Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee, Tuesday, March 24, 2026
No chapters available yet
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee California State Assembly
Follow its sittingsSpeaker 3
Connolly, here. Ellis? Ellis, here. Bauer Cahan? Here.
Bauer Cahan, here. Castillo, Lee, McKinnon? Here. McKinnon here. And Pappan?
Here. Pappan here.
Speaker 5
Thank you very much. My name is Dora Mendivil Angulo on behalf of La Cooperativa Campesina de California, proud sponsors of AB sixteen hundred. For over fifty years, we have worked alongside farm worker families throughout California, the very workers who sustained our state's over 100,000,000,000 agricultural economy. These communities are on the front lines of climate change facing extreme heat, wildfire smoke, pesticides exposures, and substandard housing. Yet despite these realities, many farm worker communities are inadvertently excluded from the state's climate investments.
We know these investments work because we have seen it firsthand through, like, through the low income weatherization program. La Coperativa has helped deliver energy efficiency upgrades and solar installations to farm worker households throughout the state. The program has weatherized more than 2,500 houses and installed nearly a thousand solar systems, reducing energy bills, improving home safety, and lowering emissions. For families, this means going from hundreds of dollars in monthly energy cost to a fraction of that while leaving in safer, more comfortable, energy efficient homes. But here's the problem.
Many farmworker communities do not have access to these benefits because California's definition of disadvantaged communities relies on tools designed for urban pollution, rural farmworker communities are often left out entirely. AB 1,600 provides a targeted solution. It does not dismantle existing tools. It simply clarifies in statute that farmworker communities must be included in the definition of disadvantaged communities. By doing so, this bill
Speaker 6
will expand access to energy efficient program, climate resilience investments, clean transportation,
Speaker 5
and safe water infrastructure, resources that directly improve health, reduce costs, and strengthen communities. At its core, a b 1,600 is about aligning California's climate investments with the people that need the most, Farm workers feed California. They should not be left behind in California's climate future. We respectfully ask for your I vote on a b 1,600, and thank you very much.
Speaker 7
Alejandro Solis on behalf of Los Amigos de la Comidad, Center for Employment Training, Central Valley Opportunity Center, California Human Development, and Proteus Incorporated, all in support. Thank you.
Speaker 1
Thank you. Any other witnesses? Okay. Why don't we move to, is there any opposition to AB 1,600? Seeing none, including any members of the public.
Back to the dais, Questions from committee members. So we have motion, Bauer Cahan. Second, Pappen. Questions, comments? Not seeing any.
Alright. Well, thank you so much and for your steadfast work on behalf of, farm workers. This does have an eye, Racko. Would you like to close?
Speaker 3
file item number one, a b 1,600, authored by assembly member Ambula. The motion is due passed to the committee on appropriations. Connolly? Aye. Connolly, aye.
Ellis? No. Ellis, no. Bauer Cahan?
Speaker 3
Bauer Cahan, aye. Castillo, Lee, McKinnar? Aye. McKinnar, aye, and Pappan? Pappan,
Speaker 1
to one. And we'll that passes. We'll hold it open for absent members. And we will I see Assembly Member Pellerin in the audience. Why don't you come on up?
This will be file item four, AB twenty four sixty two. And this deals with recalled products. Welcome.
Speaker 4
Thank you. Thank you, chair members. In 2008, California passed eighteen sixty to make sure unsafe or recalled products are taken off the market and that consumers are notified. The intent was simple, protect public health and keep dangerous products out of circulation. But in practice, that system is not working the way it was intended.
Instead of taking products back, manufacturers are often directing consumers to dispose of recalled items at local waste facilities or recycling centers. That means the costs and responsibility are being shifted away from manufacturers and onto local governments, taxpayers, and even nonprofit thrift stores who can't resell these items and are stuck trying to are stuck paying to dispose of them. As a result, recalled products are still showing up in recycling streams, landfills, and secondhand markets, creating public health risks, environmental concerns, and unnecessary costs for local agencies. At the same time, product recalls are increasing significantly. Millions of unsafe items are being recalled each year, and many are never returned to the manufacturers.
When products are recalled, the responsibility should remain with the companies that made and sold them, not with taxpayers or local agencies. AB twenty four sixty two clarifies that manufacturers must take back recalled products at no cost, not just to consumers or retailers, but also to recycling centers, waste facilities, and thrift stores. This bill also strengthens enforcement by giving CalRecycle authority to issue administrative penalties when companies fail to comply. And with me to testify in support are Joanne Brash, director of advocacy at the California Product Stewardship Council, and Jordan Wells, legislative advocate for CSAC.
Speaker 11
Good afternoon, chair Connolly and members of the committee. My name is Jordan Wells, and I'm here on behalf of the California State Association of Counties, which represents all of California's 58 counties and proud cosponsor of a b twenty four sixty two. I'd like to thank assembly member Pelerin for authoring this important measure and to the committee staff for their thoughtful analysis. A b twenty four sixty two would meaningfully improve an existing law designed to protect consumers and hold manufacturers accountable for dangerous product recalls. In 2008, the legislature passed a b eighteen sixty, California's Product Recall Safety and Protection Act.
While a b eighteen sixty requires recalled products to be returned and disposed to at no cost, at to consumers or retailers, manufacturers are often unresponsive and fail to facilitate their safe return, shifting the burden to local waste facilities. Unfortunately, the 02/2008 law did not anticipate this failure to fulfill manufacturers' responsibilities, and recycling and waste facilities were not included in the entities eligible to use this process. As a result, local jurisdictions, which are already under operating under significant financial and operational strain, ultimately bear the end of life management costs, not the manufacturers. AB twenty four sixty two would remedy this issue by ensuring recycling and waste facilities as well as thrift stores are eligible entities under the state's product recall safety and protection act. The bill would also improve enforceability by updating the definition of manufacturer to reflect the tier definition that it has become standard in modern producer responsibility statutes and increases the fines for noncompliance to match current day penalties.
