Entrepreneurs & Government - CA Fires, AI, Regulation, Prop 13 | Senator Ben Allen - Meyerside Chats: Government, Policy & Civility

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Evan Meyer (00:00):
So, let's get started.
Senator Ben Allen.
Round of applause, please.
You hear a lot aboutpoliticians.
This guy is the best.
I've known him forever, and he'snot a traditional politician of
whatever you see on the news.
He's an incredible thinker.

(00:21):
He's a brilliant man and afriend.
And I'm honored to have him sithere with me today.
And let's get started.
It would be remiss if we didn'tjust say something about the
fires.
Right.
So how is that you, you'vemanaged this district that
experienced the most difficultportion of this catastrophe.

(00:41):
How have you, what does your dayto day look like now?
What are some of the challengesand opportunities and what's in
your power to do about

Senator Ben Allen (00:48):
it?
So good morning, everybody.
So great to see everyone.
It's a great, great turnout andI appreciate it very much.
I represent a state senatedistrict.
Our districts are about amillion people a piece.
It's enormous.
But my district includes theentire Palisades Fire.
It also goes all the way out toHollywood, the whole coastal
South Bay.
So it's a lot of differentcommunities from Palos Verdes

(01:10):
all the way up to Calabasas allthe way out to to the Hollywood
Bowl.
And certainly this wonderfulcommunity here in Venice.
What a difficult few weeks it'sbeen.
This beautiful community that Iknow well.
We've been members of the KeyLight Israel Synagogue for a
long time up there.
You know, I grew up in SantaMonica, so, you know, we're kind
of sister communities.
So many of my friends fromthere.
And just to have the wholecommunity burn down to a crisp.

(01:32):
Right in front of our eyes.
I've been up in the zone anumber of times now.
Of course, we've moved fromshock to anger.
I think people are very upsetjustifiably about losing their
homes, losing their community.
It's been immensely difficult.
And there's now this incrediblychallenging.
process involved with, with the,with the, with the cleaning of
it all and the rebuilding.

(01:53):
And, and there's so many factorsto this.
And part of the challenge isthat everybody's flying a little
blind.
I think you're, you know, peoplewant to think the government
knows exactly what it's doing.
And I think anyone who's workedclose to government knows it's
just a bunch of people tryingtheir best for the most part.
And if, you know, yes, we have.
Federal support, you know, whogo from disaster to disaster,
and that's immensely helpful.
Quite frankly, I, I can't, Imean, I, I can't imagine that

(02:14):
the president would considerdisbanding FEMA given their
immense experience.
But, you know, having their helpis really helpful because they,
they go from disaster todisaster.
Most of us have neverexperienced a disaster.
Most people have never built ahome, right?
I mean, most people, you buy ahome, you rent a home, you don't
build a home.
If you have built a home, you'venever built on a toxic fire
site.
And with all the challengesassociated with that.

(02:37):
And yet we're now having to,we're asking this entire
community, two major communitiesin the L.
A.
area, with all of the challengesand the tariffs and the supply
chain issues and labor shortagesand immigration deportations, to
rebuild two massive communitiesin a matter of months that have
just been flattened, that arefilled with toxic ash.

(02:57):
And so it's really hard.
It's hard, I love hard work, butwhat makes this one hard also is
just the human tragedy behind itall.
I mean, having to look people inthe eye.
who've lost everything.
Some people have lost friends.
They've lost their lives.
And and so, so much of our workright now is just focused on
support.
How do we help people hook upwith insurance?
How do we get them theinformation they need?

(03:18):
How do we get them back to theirsites?
But how do we, if they're goingback to their sites, how do we
make sure that they're gonna beprotecting themselves?
Because it is dangerous to goback.
How do we get the schoolsreopened?
How do we get the kids you know,from one side of the community
to the other?
And, and, you know, it's workingwith law enforcement, and the
fire, and the insurancecommissioner, and the water has
been contaminated.
And how do we, you know, getpeople fresh water that's gonna

(03:40):
be clean?
How do we deal with the factthat you've got, you know,
people who lost their homes, andthere's people in the same zone
who didn't lose their homes, andyet it's still pretty
uninhabitable?
There's the utilities.
So, there's just many layers tothis work.
And it also, of course, involvesa lot of different layers of
government.
And I think we're also seeingsome of the dysfunction, quite
frankly, of L.
A.
governance.
Who's in charge?

(04:00):
Right?
Is it the mayor?
Is it the county supervisor?
Is it the Congress?
Is it FEMA?
Is it the state legislature?
The governor?
You know, the city councilmember?
You know, it's interestingtalking to my colleagues who are
state senators in other parts ofthe, of the state.
When they walk in the room,they're the big cheese.
Because, you know, their, youknow, their counties are, you
know, 100, 000 people live inthe county.
They represent a million people.

(04:20):
But when I walk into the room asrepresenting a million people,
the mayor's got, you know, threeand a half million constituents.
The supervisor's got two millionconstituents.
The congressman's got a similar,you know, so there's all these
cooks in the kitchen.
And and, and different skillsand different interests and
different focus.
And so that's a whole notherlayer of challenge too and, you
know, my, my job, my, I see myjob, quite frankly, as

(04:42):
supporting their efforts, givingwhatever support we can from the
state, advocating for thecommunity, trying to get
resources, we've just got amajor package of funding through
from the state, and then justpushing the state agencies to
provide whatever help they canto the locals and the feds that
are doing the bulk of the on theground work of the, of the, of
the cleanup and recovery.

Evan Meyer (04:59):
Yeah, it just.
When we talk about levels ofgovernment, does that make sense
to everybody?
Okay, does everyone think theyknow all the levels of
government?
Okay does anyone know what acounty supervisor is?
Do you know what they do?
Do you know the differencebetween a state senator and a
federal senator?

(05:20):
Alright, good.
Good, good, good.
There's a couple of them.
Yeah, it's like there'ssomething like 20%.
Some studies say 20 percent ofpeople understand civics in
general and even less getinvolved in it.
But just for another benefit, isanyone here involved in
civically active businesses?
Raise your hands.
Okay.
Anyone using A.

(05:40):
I.
Or any of the emergingtechnologies right now as part
of their business?
Got it.
Anyone use AI in general?
No.

Audience (05:51):
Can't help it.

Evan Meyer (05:54):
I'm sorry.
Civics is different.
Civics is your responsibility asa person versus getting involved
in working for the government ornecessarily being a politician.
Civics is the understanding ofgovernment and what's, and
what's required there.
But Can you explain a littlebit, Ben about the levels of
government and why it's soimportant to understand and, and

(06:18):
what, how that can impact peoplein terms of getting involved?

