Summary: The Rules Committee was called to order in the afternoon and a quorum was established by roll call. The committee then took up a consent agenda, with a motion and second offered. A roll call vote was taken on the consent agenda, and members present voted aye. The motion passed unanimously, and the committee adjourned.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on AB 262, which would direct the new California Housing and Homelessness Agency to study the needs of pregnant people experiencing homelessness and evaluate a voluntary “Pink Alert” notification system. Supporters, including the California Commission on the Status of Women and Girls and a mutual-aid volunteer, said the bill would help identify gaps in housing and prenatal services for a highly vulnerable population. Members generally supported the study concept, though one senator cautioned that the “Pink Alert” name could imply a missing-person alert. The bill was moved to Appropriations on a 3-0 vote and placed on call. Members then heard AB 673, creating the Unaccompanied Youth Support Grant Program for 16- and 17-year-old homeless students not in a parent or guardian’s custody. The Superintendent of Public Instruction and advocates said the bill would help connect youth to housing, basic needs, tutoring, employment readiness, and mental health services, while opponents raised concerns about duplication with existing school and county services and staffing shortages. The author and supporters argued the program would fill gaps for youth who often fall through existing systems. The bill passed to Appropriations on a 3-0 vote and was held on call. The committee also approved AB 1575, which updates the Lanterman Act to replace the term “consumer” with person-first language for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, and AB 2510, which would expand CalWORKs family reunification aid so families do not lose support when only some children are removed from the home. AB 1688, requiring broader notice when abuse or neglect is alleged in foster placements so attorneys for other children in the placement can check on their safety, also passed to Appropriations. AB 2304, “Gabriel’s Law,” requiring a child in immediate medical need to be seen by a medical professional and clarifying penalties for falsifying child welfare records, passed to Public Safety after testimony from the author, Gabriel Fernandez’s aunt, prosecutors, and a dependency lawyer who opposed parts of the penalty language. The committee then heard AB 1746 on faster county processing of CalWORKs child care requests, with support from the author, advocates, and county welfare directors who said they were still working on amendments; it was moved to Appropriations and held on call.

Summary: The Senate session opened with a roll call, prayer, and Pledge of Allegiance, then moved through a long series of floor recognitions and votes. Members spent substantial time honoring the Los Angeles Dodgers, celebrating their back-to-back World Series championship and highlighting the team’s history, community role, and connections to Jackie Robinson, Fernando Valenzuela, Vin Scully, and Jaime Jarrín. Senators also recognized summer interns and welcomed members of Kappa Alpha Psi’s Kappa League and Guide Right program to the floor. The chamber then took up several measures, beginning with AB 182 on ballot order and proposition numbering for the 2026 statewide ballot, which passed 38-8 after debate over whether placing legislatively referred measures first was fair. SR 113, commemorating the International Day of Peace and honoring Dr. Yongshik Cho’s role in proposing it, passed unanimously after supportive remarks about peace, education, and California’s diversity. The Senate also adopted SJR 16 urging Congress to restore commercial driver’s licenses for affected California truck drivers, and SCR 185 designating Probation Services Week. A major portion of the meeting was devoted to budget trailer bills. The Senate concurred in Assembly amendments to AB 112, AB 150, AB 152, AB 181, and AB 179, covering Medi-Cal, child care, human services, education governance, and housing. It also passed or concurred in SB 168, SB 169, SB 170, SB 171, SB 172, SB 174, SB 177, and SB 180, addressing public resources and energy, transportation, executive branch reorganization, labor, state government, courts, Medi-Cal financing, and taxation. Several of these drew opposition centered on energy costs, transparency, business impacts, or the proposed “fair share” approach to Medi-Cal costs for large corporations, but most measures passed on party-line or near-party-line votes. The Senate also confirmed three California Horse Racing Board appointments and ended with adjournment motions, including a request to adjourn in memory of Francis Lydia Limos of American Canyon.