For nearly two decades, these critical gaps have undermined the law's effectiveness. And for these reasons, we respectfully urge your I vote on a b twenty four sixty two. Thank you.
Speaker 12
Thank you. Good afternoon, chair, committee. My name is Joanne Brash. I'm director of advocacy for the California Product Stewardship Council. We're a nonprofit that advocates for EPR, extended producer responsibility, and product stewardship laws.
And what we have found successful, as sponsoring bills on medicine, needles, and propane, and textiles that working with the regulated community is how these programs are are most successful. Federal recalls have been in place since the nineteen seventies. So this process of having your products recalled, how to retrieve them from the market, and the processes for communication have been in place for several decades. In 2008, statewide requirements by set by 1860, added some additional requirements for those products that have been sold in California. Those additional requirements were to reimbursement processes and communication requirements that are faster than the federal requirements.
Recalls have increased in frequency, volume, and toxicity. In 2025 alone, there were 422 federal recalls covering three 34,500,000 units, estimating about 5,000,000 of those units here in California. And these recall recalls happen because there are unsafe components, unsafe design features, and a lot of these products cover batteries, electronics, mattresses that are going into established programs. And these products have increased cost, increased administrative burdens, and increased risk because of these unsafe features of the product. So this practice effectively externalizes the private liability onto unfunded pub public mandates, forcing the program funders to basically absorb these costs.
AB two four six two updates that 2008 law by delegating oversight authority, expanding the list of collection sites eligible for reimbursement, and updating the penalties and enforcement to match some of the other programs that are oversought, seeding by CalRecycle that have passed since 2008. So just making sure there's cohesiveness in the CalRecycle enforcement procedures. So it really uses real world experiences to inform and update to an established program that's really important this works. Recalled Products is considered one of the original EPR programs. And in a time when we need EPR to really work, cleaning up this program is a really important step.
So with that, I respectfully ask for an I vote.
Speaker 13
Thank you. Melissa Sparks Kranz with the League of California Cities in support.
Speaker 15
John Kennedy, rural county representatives of California, and also Mewtwoing on behalf of the National Stewardship Action Council in support. Thank you.
Speaker 9
Good afternoon. Elizabeth Escobel with the California Manufacturers and Technology Association representing a diverse cross section of manufacturers across the state, respectfully in opposition to a b twenty four sixty two in its current form. We appreciate the author's intent to strengthen consumer safety and improve the effectiveness of product recalls, and we also want to acknowledge and thank the author's office and the sponsors for their engagement. While we support the goal of ensuring recalled products are safely removed from circulation, we have several concerns and are seeking clarification in the following areas, which are also noted in the committee analysis. First, it's the interaction with existing recall logistics systems.
Manufacturers currently utilize reverse logistics, reverse logistics centers and other third party systems to manage recall collection, segregation, and disposition. AB twenty four sixty two expands the authority return points to include several other entities noted in the bill. However, the bill does not specify how these newly authorized collection points are intended to integrate with existing recall logistics systems or whether they are expected to operate in parallel or in coordination with the manufacturer directed recall processes. Clarification may be warranted to avoid duplication or inconsistent hand handling pathways. Second is enforcement authority and regulatory coordination.
The analysis identifies the need to clarify and respect respective enforcement roles of CalRecycle and DTSC, particularly where recalled products may also be classified as hazardous waste under the hazardous waste control law. Given the overlapping jurisdictions, considerations, CMT believes additional specificity regarding agency coordination, enforcement sequencing, and applicable standards would improve implementation certainty. And third, secondary market and nontraditional collection points. While the bill extends obligation to thrift retail stores and other reuse entities, tracking recalled products within secondary markets present operational challenges due to distributed inventory flows and limited traceability mechanisms. Additionally, clarification may be helpful regarding expectations for identifications, segregation, and return processes in these settings, particularly where product origin or recall status may not be readily verifiable at point of receipt.
Lastly, penalty structure and compliance administration. As noted, Cal recite, the bill gives authority to Cal Recycle to impose administrative penalties. The committee analysis also notes concerns regarding the potential disproportionality where compliance issues arise from logistical or third party factors. Clarification regarding enforcement discretion, cure periods, or safe harbor provisions may assist in ensuring penalties are applied consistently in relation to feasible compliance pathways. CMTAs remains committed to continued engagement with the author on these technical and logistical issues with clarification in these areas, particularly regarding system integration, interagency coordination, secondary market implementation, and enforcement parameters, the bill may be better positioned to achieve its state stated objective objectives in a workable manner across the existing recall and waste management frameworks.
Thank you.
Speaker 16
Good afternoon. My name is Edwin Borbon on behalf of the Baby Safety Alliance, a trade association of juvenile product manufacturers. Respectfully opposed for the reasons outlined by CMTA. Also, it's unclear whether the legislation allows for refunds, repairs, or replacements as allowed by federal law. So another point of clarification.
Thank you.
Speaker 17
Yes. Good afternoon. I have a couple of questions about implementation and readiness. What's the realistic timeline for implement station, and what benchmarks should we expect in one year?
Speaker 12
I mean, implementation would take my a couple months maximum. I mean, these processes have been in place since the seventies, and, really, the California extra steps have been in place for almost twenty years. So we're really just adding more entities who can file into the process but not changing the process. So the file to request a reimbursement doesn't change, and the and the process for determining the how to reimburse doesn't change.
Speaker 17
Doesn't change. And how will you guys measure success? Reduced illegal disposal, cost savings, compliant rates? Like, you know, I'm gonna support you guys today, but as we're doing these bills, I always wanna see how are we measuring the success of it. Mhmm.
So how are you guys measuring success, and what's your benchmarks for that?
