Assembly Human Services Committee, Tuesday, April 14, 2026
Derzeit keine Kapitel verfügbar
Legende
Markierungen im Transkript
- Text Aktuell abgespielter Satz
- Text Suchergebnis
- Text Redebeitrag, auf den der geöffnete Link verweist
Klicken Sie auf einen Satz, um das Video ab dieser Stelle abzuspielen. Markieren Sie Text, um ihn mit Redner, Zeitstempel und Link zu zitieren.
Weitere Optionen
Assembly Human Services Committee California State Assembly
Ihren Sitzungen folgenRedner 1
reduce harmful labels by showing that a disability is just one part of who someone is. At the time,
Redner 3
as the time as as times are changing, our language should change too. The term of Consumer Enlargement Act may once been okay, but it's no longer okay. The word consumer bothers me. It doesn't not sound like a person. When when I when I hear consumer, I think of someone eating something something.
Redner 37
It is not clear and does not describe who you who you are talking about. To change is the is the law could stop calling me a consumer from now and on. I would be called a person eligible for regional center services. When when you are talking about me, please call me a person. I want to be treated like a person.
Redner 19
assembly. My name is Alex Mountford. I'm the c, CEO of Monos as well as the president of the California Respite Association. AB fifteen seventy five updates the definition of respite to provide clarity and consistency on where in home respite services can be provided. When in home respite services are authorized, we see some regional centers state that the services can only be provided within the four walls of the home, while others allow the individual to access the community resources, such as a park down the street during their respite services.
Redner 4
There have even been cases where different case managers in the same regional center will have differing interpretations on where respite can be provided. The language in this bill provides clarity and updates the definition that has not been changed since the seventies, Especially now that in home respite is a home and community based service, this legislation ensures that community access is an option for the individuals receiving in home respite services. I'd also like to provide a little clarity on what this what these changes do and do not do. This bill does not change what in home respite is nor the types of supports provided to an individual during these services. This bill does not authorize or add transportation or driving components to in home respite and does not create any additional costs outside of the established and existing rate structures already in existence for in home respite services.
AB fifteen seventy five provides clarity that it is an option to go into the community during these services. This community access is not guaranteed, but is available based on what the individual case manager, planning team, and service providers determine is safe and appropriate. Providing clarity and enabling an individual to access the community when appropriate and safe during in home respite services ensures that that individual has all the integration engagement opportunities as their neurotypical peers, that they are truly a part of their community while receiving in home respite services and are not being strictly confined to their home. In closing, AB fifteen seventy five is important, impactful, no cost legislation that supports the IDD community and ensures consistency for in home respite services. I thank you for your time.
Redner 1
Thank you. Now do we have members of the public who wish to testify in support of the bill? Please come to the microphone. Name and organization, please. Give it one second to turn on first.
Okay. Go for it. Eric Champo, United Cerebral Palsy here in Sacramento. We're in support. Thank you.
Redner 5
Diana Gonzales, public policy and advocacy manager at Monos Home Care, and we're here in support of AB fifteen seventy five.
Redner 6
Hi there. Julie Sherman, director of public policy of The Arc and UCP California Collaborative for the bill sponsor. Thank you.
Redner 7
Good afternoon. Shauna Day, senior director of government relations, twenty four hour home care in support.
Redner 1
Now do we have any, witnesses in opposition to the bill? Please come forward. Any members of the public who wish to testify in opposition to the bill, please come forward. Alright. Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the dais for the committee members.
Any questions or comments? Any questions or comments? Oh, somebody else who worry? Go ahead.
Redner 8
I just wanted to, thank the author and especially the witnesses for sharing your experiences and your story with us, and especially around utilizing people first language.
Redner 1
I would also like to thank the author for bringing this bill forward. And and many of the bills that Assembly of Rembrandt does, it's always people centric, and this is one of those things upshifting the letter of law to be pe people centric so that the spirit of all our services are people centric. I recommend I vote on this matter when, we have a quorum to vote on it. But, assembly, would you like to close?
Redner 2
Thank you, mister chair, for the opportunity to present assembly bill fifteen seventy five. Ultimately, this bill is about making sure that persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities are treated with the dignity and respect that they deserve. I respectfully ask for an I vote when it's appropriate.
Redner 1
Thank you very much. We will take the matter up when we have a quorum. Thank you. Okay. Do I I saw I saw it on your office.
Bills, mister Oh, you have a oh, sorry.
Redner 1
Assemblyman Rambula, you're on a roll. Which one do you wanna go for? You wanna go file item eighteen, twenty one, or 25 or 22. Sorry.
Redner 1
If you can do all three simultaneously? Yep. No. If you could do a file of 18AB2470. Let's start with that one.
Redner 2
Thank you, mister chair and madam vice chair. AB twenty four seventy addresses a critical but often overlooked issue, the economic impact of intimate partner violence. According to a 2021 report from the Little Hoover Commission beyond the crisis, IPV is widespread, impacting women, men, and especially vulnerable populations, including young people and transgender individuals. IP b IPV goes well beyond physical violence. Survivors often face financial abuse, identity theft, damaged credit, and loss of vital documents.
These barriers make it extremely difficult to secure housing, employment, and to provide stability necessary to escape from abuse. AB twenty four seventy establishes a statewide one step reentry program to help survivors, to replace vital documents, to repair credit and financial damage, to protect against future economic abuse, and it also expands flexibilities in the CalWORKS emergency housing program by allowing survivors to use unspent funds for permanent housing needs. Economic stability is essential to survivor safety. Without it, survivors are at a higher risk of returning to abusive situations. This bill streamlines access to services, reduces barriers to service, and supports dignity, independence, and long term recovery of survivors.
With me today to provide testimony is Tamar Foster, deputy executive director of the Little Hoover Commission.
Redner 40
Good afternoon, Chair Lee and members. Again, my name is Tamar Foster. I'm deputy executive director of the Little Hoover Commission. And back in 2021, we released a report that examined how the state responded to intimate partner violence. We found that survivors often experience financial abuse, which affects them long after they've left their abuser.
Redner 10
Many survivors have lost access to their identity documents and even control over their bank credit and other financial accounts. This blocks them from resources that they may need to flee. Some have had their Social Security number used to create accounts and open lines of credit without their knowledge. This can make it extraordinarily difficult for survivors to secure employment, transportation, childcare, and permanent housing, particularly if survivors lack funds to cover deposits, move in costs, and other upfront costs. So we recommended a one stop reentry program to help survivors recover identity documents, help them understand their financial picture, repair their credit, and connect with legal and federal resources.
We also recommended improving the flexibility of CalWORKS emergency housing voucher program by allowing domestic violence survivors to use their unspent funds to help them pay for permanent housing. Because AB 2,470 implements these recommendations, we respectfully request your eye vote when the time is appropriate. Thank you.
Redner 11
Thank you so much. Do we have any members of the public in the hearing room to testify in support? Do we have any members in the audience that are primary witnesses in opposition? Seeing none. Do we have any members of the public in the hearing room to testify in opposition?
I'm gonna bring it back to the committee. Is there any comments from committee from the committee? I actually just wanna thank you for this. I have, in the past, worked with, victims of domestic violence, as well as the perpetrators as well. So I do thank you for this.
It is important to be able to help them in those situations that are very difficult to get out of. So thank you for the bill. And I'd like to invite you to close.
Redner 2
Thank you, madam chair, for the opportunity to present. I respectfully ask for an I vote when appropriate.
Redner 11
Okay. Thank you so much. Okay. So now we are going to move to file item 21, a b two five ten.
Redner 2
Thank you, madam vice chair. AB twenty five ten strengthens the CalWORKS family reunification program by ensuring that families have the support they need to bring children home safely and successfully. CalWORKS provides critical support to families working to reunify with their children who have been placed in foster care, including the family reunification funding for families who have had their children removed from the home. Successful reunification requires stable housing, food, childcare, and transportation. However, under the current rules, all CalWORKS eligible children must be removed from the home to qualify for reunification funds.
Cutting off support during this critical time undermines reunification efforts and creates unnecessary hardship that jeopardizes family stability and delays reunification. This bill aligns policy with the goal of keeping families together whenever safely possible and increases the likelihood of timely reunification. AB twenty five ten ensures that families have access to these critical resources by allowing families to continue receiving cash aid and childcare during the reunification process. This bill is about stability, equity, and better outcomes for children and families. With me to testify in support is Rebecca Gonzalez, policy advocate at the Western Center of Law and Poverty, as well as Coy Citarum with the Coalition of California Welfare Rights Organizations.
Redner 7
Good afternoon. My name is Rebecca Gonzales with the Western Center on Law and Poverty. We are cosponsors of AB twenty five ten along with the Reimagine CalWORKS coalition. This bill updates the CalWORKS family reunification program to remove barriers that prevent parents from continuing to receive cash aid and services while their children are temporarily placed outside the home in foster care or the home of a relative. This allows the state to better achieve its goal of family reunification by promoting family stabilization.
Redner 12
The 2021 law allowed the California Department of Social Services to issue guidance to the counties to implement the program. In doing so, the department restricted when a family can continue to receive assistance in ways which are inconsistent with the intent of the statute. The department resolved several of our concerns about the guidance, but, ultimately, the areas addressed in twenty five ten were identified as needing statutory clarification. As mentioned, this bill, says that not not all children have to be removed in order to continue receiving reunification cash aid. Two, re reunification aid can be continued when an eligible child joins the family, such as the birth of another child or in case cases of partial reunification when the parents are still meeting conditions to have the other children returned.
Three, automatically ends the immunization sanction for families who fail to show proof of immunization or submit a statement of good cause. This bill would restore the parent's aide since they do not have physical or legal custody of the child. Thus, they cannot meet that requirement. Four, specify that parents must navigate only one set of requirements that cover both reunification and welfare to work requirements in a unified plan. Five, specify that the assignment of child support and child support cooperation agreements are suspended during this period.
Six, clarify for families when the children were removed from one parent and placed with the other parent otherwise eligible for CalWORKS. The CalWORKs parent can receive, family reunification aid. Lastly, ensure the sixty month limit on CalWORKs time and aid is not running for CalWORKs family reunification families. This bill helps to fulfill the state's goal of reunifying CalWORKS families by removing unnecessary barriers. We ask for your support of this bill.
Thank you.
Redner 11
Thank you. Do we have any members of the public in support? Do we have any witness are you in support? Say your name and your position.
Redner 13
Good afternoon. Amanda Kurtzner on behalf of County Welfare Directors Association in support.
Redner 11
Thank you. Do we have any primary witnesses in opposition? Do we have any members of the public in opposition? I'm gonna bring it back to the committee. Any questions from the committee members?
And would you like to close?
Redner 2
Thank you for the opportunity to present. I respectfully ask for an I vote when appropriate.
Redner 2
Thank you, madam vice chair. I would like to begin by thanking the chair and their committee for their work on this bill. Guaranteed income pilot programs across California and the nation have demonstrated promising results, including improved financial stability, health outcomes, and participants' ability to pursue education, employment, and safe housing. Pregnant individuals, parents of young children, foster youth, and survivors of intimate partner violence often experience significant economic instability during critical periods of their lives. Providing modest direct cash assistance during these pivotal moments can help stabilize families, reduce financial stress, and improve outcomes for both parents and children.
However, many regions, particularly underserved and rural areas, have not yet had the opportunity to participate in or benefit from these efforts. Because California's communities vary widely in terms of cost of living, economic conditions, and access to services, expanding pilots to include counties that have not previously received funding is critical. Here with me to testify in support of a b twenty five eighty five is Amber Crawwell with the professor of department of sociology at CSU Fresno.
Redner 28
afternoon. Guaranteed income has been shown to improve income volatility, quality of life, and economic opportunity. However, most of what we know about guaranteed income in California and across US has come from studies conducted in urban areas. This is why I'm here to support a b twenty five eighty five. None of the GI pilots that were funded by the state of California in 2022 were in the Central Valley despite high levels of poverty in the region and the need for geographic diversity.
Redner 14
After not receiving funding from California's round of guaranteed income pilots in 2022 in Fresno County, We raised funds to conduct our own guaranteed income pilot, where we have the largest urban center in the San Joaquin Valley but also many rural communities that are home to the farm workers who sustain our food production. It was important for us to understand how San Joaquin Valley communities, often overlooked by state programs, could benefit from a stronger and more robust social safety net. The only other GI pilot conducted in the valley was led by former mayor Michael Tubbs in Stockton, which was also not state funded. We focused on the urban community of Southwest Fresno and the rural community of Huron, where over a third of families live in poverty. We conducted our pilot and study from 2024 to 2025.
I served as lead evaluator of this study, and we conducted surveys and focus groups over a twelve month period using a randomized controlled trial design to understand how guaranteed income was affecting the lives of families in Southwest Fresno and Huron. What we found was largely aligned with what other pilots have concluded, but some of our findings particular to the small farm farm worker community of Huron and marginalized families in Southwest Fresno illuminated some important contextual factors that required more study of rural and underserved communities. We found that while families enjoyed improved quality of life, reduced debt spending, and better parenting experiences, they also voiced experiences that come from living in rural and marginalized communities where even with improved income stability, it is still difficult to access child care, health care, education, and job opportunities, which are the ramps that GI is meant to get them to. One small study is not enough to fully understand these dynamics. These communities deserve social safety investments as well, but we need to better understand how to create a social safety net that is robust enough to support areas where access to resources, services, and opportunities is more limited.
A new round of guaranteed income pilots for rural and communities is needed so that this anti poverty approach, which is so effective, is also informed by empirical data from both urban and rural communities. Thank you.
Redner 11
Thank you. Are there any members in the public in support? State your name and position.
Redner 11
Thank you. Do we have any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill? Do we have any members of the public in opposition? And I'll bring it back to the committee. Any questions?
Okay. Thank you.
Redner 2
Thank you for the opportunity to present Assembly Bill twenty five eighty five. Ultimately, this bill is about making sure that Californians who are experiencing economic instability in rural and disadvantaged areas are able to receive state funding when we create these types of funding streams for GBIs in the future. Thank you, and I respectfully ask for an I vote when appropriate.
Redner 11
Thank you. We are moving to file item five, a b nineteen thirty two, Elwhari. Great job.
Redner 8
Okay. Sorry about that. We just wanted to make sure our witnesses were ready to go. Good afternoon, madam chair and members. I'm here to present AB nineteen thirty two, the Crisis Act two point o.
This bill builds on a system that is already working, community based crisis response that meets people where they are. We know law enforcement is not always the right response for someone experiencing a mental health crisis or a substance abuse crisis. And too often, situations escalate when they don't have to. The crises pilot program established by statute in 2021 has shown that trained community based responders can provide more appropriate and effective care. AB nineteen thirty two simply continues and strengthens that work.
If we let these programs lapse or this program lapse, we're not starting over. We're taking away a resource communities are already relying on. This is especially important for communities of color and for people navigating mental health or substance use challenges who need consistent, culturally competent care in moments of crisis. This bill is about making sure the right response shows up at the right time. It reduces harm, prevents escalation, and supports better outcomes for everyone involved.
Testifying with me today are Erika Naranjo, who has been directly impacted, and Asantiwa Boykin, an interventionist with Mental Health First. Also with me today is j
Redner 18
Good afternoon. My name is Erica Naranjo. On 09/28/2022, my father, Jaime Naranjo, was killed by Sacramento sheriff during a mental health crisis. A single deputy arrived, and within twenty three seconds, my father was shot five times. Twenty three seconds.
That's not enough time to understand a person. That's not enough time to de escalate a situation. That's search certainly not enough time to save a life. We are taught from a young age, if you need help, call 911. But what happens when that help that arrives isn't trained to handle a mental health emergency?
What happens when asking for help becomes a death sentence? My dad didn't need force. He needed care. He needed trained professionals who understood crisis, compassion, and de escalation. Instead, he became another statistic.
Having an untreated mental health issue makes you 16 times more likely to be shot by law enforcement. And truth is, this is not uncommon. Every year, families like mine are left grieving loved ones who should still be here today. People experiencing mental health crisis are too often met with systems that are not built to support them. This is why funding matters.
