we can fix it. We can figure it out with these manufacturers. We're happy to talk with everyone who showed up. We have been talking with Tarkett. Tarkett owns 70% of the market in California on turf. We have been talking with Mohawk and Shaw.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
They both are major sellers of LVT. They knew this was coming. We talked about this months and months ago. They wanted to keep telling us how great they were doing. And we kept saying, that's great. We do hear you what's going well. But there's things that are not going well.
- Heidi Sanborn
Person
And there's enormous amounts of CalRecycle time going to oversee this program. So we would like the time to work with them. And I'm willing to-- no vacation, I'm here. Let's go. Let's dig into the details. Cause really, we do need to get this done. And I know we can do it. We've done it before and we can do it again.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Well, from the look on their faces, they were really looking forward to the vacations. I guess that's gonna have to be in the fall. Okay. All right. Thoughts or additional questions from Members? Senator, are you interested in moving the bill? Okay. All right, so we'll give you the opportunity to close.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
Senators. CARE has repeatedly failed to administer the program effectively and equitably and has required oversight and repeated enforcement by CalRecycle. Recyclers and collectors have left the state or gone out of business due to the lack of feedback while carpet is still being landfilled. Theatrics by opponents do not change the fact of CARE's performance.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
This bill adds other recyclable flooring types as requested by the recyclers that remain in our state, and it sets resilient flooring on a path to recyclability by asking CalRecycle to study what the program needs for what these products might be. It is silent on what that program will look like or where it will be housed.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
It also invests in worker training, so we increase the rate of recycling through proper installation and removal. Shifting to internalizing the cost of this program steers industry towards responsibly spending their money on recycling and eliminates the burden on consumers.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
And lastly, the needs assessment for resilient flooring gives the industry the time that they need to figure out how they can be part of the circular economy. I look forward to working with all stakeholders and Committee to make sure this program is effective and implementable. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay. Secretary, please call the roll.
- Committee Secretary
Person
AB 863: the motion is: do pass as amended to Judiciary Committee. [Roll Call].
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, we can leave it on call. Thank you. Okay. All right, let's go--are you doing the Grayson bill or are you--or do we--or should we let it happen or what's going on? Is he gonna? I don't know. It depends on once you work it out with your colleague. Yeah. I just want to make sure they--
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
Move the bill.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
I'll try to make this quick for you. Okay. Good after--good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. I'm grateful for the committee's work on this bill. I accept the committee's proposed amendments that are outlined in the analysis. AB 2091 is a simple bill that would help expedite public access to open space across California.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
Under the CEQA, most agencies, including park districts, are required to conduct a significant environmental review for any projects or actions that would have environmental impact unless an action is categorically exempted. Currently, a categorical exemption exists that allows a park district to acquire land for the purposes of preserving open space without needing to perform a review under CEQA.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
However, no exemptions exist for changes of use, such as a park district would like to open a required land for public access, even if the acquired land already has existing roads and trails that existed prior to the acquisition. AB 2091 will exempt the opening of existing roads and trails for specified non-motorized recreational uses to the public on open space properties owned and operated by the agency.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
This limited exemption would only apply in scenarios where roads and other disturbed areas existed prior to public agency acquisition and where no significant capital improvements are required to allow public access on open space or park lands.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
Additionally, this bill would have no impact on existing land covenants that would apply such a grant agreements, conservation plans, or long-term management plans, and the park districts would be responsible for enforcing management policies that protect species and habitat. Importantly, this bill will also help save park district resources by clarifying when environmental review must take place and help open up public access to acquired lands in a quicker manner.
- Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
Legislator
Additionally, the amendments to this bill will limit the bill to four independent park--special park districts across the state and add guardrails to ensure that sensitive habitats are protected. Today to testify is Jennifer Galehouse, representing East Bay Regional Parks, and thank you, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote for Mr. Grayson when the time is appropriate.
- Jennifer Galehouse
Person
Hi. I'm Jennifer Galehouse, on behalf of East Bay Regional Park. This bill is really about an ambiguity in CEQA regarding whether a change in use for public access is a discretionary action. It's about a point in time. It delays CEQA until there's actually a physical alteration to the natural environment.
- Jennifer Galehouse
Person
So there will be a full environmental analysis when something's done to the park, such as the addition of bathrooms or camping grounds, things like that. I will say there's been some confusion with the opposition. Some of their arguments may lead you to think that we're actually siting trails or changing trails in some way. This is all about the use of existing trails and roads. Nothing will be done that alters the natural environment. So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions, and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay. Folks who want to weigh in support?
- Ethan Nagler
Person
Ethan Nagler, on behalf of the California Association of Recreation and Park Districts, in support.
- Nicholas Mazzotti
Person
Good afternoon, Chair and Members. Nicholas Mazzotti, on behalf of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, in support of the bill. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Great. All right, let's go to opposition. Hey, Matt.
- Matthew Baker
Person
Good afternoon, Senators. Matthew Baker, Planning and Conservation League, and I want to clarify, I am only speaking for PCL today, not for the other organizations that had signed on to the opposition letter that we originally sent. We were originally opposed to this bill and are fundamentally opposed.