It's funny, you know, Americans love
decentralization, right, and yetwe also want the government to
function decisively when we needit.
And those two are very they'rein discord.
They're in Dorsecourt.
So, so we've got all theselevels of government, right?
You were on a neighborhoodcouncil.
That's a very micro experience,right?
It's, it's, it's literally thepeople in the neighborhood who

(06:43):
get together and elect aneighborhood council that
advocates for the, for theneighborhood.
You have a city council and acity government with a mayor on,
in charge who, who, who overseesthe city.
Above that, you've got thecounty government with a, a five
member board of supervisors.
No elected executive.
That's changing, by the way.
We're going, we, we just allvoted.
to, to create a new electedexecutive for the county, which

(07:07):
I think is a good thing, quitefrankly, because I think it's
gonna create some locus ofresponsibility and
accountability.
Above that, you've got the stategovernment with a legislature
that mirrors Congress, anassembly, and a senate and a
governor.
And then, of course, there's thefederal government with the, the
house representatives, thestate, so the U.
S.
senate, and then the president.
And each of these layers ofgovernment take care of various

(07:29):
aspects.
of life, and it's amazing howhow complicated it can get.
I, I interned when I was incollege for the County
Supervisor, Zev Yaroslavsky, atthe time.
And I, I sat in the front, and Iwould just be listening to all
the, all the folks handling thecalls that were coming in, and
half the time the call was Oh,thank you.
That's a city problem.
Let me send you over to thecouncil member.
Oh, that's a state problem Letme send you to the state

(07:51):
legislator.
That's a federal problem And youthese people got so good at
knowing, you know, what wouldwho to direct people to?
And unfortunately But it'sdifficult.
It's it's ridiculous, right?
We ask people to have tounderstand civics just to get
basic services from theirgovernment and I will say Part
of our responsibility as a, aselected officials and we all
have staff is to really get toknow everybody we work with at

(08:13):
every level of government so wecan work more seamlessly
together.
But you know what ends uphappening?
Politicians, sometimes they'vegot egos, they've got, they're
competitive, you know, sometimespeople don't work well together.
I'm really blessed to have agroup of local electeds and,
and, and, you know, right up anddown the chain where we've got
good working relationships, butsome of my colleagues get, have
terrible relationships with someof their, their, their
politicians and that can getreally in the way of their

(08:34):
constituent service work aswell.
So, you know, it's not necessaryto know every detail of every of
every institution, but it isimportant, I think, when people
wonder sometimes why why, whythe messaging can get a little
jumbled.
It's because you do have a lotof cooks in the kitchen.
And there's beauty to thesystem, right?
We, we, we, we do try todecentralize because we don't,

(08:55):
we're not a monarchy.
We don't like centralizingpower.
We don't like handing everythingover to one person.
But that does sometimes lead toa, a, a messiness.

Evan Meyer (09:03):
Yeah.
What, what would you say toentrepreneurs either looking to
help either, I guess in a fewways, either help during
catastrophes like this and besupportive and create things
that can be really be valuablefor prevention mechanisms or or
even to help now.
But also in addition to that,where are the opportunities in

(09:24):
general and government to eitherget funding or create the sort
of public private partnershipsthat can let them, work to
achieve California's goals.

Yeah.
So I think one of the greatthings entrepreneurs are always
good at thinking about twosteps, three steps, four steps
ahead.
You know, right after the fire,we had so many people give
blankets and clothes and foodand water.
We, we couldn't handle it all.
So that was the obvious stuff.
People wanted to help in a waythat was obvious to them, but
what they didn't always think ofwas, what are, what are people
gonna need next week?

(09:53):
Or what are the, what are theother things that aren't, aren't
immediately obvious?
I'll give you one littleexample.
There was a synagogue in West LAthat called up the synagogue in
pal, in, in Palisades and said,Hey, what can we do to help you?
And, and of course the people inthe palisade said, I'll call you
back.
I mean, they literally losttheir homes.
They lost, they lost everything.
They, they were no place tothink about what they even
needed.

(10:13):
And then the the synagogue inWest L.
A.
then called them back and said,You know what?
Check it out.
You guys are going to come toour synagogue on Friday night.
We're going to give you oursanctuary.
We're going to have a toy drivefor your kids.
And we're going to give you foodand clothing for your families
that have lost their homes.
And you're going to take overthe synagogue.
And, and, and have a ceremony, acelebration of healing.

(10:34):
Hundreds of people showed up.
These are people who had been,every single person from the
synagogue had been displaced.
I mean, if they hadn't losttheir homes, they were evacuated
at least.
These are people that wouldn'tnecessarily normally go.
These are people that wouldn'tnecessarily normally call up for
mental health.
But they needed, when they gotthe email, they came.
Because they wanted, theydesperately wanted a sense of
community.
And they wanted a place ofhealing.

(10:55):
And I just bring that up to makethe point that the folks at this
place in West L.
A.
understood what the people inthe Palisades needed more than,
than even they did at the time,because they were in such shock.
So, you know, I, I thinkproactively about the kinds of
needs that are going to be inthis community.
This is a community that wasvibrant and living and, and, and
engaging, and now it'sliterally, they, they can't,

(11:16):
the, the people are still there.
Thankfully, thankfully, we, we,you know, we, we did lose some
people, but it was, thecasualties were actually pretty
low, given the amount ofdestruction.
But, but, but the communityitself is, is now dispersed.
Lots of people living in ourmidst, right?
I mean, I met someone whosesister is living with with him,
you know, displaced in, rightnow in Venice.
So they've got to re enrolltheir kids in schools.

(11:38):
They're trying to figure outwhat their next steps are.
They need to, they, they've,they're off, their home offices
have burned down.
They've, they're missing theirdocuments.
So what kinds of support can wegive them?
You know, when they've lost,when they've lost the home
office, when they've lost a lotof their documents, when
they've, you know, so from abusiness to business
perspective, I think there'sways you guys can be proactive.
When it comes to helping thegovernment, I, I've, I've, I'm,

(12:00):
you know, I will say, and I knowyou've experienced this too.
It can be sometimes a littlefrustrating because the
government's bureaucratic.
The government has a way ofdoing things.
The procurement processes aredifficult.
And sometimes, I've had a lot ofentrepreneurs, even in the last
couple of weeks, say, Hey, I'vegot this great product.
It's going to solve the problem.
We're going to get water, da,da, da.
And, you know, hey, just get mein front of a couple of people.
And it's hard for them to breakthrough.

(12:21):
They've got some product thatthey think solves the problem.
Sometimes there's already asolution that they don't quite,
they're not aware of.
And sometimes it just doesn'tfit neatly into the way that the
bureaucrats that are handlingthe recovery think.
And so I just encourage you tobe creative.
Don't don't be discouraged whenyou have trouble getting
through.
Be willing to modify yourmessage and your product and,

(12:43):
and actually listen closely.
Don't just come with a solutionthat you've already figured out
without listening to the peopleyou're trying to pitch it to
because you're going to have tomodify your product in a way
that's going to meet theirneeds.
And it's hard sometimes to getin the, if you're an
entrepreneur.
You do not have the mind of abureaucrat.
And if you're a bureaucrat, youdo not have the mind of an

(13:05):
upstart.
You are separate types ofpeople.
And you are beautiful people,and you both add a lot to our
society, and we need you to worktogether.
But you are like oil and water,and water, and oil and vinegar.
They blend nicely actually, butyou know, and, and so just so,
and we, and honestly, we canhelp you.
We can help you translatebetween those two worlds because

(13:25):
politicians are kind of, we haveone fit.
We have to be entrepreneurial.
It's part of, you got to putyourself forward and run for
office and pitch yourself and,and be risk taking.
And bureaucrats aren't likethat.
But we also work within thebureaucracy and we, and we know
the massive systemic challengesthat they're trying to solve.
And so I would just encourageyou to be.
You've got to be creative, butalso put your mind in the

(13:47):
systems thinking of someonewho's trying to run a massive
undertaking like re, like, youknow, cleaning up and rebuilding
the Palisades and understandthat whatever product you're
bringing to them is just,doesn't necessarily fit into,
into the way they're thinkingabout it.
That doesn't mean that you can'tfigure out a way to incorporate
it, but you've got to think,you've got to really use all

(14:08):
your, all your creativity and,and people skills.
To, to figure out how to do it.
And of course, there's alsogoing to be a lot of personal
actors in all of this.
Individuals that are going to bestepping up to help the
community whether the governmentlikes it or not.
And there's ways to kind ofinsert yourself.
But I, I just encourage a lotof, a lot of creativity and, and
trying to get your head into themind of the challenges of the

(14:29):
government.
in order to help the government.