Speaker 12
I think the easiest benchmark for success would be the reduced cost and burden to these entities who are adding so secondhand thrifts and the recycling centers. So we're seeing in just this summer alone, the Anchor brand battery recalls. We're seeing them show up at every event, every location. So if we can reduce that cost burden, it would be a really clear success.
Speaker 17
Do you guys collect data? Like, are you guys collecting that data so that next year, this time, maybe we could come back and see see how it's working?
Speaker 12
Yeah. Because during the the reimbursement process and as it was mentioned, the the refund repair replacement that is decided at the federal level, sometimes these, they need receipts or evidence of the disposal. So as local government are being forced to change their processes, we're also getting better data from these new processes. Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 1
Thank you. I appreciate, the thoughtful bill. You know, I believe it's reasonable for manufacturers to be responsible for ensuring their recalled product is safely returned to them. I think this is a good step. Sounds like there'll be some additional
Speaker 1
Absolutely. And and it is enjoying a high recommendation from the chair today. Do I have a motion on this bill? Tappan, and second, Bauer Cahan. And this is due passed to the committee on appropriations.
Please call the roll.
Speaker 3
Alright. This is file item number four a b two four six two offered by assembly member Pelerin. The motion is due passed to the committee on appropriations. Connolly?
Speaker 3
Connolly, aye. Ellis? Not voting. Bauer Cahan? Bauer Cahan, aye.
Castillo, Lee, McKinnar? Aye. McKinnar, aye. And Pappan, aye.
Speaker 1
That passes, but we will hold it open for absentee members. Thanks again. All right. Looks like we have Assembly Member Berman joining us. Come on up.
Wow, you already got a motion.
Speaker 1
Is file item two, a b 19 o one on children's diapers ingredient disclosure.
Speaker 8
Now I'm relaxed. Good afternoon, Sharon colleagues. Word got out that I'm a new dad, and so here we are.
Speaker 8
Exactly right. Okay. Exactly right. AB 19 o one would require manufacturers of children's diapers to clearly label all ingredients on both the product's package and online. As a new dad, I have a greater appreciation for how important it is for parents to make informed decisions when it comes to the health and wellness health and wellness of their child.
Recent testing shows many diapers are made with ingredients linked to health and environmental concerns. Given this, the lack of an industry wide transparency around diaper ingredients prevents Californians from making the best decision for their families when buying the one thing that is touching their baby's skin every minute of their child's life for the first couple of years. Some manufacturers already voluntarily disclose their ingredients showing that this requirement is feasible for businesses to comply with. To ensure transparency across the board, AB 19 o one would require all children's diapers, all children's diaper manufacturers to disclose ingredients online by 01/01/2028 and on the outermost packaging by 01/01/2029. Showing parents the list of ingredients allows parents to make an informed decision that is right for their family.
Respectfully, ask for an I vote. And I'm joined today by Susan Little, California legislative director at Environmental Working Group, and Kelly Hardy, senior managing director of health and research at Children Now.
Speaker 18
Thank you very much. My name is Susan Little. I'm the California legislative director for the Environmental Working Group, an a b nineteen o one cosponsor. First, we'd like to thank assembly member Berman for authoring this bill, which, as he said, will provide California parents with the data they need to choose diapers for their children. Parents want this information because diapers can contain harmful substances.
Substances like hormone disrupting phthalates and volatile organic compounds or synthetic musks, which are linked to reproductive harm and cancer or halogenated organic compounds, are linked to reproductive, neurotoxic, immunotoxic, endocrine, behavioral, and carcinogenic effects, or many other chemicals associated with reproductive and developmental harm that ends or severe rashes and asthma. With these when these ingredients sit next to a baby's skin, the infant is especially vulnerable to the chemical's effects. The Centers for Disease Control says babies' thin skin more easily absorbs chemicals and causes babies to be more susceptible to chemical impacts. Despite these risks, the federal government does not require manufacturers to disclose diaper ingredients to anyone. New York, however, has required full disclosure.
As of December 2025, manufacturers selling diapers in the state must disclose all intentionally added ingredients on diaper packaging. And New York's law does not shield any intentionally added or confidential ingredients from public view. California's parents, caregivers, and children deserve the same. And with me today is Sydney Swanson, EWG's science analyst, who can also answer further questions during the discussion about diapers and their ingredients. Thank you very much.
Speaker 19
Good afternoon, Terran members. Kelly Hardy with Children Now. We're very pleased to cosponsor 19 o AB 19 o one in partnership with the other cosponsors and with assembly member Berman. AB 19 o one is a pro kid bill. It makes transparent information about diapers easily accessible so families can make informed choices.
The FDA doesn't regulate children's diapers as medical devices, which is how it regulates adult incontinence supplies. Instead, baby diapers fall under the purview of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which requires diapers to be tested for lead but doesn't require manufacturers to test for a variety of other harmful harmful chemicals or disclosed ingredients. Babies spend, as everyone has said, $24.07 in those diapers for depends. Right? We
Speaker 19
I many of us, yeah. Well, I have a different experience with my confidant. So and children and youth with special health care needs often need to use diapers longer, and those are children who may be more vulnerable to these impacts. When we hear about protecting families from unnecessary concerns, in quotes, it sounds paternalistic at best, in a bad way. The lack of reliable transparent information is what makes caregivers fear ful, not having the information.
Parents can be trusted to make informed decisions for their families. Please vote yes. Thank you.
Speaker 1
Thank you. Do we have additional speakers in support of the bill? Christopher Suncheon on behalf of the Consumer Federation of California in support. Good
Speaker 20
Voice for Choice advocacy. Also, behalf of Clean Earth for Kids, California Nurses for Environmental Health and Justice, Environmental Health Services, Positions for Social Responsibility San Francisco, and CalPurg, all in support
Speaker 10
afternoon, committee chair and members. Kai Klausen on behalf of Breast Cancer Prevention Partners in strong support, also as a parent. Thank you, author. Bye.