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit Committee held an oversight hearing on a state audit of California’s community college transfer process, with members and witnesses broadly agreeing that transfer pathways remain too complex and inconsistent. Opening remarks emphasized that community colleges serve a large, diverse, often first-generation and low-income student population, but only about one in five transfer-intending students move to a UC, CSU, or other university within four years. Members highlighted disparities by race, region, campus, and major, and pointed to the Associate Degree for Transfer, TAG, and Cal-GETC as helpful but incomplete tools because requirements still vary across campuses and systems. State Auditor’s Office staff said the audit found that while UC and CSU overall enroll substantial numbers of transfer students, individual campuses and high-demand programs often do not, especially in STEM fields. They described barriers including missing prerequisite courses, unclear information, limited counseling, and inconsistent articulation between campuses. The audit used a computer science example to show how different UC and CSU campuses require different courses for the same major. The audit issued 22 recommendations, with 10 fully implemented and four partially implemented; remaining work centers on articulation, counseling, data sharing, and better use of ASSIST. UC, CSU, and the Community Colleges each said they support transfer and are taking steps to improve it. UC cited a new public dashboard, data-sharing agreements, new transfer pathways, and an ADT pilot at UCLA, while saying campus capacity and program differences limit systemwide mandates. CSU pointed to its strategic plan goals, the Transfer Success Pathway program, direct admissions outreach, and efforts to expand ADT alignment and credit applicability, while acknowledging that many students never reach the application stage. Community Colleges emphasized that transfer reform is central to equity and baccalaureate access, and called for stronger common course numbering, broader ADT acceptance, and more student-centered articulation. Members pressed the systems on why more uniform requirements and better coordination have not been achieved, and on how to reduce barriers for placebound and working students.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Appropriations met with a quorum present and heard a large suspense-file agenda, noting that most authors waived presentation and the Department of Finance had no comments on the bills. The committee reminded witnesses to focus on fiscal issues. AB 1999 by Assembly Member Kalra, presented by Senator Grayson, drew support from the California Veterinary Medical Association, the Veterinary Medical Board, and Social Compassion in Legislation; it was described as a measure to ease veterinary staffing shortages and improve access to care. The committee voted 6-0 to send AB 1999 to the Senate floor and placed it on call for additional members to add on. The remaining measures were largely taken up without presentation, testimony, or committee questions and were moved to the suspense file without objection. Bills sent to suspense included SB 1096 and numerous Assembly Bills such as AB 308, AB 441, AB 2640, AB 805, AB 1871, AB 2176, AB 2206, AB 2436, AB 907, AB 2002, AB 1048, AB 1049, AB 2251, AB 1116, AB 1836, AB 1149, AB 1552, AB 1153, AB 1969, AB 1996, AB 1301, AB 1359, AB 1961, AB 2756, AB 2765, AB 2769, AB 1382, AB 1567, AB 1574, AB 1576, AB 1598, AB 1602, AB 1983, AB 1628, AB 1630, AB 1980, AB 1645, AB 1662, AB 1694, AB 1703, AB 1715, AB 2720, AB 1721, AB 2060, AB 2440, AB 1734, AB 2081, AB 1741, AB 2592, AB 1743, AB 1755, AB 1759, AB 1932, AB 1763, AB 1916, AB 1789, AB 2241, AB 1813, AB 1906, AB 1981, AB 1907, AB 1925, AB 2122, AB 2038, AB 2157, AB 2270, AB 2339, AB 2524, AB 2633, AB 2660, and AB 2664. A few measures drew brief public testimony on fiscal impacts or policy-related cost concerns. AB 1116 prompted opposition testimony from the Secretary of State’s office, which said the bill would create significant cybersecurity and operational challenges and could cost up to $10 million in one-time implementation costs, plus ongoing expenses. AB 1382 received support from Social Compassion in Legislation, which argued it would help address shelter costs and pet overpopulation. AB 2081 was supported by a sponsor representative who said the Medi-Cal waiver proposal was cost-effective and that budget funding had been included for administrative costs. AB 1703 drew opposition testimony from a group of internationally trained practitioners who said the bill would unfairly target their work and shift costs to counties. The committee took no further action beyond moving the suspense-file candidates to suspense and adjourning after the agenda was completed.