Redner 27
We need investments in mental health response teams, trained professionals who can respond with empathy, skill, and the right tools to save lives. We need systems that prioritize care over control, understanding over fear. Because this isn't just about policy, it's about people. It's about fathers, mothers, sons, daughters. Jaime Naranjo, Sharano Stingley, Michelle Shirley, Daryl Richards, Christopher Gilmore, and Gab Gabby Nevarez.
Redner 18
My daddy's life mattered, and so do the lives of everyone who will face a mental health crisis tomorrow. We cannot keep responding the same way and expecting different outcomes. Funding mental health services is not optional. It is urgent and is necessary and is long overdue, and I strongly support AB nineteen thirty two. Thank you.
Hi.
Redner 22
My name is Isantua. I'm a board certified psychiatric mental health nurse. I'm currently working at the emergency department at UC Davis. I'm also one of the cocreators of Mental Health First and cofounder of the Anti Police Care Project. I know that you guys have probably heard a lot about what happens when police show up to mental health crisis.
Redner 19
I would like to share with you some of the things that happen when community shows up. I've personally seen sexual assault victims get rerouted to weave instead of waiting in an emergency department just to add another backlogged rape kit. I've also seen folks who needed acute mental health, care get that care and get to go in an ambulance instead of in the back of a police car handcuffed. I've also seen people who wanted to go in an ambulance, wanted to go to, mental health urgent care and got to go to those places instead of going to Sack County jail. Excuse me.
It's a lot. I've seen folks who got, I've seen folks who are not clinicians spend a lot of their time volunteering, doing it for free. And one of the things that the crisis act brought about is some of those folks were able to do the work that they're really passionate about and skilled about and actually be able to get an income and proliferate those things. I had a colleague who was not who worked in mental health care and had done so for years. She had an intimate understanding of what happens when you say things like, I feel like I don't wanna live anymore or I I don't have a reason to get out of bed.
Right? You get your rights and your dignity stripped from you. I wish we had would have done something sooner because instead she could have reached out for help instead of quietly planning her suicide that she completed. So thank you for backing this bill. I know you're gonna vote yes.
The people need this, and we don't need to lose any more fathers or health care professionals because the systems that we have are unfriendly.
Redner 11
Do we we have any members of the public in support? Yes. State your name and your position, please.
Redner 12
Good afternoon. Jasmine Ascher representing the Greater Sacramento Urban League. We're in support.
Redner 18
Sheila Bates with Black Lives Matter California and Health Care for Us in strong support.
Redner 21
Good afternoon. Darby Kernan for In Child Poverty California in support.
Redner 23
Mandy Yeek with Southeast Asia Resource Action Center in strong support.
Redner 24
Alejandro Solis on behalf of CPCA advocates in support. Eric Paredes with the California Faculty Association in support.
Redner 25
Nancy Netherland, parent of a child impacted by this bill and also little lobbyist in strong support.
Redner 1
Sally Ching with the Alliance for Boys and Men of Color in strong support. And if I may read off orgs, who would also like to give their me too? Urban Peace Institute, California Coalition Women's Prisoners, Next Door Solutions to Domestic Violence, Californians United for Responsible Budget, Transitions Clinic Network, Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, Transformative Programming Works, A New Path, Clyde Foundation, Felony Murder Elimination Project, and Buen Vicino.
Redner 20
Additional me too's from the South Bay People Power from South Bay People Power, Health and Partnership, Kindred, Trava Jardas, you UNITOS Work United, TWU, Street Level Health Project, National Compadres Network, Empowering Marginalized Asian Communities, Prevention Institute, the Children's Defense Fund of California, Services for Immigrant Rights and Education Networks, also known as CYREN, a new way of life reentry project, and end child poverty California.
Redner 16
Yep. Keon Bliss, speaking on behalf of the Anti Police Terror Project, in strong support. And, additional, organizations, of also, speaking up in Me Too's, the Peace and Justice Law Center, Sisters Warriors Freedom Coalition, San Francisco Public Defender's Office, Californians for Safety and Justice, Legal Services for Prisoners with Children, California Coalition of Women Prisoners, Justice to Jobs Coalition, La Defensea, Orange County Rapid Response Network, the Collective Healing and Transformation Project, Youth Leadership Institute, and Bend The Ark Jewish Action California.
Redner 11
Thank you. Do we have any witnesses in opposition? Do we have any members of the public that wanna testify in opposition? None. And seeing none, I'll bring it back to the committee.
Any committee members have any comments? Thank you. And I want to invite the author to close.
Redner 11
Thank you. Thank you. And we are going to move to file item number nine, a b two one two six, Elhori, and I'll invite you to
Redner 11
switch that. Since mister Gonzales is here, we are going to move to file item four a b nineteen twenty five. And assembly member Gonzales, please present your bills.
Redner 27
The witnesses. Good afternoon, madam chair and members. I'm pleased to represent, to present AB nineteen twenty five, which takes an important step toward improving how California serves individuals living with permanent disabilities. Today, millions of Californians with permanent disabilities rely on multiple programs to meet their basic needs, including health care, housing, in home services, transportation, and utilities. However, each of these programs often requires its own separate verification of disability status.
As a result, individuals with lifelong conditions are forced to repeatedly prove the same disability over and over again, even when there's no expectation of improvement. This is not just a bill or me just reading from this. This is actually in my house. This is happening in my home, where my own son RJ lives with cerebral palsy with spastic quadriplegia and a seizure disorder. He's 33.
He can't walk or speak and these disabilities, yet each year, we are required to once again take a trip to the doctor to prove he still lives with these disabilities. I pray for a miracle. That would be amazing, but the reality is he has cerebral palsy. Because he has no use of his arms or legs, transportation is a real challenge. I'll go off script quite often because this is very much in my house, such as my wife taking him to the doctor, picking him up, putting him in a chair, moving him to the to to the car, picking him up from the chair to the car, going to the doctor, picking him up, putting him back into the chair, so on and so forth.
So imagine doing that and pregnant. Imagine doing that and I'm up here. This is members, this is not the way. The duplicative the duplicative process creates real hardship. Families must repeatedly gather medical records, schedule appointments, and submit documentation across multiple agencies.
Medical providers spend valuable time completing similar forms again and again. Meanwhile, state and local agencies devote resources to verifying conditions that have already been established and are not likely to change. Even more concerning, this fragmented system can lead to interruptions in essential services. This has happened in my house for months at a time. This is this is real.
Individuals may lose access to benefits or face delays simply because paperwork deadlines are missed or standards vary between programs, not because their conditions have changed. AB nineteen twenty five addresses this challenge in a thoughtful and responsible way. This bill does not create a new certification program today. Instead, it requires the California Health and Human Services Agency to conduct a comprehensive feasibility study to evaluate the challenges and opportunities associated with establishing a statewide permanent disability certification program. Again, a study.
This is to determine if we can do this. Right? The study will examine key issues such as fraud prevention, privacy protections, technology visibility, and compatibility with existing federal, state, and local programs. It will also require consultation with stakeholders, including disability led organizations, independent living centers, and county agencies to ensure the voices of those most affected are heard throughout the process, to ensure the voices of the most, literally, the most vulnerable are heard. This is a careful and measured approach.
Establishing a permanent disability certification is a complex undertaking, and it must be done correctly. That's why I asked for a study. By requiring a feasibility study, AB nineteen twenty five ensures that policymakers have the data and analysis necessary to design a system that reduces administrative burden while protecting privacy, preventing fraud, and maintaining program integrity. Ultimately, the goal of AB nineteen twenty five is simple, to make government work better for individuals with permanent disabilities. By identifying opportunities to streamline verification process, we can reduce administrative duplication, improve continuity of services, and allow individuals and families to focus less on paperwork and more on their health, independence, and quality of life.
Members, AB nineteen twenty five represents a responsible first step toward a more coordinated and efficient disability services system in California. It recognizes that permanent disabilities should not require permanent paperwork. For these reasons, I respectfully ask for your I vote. Beside me is the the member from Stanislaus County and joint author of AB nineteen twenty five, the honorable assemblyman Juan Alaniz, as well as Heather Stiegel representing the sponsor of this measure, Disability Resource Agency for Independent Living, and Ted Jackson representing the Marin Center for Independent Living.
Redner 28
wanna thank assembly member Gonzalez for bringing forward AB nineteen twenty five, and I'm proud to be a joint author. As the author outlined, individuals with permanent disabilities are often required to repeatedly verify the same lifelong conditions across multiple programs, creating unnecessary administrative burdens and, in some cases, disruptions in services. AB nineteen twenty five takes a measured approach by directing the state to study whether a standardized statewide certification could improve coordination, reduce duplication, and better serve these individuals. I appreciate the author's thoughtful approach to examining this issue carefully before moving forward. This affects many in my district as well who've come forward, and, you know, they don't like to be reminded that they're gonna never be able to walk or be able to not have to use the services.
Redner 48
Good afternoon. My name is Heather Stiegel, and I am the executive director of Disability Resources Agency for Independent Living, also known as DREL. DREL is the designated independent living center to that serves six counties, Amador, Calaveras, Mariposa, Tuolumne, San Joaquin, and Stanislaus. DREL is proud to sponsor AB nineteen twenty five. Every day, we work with individuals with disabilities who rely on multiple programs just to meet their basic needs, health care, housing, in home support, and transportation.
Redner 31
But one of the biggest barriers that they face is not their disability. It's the system. Right now, there is no single way for someone to verify a permanent disability across programs. So people are forced to prove the same lifelong condition over and over again. That means repeated paperwork, repeated doctor's visits, and repeated delays.
We see individuals lose services not because they no longer are eligible, but because of missed deadlines, inconsistent requirements, or paperwork errors. This creates unnecessary stress for individuals, families, providers, and agencies alike. AB nineteen twenty five takes a thoughtful and responsible step forward. It does not create a new system overnight. Instead, it requires a feasibility study to carefully evaluate what it would take to build a statewide permanent disability certification process.
This includes looking at privacy protections, fraud prevention, and how a system could work across existing state and federal programs. It also ensures that stakeholders like independent living centers and disability led organizations are part of the conversation. This bill is about reducing duplication, improving efficiency, and most importantly, ensuring that people with disabilities can access and maintain the services that they need without unnecessary barriers. Thank you.
Redner 32
is Ted Jackson. I'm the CEO of the Marin Center for Independent Living and, the public policy board, the public policy board chair of California Foundation for Independent Living Centers, and I'm proud to offer support from MCIL as well as CFILC today. The Marin Center for Independent Living is a unique ILC. We are also a parent center. I think the only one like that in the country.
In addition to that, we have a robust program in Cal Ane, and we're the largest provider of veterans directed care in the entire state. So while we started with one county, we actually serve people with disabilities in the majority of Northern California. Because of all of those programs, we are probably the one organization in the disability community that reaches into every little nook and cranny of the subsectors of the disability community. And with that, we see a lot of recertifications. We see folks coming into our office who need to recertify the people that we serve no matter what the disability is from intellectual to physical.
We have memory loss issues. We have issues of poverty and people not having access to computers or getting mail on a regular basis to receive the reminders. A 101 different reasons that people come into their to the office and needing help with these many recertifications. But the other thing that I wanna draw your attention to is actually emergency preparedness and community resilience. One of the things that we have to do often is in helping people with disabilities when there are fires and there are disasters in California is to relocate them.
Redner 21
After the LA fires, we were the center in the North that became a hub for relocating disabled people who could no longer live in that quality of air, and we still are working on that and still are doing that. So that type of movement requires another certification. Having a statewide certification for a certain number of years, permanent disability that would travel with you without throughout the state, is really imperative for the sustainability of in inclusion and community integration for people with disabilities. In almost every emergency and disaster in the state, people with disabilities and older adults with access and functional needs are relocated, and I ask for your support.
Redner 11
Thank you. Are there any members of in of the public in the room that want to testify in support? State your name and position, please.
Redner 30
Good afternoon. Dan Oakenfuss with the California Foundation for Independent Living Centers here in support.
Redner 6
Hey there. Julie Sherman, the ARC of California, director of public policy in high support.
Redner 1
Alright. Is that everyone for support? Does everyone for support? Now do we have any witnesses in opposition to the bill? Please come forward.
Any members of the public which should testify in opposition to the bill? Please come forward. Seeing now. Bring it back to the dais for questions and comments. Before we do that, let's establish quorum since we now have quorum.
Madam secretary, please call the roll for quorum.
Redner 1
Those are probably a second. I come I'm I'm out for a couple minutes, and then suddenly you have an another witness. Where this guy I come from. Where'd you hire this guy from?
Redner 1
I apologize. Alright. Well, I really want to thank you for bringing this bill forward and for several Alanis for also joining us today. I am recommending an I vote for this bill, and I also wanna thank our vice chair for taking over. Madam secretary, please call the roll for a b.
Oh, sorry. I'm going to, I wanna let you close, but I will be recommending an I vote.
Redner 27
Thank you, mister chair. Members, as I stated, this is personal to me. Everything that I talked about in here has happened in my house. So it's not like I'm reading from, if you will, a script, and it's far away. This is something that's happening in my house.
So if it's happening in my house, it's happening in houses across LA, San Francisco, San Diego, everywhere in between. And we need a voice. We need a unified voice that talks about how we take care of those that are most vulnerable in the most vulnerable communities. So members, as a parent of a son with severe disabilities, My wife, Christine, and I have seen firsthand how families must repeatedly navigate complicated systems just to maintain access to essential services. She's a superhero in my eyes because she has to do it every day.
When a disability is permanent, families should not have to continually prove the same condition again and again just to receive the support they depend on. AB nineteen twenty five takes a thoughtful first step by asking an important question. How can we build a smarter, more coordinated system that respects people's time, protects their privacy, and ensures continuity of services? This bill is about reducing unnecessary barriers and making government systems work better for the people they are meant to serve. For families like mine and for the millions of Californians living with permanent disabilities, myself and my joint author respectfully ask for your I vote on AB nineteen twenty five.
Redner 1
Alright. Thank you very much. I'm recommending an I vote. Madam secretary, please call the roll on this bill.
Redner 7
File item four a B1925. The motion is due passed to the assembly appropriations committee. Lee? Aye. Lee, I.
Castillo? Aye. Castillo, Calderon? Elhwari?
Redner 1
Four to zero. That bill's out. We'll leave the roll open for absent members. Thank you. Alright.
Do we have any other author members here?
Redner 1
Stephanie Wynn is here. So I don't who are. So similar Stephanie Wynn, when you're ready, you may come up to the desk. And assembler Wynn has three bills. So which one do you want to start with?
Redner 1
three bills and one is consent, but, you can start with whichever you want.
Redner 9
Thank you, mister chair and members. Thank you for allowing me to present a b twenty one eighty nine. I would like to begin by accepting the committee's amendments and thanking the committee staff for really working with us on this bill. A b twenty one eighty nine authorizes the state council on developmental dis disabilities to award a $800,000 annual grant over three years to support a statewide effort to train and connect parents of students with disabilities. This effort will provide families with tools, training, and coordination they need to understand their rights and advocate within California's special education system.
Redner 2
Recent federal actions have significantly reduced the capacity of the US Department of Education to oversee the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, IDEA, IDEA. As a result, states are increasingly responsible for ensuring compliance, protecting the rights of students with disabilities. This leaves our most vulnerable students and their families bearing the short end of the stick with the federal government reducing their enforcement of IDEA, the responsibility to protect and ensure the rights of California's 800,000 special education students fall on us. Today, special education makes up around 15% of California's public school population. And members, I'd like to remind you all that these numbers are only growing over years and years.
Redner 9
It continues to grow. AB twenty one eighty nine provides a practical solution to this gap. Over the span of three years, this bill would lay the groundwork for the creation of a statewide special education parent action network. The organization receiving the grant would be tasked with conducting outreach training and bringing leaders together to inform students in special ed and their families about their rights and how they can advocate for themselves. AB twenty one eighty nine is an effort to strengthen coordination and uplift the parents' voice when it comes to special education.
And with me to speak in support of the bill is Jordan Lindsey, executive director of the Art California, and Christine Caselow, a powerful advocate and mother of a student in special education.
