Jim Lights — Jim Lights, speaking for the California Airports Council, is introduced as having worked with the author’s office on SB 661. He then testifies in support of the bill, underscoring the importance of the compliance provisions in Section 3 and emphasizing that California’s aviation infrastructure must be ready statewide, not just in rural fire-prone areas. He also supports an expenditure allocation approach that is acceptable to both taxpayers and airports.
Kathy Van Austen — Represents United Airlines and speaks on behalf of Alberto Tariko and Airlines for America in support of the bill.
Alberto Tariko — Named as someone who could not attend and is being represented by Kathy Van Austen.
Mike Belote — Speaks on behalf of Delta Airlines in support of the bill.
Kobe Pazotti — Identified as speaking on behalf of an entity, but the transcript cuts off the affiliation.
Senator Hurtado — Senator Hurtado explains that the bill is meant to help rural communities by returning funds to them, and adds that her Bakersfield airport was the inspiration for drafting the bill, reinforcing that the money should go back to airports and the communities they serve.
SB1 — Used as a comparison for inflation adjustment of the gas tax.
Jim — Referenced as someone who could speak more directly to airport operations and funding needs.
SB274 — SB 274 is introduced as the next agenda item and then discussed in testimony as a measure to strengthen safeguards for automated license plate reader (ALPR) systems. Speakers describe the bill as requiring stronger policies for access and use, including training, audits, retention limits, and restrictions on sharing data with federal agents. Supporters frame it as an important initial guardrail against broad surveillance and emphasize that ALPR data should only be used for narrow, specified purposes.
SB274 — The bill is described as extending retention to 60 days and establishing safeguards and oversight for ALPR data use.
SB274 — The meeting moved to item number seven, SB 274 by Cervantes. A motion was made to do pass the bill to the Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection, and the bill passed out of committee.
SB274 — The author begins presenting SB 274, focused on automated license plate recognition privacy concerns.
SB34 — Referenced as the 2016 law requiring ALPR usage and privacy policies.
Rebecca Marcus George — Introduced as a supporter from the California Public Defenders Association.
Rebecca Marcus — Testified in support of SB 274 on behalf of the California Public Defenders Association, focusing on immigration enforcement and sensitive locations.
Becca Kramer — Becca Kramer, speaking as a tweener with Kaiser Advocacy on behalf of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said they do not have a position on the bill as printed and appreciated the author's office working with them on the bill.
Corey Salzillo — Testified in opposition for the California State Sheriff's Association, arguing the 60-day retention limit would hinder investigations.
Brandon App — Brandon App testified in opposition on behalf of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.
Ryan Sherman — Ryan Sherman testified in opposition on behalf of multiple law enforcement and school safety associations, including the Riverside Sheriff's Association, California Narcotic Officers Association, California Reserve Peace Officers Association, and various city police officer associations.
Kobe Poseidio — Kobe Poseidio testified in opposition on behalf of the City of Thousand Oaks, stating a respectful opposition position.
LaShae Sharp-Collins — Addressed as Senator during the committee discussion, though the transcript may be misattributing the speaker/title.
Unnamed committee member — The committee member asked a series of related questions about ALPR/data management, including what a reasonable data retention period would be, how enforcement works for those responsible for managing the data, and how compliance is ensured, audited, and made transparent.
Unnamed opposition representative — The witness explained that the opposition coalition, including police chiefs and sheriffs, struggled to agree on a specific retention period, so the draft amendments were modeled on LAPD policy as a bifurcated system with general access followed by additional locked retention. They emphasized that many of the concerns raised in the debate stem from failures to comply with existing ALPR laws, citing audits and CalMatters reporting, and argued that the first step should be universal compliance with the laws already on the books. The witness also said the association has a history of negotiating difficult issues and expressed hope that the parties could still settle on a retention number.
Lewenthal — Supported the bill, said 60 days is reasonable, and argued against claims that the bill would increase crime.
Unnamed Sheriff's Association representative — Said sheriffs cannot agree on a retention period after which they would be comfortable destroying license-plate data.
SB533 — SB 533 is introduced as the final bill of the day and the next agenda item, then briefly described as legislation related to broader use of EV charging.
SB533 — SB 533 (Richardson) was moved do pass to the Committee on Utilities and Energy and later announced as out based on earlier votes.
Joe Lang — Represents the LA Clippers and supports SB 533.
James Jack — Speaks on behalf of General Motors in support of SB 533.
John Harabedian — Noted as being replaced by Assembly Member Bennett.
John Harabedian — Thanked for leadership on the issue.
Ryan Elaine — Public witness in support on behalf of the California Retailers Association.
Philip Pereira — Public witness in strong support on behalf of the California Chamber.
Jake Potter — Public witness in strong support on behalf of the City of Livermore.
Matt Klovenstein — Public witness in support on behalf of several organizations through Summit Advocacy.
Morgan Newburgh — Morgan Newburgh, speaking for the California State Association of Counties and Cal Cities, states opposition to the bill while expressing appreciation for recent amendments, including the addition of a sunset date and reducing the exclusion cap from $300 million to $200 million.
SB661 — Removed from the consent calendar and will be heard today.
SB661 — SB 661 is introduced as the Airport Expansion and Regional Optimization Act, which would redirect existing jet fuel sales tax revenue back to airports for aviation-related uses rather than the State General Fund. The author emphasizes that the bill is not a new tax, but a way to support airport infrastructure, air service expansion, workforce development, and improved access for rural communities. The discussion also frames the bill as a response to California’s long-standing noncompliance with federal requirements that aviation fuel tax revenues be used for airport-related purposes, with Section 3 identified as the key compliance provision. Witnesses express support, thanking the Senator and praising the bill for returning funds to airports, while questions are raised about the revenue distribution formula and whether it will adequately benefit rural or point-of-origin airports. The author responds that the goal is to ensure the funds go back to those communities.
SB661 — Passed the committee vote 13-0 and was held open for add-ons.
SB661 — Referenced as an item on the consent calendar whose title was removed.
SB661 — Item number 12; motion was do pass to the Committee on Revenue and Taxation.
SB695 — SB 695 is listed on the consent calendar as one of the bills to be handled together.
SB775 — Listed as one of the consent calendar bills.