Transcript Highlights:

• For phase one, the nonprofit organization's written report is due November 15, 2026, with a presentation
• Phase two follows the same dates one year later, with a written report by November 2027 and a presentation
• There are approved collective bargaining agreements, once they've been approved, and contracts that have
• Collective bargaining agreements not yet submitted. Required by statute.
• Collective bargaining agreements not yet submitted to the governor or approved by the legislature.

Committee: Joint Joint Legislative-Executive Committee on Budget Transparency and Fiscal Sustainability

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So that was also part of the agreement. Okay.
• So that was also part of the<00:10:35.440><c> agreement.</c><00:10:36.079><c> Okay.
• </c><00:10:36.399><c> Now,</c><00:10:36.560><c> Senator</c> the agreement. Okay.
• Now, Senator the agreement. Okay.
• </c> accreditation language that was written accreditation language that was written by<00:15:14.560>

Committee: Senate Agriculture, Veterans, Broadband, and Rural Development

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:05:53.160><c> of</c> body to honor that original agreement of body to honor that original agreement
• And then the H227, we actually have an agreement.
• And then the H227, we actually have an agreement.
• The bill is written doesn't appear to do that, and that's great.
• The bill as written doesn't appear to do that, and that's great.

Keywords: Meeting start 00:06:05 Roll Call 00:06:33 HB 152 Discussion 00:07:55 HB 152 PHS 2 Vote 00:10:12 HB 545 Discussion HB 545 PHS 1 Vote 00:13:47 HB 606 Discussion 00:15:15 HB 606 Vote 00:16:32 HJR 30 Discussion HJR Vote 00:19:07 HJR 32 Discussion 00:20:25 HJR 32 PHS 1 Vote 00:23:11 HJR 34 Discussion 00:25:04 HJR 34 PHS 1 Vote 00:28:50 HJR 46 Discussion 00:30:09 HJR 46 Vote 00:34:15 HJR 53 Discussion 00:35:40 HJR 53 Vote 00:38:55 HJR 54 Discussion 00:40:15 HJR 54 Vote 00:40:50 HB 546 Discussion 00:42:15 HB 546 PHS 1 Vote 00:46:15 HB 605 Discussion 00:47:38 HB 605 PHS 1 Vote 00:52:10 HB 694 Discussion 00:53:46 HB 694 Vote 01:07:47 HB 695 Discussion Only 01:10:20, 958, all

Summary: The House Standing Committee on Appropriations and Revenue met on February 25 and considered a series of bills and joint resolutions, mostly involving appropriations, capital projects, and local infrastructure funding. The committee first adopted PHS 2 and passed House Bill 152, which creates a Medicaid supplemental payment program for public ground ambulance providers; the sponsor said the substitute ensures no state general fund dollars will be used and that local agencies must identify a funding source for any required match. HB 152 was reported favorably on a 20-0 vote. The committee also passed House Bill 545, the annual claims bill, after members confirmed all executive-branch claims were included; it was reported favorably on a 21-0 vote. House Bill 606, requiring reporting for general obligation bonds, also passed unanimously and was reported favorably. The committee then took up several joint resolutions tied to capital and infrastructure spending. House Joint Resolution 30, concerning water projects, was described as implementing ranked projects under the Waters program administered by KIA and was reported favorably on a 21-0 vote. House Joint Resolution 32, concerning school facilities construction, was amended by PHS 1 and advanced after discussion referencing the Auditor’s report and questions about a Johnson County Schools expenditure; it also passed 21-0. House Joint Resolution 34, relating to contingent appropriations for KCTCS, was amended by PHS 1 and advanced after testimony outlining three projects in Somerset, Jefferson Community and Technical College, and Glasgow; it passed 21-0. House Joint Resolution 46, for local road projects, was described as funding the highest-scoring local road requests from a larger pool of applications and passed 21-0. The committee also advanced House Joint Resolution 53, authorizing release of funds for KSU’s Health Sciences Center project, after KSU officials said the building is needed for nursing and allied health programs and promised a business plan report by November 1, 2025; it passed 21-0. House Joint Resolution 54, authorizing funds related to the State Fair Board, also passed unanimously. Later, the committee considered House Bill 546, which revises the local roads and streets program by adding a DOT-developed scoring system, monthly reporting, a match requirement, and a $500,000 project cap; members asked about the cap and were told larger projects should be handled through other mechanisms. HB 546 was reported favorably on a 21-0 vote. Finally, House Bill 605, a technical corrections and update bill for the local economic relief grant program, was amended by PHS 1 and discussed as expanding eligibility, including to the Delta Regional Authority and certain local-affiliated applicants; the transcript cuts off before the final vote on HB 605.