Evan Meyer (14:33):
Do you think that some of those challenges, how
does California recognize someof those challenges?
There's a lot of regulatory, itcould be bureaucracy.
What does California think ingeneral?
California, the state ofCalifornia.
How do you say it responds toknowing that those things exist
for entrepreneurs?
And, and where does it sit onthat?
Is it trying to make it easier?
Is it trying to make it?

(14:55):
How is it better?
How is it engaging theentrepreneurial solution problem
solving mindset into the waysthat, you know, engineers and
entrepreneurs, it's a different,like you said, they solve
problems differently,

you know, right?
Remember that the government isnot some coherent blob that's
ready to always roll in apredictable way, right?
It's a, it's a, it's a, it's a,it really is a reflection of the
wild diversity.
That is our society.
And so many different people ingovernment come with different

(15:29):
perspectives and differentpriorities.
Certainly there is a lot ofpride in California's
entrepreneurial leadership and alot of interest in focusing on
California's entrepreneurialleadership.
And I think you see that rightup to the governor.
I mean, he himself was anentrepreneur.
He, you know, he's close to thetech sector, particularly in San
Francisco.
You can see how much he wants tohelp grow the sector, and you

(15:51):
see a lot of individuals thatare very interested.
You also have other individualsthat are pushing other agendas.
Labor rights, environmentalprotections, safety, you know,
there may be special interestgroups that are trying to push,
you know, for their particularsolution, or, or try to protect
their piece of the, of thepuzzle.

(16:13):
The realtors are an incrediblypowerful block up in Sacramento.
I mean, I, I, one of theinteresting things about being
up there is you just get awindow into these incredible,
this incredible range of specialinterest groups that have, that
have built a niche forthemselves.
And part of what they're tryingto do, quite frankly, is to
protect their prerogatives.
You know, we have, there's atied house rules.
I mean, there's things I neverknew about before I got up
there.

(16:33):
But, you know, you can't sell.
If you're a, if you're a, a, a,a liquor, if you're a distiller,
a whiskey distiller, you can'tsell directly.
to a consumer.
You have to go through adistributor.
You can do it directly at a verylimited level at the distillery,
but you can't just startshipping on your own to the
general public.
Because there's these peopleright in the middle called the

(16:53):
distributors who have created aniche for themselves and they
protect it like the devil.
You know, you've got, you've gotall these different groups out
there that are fighting eachother.
The cosmetic surgeons arefighting against the I didn't
even know there was a differencebetween them until I got up
there, but it turns out there isand they hate each other.

Audience (17:11):
You know,

the podiatrists want to work further
up the leg.
You know, the leg people arelike, no, you stay to the foot.
You know, you got the nursesfighting against the doctors,
fighting against the hospitals,fighting against the insurance
industry, fighting against thepharmaceuticals, but they all
lock arms against the triallawyers.
Right?
So there's just this kind ofmassive mix of, of, of battle.

(17:33):
And it's ridiculous sometimesthat it's the legislature that
has to cast judgment, but wedon't have a better place to do
it.
But then it becomes also aboutpower, and persuasion, and
relationships, and who gets inwith the leg Hey, are you going
to be with us?
We're the docs.
You got to stand with us againstthese against these other guys.
And, and, and that's, that's,that's a lot, that's ultimately,
that's a lot of what ends uphappening up in Sacramento, is

(17:54):
these kind of power battles thatare beyond what most people are
thinking about, certainly not,these, these are not things that
motivated me to run for officewhen I was putting my name
forward.
So, I would encourage you tojust be aware of all that
happening.
I think a lot of entrepreneursoftentimes get kind of lost in
the shuffle because you guys areso busy doing your work, and,
you know, it's usually the moreestablished folks, Once they're

(18:14):
kind of established as a biggerbusiness, they then join the
chambers and join theorganizations that are out there
advocating for whatever cause.
Tech has a strong voice inSacramento, but it's dominated
by the big guys.
Right?
It's dominated by Google andFacebook, you know, those guys.

(18:35):
Right?
And, and so, So I, I think that,that, so one of my, one of the
things I'm constantly trying todo in my job is say who's not at
the table, who's important toour state that is not, that's
too busy actually doing the workthan to be up here in Sacramento
in my face asking for a specialcarve out.
And so I would just say, youknow, one of, I guess what I

(18:57):
would say is it's so, I'm a pre,I love the fact that everyone's
here trying to learn a littlebit about our system because as
they say in Sacramento, ifyou're not, You know, if you're
not at the table, you're on themenu, right?
And, and you know, thegovernment is not going away.
They will not leave you alone,right?
Because there's always someoneout there that, that is going to
find something about yourbusiness model.

(19:18):
They're going to want toregulate some other group, some
other folk person that sees athreat or an opportunity.
And I just encourage you for thesake of your career to not
ignore politics and government.
As much as, you know, focus onyour work, focus on your
product.
Of course, that's gotta be yournumber one, but don't ignore

(19:38):
what's happening in thepolitical realm because you
know, the political realm has alot of power over the work you
do ultimately.
And and we need the voices ofentrepreneurs up in Sacramento
more than ever.
We rely on your creativity.
We rely on you staying here andbuilding businesses here and
hiring people here.

(19:59):
And that's an important part ofwhat makes California great.
We know that our state isexpensive.
We know the costs are high.
We know we've got, you know, alot of regulation.
And so we really rely on P, youknow, we, we, we also know we're
never going to compete in pencilmanufacturing or kind of, you
know, lower level Tic Tac stuff.
We, we're going to rely on the,on the brain.

(20:22):
Driven products that you'reworking on, on biotech, on the
stuff coming out of ouruniversities.
You know, those are the kind ofthings that are going to keep
California competitive in thelong term.
Most politicians know this, andthey want to help, but they're
also oftentimes flooded withmessaging from folks that have
just built their entire businessmodel around influencing the

(20:43):
government.
And, You're justifiably notdoing that.
You're actually working onproducts, right?
You're actually working onthings that are going to help
people, but incorporate apolitical and government
strategy in your long termthinking.
I just, I can't encourage thatenough.

Evan Meyer (21:01):
Awesome.
Yeah, you, you, you brought up akey word there also, biotech.
Biotech is one of many emergingtechnologies, revolution
Revolutionary technologiesrevolutionary, revolutionizing
technologies that are emergingright now.
AI, robotics, quantum computing,nuclear energy, biotech, things

(21:24):
that are, we've never inhumanity, you can only handle
one at a time, usually.
We're handling like, we're aboutto handle like 10 at a time, and
that's.
Kind of the singularity as well,right?
And the good news for

you is the government can't even think
about these issues fast enoughto, to regulate them.
No.
That, that, there's downsides tothat by the way.
Cause it leads to abuse.
But but there actually is somuch opportunity for innovation
here.
And, and the more you can kindof establish your, your value
added before the governmentcomes, gets around to figuring
out what to do with you.

(21:58):
the better for you.

Evan Meyer (22:00):
Where is California positioning itself right now in
terms of these advancements?
And, and, and where do you seerelate that to the
entrepreneurial world in termsof getting involved in creating
meaningful impact and so forth?