Redner 30
Thank you, mister chair and members, and thank you very much to our champion, the author, some member Wynn, for bringing this bill forward and for the incredible analysis that this committee staff has done on this bill. I'm Jordan Lindsey, executive director for The Arc of California, a statewide movement started seventy five years ago by parents with children with developmental disabilities who had the audacity to believe that their children deserved the same opportunities as every other child. Over the last seventy five years, we've seen the continuation of the disability rights movement with federal laws such as the ADA or state laws such as the Lanterman Act. This includes laws and rights for our students with disabilities. The ARC was a driving force in the passage of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, IDEA, in 1975, which required schools to educate all students with disabilities.
Many of these advancements, however, are under attack. Section five zero four of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, a U. S. Civil rights law prohibiting disability, is currently under attack in the courts. The ARC is fighting against nine states that are trying to invalidate Section five zero four.
Similarly, the Federal Office of Special Education has recently been dismantled, and an audit found that 90% of complaints in the last few months are going, dismissed that are going to that office by parents. What does all this mean? It means that oversight and enforcement of IDEA and other critical rights for our students with disabilities is going to be more and more reliant on the states and statewide stakeholders. Now, when we talk about stakeholders in special education, there are several, many of which are in this room and we've heard of today heard from today. And nearly all of them many stakeholders in special ed are very well organized the state level and can provide input to the legislature, whether that's the teachers or school administrators or the SELPAs.
Redner 14
The most important voice, in our opinion, however, the voice of the students and parents, is usually not at that table. So AB 2,189 would provide funding to the State Council on Developmental Disabilities to administer a grant to ensure that the parent voice in California can be heard at the state level, at the federal level, can be organized and heard. The grant would create the infrastructure for a coalition of all stakeholders in California's special education system, a collaborative, not combative coalition with the aim of unifying around systemic advocacy. The grant would not duplicate or try to replace this is important it would not duplicate or try to replace activities that are already happening around the state, such as direct parent training and parent leadership training, but instead would bring together those local and regional community leaders to align on statewide systems change. We've had great conversations with many of the stakeholders regarding the goal of the bill.
Redner 30
We have received constructive feedback on clarifying the bill, and we appreciate the amendments that have been proposed by the committee. Thank you very much.
Redner 35
Good afternoon, chair Lee and members of the committee. My name is Christine Caselo, and I have been a special education volunteer advocate for sixteen years in Santa Clara County. But more importantly, I am the parent of two children who have had special education services. Currently have an eighth grader. I am here to support AB two thousand one hundred eighty nine.
While our local family resource centers, mine is called Parents Helping Parents, does incredible work helping parents advocate for their individual child, as parents lack a statewide structure to advocate for systemic policy change. As legislators, when you hear about special education from parents, chances are you hear from a parent like me with the time and resources to learn how this system works despite the lack of a statewide special education parent and student advocacy organization. You don't necessarily hear from parents working three jobs, the non English speaking parents, or parents managing very intense medical needs. The network that a b twenty one eighty nine would create would allow local organizations like the family resource centers, like PTAs, like other advocacy groups to work together to get those voices heard by our legislators at the state level. I'm a union member.
I'm a member of SEIU twenty one sorry, 2015 as I am my son's in home support services worker. As a union member, I hear from them about local actions, actions with other branches of SEIU, and actions of many unions working together. In the labor in the labor movement, local chapters unite to create a powerful collective voice. This is the kind of network we want to build with AB twenty one eighty nine, a network where local groups doing important work can work together to create bigger action and let more voices be heard by legislators. AB twenty one eighty nine is the bridge we need.
Redner 15
It will unite existing groups like PTAs, family resource centers, and other local organizations into a powerful network able to elevate the voices of families and students affected by special education. To ensure legislators hear directly from families and students living these experiences, I respectfully ask for your aye vote on a b twenty one eighty nine. Thank you for your time and your leadership.
Redner 1
Thank you very much, and thank you for serving my our home county, Santa Clara County. Alright. Do we have any members of the public who wish to testify in support of the bill? Please come to the microphone. Your name and organization, please.
Redner 5
afternoon. Diana Gonzalez, public policy Advocacy Manager at Monos Home Care here in support of AB two thousand one eighty nine.
Redner 21
Good afternoon. Emeline Shibard with California Disability Services Association in support.
Redner 37
Jane Chen, board certified pediatrician for thirty one years and a parent of a child with special needs, in support.
Redner 6
Julie Sherman, director of public policy for the ARC and United Cerebral Palsy California Collaborative, in support.
Redner 26
Jennifer Womack Oliveira. I'm on the CAC with Sac City Unified School District. I'm also my area's LCAP representative, and I have two children's in special education. And I also am an SCIU twenty fifteen union member, so and I'm in support.
Redner 1
Eric Champa, United Cerebral Palsy in Sacramento in support. Alright. Thank you. Now do we have witnesses in opposition to the bill? Please come forward to the desk if there are witnesses in opposition.
Redner 32
Ted Jackson with Marin Center for Independent Living and Matrix parents at MCIL. We have actually sent a letter in before, which was not on the late letters, but we have an oppose unless amended, and we have sent amendments to the author. If it is amended, we will switch our position.
Redner 1
Alright. Thank you. Are there any other witnesses opposition or any members of the public who should testify in opposition to the bill? Please come forward.
Redner 35
Janice Kinnellen, Family Voices of California. We're in oppose unless amended.
Redner 25
Nancy Netherland, parent of a child with intellectual disabilities and complex medical needs and in opposition unless amended, also with little lobbyists.
Redner 1
Okay. Thank you. Any other members of the public who just wish to sign opposition to the bill? Alright. Seeing none, I'm gonna bring it back to the committee for any questions or comments on this bill, members.
Alright. Assemblyman Wynn, would you like to close?
Redner 39
Thank you, mister chair. And and, you know, I I do appreciate the the author on this, and I understand, one, specifically how important advocating for, those with special needs. It's something that I care about very deeply, and I would commit to you that on the personal end, my only worry with this bill is that it opens the door where the language can be done in the future for a different group. That and we've seen that time and time again where bills that are really good ideas also become what opens the next door. And when I see state resources and funds being used for advocacy, I think a lot of people think that means lobbying the government, pushing things.
And I think that's where, on my personal end, I commit to you wholeheartedly that I think whatever I need to do on my personal end, but when it comes to the state resources, my fear is that somebody else comes in, and then they work on another bill in the future that says this, and this is the framework that opens that door. And so, for me, I can't support this bill. Just wanted to make sure that you know, from my personal end, whatever you need me to do, I will do.
Redner 39
I've committed that to Assemblyman Jeff Gonzalez. I've committed that to Loretta's Little Little Miracles in my district. I've committed that to anybody and everybody that wants to see what we can do and work as hard as we can, but it's just a prioritize prioritization of state resources used for specific advocating that opens the door to things that aren't in the same boat as this. So thank you.
Redner 1
Any other questions, comments, members? Alright. I'll invite the I'll invite the Alta to close.
Redner 30
on this? Is that okay? Yes. Very much appreciate that and the personal work that you have done. I want to just note in a lot of our research around this, there certainly is precedent already for state funds being used for advocacy building and advocacy infrastructure development.
Whether or not you believe that's wrong or right, that's right. Up that's fair game. But this doesn't set a precedent. Just want that to be clear. There's certainly many precedents or many situations and examples of that happening already.
Redner 9
Yeah. Yeah. And assembly member Tongipai, you know, thank you thank you for that. And you've been you're right. Like, I've had conversations with you on the side, and you really do care about this this community having two members and the legislator that speaks openly about it.
And you've always opened up your heart to us and told us how much you care about this. I think for us, it's more than that. When we talk about state resources, this is the community that gets overlooked, that is forced to get cut, that is the one that never has anybody that's advocating for them. So both assembly member Jeff Gonzales and I are using our experience and our lived experience to advocate to ensure that we let members of the legislature know about this. Because if not us, then who will advocate for for this community?
Right? But I I, you know, I appreciate you for, really, you know, support supporting this effort. I under I understand what you're I disagree, but I also understand. I I think that's why we're here. Right?
Like, we're here to advocate. And when we can use, the state to be able to provide voice for families that are more in need than most other families that are still trying to figure this out, this is where we can help them out in a very small way. Right? We're not asking for millions and millions of dollars. We're asking for very little to be able to give them an opportunity to advocate and be the voice.
You've heard of a parent that's here. She's working. She's the person that supports her kiddo. She doesn't have the time to do this, and having this extra support and this this extra resource is going to help her so much more, and that's why we're doing this. I wanna also state, mister chair and members, that, some of these amendments came over really late, and so we're committed to working with them to figure out where the balance is so that we can continue to move this forward.
But I will also say that everybody that was in opposition or sending amendments are for this community. I wanna see something happen and wanna make sure that they're supported and that their voices are heard. So we have this this overarching goal. We are all speaking the same language. You just gotta figure out where that that balance is.
And with that, I respectfully ask for your
Redner 1
Thank you so much, Wen, for for bringing this bill forward. Should this bill get out should this bill get out today, it will go to the assembly education committee where I know you'll continue to work with the stakeholders. I really appreciate you bringing this, Phil, because, you know, it is a creating an advocacy network advocacy support for so many families that often, at best, are doing this on a volunteer basis in the limited amount of time that they have. And like you said, it's really supporting a network for just so that they can better amplify their needs and talk to people. It's not such an advocacy in a strict lobbying kind of sense, but also to build solidarity and like mindedness.
And this occurs especially in the local level where you really need to have advocates and like minded folks like the parents of the parents, right, on the school district's level. So I really appreciate these efforts, and I'm recommending it aye as amended. The bill was, moved by a similar slacier and seconded by similar assembly member Castillo. Madam secretary, please call the roll on this bill.
Redner 7
File item eleven, eighty two one eight nine. The motion is due pass as amended to the assembly education committee. Lee?
Redner 7
Lee I. Castillo? Aye. Castillo I. Caldera?
Elhurie? Aye. Elhurie, aye. Jackson? Solache?
Aye. Solache, aye. Tongaba. Tongaba not voting.
Redner 1
And now we'll proceed to the next bill. If a b 2684. 84. File item 24. So you may begin when you're ready.
Redner 9
Thank you. Of course. Yes. K, mister chair and members. Thank you for allowing me to present a b twenty six eighty four.
This bill aligns state law with federal law by giving nonminor dependents, also known as NMDs, who are placed at a state the option to perform monthly visits with their social worker virtually. California is currently one of 26 states that has opted to provide continued support for foster youth transitioning into adulthood. This bill builds on California's commitment to continue supporting foster youth by giving NMTs the flexibility in how they conduct their monthly meetings. I wanna also state that in person meetings are one of those that are very important to me because it allows social workers develop that relationship, the trust, and also giving them the opportunity to gauge the physical and emotional well-being. So we are not eliminating the in person meetings.
We are just making it so that way it is a little bit easier when they're able to do the virtual meetings. This bill ensures that relationship between NMDs and the social worker is maintained by requiring in person visits to happen at least once per quarter. And here to speak in support of the bill and answer any technical questions is Amanda Kirchner, director of legislative advocacy for County Welfare Directors Association of California.
Redner 13
Thank you. Good afternoon, mister chair and members. Amanda Kirchner on behalf of CWDA. We are proud to sponsor a b twenty six eighty four, which will allow nonmember dependents who are living out of state to use virtual visitation with their social workers. We've had extended foster care since 2010.
That allows 18 to 21 year olds remain in foster care. They get additional supports like housing and educational support, financial stipends, and independent living and life skills. As of January, there was about 6,700 NMDs in California. Most of them live in state, but about 200 to 300 live out of state. They live with their family.
Redner 41
Some are attending college, and others are out of state for work. Our social workers try really hard to have a very collaborative relationship where they can support these young adults as they sort of navigate through this new chapter of their lives. But because of trauma and their involvement in the foster care system, those relationships can sometimes be tricky. And when our social workers come for the monthly visit, it often feels like we are checking up on them and not checking in with them as young adults. And so we're hoping that with AB twenty six eighty four, this becomes really a youth led, choice for them to be able to use virtual visitations, have a more collaborative approach, and so that they can take the lead in how they manage this relationship with their social workers.
Redner 13
So it truly feels very cooperative and supporting. As noted, social workers will still, schedule visits in person once a quarter or if there's ever any concern about the health or safety of the NMD living out of state. By making these changes, we hope the visits are more youth led. They incorporate technology they're familiar with on their own terms to help them develop a trusting and collaborative relationship their social worker. We urge your support.
Thank you.
Redner 1
Thank you. Now do we have any members of the public who wish to testify in support of this bill? Please come up to the microphone.
Redner 35
Good afternoon. Libby Sanchez on behalf of the chief probation officers of California in support.
Redner 1
Thank you. Now do we have any witnesses in opposition to the bill? Any members of the public who wish to testify in opposition to the bill, please come up to microphone. Seeing none, we'll bring it back to committee. Any questions, comments, motions?
Someone over at Elwhari. Go ahead.
Redner 8
I'm a foster mom, to a young woman who, actually went to school out of town and just thinking about this opportunity for the youth led aspect and really allowing the young people themselves to make the choice and and really make those decisions is huge. So thank you for the work that you all are doing and to the author for bringing this forward.
Redner 1
Thank you. Any motions? Alright. Thank you. I'll invite the author to close.
Redner 9
Thank you. Thank you, mister chair, and thank you for sharing that you are a foster mom. I'm a foster mom before in the past, and we've talked about this. And when this bill came to me, when I was a foster mom, I was more of a respite looking to foster adopt. And so I took in little babies, and we would have to do visitation.
And when I did the visitation, I would once in a while see some transitional age youth, so youth that were getting into adulthood that would have to do these visitation, and you can tell how upset they are that they had to be there. You can tell that they didn't wanna be there. Just their body language and the look on their face, it already sets this negative tone in their mind. Right? And what we wanna do with these, young people is that we wanna build on that relationship.
And sometimes it does taking that virtual, like, hi. How are you doing? Just checking in. And then the next time, it gets a little bit more to some point where you develop this relationship that you wanna come and see them in person and you become friends. And that's the way you deal with young people who are growing into adulthood because they've got hormones.
They've got got all these things that are going on with them, and so we wanna meet them where we're at. And so when this opportunity came to me as a former foster mom, I thought, this is definitely something that we need to do. This is something that we need to get caught. And I absolutely thought about you, as family member, Ehra, because I remember you talking about being a foster mom as well. And I knew that this was something that you would see, have the experience, and know that this is something we need.
So with that, I respectfully ask for your arrival. Thank you.
Redner 1
Well, thank you so much for bringing this bill forward. This bill was moved by assailor Misalacha, seconded by assailor Tanguipa. This bill enjoys an eye recommendation from me. Madam sec madam secretary, please call the roll on a b twenty six eighty four.
Redner 7
File item 24, a b two six eight four, the motion is due passed to the assembly judiciary committee. Lee. Aye. Lee I. Castillo.
Redner 7
Castillo I. Calderon. El Juari. Aye. El Juari I.
Jackson. Selache. Selache I. Tongapah. Tongapah I.
Redner 1
That builds out. Congratulations. Alright. I see a similar Zaburra is here. And if he is ready to present file item number six, a B1967, he may come up when he's ready.
Whenever you're ready, you may begin.
Redner 40
Thank you, mister chair, members. I'm proud today to present AB nineteen sixty seven, which will promote better outcomes for older youth experiencing homelessness and instability. Children and young adults often experience homelessness for reasons that are distinct from the adult population. Their episodes of homelessness may follow significant family instability or exits from institutional settings such as juvenile the juvenile justice system. In other cases, youth may be left, may have left the child welfare system through adoption or guardianship often to find themselves in a situation that's unsupportive or even unsafe.
Youth who leave those situations can become homeless or exploited within weeks. Disproportionately, LGBTQ plus and people of color, these youths are extremely vulnerable, and yet current law is leaving them behind. Youth who are unhoused and living in a youth shelter or group home are often unable to enter the child welfare system through self petition. When these youth self petition, the county often only investigates the shelter or group home they are temporarily living in and considers them to be in a stable situation. This assessment ignores the reality of the situation and the circumstances that they may be left behind when they become unhoused.