Transcript Highlights:

• IT'S SAYS VOTING POWER IN AGREEMENT OR A CONTRACT.
• BOARD MEMBER SHOULD HAVE VOTING CONTRACT AGREEMENT AND SINCE IT IS A BOARD I AM NOT SURE THAT THAT MEANS
• I AM HERE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION OF THIS BILL IS WRITTEN.
• PREVIOUSLY I PROVIDED WRITTEN TESTIMONY TO OTHER COMMITTEES BUT I WANT TO SHOW AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT I FEEL
• THE BILL REQUIRES SUCH HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS PHYSICIANS TO PROVIDE PATIENTS WITH AN INFORMED CONSENT WRITTEN

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the law... ...of a presumption that equal time should be written into the law.
• And I'm like, well, if it's just written in there, then can you just make it happen?
• And I'm like, well, if it's just written in there, then can you just make it happen?
• If there's agreement, we'll just leave it at that for now.
• And I think we have it written up maybe with the 30 days.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Child Custody Review Task Force met with a quorum, approved the prior meeting minutes, and reviewed a memorandum compiling member suggestions for possible legislation. The memo grouped ideas into topics including creation of a family court, expanded education for parents, attorneys, and judges, expedited hearings for parenting-time violations, limiting law enforcement involvement in custody disputes, creating parenting time expediters, and adopting more uniform court procedures. Members also discussed whether to form subcommittees, but the task force decided to continue working as a full committee rather than create subcommittees at this time. The committee then heard testimony from Dr. John Perez, a mental health professional, who described his personal custody experience and his professional work with families he believes have been affected by parental alienation. He argued for stronger education, faster court response times, and better tools to address intentional interference with parenting time. Members questioned him about his case history, the concept of parental alienation, and whether specialized family courts or judges with family-law training could help. Dr. Perez said a dedicated family court and faster hearings would likely have helped his situation. The task force spent substantial time discussing the possible creation of a family court. Judge Hovey supported the idea of a specialized family court or at least a study of one, saying family cases are distinct from ordinary adversarial litigation and that judges with family-law experience could better handle them. Several members agreed that a family court could improve consistency, expertise, and speed, but others cautioned that the task force’s current directive is focused on enforcement of existing orders rather than broader custody policy, and noted that voters had previously rejected equal shared parenting proposals. The group also discussed expedited procedures for parenting-time disputes, with Judge Hovey suggesting a 30-day hearing timeline may be workable. On education, members generally supported requiring parents to complete a parenting education course and adding educational materials explaining court process, child support, and what judges can and cannot do. Mr. McLean suggested a short instructional video for litigants and more family-law education for judges and attorneys, while Ms. Moldenhauer said education could be incorporated into scheduling orders or mediation orders. Members also discussed the Parents Forever course, including whether it should be mandatory in all counties and whether cost is a barrier; no vote was taken on any of these proposals.

Transcript Highlights:

• The tampering statute is just a straight misdemeanor, the way this statute is written in House File 7
• The tampering statute is just a straight misdemeanor, the way this statute is written in House File 7
• We appreciate the bill that was written here. We've had a chance to look through it.
• here we've had the bill that was written here we've had a<00:23:40.520><c> chance</c><00:23:40.720><
• It was a bipartisan kind of agreement that happened here.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:42:34.000><c> comments</c> going to hand out some written comments going to hand out some written
• I'll leave you with my written testimony.
• </c> finally on the purchase power agreement finally on the purchase power agreement concern,<02:35:28.240
• </c><02:35:34.800><c> to</c> such PPAs if it finds the agreements to such PPAs if it finds the agreements
• We would note what's written expansion.