Yeah.
I mean, I think we, as I say, wereally pride ourselves on being
an innovation hub.
We pride ourselves on being thecenter of the tech industry, the
heart of Hollywood, the heartof, of, of so many biosciences.
We've invested quite frankly.
I mean so much of the investmentwe put into the University of
California and Caltech andStanford and all of those
investments are paying off inways that have really come to

(22:32):
benefit our state.
We rely on this creativity,innovation, and, and, and
entrepreneurial spirit.
And I think we're really proudof it.
We want to keep it.
We're also worried about ourcompetitiveness.
I think we understand our costsare, as I say, our costs are
higher, our regulations arehigher, our taxes are higher.
And we're in this constant pushand pull with other states that
are trying to steal ourbusinesses.

(22:52):
I'm dealing with this right now.
I'm working on a big TV film taxcredit expansion to help make
sure that we keep ourcompetitiveness with TV and film
production here.
You've seen other states andjurisdictions and countries that
are stepping up and reallytrying to steal a lot of that
work.
And we've got to offer betterincentives.
I mean, we know we don't have tomatch what British Columbia is
doing, but we've got to be morecompetitive.

(23:14):
The governor's proposed adoubling of our TV film tax
credit.
That's a really important thingto do because one of the things
that's now starting to happen isthat the infrastructure, you
know, used to be that peoplewould go off and do these one
off productions.
Well, now the infrastructure'sstarting to really build out in
places like Louisiana andGeorgia and Vancouver and
Toronto.
And, and, and so now thatinfrastructure is there, they're

(23:34):
having more cinematographers,more people, more grips, folks
who know the process.
And so we can't just rely on ourinfrastructural advantages.
We now have to provide morefinancial incentive.
And that's just one example ofhow we, you know, the world
continues to move at anincredibly fast pace.
And we as a big government witha lot of competing interests.

(23:56):
And quite frankly, a lot ofpoverty too, right?
I mean, the state of Californiahas a ton of poverty.
People don't, there's a lot ofwealth here and a lot of
poverty.
And so there's a lot of peoplethat spend a lot of time focused
on poverty.
And that's really appropriateand important.
We don't just see that, it's notjust the homeless folks, it's
also the working poor all overour state.
And those are importantpriorities too.
And oftentimes there's a bit ofa tension over taxation and

(24:17):
social welfare andredistributive policies.
And how do we strike thatbalance to allow for the
entrepreneurial innovation andthe business growth and the IPOs
that have helped to drive oureconomy and drive our budgets
while also making sure thatwe're taking care of the least
among us?
And that's another kind of verydifficult policy conundrum.

Evan Meyer (24:39):
Last question and then we're going to get to the
audience.
We'll make this our lightningquestion.
You've seen everyone here,including yourself, is an AI
user in some form or another.
It's just, I couldn't evenimagine living without it at
this point.
It only took, what, a year orso, and now it's just, it can't
go away.
What is, does the, what is thegovernment doing in government?

(25:03):
Like, what are they doing toembrace that so that they can
operate at the same wavelengthas the rest of the world and not
get behind too fast?

Yeah, probably not enough.
I think that that's you know,the gov tech folks are going to
be the ones are going to help tobridge the gap here.
How do we utilize a I you know,as effectively as private sector
is using it.
Of course, a lot of our focushas been on where regulation
goes.
You know, a lot of people see alot of our a lot of our we
talked about Hollywood, right?
I mean, you know, our writersAnd actors see AI as a massive

(25:34):
plagiarism scheme.
At least, you know, at leastaspects of it, right?
Where they take their, theirhard work and writing and
creative skills and, and spit itout with no compensation.
So there's all those issues.
But you're talking more abouthow do we incorporate AI into
government services andinteraction.
And I know that's something youworked on both when you were
working for the Senate and, andI think you're working on now.
The government's slow.

(25:55):
And yet you have someinnovative, more innovative
elected officials that aretrying to incorporate it into
their work.
And you're certainly starting tosee it filter into the, the mass
systems.
I mean, in some respects AIcould be incredibly helpful.
If you think about, governmentis the biggest business out
there.
I mean, we, we've, we'reproviding.
Massive services to healthcareand housing and education.

(26:20):
I mean, if you think about theexpenditures and the databases
and, you know, using smart smartAI technology to help smooth all
of that work can, can, can,could really be transformative.
And, and, and yet it's going to,it's going to take some really
innovative people who are ableto both really understand what
IEI can offer and also reallyunderstand not just what

(26:41):
government needs, but howgovernment works.
And that's where, you know,folks like you and others are
gonna, are gonna be reallycritical.
Awesome,

Evan Meyer (26:48):
thank you.
That's my last question.
We've got about 15 minutes forquestions.
Alright, well, the front row, Ithink, was designated the
priority of questions, right?
Let's start with Well, we'll getto everybody.
We'll get

Audience (2) (27:01):
to everyone.
Yeah, Moon should be a state.
Let's start here.
Yeah, that'll be my lastquestion.
Your opinion's on Testing, one,two, testing.
Okay, we're dialed.
Evan, thank you very much.
Ben, I really appreciate youcoming out here.
In the last couple of years,I've written my own voter guides
and really tried to understand,you know, what the fuk is going
on, especially at the statelevel.
So it's awesome to see someonein the flesh.
You don't seem like an NPC.

(27:21):
You actually seem like you careabout these things.
And Evan was singing yourpraises before, so I really
appreciate you taking the timeto come out.
I do have a few questions aboutthis event yesterday, and a few
things jump to my mind that I'mfeel really lucky that I can ask
you right now.
We have the highest LLC renewalcosts in the country, 800 a
year.
What are we doing about that?
They're the California defaultedon a federal loan, a COVID loan.
We're one of five states in theunion that defaults on that

(27:44):
loan.
And then that loan is Now, thefederal government's coming
after California businesses totake money from their payroll.
My own business got charged atthe end of the year.
It's not very much.
It's a per employee basis.
But if you're running a big shopand you have several employees
that, you know, a few thousanddollars at the end of the year,
it means you're not buying yourkids, you know, gifts at the end
of the year.
So I want to know what happenedthere.

(28:05):
And I'm also the the PalisadesReservoir.
If you have any, a couplesentences on why that was empty,
I'm really trying to understandwhat happened there.
And also, finally, the, the, youknow, we talk a lot about
innovation in California, youknow, trying to be an amazing
place for the, the, the future.
And I'm very concerned with someof the Ai, ai legislation that

(28:27):
thankfully Newsom vetoed.
It's one of the good things he'sdone.
He vetoed Anthony wiener'slegislation, which is trying to
slow down AI and regulate it.
You mentioned you're glad thatwe're creating all these new
things that regulators can evenkeep up with it.
But I would love a situationwhere the regulators were
actually good and if they couldkeep up with it, it would
actually help things and just,you know, quickly, I would love
no regulation at all.

(28:48):
We just had China come out withdeep sea.
We're in a hot, cold war rightnow, like the race is on.
I want government to, frankly,stay out of it.
I think they shouldn't doanything.
And I think we need to go fullspeed ahead.
That's my opinion.
I'm curious your thoughts onthat.
And finally, if you think moonshould be the 50, if a moon
should be the 51st state of theunion.
The moon.
Yeah.
very much.
Appreciate it.

(29:08):
You've got, you've got your

Evan Meyer (29:09):
work cut out for you there.
We'll try to keep these a coupleof minutes each so we can get to
everybody as well.

