Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development Committee
No chapters available yet
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development Committee California State Senate
Follow its sittingsSpeaker 1
Alright. Thank you for that presentation. Do you have folks with you to present or in in support or no? It doesn't
Speaker 2
Unfortunately, with this time frame, they weren't able to. But throughout the whole process, we had witnesses testifying. The city of Compton, some of the city organizations were also very supportive.
Speaker 1
Alright. I don't see anyone in the room that isn't staffed, so I don't believe there's anyone here to present on either side. If if there is, please come forward to the mic. Seeing no one, then we'll bring it back to the dais colleagues, senator Archuleta and Aragine.
Speaker 3
Thank you. Thank you for presenting this to us. My question is, I know it's a district, thing for you, especially in in the Compton area, and I've heard about it on the radio. They are publicizing it in Los Angeles County that how devastating this is to families. Families because we have veterans that have chosen to be buried there.
We have families and they're just afraid to go in because perpetrators would still be lingering. So, my question is, is this for this particular cemetery or is it gonna be for the two or four that you're mentioning? Or also, is it are we accelerating the timeline for you? Because I'm supporting the bill and I'll move it when it's appropriate. But narrow it down to that, please.
Speaker 2
Well, the policy we're moving forward is statewide policy because even though two of the abandoned cemeteries are in my district today, four others are in other members in your districts as well.
Speaker 2
All of any abandoned cemetery eventually will be able to take advantage of this program. Yes.
Speaker 2
And, it will come back to you because we're gonna be looking at a fee source in how to provide that program. But, I don't wanna get too far ahead of myself since that's not germane to the bill.
Speaker 3
So, obviously, we're also talking about reconstruction. We're talking about planting, we're talking about security. And so, it to bring the dignity back what was originally done back in the forties and fifties and so on.
Speaker 5
I just wanna acknowledge that this bill has changed substantially from its original version which came to us several months ago when it came to the local government committee. At that time you were requiring that a LAVCO would be responsible for the maintenance of the cemeteries and I I just I want to acknowledge all the hard work you've done on trying to move this forward. And it's unfortunate in the course of the process that that piece you had to take amendments to to remove that piece. But I know that by creating, you know, by expediting the the working group process and getting a report and having a a policy framework and sort of bringing the counties and stakeholders together that we can actually ultimately have legislation have a path forward. But I just wanna just acknowledge your tenacious leadership on this issue, which I know is so important to your district.
And I think this is a real issue that doesn't just impact your district, but committees throughout California. So thank you.
Speaker 2
Thank you, sir. To speak to that point, when it's all said and done, which is why this committee is so important, we're gonna have to pay for it. And no one wants to take the responsibility, meaning counties, cities, LAFCO, whoever, because they're like, we don't have the money to pay for this. So I'll be coming back once we get agreement from the stakeholders of how is it best to do. We will certainly be back to you because it's gonna cost money.
To give you an example, I got a proposal of how to bring Lincoln up to speed, $6,000,000. $6,000,000. So it's it's not going to be cheap. Fortunately, there's only six right now and four more coming. But it would be better if we could stop this from happening from being abandoned.
And so that's one of the other things I learned as I was doing the bill is that this grant abandonment program would be available to existing cemeteries. So if they have a major issue rather than going belly up because they can't afford to fix their irrigation or fix a public works part on their road, they would have access to those resources so they can continue to provide a resting place and not walk away from their property. But I look forward to coming back. In fact, during the break, I look forward to working with the committee staff to understand what would be some of the things to make, the bill best, that we could bring forward and get done for Californians.
Speaker 6
Thank you, madam chair. Let me preface what I'm saying by saying that I do not like gut and amend bills at the very end of a year or end of a session. I don't like them at all, to paraphrase doctor Seuss. And we've had some bad experiences in the last couple of years with that. And I certainly understand the points that you're making, but we have no testimony from anybody that is either in favor or opposed to the specific approach that you've recommended.
On the surface, it seems reasonable. But do we really have the detail here to really truly understand what is going to happen next? I would suggest perhaps not. Now this has been a problem for a long time. And you had this bill was of a different form, and it was something to try to get at a solution to this.