Committee: Senate Energy and Natural Resources

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Third, it requires clear written notice and a fair chance to cure before harsh actions are taken.
• If an owner wants to withhold payment for defective or incomplete work, they must provide written notice
• Any heartburn at all about the state of Missouri stepping in and stipulating an agreement between two
• And it's good for everybody, as Representative Brown had noted in the agreement between the investor
• These are private agreements between sophisticated business parties.

Committee: House Economic Development

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, I think that's a bit of a distraction. agreements. You know, kind of supply agreements.
• </c><00:27:02.640><c> with</c> actually all off-take agreements with actually all off-take agreements
• </c> It's a 100-year agreement. It's a 100-year agreement.
• agreement agreement that<01:05:39.080><c> the</c><01:05:39.200><c> buyer</c><01:05:39.560><c> has</c
• ,</c> it's sort of a it's a supply agreement, it's sort of a it's a supply agreement, right?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The meeting began with introductions, approval of the March 6 minutes as amended to add an attendee list, and a brief overview of the day’s agenda. The committee heard two presentations from carbon project developers, with the first from Dylan Jenkins of Finite Carbon. He described Finite Carbon’s work in improved forest management projects, its role in developing carbon methodologies and protocols, and its experience with projects in New England, Appalachia, Alaska, and Canada. He also outlined the difference between compliance and voluntary carbon markets, the role of registries and intermediaries, and the types of buyers in the market, including large corporate buyers and long-term off-take partners. A major focus of the presentation was how forest carbon projects are structured and how credits are monetized. Jenkins distinguished between removals and reductions, explaining that removals come from new forest growth while reductions are tied more closely to baseline assumptions and standing stock. He said improved forest management projects can generate both types of credits, and that removals generally command higher prices because they are easier for buyers to understand and verify. He also emphasized that carbon project commercialization can occur before, during, or after credit issuance, and that landowners may be paid through a variety of structures, including leases, advance fees, per-unit payments, or off-take agreements. Jenkins then addressed the committee’s tax-related questions, saying House Bill 123 appeared intended to treat carbon credit sales similarly to timber sales for local tax purposes. He argued that carbon credits are a forest product and that taxing them can be reasonable in principle, but he stressed that lawmakers should distinguish between commoditization and commercialization when deciding what event to tax. He noted that credits may be created but never sold, and that in some programs landowners retain timber and carbon rights while in others the developer has deeper control over those rights. In response to questions, he said the industry uses protocols, verification, and third-party oversight to address baseline and quality concerns, but acknowledged that baseline setting remains a major point of debate in the market.

Transcript Highlights:

• He noted that the rebate seemed to be written so that there is only one rebate issued for $500,000 and
• Chair, maybe we could submit that as written testimony to be distributed to the committee.
• I think it's a bipartisan agreement that we should sunset this.
• </c> role I think it's a bipartisan agreement role I think it's a bipartisan agreement that<01:18:44.920
• When we are living in the global agreement, we haven't had a bill to repeal 2040 there.