For unhoused youth who need the support of the child welfare system, this bill ensures that county social workers review the circumstances in the home of the youth, not just the youth shelter or group home they may be temporarily living in, when determining if they need to enter the child welfare system. This gives them a more accurate picture of the instability a youth may be experiencing and why they need services. This bill also ensures that these youth can petition the court if the assigned county social worker does not respond to their self petition and gives the court discretion to open a juvenile dependency case. For youth who left the adoptive home, this bill eliminates barriers so that they can enter extended foster care when their guardian or adoptive parent is no longer providing support but is still receiving financial benefits on their behalf. Reentry into foster care allows a youth to regain access to housing, case management, behavioral health services, and education supports that prevent homelessness and long term harm.
Older youth deserve a safe path into foster care when abuse or neglect occurs, whether they're entering for the first time on their own petition or returning because of an adopted parent is no longer supporting them. AB nineteen sixty seven continues the work I started in this space several years ago and ensures that older youth have access to the support that they need. I ask for your I vote at the appropriate time. And with me today, in support of the bill are Zakarai Okenda, senior policy attorney with the Alliance for Children's Rights, and Deni Choisolot, membership and policy coordinator with the California Coalition for Youth, both cosponsors of the bill.
Redner 36
Thank you. Good afternoon, chair and members. I'm Deni Choisolot, membership and public policy coordinator with the California Coalition for Youth. Our members support young people with other options. They've been kicked out of their homes or left abusive families.
And state law requires that unaccompanied youth who seek services from youth homelessness prevention centers, YHPC, can only stay at these programs up for ninety days. YHPC staff, our mandated reporters, note that when youth disclose abuse or unsafe home environments, the resulting reports often do not trigger immediate child welfare investigations because the youth is temporarily safe within the program. A responsive self petition process helps that. It gives older youth a confidential, trauma informed way to ask for help when they're in danger. These young people are fully capable of explaining what's happening to them, and the legislation still ensures that every petition triggers professional assessment and judicial oversight.
I'd like to share a story of a young person who came to the attention of one of our members. Matt was living on the streets in San Francisco after years of years of abuse by his father. Matt's father threw him out of the house after he came out at age 16. After several months on the streets, Matt found respite in, a local youth shelter following several dangerous encounters. Staff and staff at the shelter connected Matt to legal aid advocates who assisted Matt in filing a petition under California's welfare and institutions code three twenty nine to enter foster care alleging maltreatment.
Redner 46
Despite his self petition to enter foster care to find the stability and support he needed, Matt's self petition did not result in the county child welfare agency opening a juvenile dependency case. The county welfare agency did not, sorry, advocates believe that Matt was residing in the youth shelter, the county welfare agency did not recommend opening a juvenile justice case because he was not facing an urgent safety risk. Because California law laws law allows youth to stay in youth homelessness prevention centers for up to ninety consecutive days, the stability of a youth shelter can put in jeopardy the long term supports and services that Matt and young people in similar circumstances need to stabilize in the short term and thrive in the long term. He struggled to identify stability and safe and affordable housing. Matt was not able to find long term housing situation.
Redner 36
His relatives all rejected his request. His legal aid advocates lost contact with him after he left the youth shelter. AB nineteen sixty seven will help ensure timely and responsive attention to Matt and other young people's self petitions. I respectfully ask for your I vote.
Redner 22
you. I'm Zachariah Okenda, senior policy attorney with the Alliance for Children's Rights. We serve youth who experience poverty, abuse, or neglect, which can include youth in adoptive families. Adoption is not always the permanent safety net we hope it to be. When an adoptive placement breaks down, a young person can lose their housing overnight.
And under current law, a youth can be locked out of extended foster care entirely if they're unable to successfully reenter before turning 18. This worst case scenario, which we see too often, can happen when an adoptive parent is still collecting adoption assistant payments even while providing no support to the youth. We saw this with a client, Zara, a young woman who was adopted out of foster care and later kicked out of her adoptive home at 17. She was forced to drop out of community college and work full time just to survive. The system had no foster care reentry pathway for her.
Redner 20
No more should the provision of AAP payments or any other financial assistance be a barrier to the youth like Zora to reenter foster care. A B1967 would have helped Zara. Despite her failed adoption, by allowing Zara to reenter into foster care under a voluntary reentry agreement that triggers the suspension of those payments. This refocuses the support where it should be on the youth and their needs. I respectfully ask for your I vote.
Redner 1
Thank you. Now do we have members of the public who wish to testify in support of the bill? Please come up to the microphone at this time.
Redner 41
Good afternoon. Tiffany Fan on behalf of California Court Appointed Special Advocate Association in support. Thank you.
Redner 1
Now do we have any witnesses in opposition to the bill? Please come forward. Any members of the public who should testify in opposition to the bill? Please come up to the microphone. Seeing none, I'm gonna ring back to committee for any questions or comments from committee members.
Alright. Seeing no questions, I'll let the author close.
Redner 3
You know, one of the things that causes me to sort of focus on foster youth is the fact that, you know, they are youth that we, as the state of California, are responsible for. And so, you know, when the systems aren't working for them, we need to make sure that we're stepping forward and making sure that these kids are being cared for and whether, you know, they have been adopted and come into an adopted home, it's still it's still our responsibility when that's not working for us to sort of step in and make sure that the system cares for them. And so I just wanna thank the sponsors of the bill for working with our office and respectfully ask for a nay vote.
Redner 1
Thank you for bringing this bill forward, and thank you for your attention to, to these young people who are unfortunately out there, who definitely need flexibility, especially because of some of the stories you shared. LGBTQ, they're overrepresented in homelessness. People are experiencing a lot of hardship, especially among young people. So I think this is an important bill. I'm recommending an I vote today, and this bill was moved by Sommer Rislache and seconded by Sommer Al Hawari.
So all the LGBTQ members on here. So, madam secretary, please call the roll on a on this bill, a b nine sixty seven.
Redner 7
File item six, a b one nine six seven. The motion is due passed to the assembly appropriations committee. Lee? Aye. Lee, aye.
Castillo? Castillo, I. Calderon? Elhwari? Aye.
Elhwari, Jackson? Solache? Aye. Solache, Tongapaw? Aye.
Tongapaw, I.
Redner 1
That bill is out. Congratulations. Thank you very much. Are there any other noncommittee authors present? If not, I believe Assembly El Hawari is ready to present a bill.
You're doing file item number 92126. Correct?
Redner 8
Good afternoon, mister chair and members. First, I'd like to thank the committee and staff for all of your work on the bill, and I will be accepting committee amendments. AB twenty one twenty six removes unnecessary hiring barriers for peer partners in our child welfare system, people who bring lived experience and are uniquely positioned to support others navigating those same systems. A peer partner is someone who has navigated one or more public systems of care and now uses their lived experience to support others facing similar challenges. They play an important role in child welfare, behavioral health, and juvenile justice systems.
Research shows that peers improve engagement, strengthen stability, and support outcomes like reunification and staying in school. However, many individuals who apply for positions at community care licensed facilities are unable to secure employment because their criminal records trigger a lengthy ex exemption review process. This delay especially affects former foster youth, many of whom have nonviolent offenses tied to trauma or instability during adolescence. This exemption review process can take up to twelve months. As many of these individuals cannot wait that long for employment, the delay leads to a loss of qualified peer workers.
Accordingly, a b twenty one twenty six creates a targeted automatic background check exemption for peer applicants who are current or former foster youth and whose offenses occurred before age 21. Violent and child related felonies are still excluded from this exemption, and all existing fingerprint based checks remain in place to ensure safety. This change allows agencies to hire peer partners more quickly and enables individuals with lived experience to contribute to the workforce while maintaining safety protections. Joining me today is Annie Thomas, policy advocate with the California Alliance of Child and Family Services, and Santos Flores Castro, a former foster youth and peer partner.
Redner 21
Thank you. Good afternoon, chair Lee and members. Annie Thomas on behalf of the California Alliance of Child and Family Services, proud cosponsor of AB two one two six. The California Alliance represents over 200 organizations, including many licensed providers such as short term residential therapeutic programs, foster family agencies, and other programs that serve foster youth in the child welfare system. Our members recognize the value of hiring peers with lived experience because they see every day the trust, connection, and credibility those peers bring to youth engagement and support.
Too often, the very young people best positioned to support foster foster youth are blocked from employment because of aid youth age offenses tied to trauma, instability, and system involvement. Under current law, if the offense is not on the state's list of disqualifying crimes, the Department of Social Services already has the authority to grant an exemption. The problem is that that process takes seven to twelve months, and most applicants can't wait that long for a job. These delays not only cause agencies to lose qualified candidates, it also discourages agencies to hire peers in the first place. Current and former foster youth are uniquely appropriate for these roles because they know the system from the inside.
Redner 8
They understand what it means to navigate placements, court hearings, case plans, and the instability that so many young people face. That lived experience helps build trust, improve engagement, and help youth advocates youth advocate for themselves from a place of firsthand understanding. This bill removes that barrier. It doesn't change the law for serious nonexemptible crimes, and it maintains the same background checks and safety standards already required under current law. It simply ensures that for current and former foster youth seeking to work in a peer support capacity, already exemptable offenses committed before age 21 do not trigger a long discretionary delay that keeps them out of the workforce.
Redner 21
This bill recognizes lived experience as an asset, not a liability, and helps ensure that foster youth are supported by people who truly understand their experience. For these reasons, we respectfully ask for your I vote.
Redner 24
Yes. Good afternoon, chair Lee, members, and everyone present. My name is Santo, and I am a former foster youth. And I'm here to speak on behalf of the importance of this bill, AB twenty one twenty six. Removing barriers for former foster youth, as Annie spoke and the author, to to some, maybe just bureaucracy to some, but for former foster youth who have been let down by family, caretakers, society, who also carry trauma and the instability that has been spoken about, shuffled through systems, this can be a lifeline, a hope that cannot be truly measured.
Redner 43
I wanna share briefly just my story to illustrate this. I didn't commit any crimes after I turned 18, and I am very grateful and blessed for that. I don't have that exact experience, but I was given a second chance while in foster care. I ran away from the court ordered group home, Rancho San Antonio, had a warrant for my arrest. Two months later, after reaching the end of all hope for my life, ready to die by gang violence, God saved my life.
I had a deep desire to go back to Rancho and face all my trauma and pain. And, sorry. Lost my train right there. I turned myself into juvenile hall, and Rancho accepted me back. As a result of that return, hope was not only restored, but a life of service and devotion to helping others was birthed.
I became a youth peer, completed college, worked at the very boys' home, Rancho, that saved my life, got a master's degree in social work. I'm a licensed therapist, and I have influenced thousands of people over my career at this point. I say all this just really for one reason. What if that lifeline of a job that a former foster youth is seeking and that barrier that a b twenty one twenty six solves was removed and hope was infused and they can work? What if that trajectory of that life is like mine, serving hundreds and even thousands, giving back, making a difference.
And for this reason, I ask from my heart to yours, for your a vote, for a b twenty one twenty six. Thank you so much.
Redner 1
Thank you. Now do we have any members of the public who wish to testify in support of this bill? Please come up to the microphone.
Redner 30
Tom Renfrey on behalf of the California Association of Alcohol and Drug Program Executives in support. Thank you.
Redner 37
Yesenia Robancho with End Child Poverty in California in strong support.
Redner 36
Nicole Wortelman on behalf of the Children's Partnership, cosponsor in support.
Redner 45
Alana Ladisser, with the American Nurses Association of California, in support.
Redner 13
Amanda Kirchner on behalf of County Welfare Directors Association. We're a cosponsor in support. Mhmm.
Redner 26
Sally Ching with the Alliance for Boys and Men of Color in strong support, also reading a me too on behalf of several other organizations, California School Based Health Alliance, Sister Warriors Freedom Coalition, Integral Community Solutions Institute, Integral excuse me. Felony Murder Elimination Project, California Coalition for Youth, Los Angeles Trust for Children's Health, Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice, Cancel the Contract, National Health Law Center Law Program, Legal Services for Prisoners with Children, and Child Poverty California, Children's Defense Fund, the collective for liberatory lawyering, youth leadership institute, and boys republic. Thank you.
Redner 1
Alright. Thank you. Now are there any witnesses in opposition to the bill? Let's go forward. Any members of the public who wish to testify in opposition to the bill or members of the public wish to sign the opposition to the bill?
Seeing none, I'll bring it back to committee for questions or comments. So question or comment from Assembly Chungiba.
Redner 39
Thank you, and I look forward to moving this bill forward today, and it's good to see you both. You know, I know we've worked together a lot recently. The one thing that I do want just for consideration for the future, you know, obviously, this is the exemption all the way up to crimes committed before 21 years old. If we can at least look into something potentially that says end crimes not committed within the last two years, because I wanna make sure that we're not having a specific carve out where somebody does something, and then they're 20, then all of a sudden, you know, if there are it's just if there's just a general protection. So that way, can make sure that if somebody wants to get better, if somebody wants to then go and and give that service again, you know, we're making sure that we have all of the protections in place.
You know, one, I really thank you for sharing your story, and all of you have heard mine when I shared at the the event. But I understand what it means when you find hope and you find a chance, and sometimes that comes from somebody else with lived experience. So as long as we can have those safeguards in place, so that way we can make sure, that we're benefiting those who are looking for some help. So just just as a consideration, and, look forward to moving this forward today. And then I I will be looking for that in the future.
Thank you.
Redner 11
I wanna thank the author for this bill, and I wanna thank you for your testimony. I am a dual licensed therapist, and I'm gonna be honest. I was gonna oppose your bill. As someone who worked for the County of Riverside Department of Mental Health, I worked with peer support specialists. And although it says not caregiver roles, my concern was peer support specialists in the role doing the work that I do without a license, you know?
That was my concern.
Redner 11
Which yeah. They're still dealing with people who are very vulnerable, and that was where my concern was. After hearing your testimony, I'm gonna vote to support your bill. Thank you. Thank you.
Redner 1
Alright. Any other questions or comments? See, this is why it's important to have our witnesses come to Sacramento, so I appreciate your open mindedness. Yes. Alright.
I will invite the author to close.
Redner 1
Alright. Thank you. I thank you for working the committee staff on this bill. Foster youth's peer support allows for unique support to foster youth and ultimately lead to better outcomes. The bill reduces barriers for the specific population to work with in a peer capacity, and I am recommending aye as amended.
And this bill was moved by assemblymember Slachey and seconded by seconded by anyone? Seconded. Seconded by Tongipa? Assemblymember's Tongipa? Madam sector, please call the roll on a v twenty one twenty six.
Redner 7
File item nine, a b two one two six. The motion is due pass as amended to the Assembly Public Safety Committee. Lee?
Redner 7
Lee, I. Castillo? Aye. Castillo, I. Calderon?
El Juari? Aye. El Juari, I. Jackson? Solache?
Aye. Selache I. Tongapah I. Tongapah I.
Redner 1
Alright. Next, we're gonna go to a similar Selache for file item sixteen, a b twenty three seventy nine. Welcome. No rush. Whenever you're ready.
Please answer any questions. Yes. Yes. Thank you for joining us.
Redner 24
Go ahead. Thank you, mister chair, members, for the opportunity to present, AB twenty three seventy nine, protecting family, child care providers' constitutional rights. I'm grateful to you and the committee for, your hard work and thoughtful analysis on this bill. Child care homes are essential to California's child care system, especially for working class immigrant families. A b three twenty three seventy nine ensures licensed and licensed exempt family child care providers are informed of their constitutional rights when confronted by immigration enforcement.
Redner 10
The bill requires the Department of Social Services to notify providers of their Fourth Amendment protections and to coordinate accessible multilingual training. The training will ensure providers understand the rights regarding searches, seizures, arrests, and detentions in their homes. By educating providers of their constitutional rights, the bill helps keep childcare doors open and safe for from intimidation, misinformation, and unlawful searches or arrest by law enforcement, including federal immigration authorities. AB twenty three seventy nine builds on existing sensitive location protections by ensuring family childcare providers have the information and tools they need to protect themselves, the children, their their on the care in their care and the families they serve. This bill is cosponsored by the Child Care Providers United, SCAU California, United Domestic Workers, ASME Local three nine ninety.