- Matthew Baker
Person
The idea of removing CEQA review from a, the action of increasing access to open lands, I mean, we think that it could lead to significant, very significant impacts and it warrants review. But since the time that we sent that letter, we've met with the sponsors, we got to understand the particular predicament that they were in and realized it was sincere, and also got to realize, we had a better understanding of the kind of planning, management planning and resources they had in place to be able to handle this exemption responsibly with this increased access.
- Matthew Baker
Person
And we really worked--we, with our partners on the letter--we really worked diligently to think about how to come up with an alternative that would allow for entities that do have the appropriate management, planning, and resources in place to do this responsibility, to allow them to do it, and to limit the bill to that scope.
- Matthew Baker
Person
In that spirit of that, we talked with the author and the committee, and we appreciate the committee's analysis and the thoughtfulness that they have brought to this issue, and we appreciate the amendments, and we definitely appreciate the author's commitment to take those amendments, and with that commitment, we're not in full support yet.
- Matthew Baker
Person
There are some things that we continue on to try to talk about and clarify, but with the commitment, for the commitments that we have before us today, we're happy to continue that discussion in the next committee and happy to continue the discussion. So thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Great. No, I appreciate it. This is it--anyone else who wants to express opposition or concern? Yeah, this was a kind of tricky one for our committee because at the end of the day, this is about opening up trails and use of existing trails, and in the parks, folks whose agenda we very much share, which is wanting to ensure that we have access for folks.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
So anyway, we tried to take a middle ground with the amendments and we narrowed the scope of the exemption to apply to five independent special districts, and we had language about tribal resources and other physical impacts on the environment, and the change has to be in compliance with the regional plan. Anyhow--and I know also there was a notice in the hearing requirement as well for the exemption, but I know you're going to continue to work. It's going to go over to NRW.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
I know the Assembly Member was here earlier and he had to leave, but I ask you to please continue to work with the opposition and let's see if we can get closer to consensus as the bill goes along.
- Matthew Baker
Person
I want to reemphasize, I really think that the amendments are a great improvement and we are really happy to keep on talking.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Great. Great. Wonderful. Okay. All right, let's--moved by Senator Dahle. Let's call the roll.
- Committee Secretary
Person
AB 2091: do pass to Senate Natural Resources and Water. [Roll Call].
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. All right, let's go ahead. Thank you. So we have Senator Papan, who's here to present. AB 2515.
- Diane Papan
Legislator
Well, I was gonna start with good morning, but I'll make it good afternoon.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
I know.
- Diane Papan
Legislator
First I want to thank the Committee for their work on this Bill, and I'm here today to present a Bill that is of personal importance to me. AB 2515 the TAMPPON Act, which stands for take all menstrual product PFAs out now. TAMPPON.
- Diane Papan
Legislator
This Bill will require the immediate removal of intentionally added PFAs from menstrual products and set a threshold of 10 parts per million for unintentionally added PFAs starting in 2027. So we've got a phase-in for the unintentional.
- Diane Papan
Legislator
We've seen multiple bills come through the Legislature recently, and I know today as well, that address PFAs in various products and for good reason. These forever chemicals are ubiquitous and cause severe health problems, including hormone and immune system disruption, kidney and liver damage, and, of course, cancer.
- Diane Papan
Legislator
However, I'm here to make the case that menstrual products are different. These products are used in the most intimate way possible in an area of the body that is delicate and highly vascular.
- Diane Papan
Legislator
Because of the nature of these products, any human that has a uterus, and I recognize that's not the two Committee Members present, but any human that has a uterus must use these products for three to seven days out of every month for roughly 40 years of their life.
- Diane Papan
Legislator
Imagine the damage that can be done from such intimate and repeated exposure. AB 2515 is a reintroduction of a similar bill I carried last year, AB 246, which made it to the Governor's desk but was vetoed.
- Diane Papan
Legislator
And in the Governor's message, he asked that we work with the Department of Toxic Substance Control, DTSC, so that the bill had a defined regulatory agency, and we're doing just that. I've also been working with the opposition to address their concerns, and we've been having good conversations, and I remain hopeful there's a path forward.
- Diane Papan
Legislator
Finally, my office has been working closely with Committee staff on all possible amendments, and we will continue to do so as this Bill moves forward. With me today in support of the Bill are first we have Nancy Buermeyer, and she is Director of Program and Policy with Breast Cancer Prevention Partners.
- Diane Papan
Legislator
And then after that, we'll have Melissa Romero with California Environmental Voters.
- Nancy Buermeyer
Person
Great. Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity to testify, and thank you, Assemblymember Papan, for your leadership on 2515 which would eliminate toxic forever chemicals in the most intimate of products. Breast Cancer Prevention Partners is a science-based organization working to prevent breast cancer by eliminating exposure to chemicals linked to the disease.
- Nancy Buermeyer
Person
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAs, are a large class of highly persistent chemicals that build up in our bodies. They are associated with cancers, including breast cancer, reproductive harm, interference with vaccines, childhood obesity, and other harms to human health.