You've now come up at the last minute for us, perhaps not for you, with a different approach. But we've all known that the existing charge to the cemetery and funeral bureau has been, in your opinion, too lengthy, and you're trying to speed it up. That's not new information. Your previous bill could have moved forward, and I supported that. And then you could have introduced this in January and perhaps even and made it an urgency bill.
I would think if if with what I would imagine the support and problem probably lack of opposition, but I don't know that it could prevail as an urgency message measure at the beginning of next year. But we don't know all this. That's the problem I have with gut and amend bills. So I'll allow you to answer my concerns. I'm not indicating which way I'm gonna vote, but I'm just very uncomfortable.
I almost am to the point where I will oppose last minute Gottam amend bills whether I agree with the policy or not because of the unintended consequences that are highly more likely with last minute gut and amend bills. Again, I don't like them at all.
Speaker 2
Well, permission to respond? Sure. And I'll be brief. Mister Nilo, you're a very thoughtful member, and that's one of the things I like about you. And I guess I'll have to remember that staff is always right because I think probably had I read a paragraph that my staff had written, it would have helped to answer this question.
This is I would venture to say this is not a gut and amend. This bill, much to my chagrin and my very frustration with the assembly, this bill, it was the assembly chair who insisted that we keep his original bill, which is thirty two fifty four, keep his original bill and just move up the time frame of getting the information so then we can in turn hopefully see if everyone agrees with our ideas of how we could have implemented it. So I don't see it as a gut and amend. I actually see it as purpose preserving original legislation and not having one thing do one thing, something does something else. The next thing we know, we got 10 bills all trying to do the same thing.
This is actually the assembly's chair saying, time out. I worked on this. Let's finish what we started before we go to step b. So back in 2024, the chair of business and professions authored a b thirty two fifty four in 2024, which created a work group to convene interest interested stakeholders to make recommendations related to abandoned cemeteries and provide a report to the legislature by 01/01/2027. So that was already done in 2024.
The reason why this isn't a gut and amend and how they work together is we're now saying since 2024, it's getting worse, and we can't wait till July 2027 to finally start talking about what we're doing. So I don't see it as a gut and amend. I actually see it as a joint partnership in that we all agree something needs to be done. In 2024, they said, let's get everyone together. And I'm simply saying, we need to walk a little faster because, meanwhile, people are being horribly mistreated.
So I respectfully ask for your reconsideration. And I don't see this as a gotten amend. I see it as adhering to existing policy and then pushing forward. And I look forward to coming back next year with that even big beautiful bill that will address this issue.
Speaker 6
way, that title works with me, not Roger. They they call it the one triple b, by the way, back there. You make a good point. This is essentially the same working group that was established by that assembly bill, and you're just saying hurry up.
Speaker 6
sir. K. Under that circumstance, I will support the bill. But just generally speaking
Speaker 6
We should not and I I understand why your your rationale as to it's not really a gut and amend. I get that. But I just have to repeat, we should not be doing major legislation. This isn't that. I get it.
With gut and amend bills at the last minute, we need to stop doing that.
Speaker 1
Okay. Thank you very much. I have a couple of comments too, and then we'll give you an opportunity to close briefly. We're coming up on 09:30, and I wanna make sure none of us are late for whatever things we need to do before the floor. Did you have a quick comment?
Senator Troy, go ahead.
Speaker 7
I appreciate for bringing this important measure until you introduced this bill and identifying the problem. I didn't realize that was that serious. I think through this bill, we need to not only solve the problem that we are facing for the abandoned cemeteries, but your study, by passing this one, I guess I'm making my comments along with my questions. So, maybe you can answer by passing this bill what exactly this bill will do or solve the problem. My understanding is that the feasibility study how we can solve the problem for the abandoned cemeteries.
Is that true?
Speaker 2
The essence of the bill is to have someone be responsible. So right now, with an abandoned cemetery, the city is just kind of some cities. I can't speak to every city, but some cities just it's kind of there. And you see people drive by and brown grass, you know, not looking particularly nice.
Speaker 7
I I know that's your problem. So your your your bill will solve how will it solve the problem?