Yeah.
Well the moon, I mean, no onelives there yet.
So, but maybe in the future.
Right.
I mean, but it was certainly,yeah, you were there for, that's
true.
It's still next to no one elsehas been there.
Except for the American.
So, but it's been a while.
Reservoir, you know, a greatexample of governmental
dysfunction, right?
I mean, it was about a hundredthousand dollar fix.
There was a crack in thereservoir and it was just one of

(29:35):
those many.
Deferred maintenance projectsthat just didn't get taken care
of.
You know, there's a big debateas to how much of a difference
that would have made.
I think it would have madesomething of a difference,
right?
I mean, there would've been alittle more water up there for
sure, but it probably wouldn'thave been that, you know, the,
the, the magic bullet that thatsome people are claiming But it
is a good example of howprojects, there's a lot of

(29:58):
deferred maintenance in thepublic infrastructure.
And that's maybe another thing Icould work on.
I love your questions aboutabout the COVID loans and the
LLC.
We we are in the process ofpaying back the money.
We do worry a lot about theposture of the federal
government right now.
You know, I think under anormal, even Republican
president, there wouldn't besome of the questions.

(30:20):
That are popping up right nowabout but but that was, we were
in a budget retreat actuallyyesterday, and one of the topics
was, was paying back the money.
And I, I wasn't aware thatthey're clawing back businesses
money associated with it.
So, I'm going to look into that.
I'm also going to look into thatLLC cost, 800.
I mean, I think that ought to beyou know, I wonder if, well, I
mean, it shouldn't be zero forAmazon, right?

(30:40):
I mean, if it was, if it wasincorporated here, which is
probably not, yeah.
Because there are, there aresome administrative costs
associated with maintaining thepaperwork associated with these
corporations.
I, again, I, I think it's, it's,I don't, I don't want to see it
there's a, there's a, should thetaxpayer pay maybe, right?
I mean, you know, but, but theflip side is you know, should we

(31:02):
make it more reasonable forespecially small guys that are
just trying to get off theground when they have a low
payroll?
I, I do think so.
So, I, I'd actually like to.
It's the first time it's everbeen brought up to me, quite
frankly.
And I'd love to look into, maybewe can, maybe it can be pro, you
know, it could be calibratedbased on your size of your
business or something like that.
But I don't, I don't personallyhave a problem with Amazon
paying a fee to help pay forthe, you know, for the

(31:23):
incorporation cost.
'cause otherwise it would be thetaxpayers paying for that.
And that may not be fair.
But, but your point's welltaken.
So does that, am I trying to bequick?
'cause I know there's aboutfive.
Yeah.
The last one was ai.
Oh, ai.
Yeah.
So, okay.
So I think what we have to dowith ai, so the challenge with
AI on the regulatory side is wedon't wanna do anything that, I
don't wanna see us regulate AIin a way that will simply drive

(31:48):
the business out of the state.
I'm concerned about aspects ofai.
I genuinely am.
I brought up the issues withplagiarism, you know, with the
writers and the actors have beenbringing up.
And for example, we just passedsome legislation that the
governor did sign that gavethat, that, that, that, that
increased the rights of anactor.
Whose image and likeness isbeing utilized in AI.

(32:08):
To you know, That's, that wasone bill we passed.
I, I was at I was at a musicstudio not too long ago, and
they played some music that wasso close to the original music
that it really becomes an IPviolation from my perspective.
And again, I don't want to besuch a stickler on IP, but the
flip side is these are creativepeople.

(32:29):
I mean, I represent, just like Irepresent a lot of tech people,
I also represent a lot ofcreatives.
that their whole lives are basedon their creative output.
And if they write somethingthat's extraordinary or seeing
something, it's extraordinary.
And then it just literally getschanged, tweaked by some
algorithm.
And then all of a sudden theyhave no compensation associated
with it, even though thealgorithm is entirely based on
their creativity or at leastlargely based on their

(32:50):
creativity.
That, that, that about bothersme.
So I want to find if I love tofind a balance, I also don't
want, I will say what Throughoutthis whole conversation, I don't
want to see us regulate AI in away that simply will offshore
the work.
If we can truly protectCalifornia creatives, I'm very
interested in that.
But if it's about it, but ifit's about just regulating the

(33:11):
AI work here, that could justeasily pop over to Singapore or
Nevada or doing the exact samework.
That doesn't help me becausethe, the, the same policy
problems, you know, continue andall we're doing is just kicking
those, that goes good jobs andgood revenue out of the state.
And I think you're right, thegovernor is acutely aware of how

(33:34):
important AI has become as arevenue generator for the tech
sector and how incrediblyimportant the tech sector is for
the state of California, bothour budget and our jobs and our
economy.
We really follow the NASDAQ veryclosely from a revenue
perspective for us.
And so I think that's why yousee the reticence.
And that's gonna be, that's, butthat's gonna ultimately be the

(33:55):
debate here.
I mean, how do we protectintellectual property and
creativity while also not stymieinnovation and all the, all the
benefits associated with it?

Evan Meyer (34:05):
Awesome.
Alright, let's go right here.
And then we'll jump to thefarther back rows.

Audience (3) (34:10):
Okay.
Hey I'm building a miningcompany here.
Okay.
In California.
And just to get land had toBitcoin or No, real physical
mining.
Oh, real mining.
Try to keep the questions to oneall if possible.
Just so real mining.
That's nice to hear.
Yeah.
And we had to get land in Nevadato, like, it just didn't make
sense to start doing it here.
So we had to go get like 20acres right off the I 15.

(34:32):
Okay.
So.
So, yeah, what's, there's waytoo much regulation, way too
many fees, time, it's, it's justreally problematic when it comes
to infrastructure, especiallyland and stuff here, and that's,
it's not making it competitive.
There's a lot of other thingsthat are great about California,
but we've got to fix those if wewant to keep, you know, talent
and growth here, as I'm sure youknow.

Yeah.
I mean, certainly, you know, andI got, I mean, just to give you
another idea on the toxic wastestuff, our environmental
regulations are so strong thatwe're, we're likely going to be
out, we're likely going to beexporting.
A lot of that toxic waste inNevada and Arizona, where they
have significantly lowerenvironmental standards,
including right next to thisIndian reservation.
I mean, it's pretty ugly stuff.
There's been a lot of journalismon this.
It's a really tough balance,right?

(35:13):
I mean, California also pridesitself on its environmental
protection, and mining has beena very dangerous and damaging
activity.
That doesn't mean that there'snot ways to do it that's more
environmentally responsible.
Can

Audience (3) (35:24):
I

say something?
Yeah, of

Audience (3) (35:25):
course.
Offshore mining to countries andother places that have ten times
the pollutants.
And that's the flip side.

I think you see that also with oil
production.
You see that with oilproduction, too.
Where we may all, as folks whoare concerned about climate
change, have a certain degree ofantipathy toward the oil
industry and want to see areduction in oil use globally.
But your point's well taken.
The production of oil within thestate of California tends to be
a lot cleaner.

(35:53):
And unless Solar

Audience (3) (35:54):
panels don't grow on trees

either.
Right, right.
And they also have disposalchallenges and all the rest.
There is mining in this state,and I mean, I'd love to learn
more about your particularcircumstances.
Oh, cool.
Okay, cool.
I'd love to learn more about it.
Yeah.
Awesome.
Alright, let's

Evan Meyer (36:10):
jump, he was next, and then we'll

You

Audience (36:13):
can pick.
You want to pick, you pick.
No, you do the picking.
Yes, sir, yes sir.
Yeah.
Hi.
I'm wondering about has therebeen any talk about Prop 13 and
how Prop 13, if I have to buy,if I want to buy a building I'm
going to pay paying 10 times asmuch each year in tax.

(36:35):
Compared to somebody that's ownhas, you know, the assessed
value from the seventies.
And so this is, this is puts ahuge extra cost on us that
doesn't exist.
It's sort of like California hasthis, you know, aristocratic
real estate tax with prop 13.
And, and so it, it does impingeyou're like, should I be paying
10 times as much each year?
That's just really unfair.