Speaker 16
Yes. Thank you, chair Connolly and members of the committee for the opportunity to provide testimony today. My name is Edwin Borbon. I'm here on behalf of the Center for Baby and Adult Hygiene Products with an oppose unless amended position on Assembly Bill 19 o one. BAHP represents manufacturers of absorbent hygiene products such as menstrual products, diapers, and incontinence garments and pads, and companies that supply materials for those products representing over 85% of the market for absorbent high personal hygiene products in North America.
We wanna be clear that BHP members do take the safety of consumers as our utmost priority, and this commitment to safety goes down to the level of ingredients that are present in our products. However, to ensure that manufacturers can comply with the letter of the law, we are requesting amendments to align a b 19 o one with California's menstrual product ingredient disclosure law. In 2020, the state enacted the menstrual products right to know act requiring manufacturers to list all intentionally added ingredients contained in menstrual products. The menstrual product right to know act contains provisions that allow sufficient lead time to change labels when there's an ingredient update, an ingredient hierarchy that lists ingredients using standard nomenclature that's broadly understood by consumers, administrative penalties for noncompliance, and protections for confidential business information. Many people are likely consumers of both menstrual products and children's diapers and often simultaneously.
Given that both our absorbent hygiene products comprise of similar materials, we recommend having similar compliance requirements for both products. We urge removing the provisions under 19 o one to disclose the chemical abstract service number, and instead use the hierarchy of ingredients outlined in the California menstrual product disclosure law, would assist the consumer by having a single regulatory structure in a format that's familiar to the consumer. BHP also requests the inclusion of an ongoing eighteen month window for label changes on the outermost package due to ingredient updates and a six month window to update the list of ingredients online, both provisions coming directly from that menstrual product ingredient disclosure law. Packaging changes generally require a time frame of eighteen months to be implemented. Packaging changes for The entire US market generally require a time frame of eighteen months to be implemented.
And as manufacturers continue to innovate and change the ingredients used in products, any labeling law should reflect that those packaging changes will require the same appropriate lead time to enable manufacturers sufficient time to comply and a path to continued compliance. BHP also requests removing language allowing the attorney general, district attorneys, and civil courts to pursue legal action on manufacturers for noncompliance and instead align aligning the enforcement provisions with similar ingredient disclosure laws in California by maintaining authority for administrative penalties by DTSC. And last, I would just highlight that AB 19 o one does not have protections for confidential business information known as CBI. Absent inclusion of protections, for CBI, companies may be required to publicly disclose legitimate CBI compromising proprietary information and that and negatively impacting the health of those businesses. Further, in some instances, product manufacturers are legally bound through nondisclosure agreements with their material suppliers creating tension between compliance with this law and existing contractual obligations.
Product safety is a top priority
Speaker 21
Thank you so much. Good afternoon, chair and members. Nicole Quinones on behalf of the Fragrance Creators Association. Our members include fragrance ingredient suppliers, fragrance formulators, and the consumer product manufacturers. We certainly share the author's goal.
Parents do deserve, to know what's in the products that they are using on their children. We are not opposed to transparency. We're just here to, in our view, we believe make it stronger by aligning the disclosure pieces in this bill with, the cleaning product right to know act of 2017 as well as the menstrual product right to know act of 2020 and the cosmetic fragrance and flavor ingredient right to know act of 2020. These laws were developed with input from consumer advocates, including the environmental working group and industry and a number of other stakeholders, and, you know, has been adopted three times as I mentioned. So we believe it would be a workable framework in this instance as well for a couple of reasons.
First, it ensures that any ingredient on any of the 22 designated hazard lists must be disclosed. Those any ingredient cannot be claimed as CBI if it is on one of those lists, and we believe this creates an enforceable clear floor that is used across all manufacturers. Second, it requires disclosure of all fragrance allergens at concentrations as low as 10 parts per million. That's a rigorous threshold, which we think is especially relevant for diapers, which, again, are in constant contact with sensitive skin. Again, it ensures that these ingredients cannot be claimed, confidential business information.
And thirdly, it creates consistency across manufacturers. So when you're comparing different diaper products in the store, you can be confident that they are both interpreting the law the same way due to that specificity. Additionally, manufacturers can, invest in one robust compliance system that works across all product categories. So to be clear, anything claimed as confidential business information under those bills must be disclosed by its common name. So it's not just hidden entirely.
It must be indicated on the label and on the website by its common name and is also subject to an audit by the attorney general. So and, again, I, you know, just wanna reiterate that it would require the disclosure of any hazard ingredient on those lists, are updated consistently and over time. And, also, there's a number of fragrance free diaper options out there. Thank you. So, with that, I would just say we are opposed unless amended, but look forward to working with the author and just would put a quick me too in for the California Chamber of Commerce who's also opposed unless amended.
Thank you.
Speaker 9
Elizabeth Escobel of the California Manufacturers and Technology Association, also an oppose unless submitted position. Thank you.
Speaker 1
Thanks. Seeing no other, we'll bring it back to committee. Questions? Yeah.
Speaker 17
I'm sorry. So many questions today. I I just I talked to the the author already. I appreciate this bill, and it's it's really cute. I really love it.
But we don't want to, I do agree with the manufacturers about the trade secrets. I know that other products, they list the very harmful products, and they don't list all the ingredients. I know that the author is thoughtful, and I'm gonna give you my support today. But I know I'm hopefully, you'll work with the with the stakeholders on this.
Speaker 8
You bet. I appreciate it. Definitely, we'll continue to have conversations with stakeholders. You know, we're not asking we're not trying to do anything in this bill that that a lot of companies aren't already doing. And so there are a lot of companies that already disclose all the ingredients that they use, on on the the product manufacturing or on the the the products, also on on the websites.