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection heard several bills focused on privacy, AI, surveillance, and consumer protections. AB 302 would bar schools from excluding students from extracurricular activities because they do not use social media and would require schools to use at least one non-addictive means of contacting students and parents; it drew support from Common Sense Media and no opposition. AB 1705, the Reclaim Act, would require websites hosting non-consensual pornography to verify consent before upload; district attorneys and the Commission on the Status of Women supported it, while TechNet and CCIA opposed or raised concerns. AB 2007 would separate parental consent for a child’s image/likeness from general program enrollment forms in youth programs; educators supported it, while local government and parks groups raised implementation and penalty concerns. AB 2212 would update higher education sexual harassment definitions to include tech-facilitated harassment such as cyberbullying, doxing, and nudification-related abuse; students and advocacy groups strongly supported it, with no opposition. AB 1837 would extend transit agencies’ authority to use camera enforcement in bus-only lanes and at transit stops, with privacy retention limits and human review; transit agencies supported it, while some senators expressed concern about automated enforcement and surveillance, and the bill was placed on call after a split vote. AB 2392 would create an intersegmental higher education working group on generative AI training and procurement standards; it passed 5-0 after amendments removed prerequisites tying AI deployment to completion of the report. The consent calendar was also approved on call. Later, AB 1798 would prohibit life and disability insurers from using non-diagnostic genetic information in underwriting; supporters argued it protects privacy and encourages testing, while insurers opposed the bill as undermining risk-based underwriting, and it advanced on a 3-0 vote on call. Finally, AB 1883 would restrict workplace use of emotion-recognition and neural-data surveillance tools; labor and privacy advocates supported it, employers and local agencies raised safety and litigation concerns, and it passed 3-0 to Labor after narrowing amendments.

Summary: The committee heard several bills, beginning with AB 1921 on video game shutdowns. The author and Consumer Reports supported requiring game operators to give 60 days’ notice before ending server support and to offer a menu of remedies, including refunds or playable/offline alternatives, while the Entertainment Software Association opposed the bill as an unwarranted new standard for digital products and raised safety and legal concerns about community servers. Members questioned the scope of refunds, copyright, and community-server issues, and the author said he was open to further amendments. The bill was moved on a due-pass motion to Senate Appropriations and placed on call. AB 1965, dealing with cannabis testing, was presented as a measure to strengthen the Department of Cannabis Control’s authority over testing labs and improve product safety and transparency. The California Cannabis Operators Association supported the bill, saying it would help ensure consistent standards and protect consumers in a market with a large illicit component. There was no opposition, and the bill was moved on a due-pass motion to Senate Appropriations and placed on call. The committee also heard AB 2141, which would allow the Board of Pharmacy to resolve certain disciplinary matters through a voluntary pre-accusation settlement process. The author and a supporting pharmacist said it would speed resolution of smaller, technical cases and reduce costs, while a member raised concerns about transparency and whether the public would have less information about licensee misconduct. The bill passed the committee on a due-pass motion to Senate Appropriations, with Senator Menjivar voting no, and was placed on call. AB 2163, creating strategic clean energy and critical mineral development zones, was supported by the author and Imperial County as a way to prioritize geothermal and lithium development in areas like the Salton Sea region; it passed on a due-pass motion to Senate Appropriations and was placed on call. Later, AB 1990 on compounded weight-loss drug advertising drew significant debate. Supporters argued it would curb misleading ads and require disclosures about risks and non-FDA approval, while opponents from the compounding pharmacy community said it would create burdens, duplicate existing false-advertising law, and could harm patient access. Members questioned whether the bill actually addressed targeting minors and whether it would force use of FDA-approved labeling; the author said the bill was meant to add specificity and guardrails. The bill was moved on a due-pass motion to Senate Judiciary, with some no votes, and placed on call. The committee also heard AB 2783 on court reporters, which would add a national certification pathway and extend a remote reporting pilot; it drew support from court reporting stakeholders and passed unanimously on a due-pass motion to Senate Appropriations, placed on call. Finally, AB 2771, the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education sunset bill, and AB 2772, the interior design certification sunset bill, were presented and heard with mixed testimony: AB 2771 received support from student and borrower advocates and was moved to Senate Education, while AB 2772 drew both support and strong opposition over CCIDC governance and accountability, with the committee hearing extensive public comment before the transcript ended.