- Nancy Buermeyer
Person
According to the CDC, 97% of us have PFAs in our blood, and these chemicals are also found in Placenta, maternal cord blood, and breast milk. There is no safe level of exposure to PFAs.
- Nancy Buermeyer
Person
Industry has raised concerns about the 10 parts per million threshold in the Bill, citing the ubiquitous nature of PFAs in our products and the environment. Today, however, industry has known since the 1970s how highly toxic these chemicals are. It, despite that knowledge, has proliferated the use of PFAs to literally thousands upon thousands of products.
- Nancy Buermeyer
Person
So, yes, now, contamination is a huge problem, but it's one that industry has the responsibility to address throughout their supply chain. The most important point is our bodies don't know the difference between intentionally added PFAs and PFAs contamination.
- Nancy Buermeyer
Person
Any detectable level of PFAs are of concern because PFAs is easily absorbed through the mucous membranes that these menstrual products are exposed to. You have heard over and over how extremely toxic these chemicals are at extraordinarily low levels, levels below parts per trillion orders of magnitude lower than the 10 parts per million threshold in the Bill.
- Nancy Buermeyer
Person
California is falling behind on this issue. Other states have already acted to ban PFAs from menstrual products. For the health of us all,1 uteruses or not, it is critical that we finish the job this year by passing AB 2515. I ask your aye vote.
- Melissa Romero
Person
Good afternoon. Melissa Romero with California Environmental Voters here in support of AB 2515. I want to speak to some of the environmental reasons as to why this is a really important issue.
- Melissa Romero
Person
So, the presence of PFAs and menstrual products is particularly concerning due to their direct pathway to the human body, but also subsequent disposal into our waste management systems. So when menstrual products containing PFAs are discarded, they eventually make their way into landfills, into wastewater treatment plants. And this is where the problem gets worse.
- Melissa Romero
Person
PFAs leach into soil, into groundwater, from landfills, contaminating drinking water. Given the stability of these chemicals, the PFAs can persist in the environment for many years and poses a long-term health risk for communities, and particularly in disadvantaged communities.
- Melissa Romero
Person
Additionally, conventional wastewater treatment processes are actually not designed to remove PFAs, and as a result, these chemicals are passing through these treatment plants and are discharged into rivers, lakes, oceans.
- Melissa Romero
Person
So this not only affects aquatic wildlife, but it also reenters the human body through contaminated water and fish, causing the chemicals to further build up in our bodies. Delicious. The removal of PFAs is a huge challenge. So the current technologies available for PFAs remediation are really costly, very energy intensive and not always effective.
- Melissa Romero
Person
So given those challenges, it is super important that we prevent PFAs from entering the environment in the first place as a far more practical and cost-effective way then, rather than cleaning them up afterwards. So by passing this Bill, AB 20515 we can significantly reduce the introduction of PFAs into the environment.
- Melissa Romero
Person
And this Bill will ensure that all menstrual products which are used by millions of individuals monthly, do not contribute to the PFAs pollution problem. So with that, we respectfully urge, and aye vote.
- Pilar Onate-Quintana
Person
Good afternoon, Pilar Onate-Quintana here for the Irvine Ranch Water District in support.
- Sarah Boudreau
Person
Good afternoon. Sarah Boudreau with the City of Roseville in support.
- Erin Taylor
Person
Good afternoon. Erin Taylor with political solutions on behalf of the California Commission on the Status of Women and Girls, as well as the California Water Association in strong support.
- Ethan Nagler
Person
Ethan Nagler, on behalf of the City of Santa Rosa, in support.
- Kayla Robinson
Person
Kayla Robinson registering support for Women's Voices for the Earth, Clean Water Action, and the California Association of Sanitation Agencies. Thank you.
- Jakob Evans
Person
Hello. Jacob Evans of Sierra Club California in support. Thank you.
- Ariana Creed
Person
Ariana Creed with cleanearth4kids.org in support. Also those in support are North County Equity and Justice, NCCCA, Ecosustainability Peeps, Activist,San Diego, Facts, California Nurses for Environmental Health and Justice, Sonoma SASS, Beyond Pesticides, Yard Smart, Marin Moms Advocating for Sustainability, Center for Environmental Health, and Grandparents acting together. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
It was Eco Sustainability Peeps? Oh, cool. All right. Awesome. Okay, let's call up the opposition.
- Diane Papan
Legislator
Come on, Don.
- Dawn Sanders-Koepke
Person
All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members, Dawn Koepke, on behalf of the California Manufacturers and Technology Association, CMTA finds itself in regrettable opposition to AB 2515. To be very clear right out of the gate, our manufacturers do not intentionally add PFAs chemicals to these products for any purpose whatsoever.
- Dawn Sanders-Koepke
Person
If there are any PFAs elements within these products, it's a result of trace contamination that manufacturers may not not be able to control for, and that in and of itself is the basis for our opposition today. It should be noted we have continued, as the author has suggested, to try to work through the concerns.
- Dawn Sanders-Koepke
Person
We certainly acknowledge that the 10 parts per million threshold within the Bill for unintentionally added is very important to the author and for that reason, although it certainly gives our members a significant heartburn, we have not continued to advocate for changing that.