There are a lot that don't. For instance, my wife and I I'm not gonna throw any companies under the bus, but my my wife and I were using diapers that that I wasn't aware of of this issue, or of some of the potential harms. And I went out to the garage and I looked at the box, nothing. And and so we changed the type of diapers that we're using. And I think it's important that we actually provide the the the real information for for parents, for consumers to be able to evaluate.
And so, you know, putting something like adhesive, which is like the common name that's used for some of these products, that that doesn't tell a parent anything as opposed to telling them the actual ingredients, the different chemicals that are used to to make that adhesive. And so definitely keep on having conversations with all stakeholders. Absolutely. Know, wanna don't I I I'm not trying to do anything that is overly onerous for business, but I don't wanna do I don't wanna water the bill down so much that there can be huge loopholes that still leave parents in the dark about these really important things they're putting on their babies.
Speaker 8
With the other with prior law. We all stand on the shoulders of giants. And in this instance, the giant is Cristina Garcia, who was a former colleague of mine, you know, who authored the menstrual product right to know act, back in 2020. But we also all learn from bills that we pass. And once they're implemented, we we learn that sometimes those bills weren't as strong as they could have been, or certain language in those bills creates loopholes, that that, when in effect, don't really accomplish the goals that we're trying to accomplish.
And and so, I think that while the menstrual product right to know act and and some of the other legislation that was mentioned, it was important legislation at the time, We've learned in implementation, and and we've learned that some of those provisions have fallen short in providing true transparency for consumers. And so, you know, we we should always, I think, be trying to make things, you know, and better make things better and improve them as we go, and and that's our goal of this bill.
Speaker 10
Yeah. Thank you. Seeing as I have teenagers, I will not benefit from this bill, but perhaps my grandkids will. But I really I really appreciate this. And I think it's, it is about consumers knowing and making choice, and I think that that's a really important distinction.
Often in this committee, we hear bills that ban things, and we hear bills that give consumers power, and you're giving consumers power. And I think that's a really important thing to do, and I trust you to work through this. I also recommend now that you're a parent, you not join this committee because you'll learn everything is going to cause some harm to your child, and you can't even wash them with soap. And so you give up. But, I appreciate the effort.
Speaker 10
wanna know what tell you. The day that we heard Bill about soap, I was like, that's it.
Speaker 10
So but this is really important. And I do think, you know, as you said, our babies are wearing these around the clock. I mean, this is definitely it's like tampons. Right? I you know, that is something that we put into our bodies.
And so what is in these products is causing impacts to our babies who are their skin is so beautiful and sensitive. And so appreciate looking at not only for your own son, but for all of California's babies.
Speaker 1
Other questions or comments? Okay. Seeing none. I think we already have a motion and second. Assemblymember, yes.
Speaker 22
Well, I guess it'll help us not to go back to cloth diapers. I know. I know there was
Speaker 1
a big one for cloth diapers. That was kind of odd. Kidding. I Definitely back online.
Speaker 8
efforts. Some folks warned me ahead of time not to even not to even try that, we did not. So there's enough challenges with a newborn.
Speaker 8
and we'll definitely continue having conversations with stakeholders, about the bill.
Speaker 1
And I appreciate that and, obviously, your lived experience, but just the the right of parents and caregivers to know, particularly in those crucial first couple years and really your approach, kind of as our colleagues said, the consumers right to know perspective. So appreciate you doing some additional work on it. We have a motion and second. This is due passed to the committee on appropriations, if we can have a roll call.
Speaker 3
This is file item number two, a b 19 o one, authored by assembly member Berman. The motion is due passed to the committee on appropriations. Connolly?
Speaker 3
Connolly, aye. Ellis? Bauer Cahan. Aye. Bauer Cahan, aye.
Castillo, Lee, McKinnar?
Speaker 1
Yep. Why don't we go ahead and take up the consent calendar at this time, and then, Assembly Member Pappin, are you ready on your bill? Okay. Let's do consent. And this is on one item, a b two zero eight six.
Speaker 1
six. We need a motion and second on consent. Do I have this okay. I have a motion and second. Alright.
Speaker 3
File item number six a b two zero eight six authored by assembly member Ellis. The motion is due passed to the assembly judiciary committee on recommendation to the consent calendar. Connolly?
Speaker 1
Aye. Consent passes, and we'll leave that open as well. Okay. We have assembled member Pappin ready to go.
Speaker 22
Thank you, mister chair. I'm here today to present a bill about keeping up with the times.
Speaker 22
That's right. A b twenty three eighty, which raises a maximum fee that a board of soups can charge to support operations of the county's agricultural agricultural commissioner. So let me tell you a little bit just briefly about the import of ag commissioners in each county. They played a critical role in protecting agricultural, commercial, and residential settings from invasive pests. Agricultural commissioners' offices administer local pesticide use enforcement programs, which include issuing permits, conducting inspections, investigating pesticide misuse complaints, enforcing worker safety standards, and maintaining local pesticide registration records.
These programs are designed to prioritize environmental protection, worker safety, and public health. They really do serve a, you know, very crucial need even though we might not pay a whole lot of attention to it at any given day. But to fund pesticide enforcement activities, counties recover costs through annual reg fee registration fees collected from pest control professionals. The problem is most of those fees haven't been updated since the nineteen eighties, A few of them in 2000, but most of them have been around since the eighties. So as a result, counties aren't really generating sufficient funds, or revenue to support these critical oversight activities.
So 2380 addresses this underfunding issue by allowing counties to adjust fees to better reflect inflation and the increased costs of the crucial programs that they administer. With me today is Matt Seiberling on behalf of the county ag commissioners and sealers association.