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review heard the 2026-27 budget package, including AB 111 and AB 112 plus 16 trailer bills and two policy bills. Chair Laird described the budget as balanced over two fiscal years, with about $351.7 billion in total spending, $251.5 billion General Fund, and record reserves, while emphasizing investments in child care, homelessness, housing, Medi-Cal, education, courts, and other core programs. The Department of Finance presented each bill, outlining major items such as Medi-Cal adjustments tied to federal H.R. 1, child care and early learning funding, education and higher education investments, human services, developmental services, health, skilled nursing, resources, energy, transportation, housing, labor, state government, courts, taxation, and two policy bills on education governance and ballot measure placement. The LAO said it had no additional comments but was available for questions. The committee later achieved quorum and moved to member questions and comments, with no votes taken in the portion provided. Members largely focused on the budget’s fiscal structure and policy implications. Several senators praised staff and noted the compressed timeline, while Vice Chair Niello criticized the process as overly complex and burdensome. Senator Smallwood-Cuevas supported the budget but raised concerns about Medi-Cal changes for people with unsatisfactory immigration status, asking about access to care, the number affected, and county eligibility support; Finance said about two million people would transition to fee-for-service and that $39 million was included for care coordination, along with additional county eligibility funding. Senator Durazo said the agreement delayed, but did not resolve, cuts to immigrant health coverage, dental, and clinic payments, and argued that the budget did not create a true restoration mechanism. Senator Richardson highlighted hospital funding, public hospital definitions, DMV data protections, and court construction and maintenance needs, while Senator Grove questioned the sustainability of spending, the Medi-Cal savings assumptions, distressed hospital funding, Planned Parenthood transparency, developmental services changes, high-speed rail costs, and the property tax postponement program. Other members emphasized different priorities. Senator Blake Spear praised climate and parks investments, support for HAP homelessness funding with accountability, transit stabilization, and Care Court referral funding, while expressing concern about the lack of wildlife coexistence funding and long-term transit operating support. Senator Weber Pearson raised a technical concern in the health trailer bill regarding menopause language, arguing that the bill should refer to perimenopausal symptoms and should not narrow provider participation through contracting language. Throughout the hearing, Finance repeatedly explained that many of the budget’s savings came from reduced caseloads or delayed implementation of prior proposals, while some new spending was added to mitigate impacts and support administration of the changes. No final committee action or vote was shown in the excerpt.

Summary: The Assembly Emergency Management Committee met late in the evening and first approved a consent calendar containing SB 837, SB 894, SB 973, and SB 1079, sending those bills to the Committee on Appropriations. The committee then heard SB 904, which would codify coordinated state response and permitting review efforts for wildfire recovery, and SB 1263, which would limit post-disaster debris removal work to properly licensed contractors with required hazardous-materials training. Both bills drew support from the authors and industry/public-safety witnesses, with SB 1263 also drawing an opposed-unless-amended position from contractors who said they were working toward agreement on final language. Both measures passed to Appropriations on unanimous or near-unanimous votes. The committee next heard SB 804, the Hydrogen Pipeline Safety Act, which would designate the State Fire Marshal as the safety regulator for interstate hydrogen pipelines and require hydrogen-specific safety standards. The author and supporters from building trades and pipe trades argued the bill would provide clear safety rules before hydrogen infrastructure expands, while one industry witness said the correct agency had been identified but that some concerns remained. The bill passed as amended to Appropriations, with Assemblymember DeMaio voting no. Finally, the committee considered SB 883, which would impose additional oversight on facilities storing methyl methacrylate and other reactive chemicals after a recent Orange County evacuation tied to a potential explosion risk. Supporters, including community, environmental, and public-health groups, said the bill would improve transparency, emergency planning, and safety protections near homes and schools. Chemical and manufacturing groups opposed the bill in its current form, citing undefined terms, concerns about mandated cooling systems, and possible conflicts with existing regulatory frameworks, but said they were willing to continue working on the measure. The bill passed to the Committee on Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials on a 4-2 vote, with Assemblymembers Hadwick and DeMaio voting no.