- Dawn Sanders-Koepke
Person
Rather really just focusing on trying to right size the enforcement, penalties, and liability associated with the Bill, particularly given that any elements of PFAs within these products is trace contamination that in virtually all cases is unavoidable. That said, we've continued to try to work together.
- Dawn Sanders-Koepke
Person
We've provided over 20 different sets of amendments and concepts to try to mitigate those concerns in good faith. It is not taken lightly by CMTA or its members to be in this regrettable position of opposition. But nevertheless, we do find ourselves struggling to find common ground on some of these enforcement liability provisions.
- Dawn Sanders-Koepke
Person
Now, certainly we recognize that those particular concerns are not necessarily within, you know, the jurisdiction of this Committee. We do feel it really imperative just to highlight that we do not agree or do not disagree with the intent of the Bill. We do not have manufacturers adding these chemicals.
- Dawn Sanders-Koepke
Person
This is really about right sizing the enforcement liability penalties when it comes to potentially unavoidable trace contaminants. So I am happy to answer any questions that you may have, and we are continuing to look forward to working and trying to get there with this author.
- Dawn Sanders-Koepke
Person
It is our preference to do so, and we will continue those discussions and certainly appreciate her willingness to do so as well. So with that regrettable opposition on behalf of CMTA, but again, happy to answer any questions.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
That enforcement conversation is happening with Judiciary?
- Dawn Sanders-Koepke
Person
Yes, we are indeed in conversation with Judiciary. Yes. Thank you.
- Lauren Aguilar
Person
Thank you, Chair and Members, my name is Lauren Aguilar. I'm here on behalf of BAHP, which is the Center for Baby and Adult Hygiene Products. It's exactly what it sounds like. We are a trade association that represents all absorbent hygiene products, baby diapers, adult incontinent products, as well as menstrual products.
- Lauren Aguilar
Person
Our members represent about 85% of the market for personal absorbent hygiene products in North America and provide about 10,000 direct jobs in the United States. Unfortunately, today we're also testifying in opposition to AB 2515. We fully agree with and support the intent of the Bill as our members do not intentionally add PFAs to their menstrual products.
- Lauren Aguilar
Person
Our concerns were, with the language, recovered really well by Dawn, and most will fall under the jurisdiction of the Judiciary Committee, where this Bill is headed to next.
- Lauren Aguilar
Person
But in terms of EQ issues, there was one more issue that I just wanted to address quickly and be on the record for, was the relationship between this Bill and AB 347 by Assemblymember Ting, which was obviously heard earlier today, and AB 1817, within AB 347 covers textile and apparel, and reusable menstrual undergarments are technically under 1817, as well as 2515.
- Lauren Aguilar
Person
So just something that we're hoping to get clarified as the Bill moves forward. And like Dawn said, we really do want to thank the author for continued dialogue. Lots and lots of conversations on this Bill and more and more to. To come. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. All right. Yeah. Randy.
- Randy Pollack
Person
Randy Pollack, on behalf of the American Chemistry Council, in opposition for the reasons stated. Thank you. Okay.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Great. Discussion. I know, yeah, Senator Dahle.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Well, I'll just say I want to vote for this so bad. I laid off of it, I laid off the Bill last year, and again, this is like the right thing to do, but at the same time, how close are you I mean, there's got to be some common ground here.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
I know that private right of action is in this Bill. It wasn't in the last Bill. So I don't know where you're at in those negotiations, but I really want to vote for this Bill.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
But I also don't want to put, as I stated under the Ting Bill earlier, I don't want somebody who's trying to do the right thing, who's not adding the PFAs to their products get stuck for something they didn't intentionally do. They're just using the water or whatever to manufacture and it gets in the product.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
So that's where I'm at. There's got to be some way we can figure this out, that we get to a happy place for everybody. So that's where I just want to say that it's frustrating. We know that this should be done, and I think both sides see that.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
But there is also liability, and liability is a huge problem in California for manufacturing and for business. So where are we headed?
- Diane Papan
Legislator
So I think on the enforcement part, we have some very good discussions going to work out whether there should be a private right of action or not and how do we replace it and how do we work with the DTSC so that they as an administrative agency can enforce.
- Diane Papan
Legislator
And one of the good things about this Bill that wasn't in the last Bill deals with the scope of the enforcement. And we've left it at DTSC to do a, you know, a sufficient amount of sampling so that they can determine if we have over 10 parts per million, how extensive is it?
- Diane Papan
Legislator
And then from there they have an enforcement procedure that they can enforce. So that answers the first question and we will continue those discussions after today. Things go well. As it relates to the intentional and the unintentional, totally hear you.
- Diane Papan
Legislator
Which is why we did a two-year phase in on the unintentional so that there is some ability to kind of get into it. And let's figure out is there some place where things might be coming that we might actually have control over.