Redner 33
Good afternoon, madam chair and members. My name is Charlotte Neal, and I am a twenty four hour childcare provider here in Sacramento. I am here today to support a b twenty three seventy nine. Providers like me have been first know firsthand how child care facilities have become targets for aggressive immigration enforcement activities. We know that agencies like ICE prey upon people's ignorance of their rights in order for people to unwittingly cooperate with their own victimization.
Redner 47
I have to say that again, to cooperate with their own victimization. We know knowledge is power, and that is why it is essential that a b twenty three seventy nine be adopted. We must have mandated training that informs us of our Fourth Amendment rights against unwarranted searches, seizures, and unlawful entries into in order to protect the children in our care, the families who rely on our services, our employees, and ourselves. AB 23 will ensure that providers are already prepared, informed, and ready to assess our constitutional rights. If ICE comes to our doorstep, we must know how to respond and how to stay safe.
We are proud to partner with Assemblyman Solaj to ensure that state broadens its trainings, offerings for our providers with a focus on the safety and well-being of us, our families, communities that we serve. Thank you very much.
Redner 48
Good afternoon, chair and committee members. My name is Elvigar Ramirez, and I am a childcare provider in San Jose. And I am a proud member of childcare provider, ECI U Local five two one. And I am also a certified Know Your Rights facilitator with our childcare providers united training fund. I have cared for many children, including kids with immigrant families, and I have seen firsthand the trauma, fear, and cause.
One of those families recently experienced this as the father was detained by ICE for two months. His his young son went from being happy and carefree to anxious, living an uncertainly while his mother had no had no one to turn to but me. Providers are often placed in this uncertain situation, which we were never trained for. That is where my role as a certified, facilitator matters. Through Know Your Rights training, I am able to teach providers about the four amendment protection and how to respond safely while protecting their homes, their business, and children in their care.
I have seen providers to go from fear to confidence, from no from knowing not knowing what to say to being able to respond calmly and clearly, and from feeling alone to feeling prepared. Right now, this training is not reaching everyone because access depends on location, language, and opportunity, which means our childcare system is relying on chance. That is not acceptable. AB twenty three seventy nine changes that by ensuring every provider statewide is prepared by receiving consistent know your rights training in multiple languages. So when a moment crisis happen, providers have the tools and preparation to face it.
Redner 12
If providers are prepared, children are safer, families have pace of mind, and communities are stronger. As a provider, I have lived it. Now as a facilitator, I am able to help fellow providers and their families to serve. That is why I respectfully urge you to support the a b twenty three seventy nine so that together we can educate entire communities. And I can tell you firsthand that this cannot wait.
Redner 24
Thank you. And we have Edgar Aguera, who will just be here to answer any technical questions from SAU California.
Redner 1
Great. Thank you. Now do we have any witnesses in support of the bill or any members of public who should just sign in support of the bill? Please come to the microphone.
Redner 37
Hi. Yesenia Robancho with End Child Poverty in California in strong support. Thank you.
Redner 12
Lucy Salcedo Carter with the Alameda County Office of Education in support.
Redner 9
Aliyah Griffin with the American Federation of State County Municipal Employees in support.
Redner 36
Kathy Van Austin on behalf of the American Association of University Women of California in support.
Redner 21
Stephanie Orozco on behalf of First LA in strong support. Yahaira Gonzales with First Five California in strong support.
Redner 1
Alright. Thank you. Now do we have any witnesses in opposition to the bill? Please come forward. Any witnesses in opposition?
Any other members of the public who should wants to sign the opposition to the bill, please come forward to the microphone. Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the committee for any questions or commentary on this bill or any motions. You have a commentary or questions? Okay. Go forward.
Redner 39
So typically, for me, I never have an issue with trying to inform the public when it comes to their own constitutional rights. I think everybody should be aware. Heck, I even think that members of the legislature should have lessons on the second amendment, maybe the first amendment as well. But, you know, when it comes to the positioning of DSS, or d d or, yeah, DSS, you know, I think that this is something that the constitution has made legible so and easily so people can actually access it. And, you know, when I'm looking at what's going on right now, the this is I don't believe it's the purpose of DSS, to work on this.
And that's where when it comes to the education on the constitution, I think, one, there's a lot of information out there. It's readily available. And, you know, for that, I'm just laying off. Thank you.
Redner 1
Are there any other questions or comments or motions, members of this bill? If not, I will invite the author to oh, is someone in a call room? Yes. Go for
Redner 15
Hi. Can you hear me? Hi. I just wanna thank you for bringing this bill forward. I know I walked in late, but, I think it's a good bill, and I'd love to be added as coauthor, please.
Thank you.
Redner 24
Sure. Thank you, mister chair and committee members. Thank you for those comments today. I think it's a very simple and to the point we're trying to hear today. We're trying to ensure that our providers know their rights In my district where I probably represent eight communities, my community continues to live in fear of what if, what what happens.
And so I think one of the things that that I'm I'm proud to have carry this bill to ensure that our child care providers who are taking care of our children statewide are gonna have the opportunity to, ensure that they're educated and and and and informed of what the rights are. Nothing new. We're not creating anything new. We're just informing them and ensuring that they have the best tools to protect not only themselves, the childcare, and ultimately, the children that they're caring for. So I'm proud of our our childcare providers today that offer testimony, of course, to our our our labor partners at SA California, ensuring that we are always advocates for our communities.
And I think this is, the right direction to just keep informing, community members of of their rights and, in a time of kind of of living a a little bit of of fear in this situation. So thank you, and I ask for your it's okay for your your high support.
Redner 1
Alright. Thank you so much. Assembly member, I really appreciate you bringing this bill forward and building upon the momentum we've had in the recent years. It is an unfortunate reality that our child care centers are potentially under threat from mass deportation raids, and I do think it is important that our childcare providers do are educated more on the constitution and the constitutional rights, especially it's something as critical as the Fourth Amendment. I would say that eighteenth century English is not actually the most successful thing, especially for immigrant families and especially for and I really thank all of our, childcare providers themselves are coming all the way up to Sacramento, especially since you're doing twenty four hour care.
You're taking a couple hours to come up here is really important as well. I do think it is very important because, especially speaking for people of color and immigrants, you know, it they do come from other regimes that you have to cooperate with the government. Right? But in America, you have constitutional rights, so this might not be the norm for people. And I think it is so important, especially when you're protecting our children, especially as we've seen the federal government also use children as bait.
So I think it's very important that we can do such important step as educating people about the Fourth Amendment right, which is a very crucial part of the bill rights. I also would love to be added as a coauthor. I, also believe in this bill very much. I'm recommending an I vote on this bill. If we could get a motion and a second for this bill.
Redner 1
The bills are probably moved and seconded by assembly member Calderon and assembly member Elawari. Madam secretary, please call the roll on a b twenty three seventy nine.
Redner 7
File item 16 a b two three seven nine. The motion is due passed to the assembly judiciary committee. Lee?
Redner 1
bell's out. We'll leave the role open for absent members. Alright. Do I see any author members here? If not, we'll go to assembly member Calderon to do a b twenty two ninety nine item 14.
And then after that, if we have a lull, we will just we'll take up motions on all the bills we didn't previously have quorum on first. But we're also looking for authors. So if your staff and you're watching this and you have a committee bill, we're still looking for many authors. Alright. Whenever you're ready, it's something called the wrong.
You may begin.
Redner 15
Good afternoon. Thank you, mister chair and members. In July 2025, president Trump signed h r one, which made the largest cuts to the supplemental nutrition assistance program, also known as SNAP, and CalFresh, in California history. HR one cut food assistance for millions of families and shifted costs from the federal government to the state. One of these cuts was an expansion of time limits on food benefits.
Redner 42
As a result, beginning in June 2026, nearly 700,000 Californians will lose federal food assistance simply because they cannot prove they meet the work or community engagement reporting rules. After June 1, anyone receiving CalFresh who is not exempt can only receive CalFresh benefits for three months within a three year period unless they can demonstrate they are working a minimum of twenty hours a week every month. Through h r one, the federal government cruelly limited exemptions from these time limits. So now people who were once exempt will be cut off from food benefits if they can't find work or fail to report their hours, including veterans, former foster youth, older adults aged fifty five to sixty four, people with dependent children older than 13, and people experiencing homelessness. Limiting access to food is just wrong.
Redner 15
If we do nothing, the California Department of Social Services estimates that 665,000 Californians will lose indispensable food assistance. AB two two nine nine, the California Anti Hunger Response and Employment Training Act, will provide a safety net for Californians who lose their CalFresh benefits until they are able to become eligible for CalFresh benefits again. I'd like to thank the chair and the committee for working with me on this critical bill. With me with me here to testify in support is Keely O'Brien from the Western Center on Law and Poverty and Khoi Seidern from the Coalition of California Welfare Rights.
Redner 17
Hi, chair and committees. Khoi Seidern with the or legislative advocate with the Coalition of California Welfare Rights Organization. I'm the daughter of a Yumaan refugee family, US military allies in the secret war in Laos. We came to this country carrying the weight of a war this government helped start, and we built our lives here the best that we could. I'm a first generation American born in Fresno, a UC Santa Cruz graduate, a CalFresh recipient.
This system was built first with someone like me in mind, and it's so hard. Fourteen days ago, humanitarian immigrants, refugees, asylees, survivors of trafficking began losing their CalFresh. People who came here the same way my family did to flee persecution, violence, and torture. They haven't all lost their benefits yet. They'll lose them one by one at recertification without a bridge waiting for them.
AB 2299 is that bridge. It has to pass before the wave fully lands. My community came here carrying trauma most had never had the chance to treat. A published study in the American Journal of Psychiatry found that ninety percent of me and patients showed PTSD, even among those who made it to a clinic. These are people already below baseline.
When you're carrying that kind of weight, losing food doesn't arrive as a separate problem. It really accelerates everything. A 2023 JAMA study found that snap access is directly associated with reduced suicide risk. The ripple effects land in emergency rooms and hospitals and child welfare cases. Thirty six percent of the people who have begun losing their benefits right now are children.
Redner 38
While food banks are a vital source, they cannot fill the gap that HR one is causing. For every one meal that the food bank provides, CalFresh delivers nine. Public benefits gave my family room to breathe. The Californians who have already begun to lose their benefits and the hundreds of thousands who will lose theirs in the coming months deserve that same room. This bill is cheaper than what happens without it.
Redner 17
So being hungry never supports stability, and I truly believe that we should support policies like AB twenty two ninety nine to help as many vulnerable Californians receive basic human needs in order to thrive. I urge you to support a b twenty two ninety nine.
Redner 45
Good afternoon, chair and members. Keely O'Brien with the Western Center on Law and Poverty. Two weeks ago, as Khoi said, 72,000 humanitarian immigrants in California, including refugees, asylees, and survivors of trafficking, started having their food benefits stripped away. In June, nearly 700,000 more Californians will follow as time limits are implemented. If we do nothing, time limits alone are expected to cause four thousand four thousand avoidable deaths in California among older adults and parents with children by 2040.
And these cuts are built on a lie that hungry people must be starved into working harder. The research is unambiguous. Work requirements do not increase employment. Every rigorous study shows the same result. People don't find more work.
They just lose food. The maximum CalFresh benefit is $10 a day. Nobody is avoiding work for $10 a day. These are people who are already working in jobs with low pay, unpredictable hours, and no margin for error. AB twenty two ninety nine empowers California to fight back against this cruel policy.
This bill and the associated budget request would make California the first state in the nation to build a food system that's capable of providing everyone losing access to CalFresh with, excuse me, everyone losing access to SNAP due to discriminatory federal rules. And it builds on work that we've already committed to. The planned expansion of the California food assistance program to undocumented older adults in 2027. A b '22 a b 2299 adds to that plan and makes CFAP an even more powerful tool against discrimination and hunger. The return on investing in food security is extraordinary.
Higher employment, stable families, reduced health care costs, better educational outcomes, and so much more. And if we don't fight back, people will suffer and thousands of people will die. When we strip food access, those costs land in our Medicaid budget, our ERs, and our child welfare system, as Koi said. And HR one didn't cut food benefits because we ran out of money at the federal government. The $1,500,000,000,000 they cut from food and health benefits, that funded $1,500,000,000,000 in tax breaks for the ultra wealthy.
Redner 29
So the best way for California to fight back against h r one, against all of its cuts to food, to medical, to our communities is to reverse it, claw back those tax breaks where we can, and restore what was taken from our people. We're lucky to be in the most beautiful and prosperous state in this country, and a b twenty two twenty two ninety nine is our chance to make that prosperity a reality for everyone, not just the ultra wealthy, but the hundreds of thousands of people, the veterans, the seniors, the families, the refugees who built our state and who are now being abandoned by the federal government. I urge you to vote an eye on a b 2299. Thank you.
Redner 1
Thank you very much. Now do we have members of the public who wish to find support of the bill? Please come up to the microphone.
Redner 35
Yesenia Robancho with End Child Poverty in California. This is an End Child Poverty Imagine priority, also a priority for the Dream Alliance Coalition, Stronger California Coalition, and adding in support the California Immigrant Policy Center and End Poverty in California EPIC.
Redner 14
Thank you, mister chair and members. Dawn Kepke on behalf of the Child Abuse Prevention Center and California Family Resource Association. Pleased to be in support.
Redner 24
Alejandro Solis on behalf of California Primary Care Association in support.
Redner 49
Josh Wright with the California Association of Food Banks. Proud cosponsors along with
Redner 1
Thank you. Now do we have any witnesses opposition to the bill? Please come forward. Any members of public who should just find opposition to the bill, please come forward. Alright.
Seeing now, we'll bring it back to committee, assimilator Slachey.
Redner 24
Go forward. Thank you, chair. I wanna thank, again, the author as well for, bringing this bill to forward to us. I know our chair earlier this year was also speaking about how do we improve and work on the SNAP program and food and food insecurity issues. I have a bill in the space, so I just wanna thank the author for this.
This is an important conversation to have and to, obviously, the witnesses today. I also would like to add myself as a coauthor and the importance of moving this conversation forward and looking forward to celebrate when the governor signs it.
Redner 1
Thank you. Alright. Any other questions or comments, members? Seeing none, I'll invite the author to close.
Redner 1
Alright. Thank you. I, again, also wanna reiterate how important this work is. Food security is so critical right now. We have seen time and time even in other states that work requirements are a smooth conservative talking point, but it is a smooth way to actually kick people off of services who actually desperately need it.
So I would also like to be added as a coauthor to this bill, and I will be recommending an I, an I recommendation for this bill. Can I get a second for this bill? Can I get a second for the there we go? Alright. The bills are probably moved in seconded by assembler Mislache and assembler Elhawari.
Madam secretary, please call the roll on this bill.
Redner 7
File item 14 a B2299. The motion is due passed to the assembly appropriations committee. Lee?
Redner 7
Lee, I. Castillo? Calderon? Aye. Calderon, Elhawari?
Aye. El Juarez, aye. Jackson? Salache? Aye.
Salache, aye. Tongapah?
Redner 1
That bill's out. Congratulations. Alright, members. Let's run through some of the bills we, only heard as a subcommittee so we can, bring motions to them. Madam secretary, should we do them one at a time?
Should we go through them? Alright. Let's start with the consent calendar. Can I get a motion in a second for the consent calendar? Second.
Second. Alright. Consent calendars are moved and seconded.
Redner 7
Bills on the consent file. File item two, AB1689, Quirk Silva. File item three, AB1829, Phong. File item eight, AB1996, Bonta. File item 15AB2304 Lackey with amendments.
File item 17, a b two four one four, when?
Redner 7
Lee, I. Castillo? Aye. Castillo, Calderon? Eljore?
Aye. Eljore, Jackson? Solache? Aye. Solache aye.
Tonga Pa?
Redner 1
Yes. Our consent calendar is out. We will leave the rollout open for absent members. Let's move on to bills that had yet to receive their motions and vote on those. So let's start with file item number one, a b fifteen seventy five by Arambula.
Can I get a can I get a can I get a second on that one? Second? Alright. This is for a b fifteen seventy five as I'm properly moved and seconded.