Speaker 23
Thank you, mister chair and members. Matthew Seiberling on behalf of the California Agricultural Commissioners and Sealers Association. As stated, we're here today to attempt to allow counties to recover some costs for administering some very critical programs. These programs ensure legal authorization and compliance with various pesticide laws in our counties and in our state, protect public health and the environment, support local oversight and enforcement, and facilitate accountability and traceability to ensure that when and if something does go wrong or there are questions about certain applications within the counties, we know who is there to do it. We know how to get ahold of them, and we know how to enforce enforce pesticide laws and potentially penalties on them when and if we do find issues.
So we do appreciate the the committee's consideration of allowing the counties to recover these costs. Again, it has not been done in decades, so we're here today to to ask for that and and respectfully urge your I vote.
Speaker 1
Thank you. Thank you. Additional speakers in support? Not seeing any. How about in opposition?
Also not seeing any. Questions from committee members?
Speaker 24
I first seen this, you know, I'm the one that's always complaining and moaning about extra fees and overregulation. And, you know, I'm in Kern County. I have a pistachio ranch. And we go into Kern County, and they provide us our permit safety regulations. They are underpaid.
This is an easy support for me because we they take such good care of us and and the elements of safety and and our guys go in and and get permits and they have to go through a class. Safety is so important in the pesticide world. So, assembly member, I wanna thank you for bringing this bill forward. This is an easy an easy. Yes.
So thank you.
Speaker 1
Well done, and and I would echo that. And, obviously, our local regulators need to have the funds, to do this important work. So thank you for flagging this issue, addressing it. Would you like to close?
Speaker 1
And this is an I recommendation. We do need a motion and second. We have a motion and a second. This is to be adopted to the or to be, moved to the assembly floor. If we can have a roll call.
Speaker 3
Alright. This is file item number three a b 2380 authored by assembly member Pappin. The motion is to be adopted to the assembly floor. Connolly?
Speaker 3
Ellis, aye. Bauer Cahan? Bauer Cahan, aye. Castillo, Lee, McKinnar? Aye.
McKinnar, aye, and Pappin? Aye. Pappin, aye.
Speaker 1
That bill passes. We will leave the roll open for absent members. We do have one more, bill scheduled, from assembly member Hadwick. We can get in touch with her. We have a semi member Haddaway.
Speaker 1
So No problem. File item five, a b twenty six sixty seven dealing with vapes and household hazardous waste.
Speaker 25
you, mister chair and members. I first really like to apologize for my tardiness.
Speaker 25
been late. So, it's been a crazy day. I would like to thank the chair of the committee staff for working with me on this critical issue. Teenagers and adults in America are buying roughly 12,000,000 disposable vapes per month, and four and a half million are thrown away every second. Nicotine is a highly addictive substance, and early exposure increases the likelihood of long term addiction and adverse health outcomes.
As a mom of teenagers, I fought the vaping crisis with my own children. We don't yet have the research to know the full damage that vaping will have on our youth. Rural areas are seeing even higher statistics. In my schools, almost every kid has tried it, and half of them are addicted. When we ask kids what percentage of their school was vaping, they almost always said about 80%.
When I ask parents that same question, they would say ten to 20%. An even more troubling trend is kids are using vapes that are at school that are disguised as everyday items like pens, key fobs, chargers, highlighters, and hoodie strings. Some have features intentionally designed to increase dependency in addiction like built in video games. These hidden devices make it even harder to train teachers and staff on what to look for to stop to stop students from vaping in class. Even if a school can detect and confiscate these disguised vapes, the school has no way to dispose of it.
As a tobacco use prevention education program director, I had a drawer full of vapes that I could use, that I cannot do anything with, because they're considered hazardous waste. While a parent can take a vape to a household hazardous waste facility, a school cannot since it is not considered to be created by a household. When these vapes do make their way to a facility, they are unable to process them cost effectively. A special permit is required to separate the nicotine and cannabis cartridge from the battery and other electronic components. Because some vapes are disguised, some waste facilities never catch them, leading to battery fires and the release of this hazardous waste.
Disguised vapes are poisoning our kids, causing fires at small underfunded waste facilities and wasting precious tax dollars in additional processing costs. AB two six six seven bans deceptively marketed and disguised vapes targeting children that look like a handheld video game, food, candy, school supplies, clothes. The bill also reduces vape processing costs by allowing household hazardous waste facilities to safely disassemble vapes. Finally, this bill requires the Department of Toxic Substance Control to address the management and disposal of vapes confiscated from students by a school. AB two six six seven will protect kids, support schools, and ensure hazardous materials are handled responsibly.
I respectfully ask for your I vote, and I would like to ask permission to use a prop. And I'm joined or for one of my witnesses to use a prop. And I'm joined here by Modoc High School principal Kristen Budmark and John Kennedy representing rural county representatives of California.
Speaker 6
So as she, takes these out, these are the vapes that we are a small school, a school of about 244 students currently. This is from this school year that we have confiscated.
Speaker 6
also I have some chew in there and some bottles of pills, but most of these are what we collect on the daily. Yeah. Hey. That too. Sharpies?
Oh, I love a Sharpie.
Speaker 6
Yes. Yes. Okay. Okay. Good afternoon, and thank you all for having me.
My name is Kristen Budmark, and I am the principal of Modoc High School in Alturas, California. I drove 5.5 miles one way for this opportunity to share my thoughts, and I'll drive five point five hours home after I do that. I'm here as a rural school leader with a front row seat to what is rightly being called a vaping epidemic. In the county like mine, the issue hits harder. In Modoc County, the need is greater and the resources are fewer.
17.1% of Modoc County residents live in poverty. Modoc County's local health assessment reports that 30% of our children live in poverty, nearly 17% of adults are current smokers, and 22% of adults report excessive drinking. In a rural county already carrying that level of a hardship, addiction lands harder and help is harder to access. What that looks like at our school is heartbreaking. At my school, vaping is not a small discipline problem.