- Diane Papan
Legislator
So that's why I thought it was only reasonable to give some runway into when the unintentional will be enforced. So that's where we are.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Back to that. Let me just. Unintentional is unintentional. The water agencies are here supporting because they have a problem. They have PFAs in their water and we're all consuming it. Okay, so that's unintentional. They're not trying to harm us, but it's happening.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
And we have, this is a huge subject and I, you know, in a couple months I won't be here anymore. And I asked for a hearing to talk about PFAs because it is so started out with the firefighters and I've supported all those bills. And here we are now talking about PFAs is in a lot of things.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
It's in popcorn bag, microwave popcorn. I'm not eating it anymore. I used to eat it, now I don't eat it because it's in that bag and it's everywhere and it's in our water system. And so to hold somebody accountable, that's the part here, to hold somebody accountable.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
I don't care if you give them a runway, there's a cliff at the end of it. We're not talking about.
- Diane Papan
Legislator
But it won't change the intimacy of this use and that half the population has to use it for 40 years, 7 days a week. So at some point you may not be happy with the unintentional, but in this use you got to be liable at some point.
- Diane Papan
Legislator
And so that's why I say you got to look at this Bill much differently than any other PFAs Bill.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
That's why I said in the beginning, I want to vote for this Bill.
- Diane Papan
Legislator
And I welcome your vote.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Maybe they just won't make the products anymore because there's so much liability. That's the point.
- Dawn Sanders-Koepke
Person
May I, thank you, through the Chair. So in response to the question, so we have been going back and forth, certainly on amendments, a variety of them over 20, to try and get there on this.
- Dawn Sanders-Koepke
Person
I think again, it comes down to what is avoidable and not even in the analysis, based on some testing done, I think it was by Momovation and reported in environmental health news, they found concentrations that are above 10 parts per million for these products.
- Dawn Sanders-Koepke
Person
Now perhaps there are companies that are not CMTA members that are adding that, but I can tell you for CMTA members they do not add these chemicals. And so even in this particular analysis that cites to their testing data, it is above 10 parts per million.
- Dawn Sanders-Koepke
Person
So even though, you know our manufacturers will commit to doing everything they can to wipe down their lines, to do better sourcing of the raw materials, what have you, there may be a scenario where we can't avoid 11 ppm, and yet that puts us in a position of liabilities subject to enforcement, even though it's unavoidable.
- Dawn Sanders-Koepke
Person
We've done everything in due diligence. So I think that's really what the issue comes down to, if it was our preference, I mean, this wouldn't be an issue. Right. But there are serious challenges to that.
- Dawn Sanders-Koepke
Person
And so even as part of some of the amendments that we've gone back and forth on, certainly we're open to enforcement review by DTSC, sampling of the products across the market. Certainly we've been working very productively on that.
- Dawn Sanders-Koepke
Person
I think the issue does come down to, though, if it is unavoidable to hold us liable and potentially require that these products can't be put into the market and sold in California if they're in violation, even if it's unavoidable at 11 ppm, it will inevitably affect the availability of these products, much less just the liability that the manufacturers will incur.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
So was the testing that was done, was it on different brands? And was one brand higher than the other?
- Dawn Sanders-Koepke
Person
My apologies, Senator, Vice Chair. I do not have the data. I'm just referring to what was cited within the analysis from a nonprofit organization that provided some testing data that was reported in the media. I don't have that. We can certainly look into it and follow up, but these numbers certainly are above the threshold within this Bill.
- Dawn Sanders-Koepke
Person
And for CMTA members whose products may have been included as part of this, not intentionally added.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay. Some additional work to be done on negotiation. I know some of it's already very much underway, but any other questions or thoughts from the Members? Motion from Senator Menjivar. Okay, we'll call the roll. We'll give you the opportunity to close. I'm sorry.
- Diane Papan
Legislator
Thank you for the opportunity, and I appreciate the discourse. And I will represent to you that we are talking about means of enforcement that does make it such that it is commensurate with the scope of a violation.
- Diane Papan
Legislator
So we're working very hard to make sure that we have some simpatico between what might be unintentional and how does it get enforced by the DTSC. So with that, I respect the request and aye vote. And I thank you for the lively exchange.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, secretary, please call the roll.
- Committee Secretary
Person
AB 2515. The motion is do pass to Judiciary Committee. [Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, so we'll leave the roll open for folks. Thank you. I see Juan Carrillo here. He's been very patient, learning about menstrual products. Come on up.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Very different subject, this one. AB 3179. You may proceed when ready.
- Juan Carrillo
Legislator
Thank you. Mister Chair and Committee Members, I have to say that this is the first time I'm in this committee room, and it's a beautiful room behind you. It's beautiful.
- Juan Carrillo
Legislator
Anyway, thank you for allowing me to present Assembly Bill 3179, but before I begin, I would like to say that I am committed to taking the amendments describing the committee analysis.
- Juan Carrillo
Legislator
I know we're still working out a specific wording with staff to make sure we accomplish that outcome, and I understand these amendments will be adopted in the next committee, should it pass today. So I'm committed to do that.
- Juan Carrillo
Legislator
Again, thank you, Mister Chair and your Committee consultant for working closely with my staff on this very important issue. AB 3179 is a necessary measure that would allow for a narrow exemption, specifically for budget, bucket trucks. Excuse me, bucket trucks and cell on wheels to the CARB Advanced Clean Fleet Regulations.