(36:55):
Right.
And is there any.
Talk in that in terms of like,you can help, you know, spur
business, new businesses.
We have to pay 10 times as muchjust to start up.
So, and it's unfair to young

families.
You know, so traditionally prop13, so prop 13 for folks who
don't know as much about it, itbasically locks in very low
property tax rates and incrementfor, for when, when, when, when
a property is purchased.
And, you know, of course it waspassed at a time when.
Home values were skyrocketingand a lot of people on fixed

(37:27):
incomes were basically gettingpriced out of their homes
because of their tax liability,which was pretty ugly.
Now, of course it extended tonot, while it was written, well,
I think it was passed largely tohelp residential folks.
The biggest windfall has beenbig corporations, right?
I mean, Disneyland is stillpaying their tax increment from.
You know, the 70s, you know,from their assessed value in the

(37:48):
70s, and they're paying a much,much lower rate than either of
us are paying.
And you know, it's funny, Imean, I, I've experienced this
in my own family.
My parents have had their homesince the 70s.
I have a much, much more modesthome than they do, and yet I'm
paying, you know, almost double,triple the tax.
So, I think, you know, it's beena, considered the third rail of,
of California politics.
Nobody wants to touch it, it'sso popular, Prop 13.

(38:10):
But, like, so many things, Ithink, on a lot of things we've
been talking about.
I, I've always struck by howlame the conversation about
taxes is in general in America.
People want more taxes, theywant less taxes.
From my perspective, it's howyou tax, what you tax, what you
tweak, what you incentivize,what you disincentivize.
And I would love to see somelittle tweak, right?
A, a, a slightly higherincrement for those folks that

(38:32):
are, that are, that have theirreassessment in return for maybe
a slightly lower amount for, forthe new reass, you know, new
assessments.
So there would be kind of anacross the board, you know, that
would be a bit of a transfer,and I think a lot of people
would kick and scream, but if wekeep it modest enough, it would
still be meaningful to peoplelike you, but also be something
that might be, that the folkswho are paying a little bit more
would be more willing toswallow.

(38:53):
I think they're locked in atlike a 2 percent annual
increase, which is so much lowerthan inflation.
Maybe it could be 2.
25, right?
In return, we can, we canprovide some tax relief
elsewhere.
2.
3, you know, something modest.
Not, not a massive revolutionarychange that would break the
bank, but that could allow formore relief along the lines of
what you've been describing.
That's what I'd love to see.
Yeah, sir.

(39:15):
I know we, I'm gonna go fasternow because I, we're under time
pressure.
Yeah.
I

Audience (4) (39:20):
have one actual question.
Yes.
It's not a manifesto or acomplaint.
Okay.
So, There's a direct linebetween what happened in
Southern California, the firesand suburban sprawl, big ass
SUVs commuting 20, 30 miles eachway and generally ignoring the
fact that climate change isreal.
As we're rebuilding, are we isthere some provision in

(39:41):
California to rebuild in a waythat doesn't propagate these
same mistakes such that thiswill happen?

I, I absolutely agree with your,
with, with, with the corepremise of your question.
And I am concerned that there'sso much pressure to to just get
people back on their feet andrebuilding, which I understand
completely.
I mean, if you lose, it's easyto, I think it's easy for those
of us who haven't lost a hometo.
think bigger picture, but theseare folks that have lost
everything and they're soanxious to get going again.

(40:09):
The flip side is it would beridiculous for us to just carry
on as though this hadn'thappened and just repeat the
same mistakes of the past.
I mean what shame on us if werebuild in a way that will just
lead to a high likelihood ofthis happening again for the
next generation of people wholive in those homes.
So certainly I think thereshould be no compromise on, on
strict fire.

(40:29):
standards, home hardening,brush, you know, the kind of the
defensive space.
You know, one thing that we findis that it's also some of it's
about a community, right?
I mean, you know, community, youcan build the most home heart
and home in the, in the, in theneighborhood and you may save
your house.
But if all of your neighbors arenot engaging in fire safe
practices, you're also stillgoing to be very likely to burn.
And so I'm hopeful that I'm so,so I've been advocating as we

(40:54):
give more flexibility that wereally not.
That we, that we, that we notcompromise at all on, on fire
safety.
I also think we should beincentivizing more climate
resilient rebuilds.
I also think we should treat, I,I, I, I personally think of the,
the person who lost their familyhome, who's trying to rebuild

(41:14):
differently than a developerwho's coming in, buying the home
at a, at a discount and tryingto just redevelop the area.
I treat them differently.
I, I don't think that, that theyshouldn't be getting some.
Streamlining too, but I would, Iwould think that maybe we should
hold them to a, a, a somewhathigher standard on, on some of
the issues that you raised.
Because the reason why we're soanxious to let people, to, to
streamline right now and dropall the regulations is because

(41:35):
we're so sympathetic, we're soempathetic to the folks who lost
their family homes.
And we don't want to put anybarriers in the way, but they,
but their situation feelsdifferent than someone who's
trying to profit.
I mean you have, you know,Blackstone, BlackRock moving
into Altadena, you know, lookingto purchase a lot of homes.
And that just feels different tome when it comes to regulatory
relief.
So, yeah, so that, I, I wouldsay please no compromise on, and

(41:58):
I'm saying this to my colleaguesat the city council and the
county, please no compromise onfire safety and let's
incorporate some of the lessonslearned.
And, and, and then also I thinkwe should be looking to
incentivize more climateresilient planning and building
in general.
You know, I, I, I tend to be,wanted to be a little bit more
carrot when it comes to arebuild.
I want to be more stick when itcomes to new development.

(42:18):
I don't think we should, I thinkwe should be much more
circumspect about building newdevelopment in very high fire
risk zones.
You know, we gotta have betterplanning for water.
Not just for the homes, but forthe firefighting.
We gotta, we gotta have ingressand egress.
I did a bill on this topic whereif you're gonna build a new big
development out in the very highfire risk zones, you gotta have
a way in and a way out.
Two different ways.

(42:38):
So you don't have people fryingto death in their cars stuck in
a traffic jam like they did inParadise.
Where dozens of people literallycouldn't get out.
They couldn't get out and theyburned to death in their cars.
Because there was only one roadout of town.
In the middle of this very highfire risk zone.
And so we've got to be muchsmarter about, about the way we
plan.
And then of course we also, youknow, we're proud of our

(42:59):
leadership role in fightingclimate change writ large.
And we're very, I'm quite frank,I'm personally very worried
about the posture of the federalgovernment on this issue, given
what a massive challenge it isfor our, our, our, our and, and
yet, as you know, California, Ithink it's going to continue to
be an innovator on, on, on, on,on trying to help drive
solutions globally on thismassive existential problem.
And you know, as they say, ifyou don't believe in climate

(43:20):
change, go ask a firefighter.
They are, they, they will tellyou, even young firefighters
will tell you how much worsethings have gotten the basic
conditions in the last 10 to 15years as a result of climate
change.
Yeah.
Yes, sir.
Hi

Audience (5) (43:34):
I think it's so many levels.
You know, relative to mine, mybrother in law lost their house.
Oh, God.
I'm sorry.
I just found out my liveproducer from my last show lost
three houses.
His, his daughters, and hisgranddaughters.
You know, we all have thoseexperiences.
I'm involved in our neighborhoodcouncil.
I'm involved in our communitycouncil.