It is an addiction issue, a learning issue, and a safety issue. The bathroom has become a vape lounge. Some students cannot make it through one class period without leaving to use the restroom because they need a hit. Other students are uncomfortable and at times afraid to walk into that environment. This is not normal and this is not acceptable.
When we talk about vaping, we need to remember who we are really talking about. Imagine being a teenager trying to keep your grades up, your behavior in line, and your athletic performance strong. Add in friendships, extracurriculars, a job, and the normal pressure of growing up. Then you start vaping. Then you realize you can't stop.
Now you are trying to navigate teenage life while battling cravings, withdrawal, secrecy, and shame. You know you need to quit. You may try and you may try and try again, but you will fail every time. And all of all the while, you are hiding it from your parents to your family, trying to keep functioning, and trying not to be let trying not to let your life slip. This is the face of vaping, and this is not rebellion.
This is addiction. And the reason this is so dangerous is because teenage brains are still developing. Nicotine addiction is especially destructive for teenagers because the adolescent brain is still developing. The CDC says that withdrawal can look like irritability, restlessness, anxiety, depressed mood, trouble sleeping, cravings, and problems concentrating, behaviors that we witness every day at Modoc High School. That means that vaping is not just hurting health.
It is actively getting in the way of students being able to learn, regular regulate themselves, and succeed in school. And to make matters worse, access is too easy. Students are getting vapes online. Some parents are purchasing them online and giving them to their students. Students are reselling them on campus, and local businesses are selling to minors illegally.
I can go to the businesses that I know are selling to my kiddos and demand that they stop. I have done that. They have not stopped. That should tell us everything. Schools cannot fight a community wide, state wide addiction pipeline by themselves.
And what I am hearing from parents is deeply concerning. They do not know what to do. They do not know how to help their children once they are addicted. We are in trouble. So I'm here today with a very direct plea.
I am pleading for your help. We are willing to do the work, but please help us. Help us with real consequences and real enforcement for people and businesses that illegally sell nicotine products to our minors. I believe you with this. Here is the ugly truth.
I said this. I'm gonna say it again. I can go out to all the businesses that I know who are selling to my kids and demand that they stop. I have done that. They have not stopped.
Schools cannot fight this alone. We are willing to do the work, but schools cannot out discipline an addiction epidemic. Please help us protect our kids. Thank you for your time.
Speaker 15
Alright. Good afternoon. John Kennedy with the rural county representatives of California. We represent 40 of the state's 58 counties. As local governments, we're charged with managing the state's solid waste and hazardous waste streams.
And so we operate a number over a 150 household hazardous waste collection facilities where people can bring these back so we can safely and appropriately dispose of things. Vapes are ubiquitous. They pose a real growing challenge in the waste stream for our facilities. We've tried to craft a b twenty six sixty seven to address three distinct but interrelated issues. You've heard about the school issues.
We've been working really closely with Yuba and Sutter County Schools for how to manage the vapes that they've confiscated. It's not an easy regulatory environment. We've been in discussions with DTSC for a couple years now trying to break down the silos and find better ways, cheaper ways for schools to manage this. It was actually surprising. We've heard the same, comments and concerns from the law enforcement agencies out there.
Local police departments are also having serious challenges because our cost as household hazardous waste facilities, it's about $350 to manage a five gallon bucket of vapes. That's not sustainable, especially with the number that we see in society. So we're looking to get authority to simply crack the case on these vapes. If we can manage the batteries and the circuitry, we can recycle those, and it's much more cost effective. We can get far more of those vape cartridges in a five gallon bucket and then be able to manage that much more cost effectively.
And then the other thing, I passed around the Sharpie vape. Thanks to some of my colleagues out there who happened to to stumble upon that. I didn't think it was vape until I looked a little more closely and saw the couple of holes that are in there aside from the patent or trademark infringement issues. I think it it would be hard for a school to tell that that's a vape. Right?
And when they throw it in the trash can, it's gonna be hard for us on the waistline to figure out that it's a vape. If we have it on the sort line and it goes through our facility, if it gets crushed, if it gets run over by a bulldozer or something, we could spark a fire from that. So we're seeing more of those. We're seeing even more of these, which are video game vapes. And the video game vape increases addiction and dependency on the device.
You can turn it on. Some of them play Tetris. Others play different types of apps. They're a real challenge. So we need help in managing these.
We've been having conversations, like I said, with US EPA, with DTSC to find creative solutions to these problems from the waste management perspective. We're happy to address the larger societal problems of how do we enforce some of the laws that we have on our books today. This is a step in the right direction and one that will reduce costs and simplify management challenges for us as local governments. So for those reasons and for your support of this bill today so we can keep the discussions and conversation moving. Thank you.
Speaker 13
Thank you. Melissa Sparks Kranz with the League of California Cities in support.
Speaker 10
Good afternoon, Lindsey Goldhorn on behalf of the Resource Recovery Coalition of California in support.
Speaker 6
Good afternoon. Dorothy Johnson on behalf of the Association of California School Administrators, in support and appreciate the leadership of the author on this measure.
Speaker 3
McClain Rosansky with the Alameda County Office of Education in support.
Speaker 1
Hi. Dylan Hoffman on behalf of the California Product Stewardship Council in support.
Speaker 24
Good afternoon, chair Conley, members of the committee. Mike Caprio with Republic Services here in support.
Speaker 14
Hackett with Californians Against Waste in support. We're the sponsor of the disposable vape ban. We see this as entirely complementary and a necessary strategy for enforcement. Thank you.
Speaker 1
Thank you. Witnesses in opposition. Seeing that? Important. Alright.
Let's bring it back to committee questions. We got so motion second, even though I think we already had a motion. Right? So we're gonna go Pappen motion, Lee second, Bauerquian question.