Redner 7
File item one, a b one five seven five, the motion is due passed to the assembly appropriations committee. Lee?
Redner 7
Castillo, not voting. Calderon? Aye. Calderon, aye. El Jore?
El Jore, aye. Jackson? Solache? Aye. Solache, aye.
Tonga paw?
Redner 1
Four to zero. That bills out. We'll leave the roll open for absent members. Alright. Let's move on to file number 5, AB1932 by Elhor.
Can I get a motion and second? Probably the bill has been probably moved and seconded, a b nineteen thirty two. Secretary, please call the roll.
Redner 7
File item five a b one nine three two, the motion is due pass as amended to the assembly judiciary committee. On the urgency, Lee?
Redner 7
Vote change. Castillo on the urgency. Castillo? Aye. Castillo, vote change no to aye.
Redner 1
That bill is out. We'll leave the roll open for absent member members. Alright. The next item that we don't have any motions for will be will be a b twenty four seventy by Orambula. Can I get a motion in a second?
Second. Moved moved by assembly member Slachey, seconded by assembly member Calderon. I'm recommending an I vote. Madam secretary, please call the roll on a b twenty four seventy.
Redner 7
File item 18, a b two four seven zero. The motion is due passed to the assembly appropriations committee. Lee?
Redner 1
Is out. Five of of zero. That bill is out. We will leave the roll open for absent members. Alright.
The next item is file item 21 a b twenty five ten by Arambula. Can I get a motion in a second? Second. It's been moved by assembler Solace, seconded by assembler Calderon. Madam secretary, please call the roll on a b twenty five ten.
Redner 7
File item 21 a b two five one zero. The motion is to pass to the assembly appropriations committee. Lee?
Redner 7
Calderon, aye. Eljore? Aye. Eljore, aye. Jackson?
Solache? Aye. Solache, aye. Tongapaw?
Redner 1
Four to zero, that bill is out. We have one more bill. Right? To bring a motion. We'll do this one, and then we'll go to a similar alpha affairs.
Okay. File number file number 22AB2585 by Arambula. Can I get a motion second, please?
Redner 1
The bills are properly moved and seconded and moved by a similar Calderon, seconded by a similar Sache, madam secretary, please call the roll.
Redner 7
File item 22AB2585. The motion is due passed to the assembly appropriations committee. Lee? Aye. Lee, aye.
Castillo? No. Castillo, no. Calderon? Aye.
Calderon, Elhwari? Aye. Elhwari, I. Jackson? Solache?
Aye. Solache, Tongapah?
Redner 1
Four to zero. That bill is out. I'm going to present actually my bill first because I our witness, I understand, has to leave urgently. So I'm gonna present the bill. Assembler Casio, can you take over?
Yeah.
Redner 1
Thank you, madam vice chair and members. I'm presenting a b twenty two thirteen, which reconstitutes the California Healthy Food Financing Initiative. First, I'm accepting the amendments, including analysis, which are very thoughtful and very thorough, starting on page eight. CalFresh currently serves 5,500,000 people, and it is proven to be one of the most effective programs in tackling food insecurity. If it wasn't for safety net programs like CalFresh, an additional 2,600,000 people would be living in poverty.
Redner 6
But with the passage of HR one and its unprecedented cuts and draconian eligibility restrictions, every CalFresh family is expected to be negatively impacted. Amid devastating federal cuts, the California Healthy Food Financing Initiative will build much needed state reserves to maintain investments in food aid. The bill will create a council represented by the state treasury, the Department of Food and Agriculture, Social Services, as well as labor and workforce development to implement the initiative and develop financing options. The initiative will prioritize funding to organizations that serve communities and food deserts along with the food cooperatives and independent grocery stores, among others. Funding sources may include new market tax credits, federal and foundation grant programs, as well as financing from private financial institutions.
Redner 1
It is estimated that roughly a quarter of California families experience food insecurity. More and more families are struggling to afford their groceries. Over the last five years, grocery prices have surged by almost 30%. The federal government's trade war is causing problems to rapidly increase and hurts local farmers. Without safety net programs, roughly 2,600,000 more Californians would be in poverty.
The bill creates another tool for California to preserve our efforts to combat food insecurity and invest in all of our communities. With me today in support is Arnold Soell with NextGen California.
Redner 51
Good afternoon, madam chair and members. My name is Arnie Soell, and I am the executive director of NextGen California. NextGen is a nonprofit organization that focuses on economic climate, environmental food, and racial and social justice. I'm here today in strong support of a b twenty two thirteen, the California Healthy Food Financing Initiative. First, I wanna thank, assembly member Lee, for bringing this bill forward.
It's, extremely timely. It's comprehensive, and the and the legislation aims to improve healthy food access, eliminate food deserts, better link state the state agricultural sector with regional food systems, and combat food insecurity. Secondly, I just wanna say that this bill has a personal aspect to me, and that is that fifteen years ago, I was the policy director for speaker John Perez, and, speaker Perez is the author of the original California Healthy Foods Financing, initiative. And later in the testimony, mayor Kames was one of my colleagues in the speaker's office who actually worked on the original in the original bill. That being said, the reason why this bill is coming forward is because there's still more work to be done.
The problems of food access, food deserts, and food insecurity still persist still persists in our state. And as a matter of fact, despite California's agricultural abundance, an estimated 3,000,000 Californians live in communities without reliable access to fresh, affordable, and healthy food. In these regions of our state, often, food offerings at, convenience stores as well as, food offerings at, fast food restaurants, are what constitutes the opportunities for folks to access, access food because full service grocery stores are much too far away. And this adds to the financial strain, for families as well as it increases the incidence of diet related disease. It is well documented that these disparities are not evenly distributed.
Low income communities, rural and tribal communities, and communities of color are far more often to lack full service grocery stores. And as a senate member Lee indicated, at the same time all this is happening, the CalFresh program is being devastated by federal actions, and an estimated five point five million Californians could result in in in lose are are on CalFresh and could could lose their benefits. AB twenty two thirteen is a a necessary legislative solution to meet the moment we're facing. By reviving the California Healthy Food Financing Initiative, this bill creates a coordinated cross agency approach to expand food access, build out our food systems, and invest in resources in underserved communities, leveraging federal, state, philanthropic, and private funding, develop a more sustainable strategy for eliminating food deserts and tackling the issue of food insecurity. I respectfully ask that the committee move this bill forward with an I vote.
Redner 11
Thank you. Do we have any members in the hearing room of the public in the hearing room that are in support? Please state your name and your position.
Redner 37
Yes. Yesenia Robancha with End Child Poverty in California in strong support.
Redner 33
Hello. Kelly McMillan on behalf of the American Academy of Pediatrics California in support.
Redner 51
Russell Manning on behalf of California state treasurer Fiona Ma in support.
Redner 49
Josh Wright on behalf of the California Association of Food Banks in support.
Redner 11
Mary Kames on behalf of the office of Kat Taylor in strong support. Thank you. Do we have any primary witnesses in opposition?
Redner 11
tricked us there. Do we have any members of the public in the hearing room in opposition? None? Okay. I'm gonna bring it back to the committee.
Redner 24
Thank you, vice chair. Again, as mentioned earlier in in miss, Calderon's bill, mister Lee and I spoke earlier at one point about this is this priority, and I also wanna coauthor this bill. I think it's imperative that we pro prioritize these dollars and and the SNAP program into ensuring that, you know, folks don't go without food. So with that, thank you to the author for for this bill. Thank you.
And with that, I'd like to move it.
Redner 11
Thank you. I wanna thank the author for the bill, and I wanna thank your witness here for your testimony. Thank you so much. And I'm gonna ask you to close.
Redner 1
Alright. Thank you so much, madam vice chair. This bill is a great foray into what I think resolving a big paradox in the state. California is the breadbasket of the nation, if not the world. The trade war, of course, made things so difficult on the world stage, but yet we have such a strong agricultural economy.
We saw people literally work in the fields or miles in the fields who go hungry, who starve. And it is really important that we access our powerful economic might as well as our state resources to really connect people to fresh food that is grown in California. And so with that, I respectfully ask your aye vote.
Redner 11
Thank you. The bill was motioned by Solace, second by Jackson. Secretary of government. Madam secretary, please call the room.
Redner 7
File item 12, AB2213. The motion is due pass as amended to the assembly appropriations committee. Lee?
Redner 7
Lee, I. Castillo? Aye. Castillo, I. Calderon?
Aye. Caldron, I. Eljore? Aye. Eljore, Jackson?
Aye. Jackson, Solache? Aye. Solache, I. Tongapah?
Redner 45
Six to zero. That bill is out. We are going to move to file item 14 a B2230. Avila Farias. Careful there.
Redner 49
Thank you, madam chair and members. ICE enforcement has created fears across California impacting both citizens and immigrants alike. AB twenty two thirty protects two critical spaces, voting rights and centers and child care center facilities. This bill prohibits immigration enforcement from entering or surrounding area locations, ensuring people can vote and that children can learn without fear. California is home to 10,000,000 immigrants, many of whom are US citizens and are eligible voters.
Redner 33
At a time when there is a growing concern about intimidation at the polls and aggressive enforcement tactics, we must act to protect fundamental rights and community safety. No parent should fear losing their child to enforcement actions, and no voters should be intimidated from participating in our democracy. AB twenty two thirty ensures that these spaces remain safe, free, and and fear and free fear free, and from intimidation. I respectfully ask for your I vote. Thank you.
Redner 11
Thank you. Do we have any members of the public in the hearing room in support? Do we have any primary witnesses in opposition? Do we have any members of the public in the hearing room to testify in opposition? State your name and your position.
Redner 11
Thank you. And I'll bring it back to the committee. Any questions from the committee? Comments?
Redner 8
And I just wanna echo that. I think in this time where we're really seeing our community struggling, and for those of us who have seen that firsthand with our community members who are immigrants, ensuring that they feel safe, that our community members feel safe, whether they're an immigrant themselves or related to someone, especially looking at the childcare facilities and polling places, it matters. So thank you.
Redner 11
The bill was motioned by Calderon, seconded by El Huari. Madam secretary, please call the roll.
Redner 7
File item 13, AB2230. The motion is due passed to the assembly elections committee. Lee? Castillo?
Redner 11
We are moving to file item 10 a b twenty one sixty two by assembly member Brian. Can present your bill, please.
Redner 50
Thank you, madam chair and colleagues. I'm proud to present a b twenty one sixty two, which would build on California's progress in preventing and reducing homelessness for former foster youth by making targeted improvements to the housing navigation and maintenance program, also known as the HNMP. The HNMP is a state run program that operates with the California Department of Housing and counties to provide services to youth with federal housing vouchers. Former foster youth receive federal vouchers from the US Department of Housing until they're 24 years old, and these vouchers remain valid for up to five years after receiving them. The problem is that our HNMP program only assist youth from ages 18 through 24 in navigation.
This means that if a youth who has a valid housing vat voucher from the federal government turns 25 years old, they cannot access the services of the program to help them find housing, even though that voucher is good for up to five years after they receive it, and they could receive it at 24 years old. As you can see, there's a gap here. The federal government is stepping up and providing vouchers, and we are providing navigation, but not for as long as you can use the voucher. We need to correct this imbalance. Joining me to testify in support of a b twenty one sixty two are Mercedes Jackson, a youth advocate with the John Burton Advocates for Youth, and Simone Turek Lee, a senior director for pro of programs and policy also at J Bay.
Redner 42
Thank you, assembly member. Good afternoon, chair and members. My name is Simone Turek Lee. I'm with John Burton Advocates for Youth in support of a b twenty one sixty two. Thank you for authoring this bill.
A b twenty one sixty two strengthens an existing program, a proven state program that prevents homelessness among former foster youth, the housing navigation and maintenance program, as the assembly member pointed out. This program provides supportive services that counties need to pair with federal housing choice vouchers for former foster youth. Because of this state investment, we've seen a 137% increase in federal vouchers coming into California, for this population specifically. With a $13,700,000 investment in the housing navigation and maintenance program, we're unlocking more than $33,000,000 in federal housing assistance each year for former foster youth. And this is uniquely a federal program that remains safe with all of the proposed cuts and changes happening at the federal at the federal level.
These vouchers are powerful, but really only work when paired with these services, to help youth find and secure housing and maintain stability. Counties provide our contract for that support, and the housing authorities provide the rental subsidy let last for three to five years. Right now, there's a gap. As you heard, youth can receive that voucher anytime between 18 and 24. And so if they get it toward that 20 birthday, that takes them into their mid to late twenties.
Redner 4
AB 2162 simply closes that gap by extending this program, the housing navigation and maintenance program, to age 28 to ensure that young people have consistent support like education, employment, and crisis double stabilization for the full life of their federal voucher. This bill also brings much needed transparency. Currently, there's no public data showing which counties and housing authorities are participating in the federal voucher program or how many vouchers there are in California. AB twenty one sixty two requires this information to be reported as part of the reporting requirements for the housing navigation and maintenance program for the counties that accept that funding so that we can better understand at a community level where the federal resources are, whether they're being maximized or not being maximized, and so that we can advocate at the local level for full participation in this program for our counties and housing authorities. Now I'd like to turn it over to my colleague, Mercedes, to talk a little bit more about the importance of the bill.
Redner 54
Hi. Good afternoon, chair members. My name is Mercedes, and I support a b two one six two. I'm speaking as someone with lived experience and as someone who continues to work closely with young people through the Los Angeles Youth Commission. What I've seen again and again is that age cutoffs don't match real life.
For former foster youth, support doesn't suddenly stop being needed at 24. In many cases, that is exactly when the pressure becomes more serious. People are trying to hold together housing, work, school, transportation, mental health, and basic survival all at the same time without the safety net that many other young adults have who are not in the foster care system. Sometimes young people do not hear about these resources early enough. Some find out too late.
Some are already in crisis by the time they learn that help exists. And when services cut off too early, that could push youth closer to homelessness, disconnection, and instability. That is why a b two one six two matters. If a young person is able to keep a federal housing voucher after turning 25, the supportive services tied to stability shouldn't cut off at their 20 birthday either. Housing stability is not just about rent.
Redner 13
It's also about navigation, deposits, employment support, education support, case management, and having someone to call when things start falling apart. The second reason this bill matters is accountability. We need clear public information about which counties are partnering with housing authorities to offer these vouchers and how many are in circulation in our communities and statewide. With that, gaps stay hidden, and youth pay the price. AB two one six two is a practical bill.
Redner 54
It closes a harmful gap, strengthens support during a critical transition into adulthood, and it prevents homelessness before it starts. I respectfully ask for your a vote your aye vote. Sorry. Thank
Redner 11
you. Do we have any members of the public in the hearing room in support? Please state your name, organization, and physician.
Redner 11
Thank you. Do we have any primary witnesses in opposition? Do we have any members of the public in the hearing room in opposition? I'm gonna bring it back to the committee.
Redner 15
I wanna thank the author for bringing this bill forward. We got elected at the same time during COVID, which was a really, really difficult time. But every year, you introduce bills to help foster youth in and around this space. And I know you have a deeply personal story, but I really appreciate that you don't forget where you came from. You don't forget the people that need the help most.
And so I just wanna thank you for bringing this forward. Thank you.
Redner 53
Assembly member, I wanna thank you for continuing to ensure that this legislature remembers its responsibility to the children that's within its care, and want to always appreciate the con the annual bills that you bring forth to making sure that the state of California is holding up to that commitment. I just ask that your staff just keep in contact with mine once the bill is scored because I'm very interested in the bill.
Redner 8
And I especially wanna thank your witness for sharing your lived experience, for telling us both about what you've gone through, but also for advocating on behalf of so many other foster youth and your experience on the LA Youth Commission too. Thank you.
Redner 11
And I wanna thank the author for the bill. In the short time I've been here, you've always championed legislation for foster youth. You know, as someone who worked for county mental health and I worked with foster youth, I really do appreciate the legislation you pushed forward to help those that are in need. I'm gonna read the comments here from assembly member Lee, the chairman. This is a common sense change to a program that has proven results in helping former foster youth navigate barriers to securing housing.
And he's recommending an I vote. I'm recommending an I vote. Thank you.