- Juan Carrillo
Legislator
Bucket trucks play a vital role in performing aerial maintenance and repairs and telecommunication lines, ensuring connectivity for emergency services. Similarly, cell on wheels are deployed to restore cellular coverage swiftly in temporary locations during emergencies or outages, ensuring that essential communication channels remain operational for emergency calls and services.
- Juan Carrillo
Legislator
Without these specialized vehicles, telecommunications providers would face significant delays in restoring services during emergencies, potentially endangering lives and compromising public safety. There are no manufacturers that provide reliable bucket trucks or cell on wheels vehicles that meet the current ACF regulation.
- Juan Carrillo
Legislator
These vehicles face challenges in adopting zero emission electric vehicles due to their heavy duty nature requiring high power and long range capabilities. Additionally, rapid deployment needs during emergencies, often areas with limited or commercial power, further complicates the feasibility of electric options.
- Juan Carrillo
Legislator
The California Resources Board has recognized the important role emergency vehicles play in times of crisis and exempting them from their advanced clean fleet regulation. Unfortunately, existing exemptions and off ramps are not viable options for privately owned telecommunication providers as they only apply to publicly owned vehicles.
- Juan Carrillo
Legislator
With the unpredictability of natural disasters, we must remain prepared and ready to ensure that our communities are provided with reliable connections to ensure services in cases of severe weather, wildfires, or floods. Joining me today to testify in support and answer technical questions is Amanda Gualderama with Karl Brandt and Terry Mahal with California Association of Highway Patrolmen.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Proceed.
- Amanda Gualderama
Person
Thank you, Mister Chair and Members, Amanda Gualderama with CalBroadband proud sponsors of AB 3179. I first want to thank the author, his staff, and the committee staff for their careful consideration of this bill and continuing conversations to ensure the language reflects the intent.
- Amanda Gualderama
Person
As the Assemblymember stated, this bill will allow for very narrow exemption to the advanced clean fleet regulations for bucket trucks and cell on wheels. Telecommunication providers are entrusted with maintaining the network infrastructure crucial for facilitating 911 and emergency alert communications.
- Amanda Gualderama
Person
This includes physical infrastructure as well as the necessary software and protocols to direct emergency calls to the appropriate public safety answering point or emergency dispatch center. They must also comply with the California Public Utilities Commission and Federal Communication Commission requirements related to 911 services.
- Amanda Gualderama
Person
This includes ensuring the ability for users to reach emergency services by dialing 911, ensuring that emergency dispatchers automatically receive the caller's location information, notifying 911 call centers of outages, and certifying the reliability, that reliability measures are taken.
- Amanda Gualderama
Person
As stated, bucket trucks and cell on wheels are specialized vehicles that telecommunication providers utilize when performing maintenance and repairs to the telecommunications line lines or utilize to temporarily restore cell service swiftly during emergencies or outages.
- Amanda Gualderama
Person
The transition to fully electric solutions remains impractical for these two types of vehicles, making these exemptions critical for maintaining the reliability and availability of emergency communication infrastructure. Therefore, it is imperative to pass this bill to ensure that telecommunication providers can effectively respond to emergencies and restore critical services promptly.
- Amanda Gualderama
Person
I'm happy to respond to any questions you may have and respectfully request an aye vote. Thank you.
- Terence McHale
Person
Chairman, Terry McHale with Aaron Read & Associates. Thank you for the hospitality, and it's not my first time in this room. I feel like I'm getting old enough. I remember when that was painted almost. We're very proud. California Highway Patrol is very proud to be a co sponsor of this bill. We're talking about very specific, specific vehicles.
- Terence McHale
Person
We've all seen trucks, but I'll bet nobody in this room has been in a bucket truck. We've all seen cows, but I don't think any of us have seen cells on wheels. These are very specific vehicles used for very specific concerns.
- Terence McHale
Person
The California Highway Patrol is very proud of the fact that it takes a whole crew of people, not just public safety, to respond during times of emergencies. Yesterday, three strike crews were sent out to fight fires in the State of California.
- Terence McHale
Person
The earliest that three strike crews have been sent out in recent memory, and that includes the nightmarish years of 6 and 7 years ago. When they go out, they make sure that the communication part of that equation is taken care of.
- Terence McHale
Person
And it takes the brave men and women, you know, who work in broadband who are there to make sure that that communication is taken care of. I'll close by just reading what one of the firefighters wrote.
- Terence McHale
Person
He said, "Not only do firefighters rely on electric power, Internet and cellular connectivity to respond and to safely mitigate wildfires, but the public also suffers profoundly when these systems fail." This is a good bill. We also agree that the sunset gives time to deal with the fact that there are issues that need to be resolved.
- Terence McHale
Person
Technology will catch up with it. And so we ask for an aye vote. Thank you very much.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Other folks want to voice support for the Bill.
- Yolanda Benson
Person
Good afternoon. Yolanda Benson with US Telecom, the Broadband Association also co sponsors of this bill and obviously very supportive.
- Pam Loomis
Person
Pam Loomis, on behalf of the small rural telephone companies that comprise the California Communications Association, in support.
- John Moffatt
Person
John Moffett, on behalf of Comcast, NBC Universal. In support.