In Venice or Palisades?
Well, I'm

Audience (5) (43:51):
in Venice.
I'm in the council.
Yeah.
But, but, no, in the Palisades.
Yeah.
You know, we all know a lot ofpeople.
And I keep hearing about thetoxic waste, but if I, I build
houses, if you tear down yourhouse, you move it away.
So no one ever speaks to theidea why it's, why this is, I
get the fire may be chemicals,but why is that different than
just tearing down a house forone?
Two, and I want you to do thisthe right way, because I really

(44:12):
think you're, you're obviouslymean well, you go to KI, you're
involved in that, you must havegrown up in that area.
So, then I start to think about,why is it, why is, why is it
that, In a way, you're speakingtoward, well, here's, you know,
in a way what you can do.
We have AI.
We can actually look at things.
You could look at build betterbills, but I'm hearing, I'm not

(44:33):
hearing action.
I'm hearing about thebureaucracy.
I know all about thebureaucracy.
We all, I think a lot of peoplein this room do.
What's the call to action?
What can we do?
What can you know, why is, whyis it toxic?
Why can't my brother in law andmy friends just bring up a
private company and clear itout?
Maybe you're doing theinfrastructure while we're

(44:54):
building houses, you know,building their houses.
That's what's sort of my vaguequestion, but it's sort of
generalist.

Yeah.
So the, the, the, the differenceof course is the incineration,
right?
So when you, when you burn, youknow, when you're, when you're
demolishing a house, you'rebasically taking out the
dangerous items and, and, andthen demolishing the rest.
In this case, our houses arechock full of electronics, of
refrigerants, batteries.

(45:21):
That are now just literally upin smoke and in the air and all
over the ash.
In fact, two days after thefire, the L.
A.
basin had lead levels in the airthat were a hundred times normal
levels, chlorine levels thatwere 60 times above normal
levels.
That was for the whole basin.
Imagine what it was like rightnext to the the fire zone.

(45:43):
And that's all in the ash thereright now.
So there's a lot of stuff.
I mean, I'm working on a bill onhousehold hazardous waste.
There's a lot of stuff in ourhomes that are actually, it's
actually dangerous stuff.
It's not dangerous if it'sinert, if it's in a container on
the shelf and you use itcarefully, but if you literally
light it on fire and thenbreathe in the fumes and have
the ash strewn about in yourhouse, it's very dangerous.
It's very toxic.

(46:04):
So, now, they are letting incontractors now.
You know, they, they, they, theyneeded to get, there were down
power lines, there was open gaslines.
There was water mains that wereshooting up.
I went there a couple days afterthe fire and it's just, it was,
the place was crawling withutility workers just trying to
shut everything off.
So just, they weren't ready tolet, you know, general folks

(46:25):
come in and start working ontheir properties.
That just wasn't that wasn't apossibility because there was
so, it was so much chaos anddanger.
But now they're lettingcontractors in.
The EPA's already started thetoxics cleanup.
And it's just, it just takes awhile.
I think if you get in there,you'll see.
I, I, it's hard to describe whata massive undertaking it is if
you don't, if you haven't had achance to walk the, the, the,

(46:47):
walk the streets there.
Which most people haven't,right?
Cause you know, it's dangerousand we can't let everyone in
there.
And then, of course, we hadlooters and all sorts of other
things happening.
In terms of the call to action,are you more talking about the
Palisades or are you talkingabout AI?
Or just in general, or both?
A little bit of both.
I mean the call, well, I, Iguess, I mean I've been, lots of
calls to action on, on, on thePalisades.

(47:07):
We've been raising funds.
We've been, we've been you know,getting donations.
We've been hosting town halls.
We've been trying to pump out asmuch information as we can and
trying to engage as many peopleas we can.
You know, I'm certainly, ifthere are people that want to
talk specifically about how tohelp,

Audience (5) (47:22):
I can bear that a little bit.
So like, one of the comments, Icalled Oliver's example, instead
of bringing clothes necessarily,and it came back again so one of
the calls I talked to theItalian chiefs who said it's
better to give us, you know,credit gift cards to Ralph so he
can get a buyer of the food.
That's better than a bunch oftapes and clothes showing up at
our fire station where we'rerunning a fire.

(47:43):
It has long term effect.
And then I said to that, like,send that, send parts to your
friends, because, and I cameback with one of my friends in,
in Acton, who said, That'sactually great, because I don't
even know if I need underwearthis morning.
Right.
So that, that would be kind of acall to action.
A house that's burned down, youjust helped explain why you
can't just get in there withyour own contractor.

(48:04):
Those are, you know, so whatwould be the call to action if
you can help them?
That's kind of, on AI, is howcan we use AI?
We're in a localized community,whether it's Los Angeles or
Palisades or Acton, it's notActon, it's New York, sorry.
Like, how can we use the thingsthat this group is about, aside
from building filteredfiltration systems in schools,

(48:27):
what can we do to actually doit?
Yeah,

I mean, I guess it's, it's ultimately
about, I mean, I'd want to sitdown, I'm not super familiar
with everybody's work here andI'd love to kind of get more of
an understanding and I think ifwe had deeper conversations, we
could probably get into waysthat you could be helpful.
I don't know.
I mean, I'm sure there's a, youknow, 20 different products
here, some of which would bemuch more helpful than others

(48:56):
for the work that we do.
So I need to get more into thedetails, I guess, of what's on
offer here.
And I'm happy to engage.
I mean, I'd love to, you know,we could get a little group
together and have a chat aboutit and I'd love to, we'd love
brainstorm with you.
Yeah.
So I, so my, I guess my, yeah,my, my call to action, I guess,
is a call for conversation.
So we can, so we could talkabout how we can work together.
I'd love, I'd love to hear theideas that are on the table.

(49:18):
I, and I didn't mean to be toomuch of a Debbie downer about
the bureaucracy, but I've beenworking in it for awhile and it,
It has gotten me down a littlebit.
Yeah, yeah.
So I'm going to take a couplemore questions.
I know we've got to wrap up, butI want to make sure we at least
hear from everybody.
But I'd love to talk to you.
I'd love to, if you want to geta little group together, let's
get together in a couple weeksand have a little round table
and just talk about what sortof, just try to bridge some of

(49:39):
these gaps and brainstormtogether about some of the
products that are on offer herethat could help.

Audience (5) (49:43):
I meant to say, by the way,

Yeah, no, no, I appreciate it.
This is fine.
Yeah, yes, sir.
And then we'll go over here.

Audience (6) (49:52):
Hi, thanks for taking these questions.
So, for companies that arelooking to eventually contract
with, let's say, California orlike the government would you
say, what do you think is thebest means to find out if
government needs it?
And, you know, oftentimes it maybe related to a particular,

(50:15):
let's say, department that wouldneed it, but they, you know,
haven't even told procurementabout it, right?
There's a little bit of amapping here, if you have any
suggestions as to how we canprobably even get anyone who's
starting from step zero, likewhat they should probably be
doing.

Okay, that's a great question.
And what's the question overhere?
I'm just wondering how you

Audience (50:31):
begin a public

and

Audience (50:33):
private

partnership.
Yeah, and there's similarquestions actually, that's
great.
Okay, any final questions?
And I'll still answer these twoand then we'll wrap up.
Oh yes sir, yeah.

Audience (7) (50:40):
I had a question.
What kind of support is beingoffered to like the workers who
in general offer services tothese burned down areas?
Like, House cleaners or yardworkers, things like that.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.
There's unemployment support.
Obviously the workers that aregoing to be going in there are
going to be getting bothcompensated and also there's a
lot of protective equipment thatwe're giving them.
But that's another, that'scertainly been a big most of
them right now we're assistingwith getting on EDD,
unemployment insurance.
To get some, some kind of backupsupport.