Redner 50
Thank you. Thank you to to my colleague from Whittier. It's interesting. Nobody else on this committee actually knows, but when I got here, you were chair of this committee. And serving on this committee was the first committee hearing I ever served on as a legislator several years ago on this committee, and it means a lot to come before before all of you and and fight for these bills.
Redner 25
This is a common sense bill. The federal government, even under this administration, is continuing to provide housing vouchers for foster youth up until they are 24 and then can then be used for another four years. If the state is providing and counties are providing pure navigation or or supportive navigation to use these vouchers effectively, it should last as long as the voucher lasts. To me, that's good governance. That's responsible.
Redner 50
I I would like to believe that is bipartisan, and I respectfully ask for an I vote.
Redner 11
Thank you. We have a motion from Calderon, second from Jackson. Madam secretary, please call the roll.
Redner 7
File item 10, a b two one six two. The motion is to pass to the assembly appropriations committee. Lou Castillo? Aye. Castillo, aye.
Calderon?
Redner 7
El Khoury, I. Jackson? Aye. Jackson, I. Selache?
Aye. Selache, Tonga Paw? Aye. Tonga Paw, I. Six
Redner 11
And we are gonna move to file item 19, a b twenty four seventy eight. Assembly member Scholz, can you present your bill?
Redner 52
Well, thank you very much, madam vice chair and colleagues. Privilege to be here to present a b twenty four seventy eight today. Just wanna give a special thank you and acknowledgement not only to committee staff, but also to our joint author and most importantly, my roommate, mister Solace, who's here on the committee. Nice to see you. This bill, quite simply, will strengthen California's commitment to keeping children with their families and extended kin whenever possible.
Redner 16
California has embraced a kin first culture, meaning that the state strongly prioritizes keeping a child placed with a family member or a trusted adult who can better assure that a child stays connected to their communities and their cultures. The state recognizes that kinship care includes both relatives and nonrelative extended family members who are safe adult caregivers that a child has a preexisting familial relationship with. Now research consistently and strongly shows that children placed with family caregivers experience better outcomes, including greater placement stability, higher likelihood of enrolling in higher education or gaining employment by age 21, and improved mental and behavioral health. Now currently in the state of California, all foster care applicants must go through one unified application called the resource family approval process or the RFA for short, regardless of whether or not they are kin with the child they're applying to care for. The RFA was largely designed for licensing foster parents in traditional foster homes and does not fully reflect the needs of kin caregivers who step up amidst a family crisis.
Redner 52
This standardized process can create unnecessary administrative barriers and undue delay for these kin applicants, sometimes preventing children from being placed with kin altogether. Recognizing these issues, the legislature passed a b twenty eight thirty by speaker Rivas in 2024, calling on the Department of Social Services to adopt a simplified approval process for relatives to become foster caregivers. A b twenty four seventy eight follows through on this requirement. It would create the kinship family approval pathway or KFA for short, a streamlined approval process specifically for kin caregivers. This pathway would reduce these regulatory barriers and irrelevant requirements to maximize efficient kinship placement.
The bill would also include nonrelated extend family members and tribally approved foster homes in the definition of kin in line with established best practices. AB twenty four seventy eight also removes barriers to kinship placement by number one, clarifying that courts may authorize placement with safe kin caregivers while approval processes are still pending, provided that a court has found they pose no risk to the child. Number two, extending a limited and preexisting criminal records exemption process to nonrelated extended family members and tribally approved foster homes. And number three, enabling agencies to be eligible to claim title four e federal dollars. By reducing these administrative delays and strengthening family first placement policies, AB twenty four seventy eight helps to ensure that children entering foster care can thrive, and they can remain connected to the people and communities that matter most to them.
In closing, madam vice chair, I'd like to note that I am committed to continuing to work with all of our sponsors, the Department of Social Services, and tribal advocates to continue fine tuning some of the technical language of the bill. I, at the appropriate time, will respectfully ask for an I vote, and with me to testify in support today is Amanda Kirchner with the County Welfare Directors Association of California and Ann Quirk with the Children's Law Center of California.
Redner 13
Good afternoon, men, chair and members. Amanda Kirchner with CWDA. I wanna thank the author for his leadership on this issue. I wanna thank committee staff for their excellent analysis. When a child enters foster care, it is a moment of crisis for that family.
And as noted with traditional resource families, they do all that work up front to get trained and approved, but families have to do that after the moment of crisis when the child is being removed. Statewide, about one third of our children are placed with family members. Counties have worked diligently to over the last few years to increase placements with relatives, including partnering with the Center for Excellence and Family Finding on best practices, participating in CDSS's Kinship Navigator sprints, and utilizing statewide funding to build out family finding efforts. But we know that there is more that we can do, and
Redner 13
thousand four seventy eight is our next step. This will help us streamline relative approvals so that more children in foster care can be placed with their family members. We are working collaboratively with our co sponsors, stakeholders, and the Department of Social Services to ensure that this new kinship specific approval has equitable funding for and resources as well as greater flexibility on requirements that do not impact child safety. CWDA is committed to moving forward a process that prioritizes kin first culture because we know that children in foster care simply do better when they are placed with kin and keep ties to their culture and to their community. We ask for your support.
Thank you.
Redner 55
I'm Ann Quirk, policy attorney with Children's Law Center of California. We are the attorneys for the children and the child welfare dependency system in Los Angeles, Sacramento, and Placer Counties. Being placed in foster care is often scary, confusing, and traumatic. We teach children about stranger danger, then a social worker shows up, takes them from their home, and places them in a stranger's house. Seven year old client of mine clarified this for me many years ago.
She'd recently been placed into a foster home, and I asked her how she was doing. She told me, I don't feel safe. I know I'm supposed to, but I don't. They're very nice people, but I don't know them, and I don't feel safe. AB twenty four seventy eight seeks to remedy this.
It's a big bill with a simple purpose. When a child can't get home, get them with the people they know and love as quickly as possible so they can both be safe and feel safe. Sadly, have many examples of why this bill is necessary, but I think Jeremiah's story is particularly illustrative. We've changed his name and blurred some of the details for his privacy. He entered foster care as a young teenager along with his little half brother and half sister.
Redner 43
They had the same mother with a diff with different fathers, but their father had been the one who raised Jeremiah, so he considered him dad. That father jumped right into reunification services and did everything that was asked of him so Jeremiah's little brother and sister were able to be returned home quickly. Unfortunately, it wasn't the same for Jeremiah. The father had some criminal history from long ago. And because he'd never married Jeremiah's mother, there was no legal relationship between Jeremiah and his and the father.
Redner 55
So Jeremiah couldn't be returned. It was very hard to explain why it was safe for his little brother and sister to go home, but not safe for him, the teenager. Because the issue wasn't about safety. It's just the law doesn't allow it. Jeremiah remained in foster care and ended up aging out.
We were never able to find him permanency, which makes sense because he had a home. We just couldn't put him there. AB twenty four seventy eight would change that, give us the legal tools we need to get the current Jeremiah's home. We thank you for your support and respectfully request your I vote.
Redner 11
Thank you. Do we have any members of the public in the hearing room in support? Please state your name and your position.
Redner 22
Zechariah Okenda, Alliance for Children's Rights. We're a sponsor in support of the bill.
Redner 41
Good afternoon. Tiffany Fan on behalf of California Court appointed Special Advocate Association in support. Thank you.
Redner 52
David Bolag of the SFE Alliance with great respect to the author in support.
Redner 11
Thank you. Do we have any witnesses in opposition? Do we have any members in the hearing room in opposition? And I'll bring it back to the committee. Is there any questions from the committee members?
Redner 24
Thank you, madam vice chair. And, again, thank you to the author. I'm proud to work with him on this. I think it's a and to to get to Winston's and sharing those stories. As a local, former mayor myself and council member of my city, I got to work with so many families and so many caring families that, you know, that you hear all the stories.
I think there's no I need to re re reiterate all the stories that we all know and we all have lived experiences. I think this is the right thing to do when we can unify families and, you know, and give these, children a a safe haven. I think that's that's the goal of all of us to do that. So I think maybe we could do that. I'm looking forward to support this and just happy that we're moving this forward.
And then and like you said, it's just changing something in the law that's gonna help, advocate and and make this a a safer area for support kids. So with that, I'd like to
Redner 39
I I also wanted to just really thank you for sharing, Jeremiah, although you changed his name, story. It was it's just so powerful to be able to bring, those stories into the room, especially when they can't be here themselves, but to really illustrate, like, what it means when we're not able to place someone with a family member for these, you know, legislative barriers that have really made it harder for young people like him to thrive with their own family. I shared earlier, but I'm a foster mom too, but I'm actually a foster mom because I'm a nephron, like a non extended family relative family member, whatever it is, because my foster daughter was my mentee. And it was because of that that they were able to easily make it happen, but there are so many barriers to even doing that. And so thank you for really advocating on behalf of those young people who deserve, an opportunity to stay with folks that they're familiar with.
Redner 11
I wanna thank the author for the bill. I get emotional, because hearing it, I think of all the foster youth that I worked with with a lot of stories like that. I don't want there to be any more Jeremihs. So I thank you for the bill.
Redner 11
We have a motion from Solace and a second from Jackson. Madam secretary, please call the room. Oh, I'm sorry. Can you close?
Redner 52
I'll be very brief. I respectfully asked for an eye, and all I would say is in a really tough year, I know we all don't agree on everything, and sometimes we have to go to battle, and it's a tough budget year. But in my entire legislative package, I really view this as a bright spot and a potential to come together and do some real good for kids. So and just I'll say thank you to the witnesses for being here. You really you you told the story better than I could.
So thank you.
Redner 7
File item 19 a b 2 four seven eight, the motion is due passed to the assembly judiciary committee. Lee? Castillo? Aye. Castillo, aye.
Calderon? Calderon, I. Eljwari? Aye. Eljwari, I.
Jackson?
Redner 7
Jackson, aye. Tongapah? On the consent calendar. Aye. Tongapaw aye.
Final vote on the consent calendar, seven to zero. File item one, AB1575. The current vote is four to zero. Jackson?
Redner 7
Tongapah not voting. Current vote, four to zero. File item four, a b one nine two five. Current vote is four to zero. Calderon?
Redner 7
File item 4AB9 aye. Tongapah aye. Vote, seven to zero. File item five, AB1932. Current vote on the urgency, five to zero.
Jackson? Aye. Jackson, aye. Tongapaw? Tongapaw not voting on the urgency.
On the bill, current vote, five to zero. Jackson? Aye. Jackson, aye. Tongapo?
Tongapo not voting on the bill. Current vote, six to zero on the urgency, six to zero on the bill. File item 6AB1967. Current vote is five to zero. Calderon?
Aye. Calderon, aye. Jackson? Aye. Jackson, aye.
Final vote, seven to zero. File item 9AB2126. Current vote is five to zero. Calderon? Aye.
Calderon, aye. Jackson? Aye. Jackson, aye. Final vote, seven to zero.
File item 11AB2189. Current vote is four to zero. Calderon?
Redner 7
Calderon, aye. Jackson? Aye. Jackson, aye. Current vote, six to zero.
File item 12AB2213. Current vote is six to zero. Tonga pa?
Redner 7
is. Tonga aye. Final vote, seven to zero. File item thirteen, a b two two three zero. Current vote is four to zero.
Lee, Tongapan. Tongapan, no. Current vote, four to one. File item 14, AB2299. Current vote is four to zero.
Castillo?
Redner 7
Castillo not voting. Jackson? Jackson, aye. Tongupa? Tongupa.
Tongupa not voting. Current vote, five to zero. File item 16AB2379. Current vote is four to zero. Jackson?
Aye. Jackson, aye. Final vote, five to zero. File item 18AB2470. Current vote is five to zero.
Jackson? Aye. Jackson, aye. Tongupa? Tongapah aye.
Final vote, seven to zero. Final item 21AB2510. Current vote is four to zero. Jackson?
Redner 7
Jackson, aye. Tongapaw. Tongapaw not voting. Current vote, five to zero. File item 22AB2585.
Current vote, four to one. Jackson?
Redner 7
Jackson, aye. Tongapaw? No. Tongapaw, no. Current vote, five to two.
File item 24AB2684. Current vote is five to zero. Calderon? Aye. Calderon, aye.
Jackson? Aye. Jackson, aye. Final vote, seven to zero.
Redner 11
We're waiting for assembly member Bonta to present her bill. She's not in here yet.
Redner 33
96 was on his parents. So we need 2,600. I can do it for her if someone has it. She's okay. I mean Should
Redner 1
Alright. Alright. We will do some, vote ads add ons to the role. So, MavSec here, whenever you're ready, you can begin.
Redner 17
File item one, AB1575. Final vote, five to zero. File item four, a B one nine two five. Final vote, seven to zero. File item five, a b 1932.
Redner 7
On the urgency, final vote, six to zero. On the bill, six to zero. File item six, a b one nine six seven. Final vote, seven to zero. File item nine, a B2126.
Final vote, seven to zero. File item 10, a b two one six two. Current vote, six to zero. Lee?
Redner 7
Lee, Final vote, seven to zero. File item 11, a B2189. Final vote, six to zero. File item 12, a B2213. Final vote, seven to zero.
File item 13, a B2230. Current vote, four to one. Lee?
Redner 7
Lee, aye. Final vote, five to one. File item 14, a B2299. Final vote, five to zero. File item 16, AB2379.
Final vote, five to zero. Item eighteen, a b two four seven zero. Final vote, seven to zero. File item nineteen, a b two four seven eight. Current vote, six to zero.
Lee? Aye. Lee, aye. Final vote, seven to zero. File item twenty one, a b two five one zero.
Final vote, five to zero. File item 22AB2585. Final vote, five to two. File item 24AB2684. Final vote, seven to zero.
Redner 1
Alright. Standby. We are still waiting for one more author to arrive. Alright, Assembly Robonta. Whenever you're ready, you have a couple bills in front of us.
So whichever you want to start with first.
Redner 1
Just the one bill. Never mind. Other one consent. We took care of it already.
Redner 41
of a moment there. I wanna thank you for your patience, committee and chair. I wanna start by thanking the chair and committee for working with my office on this piece of legislation that is so important. AB 2,600 is a recognition that no one facing consequences such as indefinite detention without due process, deportation, or permanent family separation or exile should do so without an advocate by their side. You see, unlike in the criminal legal system, people facing deportation in The United States do not have a right to a government appointed legal representation if they cannot afford it.
As a result, most immigrants who cannot afford a lawyer must represent themselves in immigration proceedings. That means that the mom who was was picked up by ICE after dropping her daughter off at school, the farm worker picked up in an ICE raid, or the domestic violence survivor going in for the routine ICE check check-in but gets taken into custody by ICE has no right to a lawyer if they cannot afford one. As of February 2026, more than 93,000 people with pending deportation cases in California remain unrepresented. Even though thousands of Californians are detained by ICE every year in for profit detention facilities in dangerous conditions, only thirty two percent of Californians detained by ICE and facing deportation do not have legal counsel to protect their rights or help them navigate complex legal proceedings. We need representation now more than ever.
Since June, more than 10,000 Californians have been arrested in raids and indiscriminate arrests across our state. Over 8,250 Californians were deported in the first nine months of 2025 alone, triple the pace of 2024, and over 6,400 remain in custody as of February 2026. Additionally, six Californians have tragically died in ICE custody since September 2025. Legal representation saves lives, protects civil liberties, and keeps families together. Studies show that represented immigrants are up to 10 times more likely to obtain lawful relief than unrepresented individuals.
This is a due process issue. In California, people can lose their freedom, their family, their job, and home through immigration proceedings, which are civil administrative proceedings, yet there is no guaranteed right to an attorney. That is not consistent with the basic fairness and access to justice. AB 2,600 helps right this injustice. It creates a state program to provide legal representation to all Californians facing deportation proceedings.
AB 2,600 does so by establishing a framework that allows an administrator within CDSS to create a phase and plan for the implementation of the right to counsel and to effectively track implementation. The administrator will create the plan in collaboration with expert legal services providers from across the state and immigrant rights advocacy organizations to help ensure everyone has access to immigration legal proceedings. I wanna make one important point as we continue to discuss the difficult budget decisions we need to make in the in the coming months. Mass deportations threaten the state's economic vitality and workforce stability. A national 2024 report by the institution of taxation and economic policy highlighted that for every 1,000,000 undocumented immigrants who reside in the country, public services receive $8,900,000,000 in additional tax revenue.