Speaker 10
Yes. I'll take it. I just wanna start, by thanking you, a solemn member, for bringing this bill. It's really important. You and I both sit on business and professions, and I believe you were also in that hearing we had recently on marketing of vapes to children, which was frankly appalling.
And I think it really highlighted the failures of the agency, the enforcement agency, to properly understand. Well, I mean, I don't even know what they were failing at, but a lot of things. But I noticed your bill uses very similar language to what they were failing to do in that hearing, which was so you in part ban, the sale entirely of the vapes that mimic pens, and other things. But then you also have language in here that, which I like because it's just an outright don't sell it if it's confusing to parents and schools, and I think there will be no misunderstanding of that. But then you also have the marketing language.
So you're banning anything that is marketed to be attractive to children. I guess my concern is that we're already seeing that agency isn't able to properly analyze that. So putting that into I'm gonna support the bill today. No question. But I'm just wondering if we should make a change to that to make it more effective.
Can
Speaker 25
look into that. There's also, some stricter guidelines for people selling illicit vapes because I truly believe that's where the the problem lies is there's no teeth in it. So if you're gonna be have a $500 fine as a store owner for selling vapes from China that aren't FDA approved or, you know, 90% of the vapes sold in The US are illicit. So that's where we have to have some teeth. Yeah.
And they have to have something worth losing. 500 they make $500 in a couple hours
Speaker 25
Or an hour, probably, in some of these places. I mean, you can go down the street. There's there were kids here yesterday lobbying about vape stores that were across the street from their school. You know? And so I think that this is in part, like, to help the schools and then to give us some teeth on the other side of it too so we can be able to have more enforcement.
Speaker 10
Yes. Which I also I mean, per violation, as I read it, would be every pen sold could be a violation. There's a crack up real fast, which is a good thing. Yeah. And, it's in the discretion of court or whoever to decide what that is actually.
But it does give the real, I think Yeah. Disincentive to be selling these things, which I think is really important. I also noticed that you had those penalties going back to the agency to help fund enforcement on the front end. So I think all of that creates a real dynamic of enforcement, which is critical because I think this is, to your point, thank you for being here to speak on behalf of our kids. There is a real epidemic, and we need to be doing everything we can to protect our children's health and safety.
So I appreciate this work.
Speaker 22
Well, first of all, thank you for driving five plus hours Thank you very to
Speaker 22
I appreciate that. I know in my own city, when I was on the city council, we did ban the ability to sell to kids, and and then we eventually went after the shop staying open at all. But it's a much more suburban environment. It's a little different when you're, you know, come from a rural area. So I can appreciate, you know, the sort of whack a mole that might be happening.
So I thank you for bringing the bill. Of course. Obviously, you left an impression on all of us here as to how easy it is, how addictive it is, and detrimental. So especially with a young mind that's trying to do a whole lot of other things. So I I very much appreciate hearing your perspective, and I would ask to be asked, added as a coauthor.
Absolutely.
Speaker 7
Wanna thank the author for this bill. And if it was up to me, I would wanna ban all things back. That's not a conversation for now. But you're the principal, you said, at that school. And I just wanted to get clarification.
You said those your school has 200 students?
Speaker 6
We have 200 I I think we're at I would check this morning. Think we're at two forty one today.
Speaker 25
And and that's what they caught. Like, they're very hard to catch them because they know where to hide
Speaker 10
May I be added as a co author as well? Yeah. Mhmm. Thank you. Yes, please.
Speaker 1
Great. No. Great bill. Eye opening and obviously kinda seeing firsthand what you're dealing with at at our schools. So thank you to the author for this work.
Obviously, we want to give schools cost effective ways of dealing with these vape products that are confiscated. So appreciate you coming forward with this. We do have a motion and second. This would be a due pass to the Business and Professions Committee. I am recommending an I vote as a chair.
Let's go ahead and call the roll.
Speaker 3
This is file item number five, AB two six six seven, authored by Assembly Member Hedwig. The motion is due passed to the Business and Professions Committee. Connolly?
Speaker 3
Connolly, aye. Ellis? Aye. Ellis, aye. Bauer Cahan?
Aye. Bauer Cahan, aye. Castillo? Aye. Castillo, aye.
Lee? Aye. Lee, aye. McKinnar? Aye.
McKinnar, aye. And Pappin? Aye. Pappin, aye. Thank you all.
Speaker 1
The vote's unanimous. Vote passes. So we're gonna circle back and do add ons, right now.
Speaker 1
Thank you. K. Let's keep it down if we can. We're gonna do some add ons.
Speaker 3
I'm gonna start with file item number one, a b 1,600. The motion is due passed to the committee on appropriations. It has four ayes, one no. Chair voting, aye. Castillo?
Not voting.
Speaker 3
Five ayes. One no. File item number two, a B 19 O1, authored by Berman. The action is due passed to the committee on appropriations. Chair voting, aye.
The vote is four ayes as of now. Castillo? Not voting. Castillo?
Speaker 3
And Lee? Lee aye. That is five ayes. File item number 3AB2380. The action is to be adopted to the assembly floor.
There is five ayes. Chair voting aye. Castillo? Aye. Castillo aye.
And Lee? Aye. Lee aye. Is seven ayes. File item number four, a b two four six two authored by Pelerin.
The motion is due passed to the committee on appropriations. The vote is four ayes. Chair voting, aye. Castillo? No.
Castillo, no. Lee? Lee, I. That's five ayes and one no. And file item number six, this is a b two zero eight six.
It is the motion is due passed to the assembly judiciary committee with the recommendation recommendation to the consent calendar. Chair voting aye. Castillo?
Speaker 3
That's okay. File item number six two zero eight six. It was on consent. Aye. Castillo, aye.
And Lee? Aye. Lee, aye. That is 7 zero.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.