- Stephen Carlson
Person
Steve Carlson from CTIA, we're the trade Association for the Wireless Telecommunications Industry, in support.
- Damon Conklin
Person
Damon Conklin, on behalf of CalCities as well as CSAC, the California State Association of Counties, in support. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Thank you. All right, any opposition? Folks want to raise concerns about the bill? Okay, Mister Vice Chair.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
Thank you for the bill. Common sense bill. I'd move it.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, bill's been moved. Any questions, comments? We'll let you close.
- Brian Dahle
Legislator
The bucket truck, too.
- Juan Carrillo
Legislator
I just respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, secretary, please call the roll.
- Committee Secretary
Person
All AB 3179. The motion is do pass to transportation. [Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, I will hold the roll up, and I will get my glasses cloth back. Thank you. Thank you so much. You're looking good. All right, let's. Now, Senator Dahle would like to move item 20. That's Assemblymember Wood's, AB 2902, we heard that at the very beginning of the day.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
No, it wasn't a quorum at the time, so he's moving that. Let's call a roll. This is item 20. AB 2902 Wood.
- Committee Secretary
Person
AB 2902. The motion is to pass as amended to appropriations.[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, so that's four to zero. We'll leave the roll open. So let's lift calls for folks. We have some of our. Bryan's on his way. Okay, great. Sorry. Four, 5 and 6. Okay, 5 and 6. Okay, so six was pulled. So item six, AB 2514 was pulled by the author, just for folks to know.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
That's Aguiar-Curry. But let's lift the call. Number five. Item five. This is AB 863.
- Committee Secretary
Person
The motion is do pass as amended to Judiciary Committee. [Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, let's see if there's other votes that folks need to cast. Number 13. That's Grayson, AB 2091. Item 13, Grayson 2091.
- Committee Secretary
Person
The motion is do pass to natural resources and water. The current vote is two to zero. [Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, we'll hold the roll open for that. Any others that we're waiting for, folks on? All right, let's take a brief recess while we wait for Assemblymember Bryan.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
are reconvening the Senate Environmental Quality Committee to hear our very last item. This is item 22 in your packet. That's AB 3265. So let's proceed.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
Thank you, Mister Chair and Senators. I'm here to present, as the chair mentioned, AB 3265, a Bill that will be a catalyst for sustained job growth by streamlining the process for renovating sound stages and updating production facilities to incorporate the latest graphics and audio technology. I want to thank the Committee staff for working with my team.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
And I'd like to accept the Committee amendments. California has a rich, rich history as the entertainment capital of the world. In recent years, the Legislator has tried to reaffirm California status as the preferred choice for film and TV production with legislation and various tax credits.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
Unfortunately, the construction of sound stages in California has not kept pace with the recent growth in the production of film, scripted television and streaming content, which in turn forces more production outside of the state. AB 3265 will help keep productions in state while maintaining environmental protections.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
This Bill will meet the highest environmental standards set by other streamlining bills and also includes language that will assure the creation of high roads, good paying jobs throughout the construction of the project through labor peace agreements.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
These projects will generate thousands of full time jobs during construction and thousands of additional permanent jobs once they are constructed and operating. Today with me to testify is Cathleen Galgiani, representing Fox Studios. This Bill has also moved through two committees and the Assembly, four with bipartisan support and even on consent and at the appropriate time.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
I respectfully ask for your aye vote
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Proving that there is life after the Senate.
- Cathleen Galgiani
Person
Yes, Cathleen Galgiani. Thank you Mister Chair and members. Thank you also to the Committee consultants for working with us on the amendments here. While California economy languishes, there is a growing need for economic activity and investment. And the Bill before you will expedite the investment of nearly $2 billion with the expansion of the historic Fox lot in Century City.
- Cathleen Galgiani
Person
This Bill incorporates the best and most advanced environmental practices from prior successful bills to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to reduce traffic as much as possible. In addition, Fox is proud to partner with the local and state building trades through the signing of a project labor agreement.
- Cathleen Galgiani
Person
In 2021 the Legislature acknowledged the need for infrastructure improvements and new soundstages with passing the Soundstage Filming Tax Credit Program, which allocated $150 million to incentivize construction and renovation of California sound stages, as well as the repurposing of space into sound stages.
- Cathleen Galgiani
Person
AB 3265 will complement the Legislature's efforts to promote continued investments by streamlining the CEQA process for environmental leadership media campus projects which advance California's environmental goals and generate new living wage and prevailing wage jobs. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, let's hear from anyone else who wants to win in support of the Bill? Opposition, witnesses or folks who want to raise concerns? Okay, we'll bring that back to the Committee for questions. Comments? Thoughts? Senator Menjivar.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
Assemblymember, just want to clarify. Is this only for Fox Studios or for all studios?
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
All studios in LA County. Fox Studios is currently undergoing this project in Century City. I also personally represent Sony Studios in Culver City, Amazon and MGM Studios in Culver City.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
But I know that this entire industry is based in our home region, and so we wanted to make sure everybody could benefit from this work.