With AB 2,600, we will help keep families together, keep our communities and economy stable, and protect the safety and rights of all Californians. With me to testify today in support of the bill are Herzan Navidad, immigrant defense Defenders Law Center, and Arisel Garcia from the vars the Vera Institute of Justice.
Redner 34
Good afternoon. My name is Gerzan Navidad, and I'm here on behalf of Immigrant Defenders Law Center. Is the largest deportation legal defense organization in Southern California and a power co sponsor of a p 2,600. At a time when escalating anti immigrant policies and persecution are deliberately targeting immigrant communities, a p 2,600 is an urgent and necessary response. Access to counsel is more critical now than ever because for immigrants facing detention and deportation, legal representation can mean the difference between safety and separation, hope and despair, in some instances, the difference between life and death.
AB 2,600 is the best tool we have to uphold due process for immigrants navigating one of the most complex legal systems in our country. I know this because I lived it. At 16 years old, I spent a month and a half in government custody after arriving in The United States seeking safety. I was a minor, alone terrified, and completely unfamiliar with how the legal system in this country worked. Like many immigrants, I arrived knowing only that I had to survive and reach safety.
Redner 11
During detention, I witnessed what no child should have to witness, families torn apart, medical neglect, and an environment designed to not welcome but to dehumanize. Today, children can remain in government custody for extraordinarily long periods, sometimes as long as a hundred and eighty eight days when during those same traumatic conditions and adults even longer. Without access to counsel, immigrants are expected to defend themselves often alone within a complex legal system at a time when policies and processes are explicitly designed to prosecute them and undermine their civil and constitutional rights. That is not the process. That is not justice.
Redner 34
An attorney provides more than legal representation. They provide dignity in the humanized circumstances, including a clarity in moments of fear. Without my attorney, I saw no possibility of persevering. With representation, I had a fighting chance. Today, as a graduate of UC Berkeley, I aspire to become a lawyer myself because I know firsthand that representation changes lives and keeps families together.
AB 2,600 is a concrete way for California to match its values with action to protect immigrant communities above fairness and ensure that no one is forced to pay attention at the partition alone. Thank you.
Redner 9
Good afternoon. My name is Arisel Garcia. Sorry. Good afternoon. My name is Arisel Garcia.
Redner 57
I am with the Vera Institute of Justice. We are a proud cosponsor and supporter of AB 2,600, which would advance due process by establishing a right to counsel for all Californians facing removal, especially those in detention. Like the assembly member mentioned, unlike in the criminal justice system, people in immigration proceedings do not have the right to counsel if they cannot afford to hire their an attorney, which leaves, people thousands of people every year, alone to navigate the our highly complex immigration system on their own against against a trained government lawyer. AB 2,600 will help bridge that gap by ensuring that immigrant Californians have the right to effective counsel, giving them the opportunity for a fair day in court. This is especially important as escalating federal immigration enforcement actions have significantly increased demand for legal services.
As of February 2026, over 48,000 p over 48, 100 people are currently in detention with over, 1,500 of them remain remaining unrepresented. The impact of the representation is life changing. As the assembly member mentioned, detained immigrants with representation are up to 10 times and a half more likely to win their cases than those without counsel, and access to counsel means that these people can return to their families, continue to contribute to the workforce culture and economy. A state level legislative measure to secure and protect access to counsel is one of the most effective ways to ensure fairness and due process in this system. This law does not change immigration law but would simply ensure that Californians can navigate the immigration system and that people who have the right to remain in the country under existing laws are not deported simply because they cannot afford to hire an attorney.
I urge you to support a b 2,600. Thank you for good for your time and consideration.
Redner 53
Thank you very much. Do we have members of the public in the hearing room to testify and to declare your support.
Redner 1
Good afternoon. Marquis Cedra on behalf of the county of Los Angeles in support. Thank you.
Redner 24
Phil Melendez on behalf of the Immigrant Resource Legal Center in support.
Redner 44
Cameras Asaya with the California Immigrant Policy Center in strong support, also registering support for end poverty in California, California Domestic Workers Coalition, Friends Committee on Legislation, Glyve Foundation, Restoring Hope California, Madera Coalition for Community Justice, California Healthy Nails Claw and Co Collaborative, Ace Action, Vietnamese American Roundtable, Courage California, Legal Services for Prisoners with Children, also for Alliance for Boys and Men of Color, Wilson Democratic Renewal Club, empowering women impacted by incarceration, Oakland Privacy, Silicon Valley Debug, the the Latina Center, Alianza for Opportunity, Rubicon Programs, California Work and Family Coalition, Diversity and Health, Business for a Good San Diego, Lutheran Office of Public Policy, and Healthy Contra Costa.
Redner 41
No. Because I'm Monica Madrid with the Coalition for Humane Every Rights Ciudla in support. Good afternoon. Symphony Barbie on behalf of the ACLU California action in support.
Redner 23
Mandy Yeek with Southeast Asia Resource Action Center in strong support, also registering support for Asian Americans Advancing Justice Southern California.
Redner 45
Keely O'Brien with the Western Center on Law and Poverty in strong support. Thank you.
Redner 56
Alexander Morales with Immigrant Defenders Law Center, MDEV, in strong support and also a proud cosponsor of the bill. Also, noting support for, immigrant legal defense, Services, Immigrant Rights and Education Network, CYREN Public Counsel, Oasis Legal Services Alliance San Diego East Bay Community Law Center San Bernardino Community Service Center Center for Gender and Refugee Studies California La Raza Community Resource Center, Kids in Need of Defense, South Asian Network, Pomona Economic Opportunity Center, Social Justice Collaborative, Santa Barbara County Immigrant Legal Defense Center, World Relief Sacramento, San Diego Immigrant Rights Consortium, Acacia Center for Justice, The Children's Partnership, Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice, Jewish Family Services of San Diego, eight zero five UndocuFund, Indivisible California State Strong, Orange County Rapid Response Network, the California Coalition for Women's Prisoners, Orange County Justice Fund, New Light Wellness, and the Trans Latina Coalition.
Redner 20
Good afternoon. McKenna Mestazo, Reduction California in strong support.
Redner 53
Any opposition witnesses? Anyone in opposition from the public? Are you registered as a opposition witness?
Redner 29
you. My name is Jody Jones. I'm an Angel family member. My brother was murdered in 2018 by an illegal alien. He was arrested, and I'm gonna tell you the story.
He was arrested, and within twenty four hours of his release, he murdered my brother. He shot my brother eight times point blank range. This story's a little different because what happened was ICE had faxed Tulare County Sheriff's Department a detainer to hold him, and it wasn't recognized because they needed a federal warrant. And if anybody knows, I'm a long I was I'm twenty five year law enforcement veteran. I'm retired.
You can't get a federal warrant in five or six hours. You just can't do it. Well, they released him. Within twenty four hours, he murdered my brother. He shot him eight times, emptied his weapon on him.
Redner 44
I read this bill, and I what I don't understand is the representation for a violent criminal because because this one will actually represent people that's been convicted of murder or violent crime because I didn't see in the bill that it had nothing on that. There was no line drawn. So somebody can literally, like, the the person that murdered my brother would have legal representation after he was convicted of murdering my brother. So and this is taxpayers' money. It's like me hiring a hitman to kill my brother because I'm essentially paying for it.
Redner 29
So this is what I don't understand. I just don't understand it. And I don't understand because if this man was deported when he was in custody, my brother would still be alive. I hear a lot of things about ripping families apart. My family was ripped apart.
That'll never never I will never get my brother back again ever ever never. He was my best friend. So I understand the the community that don't wanna get deported. I understand that. But by gosh, understand our view because we're victims too.
We are victims too. We we matter. So when it comes to stuff like this, and we're paying for somebody that's murdered somebody or a violent crime, I don't think that's right. And I'm in strong, strong opposition of this bill. Thank you for your time.
Redner 32
Thank you. Is there anyone else in the room in opposition? Please come on up and state your opposition, to the microphone here. Just, your name, affiliation, and your position on the bill, please.
Redner 46
My name is Grant Watson, and I'm in opposition on this bill from Angel Families and California taxpayers Mhmm. That would have to pay for the defense of these individuals. Thank you very much.
Redner 5
Frank Van Leningenham, vehement opposition. Rocky Paul Jones was like a brother to me as well. I lost him. And paying money Thank you. To to this is morally wrong.
Redner 53
Thank you. Seeing no other opposition, committee members, any questions or comments at this time? Assembly member Tengiva.
Redner 39
So one to the opposition witness. I hear you. So I wanna ask a couple questions. Could you go into a little bit on the background of the person who killed your brother? You stated that he was deported.
Redner 29
This man was deported twice. He actually hit federal custody. He was arrested on drug charges that would have been a felony, but because of, I believe, Prop 47, they were now misdemeanors. Because it was a misdemeanor that can only hold him a certain amount of time. Well, this person was deported twice before, did federal time, and came back.
And he had a long list of crimes. A long list. And you can't help but ask yourself why couldn't ICE come in in a secure place and take this man out?
Redner 39
And and thank you. In this question that I asked to the author, so I have gone through this bill multiple times, and it doesn't seem like there is anything in the language of this bill that prevents the taxpayers from paying for people who had committed murder, or other crimes. Is it a is that an accurate description that there isn't language within this bill that actually would prevent us from paying for people that would you would have killed similar to the individual that killed this the opposition witness' brother?
Redner 41
I would remind you, assembly member Tongipan, first, I wanna appreciate the witness for your testimony and and the loss to your family, and and your brother is irreplaceable. And I I and so I will just start by saying that. I will remind assembly member Tongipa that, due process in the state of California and in The United States, according to our the constitution, allows every individual to be able to have the right to counsel. This bill, essentially applies that right to counsel to, to people who are, facing detention proceedings. And, specifically, this bill covers individuals who an individual who is not presented by counts represented by counsel and satisfies the indigency criteria set by the administrator and meets any of the following criteria, is a resident of California, detained in California, they are subject to immigration or deportation proceedings in an immigration court located in California, or the immigration proceedings must have a significant nexus to California regardless of whether the person is presently in immigration detention outside of California.
Redner 39
But, Samimar, I understand the right to due process, but the reason why you bring this bill here today is specifically paying for the legal services. And, again, that didn't answer my question. Could these paid legal services potentially pay to protect people who have been convicted of, well, drug dealing?
Redner 41
Assembly member Tangipai have laid out who is covered under this bill, and it does include people who, have who under whatever circumstance they might have been picked up and put into detention centers and are facing detention proceedings.
Redner 39
So somebody who had been picked up potentially for drug dealing, this would protect them?
Redner 23
So the main reason why I asked that is because there was a there's language out there on other bills that specifically talked about providing legal legal services to an individual who has been or, actually, it would state the simple amendment would state, the section shall not be used to provide legal services to an individual who has been convicted of or who is currently appealing a conviction for a violent felony as defined in subdivision c of section six six seven point five. There are bills right now that we are hearing that make sure that taxpayer funds don't go to people who are currently appealing those types of convictions and have been convicted. That is not in your bill. And there are thousands of angel families out there, thousands of them. I've met personally some over the weekend that even trying to say that amendment, is that even something that you would possibly consider for this bill?
Redner 41
The state of California, should that amendment be adopted, would be standing alone in provision of immigration removal defense, with the only state that would actually provide carve out that kind of carve out. There are 13 states throughout this country, California, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Washington, New Mexico, Minnesota, Nevada, and Hawaii who all provide immigration legal defense funding. And, and should that amendment be included, California would be the only state that has any kind of criminal carve out. So, no, I am not willing to accept that amendment.
Redner 39
Well, for me, those 13 states got it wrong because I don't believe taxpayer funds should go to people who have been convicted, illegal immigrants who have been convicted, drug dealers, murderers, child predators, rapists, the same individual that killed a man right here, this individual's brother. That is insanity. And and those 13 states got it wrong. And I think that there are thousands of angel families out there, thousands of them, that feel the exact same way. And I would ask the witness here, you probably know a lot of angel families out there.
Redner 29
I know a lot of them. Like, everyone, basically. I wanna ask a question. Can I may I ask a question?
Redner 53
Unfortunately, you cannot, but you can answer any questions that any of them Alright. May ask you.
Redner 39
Well, I don't understand why I'm hearing moans and groans when I bring up blanket riders.
Redner 29
So here's the thing. Here's here's you're asking me about other Angel family members. I I'm gonna I'm gonna say this. I I hear due process all over the place. I I hear people saying that.
What about our due process? What are my my brother's due process? He don't get any. He was shot and killed. Where's that due process?
Nothing. I hear about families being ripped apart. Our family was ripped apart, absolutely ripped apart. I will never see my brother again. I visit my brother at the graveyard every week.
Once a week, I go there, and I visit my brother. And a bill like this, I hear I'm gonna speak on the thirteenth the other states that that she mentioned. I believe they got them wrong too, and I know that other angel families believe they got them wrong that's that's in those states. Because how would you feel if you were providing legal representation to somebody that murdered your family member? My god.
How would you feel? Because this is this bill does that. It absolutely does that. I don't I'm I'm screaming from the from the rooftops to the witness who paid for your funeral services. My brother paid for his funeral.
We had a victim advocate pay for my my brother's funeral because what comes with violent crime and death is a funeral cost. We did not have that, and thank god for victim advocate that paid for it.
Redner 1
I wanna oh, thank thank you. Thank you, mister Jackson, for filling in well. I just wanna remind folks that we are time crunched right now because there is another committee that needs to meet in this room. I wanna thank you for coming all the way up here and sharing your testimony as well. But, similar to Tony, but I feel that you've made your point sufficiently clear.
We just want to if you're able to sense the business, if that's possible. Fairly Is it fair to say
Redner 39
that you've sufficiently made your point? And I just wanna say thank you
Redner 39
To the witness coming, speaking on behalf of the Angel families. You know, I think it's something that a lot of people need to pay attention to, that it was very clearly stated that it didn't matter if people committed murder, that the state of California should use taxpayer funds to protect them.
Redner 1
you. Alright. Thank you. I wanna thank the author for being here, all your, witnesses as well. And for the robust discussion today, I will invite the author to unless there's any other comments or questions or motions.
Any motions? No. Alright. I'll invite the author to close.
Redner 41
Second. I appreciate the committee's patience in reviewing this bill at this late hour. I will say, that we have based our democracy and our constitutional protections on affording every individual, through criminal proceedings, the ability to have a right to due process and a right to counsel. The current moment has people being swept up, put in detention centers, taken away from their families, subjected to, in detention centers, health health situations that have led to their death. We haven't, hurt we heard a little bit of that, from Haersen who spent a month and a half in a detention proceeding as well as a child.
And this, bill simply allows for us to focus on the basic tenet of our democracy, which is that everybody should be afforded the right to due process and a right to counsel. With that, I respectfully request your I vote.
Redner 1
Thank you, senator Batso, so much for bringing this bill to us and, really reminding us how court is to protect vulnerable immigrants. It is also a sad reality that many immigrants are being scapegoated for crimes and murders that are out there, and that should not be the case. It is very unfortunate when anyone has their lives lost, if anyone has their lives lost, but I think it is important to remind folks that two things can be true, we still need to protect our immigrant families. With that, I'm recommending an aye vote. It is been properly moved and seconded.
Madam secretary, please call the roll.
Redner 7
File item twenty three a b two six zero zero. The motion is to pass to the assembly appropriations committee. Lee? Aye. Lee I.
Castillo? Calderon? Aye. Calderon I. El Juari?
Aye. El Juari I. Jackson? Aye. Jackson I.
Solace? Tongapah? No. Tongapah, no.
Redner 1
Four to one, that bill is out. I appreciate the, flexibility of the judiciary committee and its chair, Asav Alcala. With that, adjourn the assembly human service committee.
Stellen Sie eine Frage zu diesem Video – ich analysiere das Transkript, um Ihnen zu antworten.