(51:10):
So that's the primary form ofsupport right now.
I know there, a lot of them are,you know, there's some different
non profit organizations thatare out there trying to get,
trying to help people find newjob placements.
And but it's, it's another oneof the many problems that we
have.
And quite frankly, it's probablyinadequate.
But, but there, there is a,there is the unemployment system
that's there to help.
You know, these are thequestions that you're asking
about how to, how to work withthe government.

(51:31):
It's not an area, quite frankly,so I've been on the legislative
side, right?
The, the, the, the work.
The, the actual work is, isreally in the, in the
bureaucracy, right?
It's in the administration, it'sin these agencies.
And I'm now actually a budgetsub chair, so I'm, people are
starting to come to me to talkabout procurement in a way that
I never, I was always working onbills, which is about policy
ideas.

(51:51):
So I'm getting deeper into this.
I will have probably a muchbetter understanding, I think in
about a year, to be able toanswer your question.
Because I don't, I don't knowthat I, I don't know that I
understand the system wellenough to give you a really good
answer.
I have found that I've tried asI've tried to hook up
entrepreneurs, I've generally,it's generally been a
frustrating experience for mebecause sometimes I'll have

(52:12):
friends that are doing reallycool stuff that I think are
really cool and they just kindof run into the wall.
There've been a couple examplesthat have worked out.
What I've found is getting, Iguess what I would say is,
especially if you're small.
If you're big, there's adifferent story.
You kind of, you hook into asystem that, that is often times
Professionalized.
They've got a system forgovernment contracts and for

(52:35):
grants and engagementprocurement.
They hire lobbyists.
They know how to work thesystem.
If you're small, I wouldencourage you to start small.
So there are lots of the, youknow, we started out our
conversation with the civicslesson about the
decentralization, which actuallycould be your friend in this
respect.
Because because we're sodecentralized, there are lots of

(52:55):
different people at manydifferent levels of government
making decisions.
The school district.
Maybe someone you're notthinking about reaching out to,
but they've lost several schoolsup there and they've got massive
problems and challenges andthey've got their whole
procurement system, not just LAUSD, but also smaller schools,
including schools like SantaMonica, which may not have had
damage done to any of theirschools, but but there's a

(53:17):
massive influx of new studentsand there's, there's various
challenges associated with airquality because they're so close
to the fire zone.
So, so thinking about.
Instead of just trying to godirectly to Governor Newsom, I'm
gonna get the best product andyou're gonna win, you know,
we're gonna get in front of youand you're gonna buy us, you
know, thinking about otherlevels of government, thinking
more local you know, gettingthrough to a city council.

(53:37):
I mean, Tracy Park, whorepresents this area, is a very
engaged person.
She's, she, she's, You know,she's proactive, she listens to
people, she's not a bureaucrat,she, you know, I would think
that if you come forward with aproduct that could be helped
with the situation, sherepresents Venice, she also
represents, the districtincludes the Palisades, I would
think that, you know, you shouldhave her come in, by the way,

(53:58):
and I think it would be fun.
She's right here.
She is?
Okay, alright, great.
See, good idea.
Yeah, Tracy's great.
So, so my, my point is I thinkshe would be an example.
And of course she's part of abig bureaucracy too.
The LA city of LA is a bigbureaucracy, but she's the kind
of person that might be inclinedto help, you know, help navigate
the LA bureaucracy.
And she's got more influencewithin the LA bureaucracy than I

(54:19):
have within the statebureaucracy.
Cause she's only one of 15council members.
And she's got particularinfluence over the cleanup
effort associated with thePalisades.
So I would just say And then, ofcourse, you got to know the
process, right?
There are people that work ongovernment procurement and you
know, and I would just, I wouldthink that, that, you know,
having someone who's gotexperience with government.

(54:41):
RFP processes is helpful, youknow, having someone who maybe
have worked for one of thesedepartments before there, there
are, there are companies thatconsult on this work.
And again, I wouldn't want to, Iwouldn't ask you that you
shouldn't break the bank.
You shouldn't spend all yourmoney on this, but I think
there's, I think it's worthhaving some expertise, just like
you would never enter into aserious contract without having
a lawyer you know, or, or it's,it's good to have someone who

(55:03):
knows the process who can helpyou walk through it and help.
Strengthen your, your, yourpitch to the government.
And so I would, I would youknow, but, but again, it's about
being proactive.
It's about people.
It's about not being too, not,not being too discouraged by
the, the kind of bureaucracy.
So if, if one fire station turnsyou down, go to the next one and

(55:24):
just, you know, and, and try tosee if you've got ends, you
know, work through someone likeTracy, find people like Tracy
within the system that are alittle bit more entrepreneurial
and a little bit more aggressiveand a little bit more willing to
take risks and listen todifferent kinds of ideas.
Who's, who's kind of an antibureaucratic.
You know, she, she, she, she,she chafes at the bureaucracy
and that's a good thing for you,right?
Because you want someone likethat who might believe in what

(55:45):
you're trying to do and couldhelp you.
And I would, I would encourageyou to engage with her in her
office and her staff if you'retrying to help.
So anyway, I, I hope this washelpful.
I was certainly, you know, greatquestions.
And quite frankly, you know, Iappreciate this because, you
know, I'm literally in my 11thyear.
It's really ridiculous.
I can't believe I've been doingthis this long.
You've asked me questions thatthat I've.

(56:08):
You know, some questions thatI've got, I've never gotten
before.
I've usually I come to a townhall, I've heard them all before
in the new version.
And and quite frankly, I mean,it's both, it kind of gets back
to the comments I was makingbefore you know, shame on all of
us, I guess.
Right.
You know, for, for, for we, wepoliticians need to hear more
from your voices and not justthe voices of big business and

(56:32):
you need to engage morePoliticians, right?
So, I, I, I really appreciatethis conversation.
I hope we have further dialogueto talk about ways that AI can
be helpful with government.
I'd love to brainstorm with youguys.
Maybe we can bring on a couplemore innovative thought leaders
in the, you know, on thegovernment side who, who can
help maybe with a little bitmore experience on the

(56:53):
procurement process.
And, and let's talk about it.
I love to, I love to helpharness some of the energy that
I sense in this room.
To help solve these bigproblems.
And in the end of the day, it'sso easy to just get discouraged
by the faceless bureaucracy.
And it's ultimately my job tohelp push through that a little
bit and, and, and, and make thesystem work a little better.

(57:17):
And so I welcome thatconversation and I hope, I hope
we have it soon.
And, and and in the end of theday, it's about helping our
fellow Californians and make ourplace, our state, a better place
to live.
And if you've got products thatare going to help with that, I'm
all ears and I want to, I wantto help facilitate it.
So thank you for the discussion.
Look forward to our futurediscussions and appreciate

(57:37):
everyone's attention.

Evan Meyer (57:43):
Thank you for for, for, for joining, like
everything Ben said.
I don't think I have too manyclosing words here.
You guys are great.
And we are the entrepreneursthat actually do the things that
make the world creative, better,innovative.
So keep doing it and we'll seeyou here next time.
And we'll get to, we'll try tomake that session happen.

All Episodes

Entrepreneurs & Government - CA Fires, AI, Regulation, Prop 13 | Senator Ben Allen

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

24/7 News: The Latest

Dateline NBC

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Entrepreneurs & Government - CA Fires, AI, Regulation, Prop 13 | Senator Ben Allen