- Caroline Menjivar
Legislator
Perfect. Thank you so much. Just clarifying because I also have studios in my district. Thank you so much.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, any additional questions or thoughts? Motion from Senator Menjivar. We'll give you the opportunity to close.
- Isaac Bryan
Legislator
Film and television screening industry is one of the things that makes California and Los Angeles great. Very proud to bring this measure forward so that we can continue to do the work that we need to ensure that the industry is thriving and here, respectively, after aye vote.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, great. Let's call the roll. Sorry, Senator.
- Nancy Skinner
Legislator
Apologies, we didn't have witnesses either in support or opposition to it?
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
We didn't. Well, I mean, we had Senator Galjani here in support from Fox. I know there's some.
- Nancy Skinner
Legislator
In the primary. That's all I meant.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
I mean, there's listed, you know, Judicial Council raise concerns.
- Nancy Skinner
Legislator
Right, But they're not here? Right?
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Right. Right.
- Nancy Skinner
Legislator
Okay. Okay. That's what I just want. Yeah. Okay.
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay. Let's call the roll.
- Committee Secretary
Person
AB 3265. The motion is do pass as amended to Judiciary Committee. [Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Great. That's four to zero. We'll leave the roll open. Okay, so where. Thank you. Thank you. Guys, we need Lena to come on down. Okay. All right, let's lift some calls. Let's lift some calls. So let's start right at the top with Assemblymember Garcia's AB 2113. This is the mill. The mill Bill that's being negotiated.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, item two. Yes. So that's three to two. We'll hold that open for Senator Gonzalez. AB 347 by Ting.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, let's now go to item three. AB 2244.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, that is five votes four. We'll leave it open for Lena. AB 2401.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, that's 6-0. Now we'll leave it up for Gonzalez. AB 863 Aguiar Curry.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, consent calendar. We need Senator Skinner to add on.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, item 10, 1864. Connolly.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, that's three to two. We'll leave that open. Friedman's AB 1963. Item 11.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, three to two. We'll leave that open. AB 2552. Friedman. Item 12.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, three to three. We'll leave that open. Item 13. AB 2091. Grayson.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, let's go to Senator. Assemblymember Papan's. AB 2515. Item 18.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Four to zero. We'll go do. We'll leave that open for Lena and then Assembly Member Woods, AB 2902.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, now we go to Juan Carrillo's. AB 3179. Item 21.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
And then AB 3265. By Bryan. Item 22.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Leave that open. I think dolly's gonna is a no vote on that one. Okay, so let's go through the list. I think Senator Skinner's all set. But for Senator Hurtado's edification, let's do item five. This is AB 863. Aguiar Curry. This is the carpeting EPR Bill.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
That's forwarded to. We'll leave that open for Senator Gonzalez. I think we've got. Let's see. Of course. Yeah. Final item 10. That's Connolly. AB 1864.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
We have you at no voting. I had you at not voting. Do you want to keep that? Okay. Yeah, we'll keep that. All right. Let's go to item 11. Assemblymember Friedman's. AB 1963. This was the ... prohibition.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, that's three to three. We'll leave that open. Okay. Assembly Member Grayson's. AB 2091. This is the ...
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, I think that's got you covered, Senator, so thank you. Yeah. What's Senator Gonzalez status? oh, great. Okay, great. We are pleased to have Senator Gonzalez here. So let's go through the roll, if that's okay. We will start with AB 2113. This is the mill fee Bill that is worked on. Being worked on right now as we speak. Senator Garcia. Secretary, please call the roll.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, that's four to two. We are going to close the roll. Let's go to item two. AB 347 by Ting.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
I will close the roll. Five to two. Senator Tings AB 2244 Bisphenol Bill.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
That is 620. We're gonna close the roll. Item four. Ting's AB 2401. Clean cars for all.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
That's out. Unanimous. Okay, we will close the roll on that. AB 863 Aguiar Curry carpet EPR.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Five to two. We'll close the roll. That is out. Next we have the consent calendar.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, we'll close the roll. That's unanimous. We'll close the roll on the consent calendar. Okay. Connally's AB 1864. Item 10.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, that is four to two. We'll close the roll. Next we have AB 1963. Friedman?
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, so that is four to three, closest vote of the day. We'll close the roll on that. Item 12, AB 2552. Friedman
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, four to three. We'll close that. Item 13. Grayson AB 2091.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
All right, seven to zero. That is out. We'll close the roll. Now we have Papan's AB 2515.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, that's out with a 5-0 vote now. Senator Woods 2902 that's item 20.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, 7-0. That is out. We'll close the roll. Juan Carrillo is AB 3179. Item 21.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay, not voting. So that was. We'll close the roll on that. That is 6-0. And then finally, Isaac Bryan's AB 3265 item 22.
- Committee Secretary
Person
[Roll Call]
- Benjamin Allen
Legislator
Okay. Six to zero. And that does it. Thank you. Yeah. Appreciate it. Okay, we will now adjourn the hearing. Thank you so much to our staff for all the hard work. Appreciate it. Thank you. You, back to education.
Committee Action:Passed
Next bill discussion:Â Â August 12, 2024
Previous bill discussion:Â Â May 21, 2024
Speakers
Legislator