Speaker 2
Who will be responsible? And then once we know who's responsible, we can say, this is the policy we would like you to implement. But right now, cities and counties don't want to and what happens is the consumer bureau has a division of funerals and cemeteries, which I had no idea of. That bureau is the one that holds the endowment funds. So for example, with Lincoln, it has a $1,000,000 endowment fund, but you can't use the endowment fund just all at once.
So all you can use is the principal interest. The principal interest is $3,000 per month. That's not sufficient to fix this. So that's why we need a policy that says because DCA, which is consumer affairs, isn't gonna manage cemeteries all across the state. We need someone
Speaker 7
Okay. So, while you are doing that, I hope that rather than one time study, this is a very important issue because it will all all face, you know, somewhere to be buried and the cemetery site will be buried or abandoned years later. And, that's terrible story. So, I think that this is important problem that we need to prevent because cemetery management companies, what I understand is that when you buy the site, you do pay the maintenance fee in perpetuity. And, I think that that's the company's claim, but obviously all these abandoned cemeteries have said the same thing to the people who were buying the gravesites in the beginning, but at the end, you know, at a hundred years later, I guess nobody can trace back their promises or what documents may be lost.
So, I think my thinking is that there has to be measure that annually or biannually or every five years consumer affairs department or real estate department, some agents through this study, agents will be the best, will have to review their financial status, whether they can sustain the next twenty years, next fifty years. By doing so, every two years, every five years, thirty years, we'll study that the feasibility. So, the management can change the grapeseye price for the future buyers. You cannot go back to the previous ones. So, hey, we are our money you pay more is not gonna work.
So, future buyers will have to subsidize to pay if I pay the $100 more on top of the real estate price for the management of the future side. Future ones can be increased to $150 to $100 annually. They can increase and they can see the no problem in maintaining the park itself, the cemetery park itself. I think that that has to be embedded in there. So, I don't know whether it might be a better idea to make it to your bill and study more or pass this one and let them include that topic, as I suggest.
Speaker 2
Sir, and I will be as brief as possible. And what I'll do for anyone who would like, I'd be happy to have an offline conversation on all the things I've learned in this process. But really briefly to answer and in defense of the administration who's not present, the Department of Consumer Affairs does do an annual audit. They do that. They actually the bank or the trustee has to submit how much money they have in that account.
So there are some things, but there are some loopholes. For example, they sit submit a map to the recorder. Oh, we have x amount of plots, but they don't say who's in them. And so what happens is if a cemetery is abandoned and now the markers are gone, how do you know who's in that number? So these are the things that we learn through the process, and I promise you I'm going to be very diligent.
I heard the things that you said. I will follow-up with you of any other ideas, and we certainly will work to incorporate them in forward policy. But I don't wanna give the impression that the administration does review annually records, all of that, but we could certainly do it better to avoid this problem, which is why I'll be coming back to you next year because there is not sufficient amount of money being charged right now to ensure that these cemeteries can be cared for into perpetuity. And that's why we're here today.
Speaker 1
We need to wrap up, so I'll be as quick as I can here. First of all, this is a study bill. She is studying it. So for those of you who your comments were, we need more information, exactly what she's asking for. It's not a gut and amend.
She made amendments in July. She's dogged. This is an important issue. We have to figure out what we're doing with abandoned cemeteries. They're bad for communities.
They're bad for the families. Thank you for your tenacity, senator. We're gonna get a quorum established here, and then I believe you have a motion incoming from senator Archuleta. I'm grateful to you for your willingness to work on this very tough issue. Please establish a quorum.
Speaker 4
Ashby here. Troy? Here. Troy here. Archuleta?
Here. Archuleta here. Adegine? Here. Adegine here.
Grayson?
Speaker 1
Alright. Very good. Thank you everyone for your comments and input. I'm sure she'll take them to heart as she starts up with the study effort. Let's call the roll.
Speaker 4
I. Choi? Aye. Choi, I. Archeletta?
Aye. Archeletta, I. Adegine? Adegine, I. Grayson?
Aye. Grayson, I. Mengevar? Nilo.
Speaker 1
Alright. To my colleagues who are here, thank you very much. I think we'll leave the roll open. Nope. We're not leaving the roll open.
Alright. That's it. You are on eight to zero. Thank you so much. Thank you to my colleagues who who came in this morning.
Appreciate you so much.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.