Bills: HF2103 , HF2793

Committee: House Energy Finance and Policy

Keywords: energy, renewable energy, ammonia, hydrogen, certificate tracking, funding, environment, community solar, energy policy, sustainability, solar garden program, regulation sunset, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• So I'm wondering... ...agreement on numbers.
• It's a much faster mechanism than requiring everybody to execute agreements.
• Mechanism than requiring everybody to execute agreements.
• It is a mutual decision by both departments to end the agreement.
• Our one concern, however, is whether this agreement will hit all the notes it needs to.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a much faster mechanism than requiring everybody to execute agreements.
• It is a mutual decision by both departments to end the agreement.
• Our one concern, however, is whether this agreement hits all the notes it needs to.
• And lastly, will they listen to the right people as they develop the agreement? Thank you.
• , if we, ...into the process of developing the interagency agreement.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services heard testimony on Department of Developmental Services (DDS) and related budget and trailer bill proposals, with a major focus on the impacts of H.R. 1 on people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). DDS and the Department of Social Services (DSS) said H.R. 1 could affect Medi-Cal and CalFresh access, but that people with disabilities and caregivers are exempt from the work requirements; the administration is working on data matching and automation through the statewide eligibility system to identify exemptions, with June 1, 2026 as the implementation date for CalFresh changes. Witnesses and advocates warned that any loss of Medi-Cal could create fiscal pressure on regional centers and households, while public commenters described the real-life consequences of losing services. Committee members repeatedly expressed concern about cost shifts to counties and asked for harm-mitigation strategies before the May Revision. The committee also reviewed the governor’s IHSS-related proposals. DSS said the budget would set a baseline for authorized hours, align IHSS disenrollment/reinstatement with Medi-Cal eligibility processes, and eliminate the IHSS backup provider system, while emphasizing that individual service hours would still be based on assessed need. DDS said if a person loses IHSS or Medi-Cal, regional centers may have to step in as payer of last resort for some services, potentially at higher state cost. Members and the Legislative Analyst’s Office questioned whether counties could absorb the proposed shifts without reducing services, and asked for more detail on implementation, data quality controls, and how regional centers could help families navigate disruptions. A separate trailer bill on DDS rate reform and the Quality Incentive Program drew mixed reactions. DDS proposed extending a contract exemption and delaying final rate reform regulations to 2030, saying the changes are budget-neutral and needed for implementation. DDS reported that about 81% of providers had completed the current Quality Incentive Program requirements, but providers and advocates argued the 90-10 structure can function like a penalty and may destabilize services if providers lose 10% of funding. Committee members asked for clearer assistance to providers, possible flexibility for good-faith efforts, and a redlined version of the language before the May Revision. The committee also heard DDS’s proposed trailer bill on regional center governance and provider capacity. DDS said the language would consolidate regional center contracts and performance measures, strengthen board training and oversight, require consumer advisory committees, expand independent legal support, raise the threshold for board approval of contracts, and remove barriers such as physical-office requirements and duplicate vendorization. DDS said the goal is to improve accountability and efficiency while preserving person-centered services, and members indicated they wanted further refinement and stakeholder input before moving forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'd like to make a motion to accept the February 11th minutes as written. Sorry about that, Mr.
• I'd like to make a motion to accept the February 11th minutes as written.
• Committee, we do have a motion to accept the February 11th minutes as written.
• They were actually members of the Joint Powers Agreement, which is our group.
• Importantly, this bill is carefully written. It does not interfere with legitimate patient care.

Committee: House Business

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have nothing that shows that there's an agreement to pay. So we entered into agreements.
• So, of course, the agreement in St.
• OA didn't enter into any kind of agreement. That's correct. That's correct.
• There is no financing agreement, which is what we would expect.
• Because everything I'm looking at, I don't see any agreements.

Committee: House Budget

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Additionally, please note that while this hearing will not have phone testimony, we are accepting written
• And as you well know, this bill, as it moves forward, is part of a broader agreement between leadership
• There is agreement between the leadership in both houses that that should be the case as well.
• We did hear this in my committee, the Assembly Education Committee, and we are in agreement that the
• We are in agreement that the status quo needs improvement, that there needs to be greater coordination

Summary: The Assembly Higher Education Committee met in a special hearing and took up SB 638 by Senator Padilla, a workforce development bill aimed at creating a coordinating entity called the Middle Class Pipeline Project. The bill would streamline interagency education and workforce programs, improve career technical education and career pathways, and direct resources toward high-unemployment, low-income regions through changes to the CTE incentive grant program. Supporters, including the Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities, the California Edge Coalition, National University, Long Beach City College, and United Ways of California, argued that California needs a statewide coordinating body to reduce silos, improve access to high-quality jobs, and better align education with labor market needs. Committee members focused heavily on whether the proposed entity would duplicate existing bodies such as the California Workforce Development Board and other education/workforce agencies, and whether its broad duties could be carried out with the $1.5 million budget allocation. The author said the bill is intended to move an operational coordinating entity into broader tri-party negotiations with legislative leadership and the Governor, and that the final structure and staffing would depend on those talks. Some members supported the concept but raised concerns about scope, duplication, and whether the bill should be delayed or audited; one member opposed it as too broad and underfunded. The committee ultimately voted to pass SB 638 to the Assembly Appropriations Committee on a courtesy vote. The roll call showed five ayes and three noes, with one member not voting, and the chair later allowed additional members to add on, including an additional aye from Assemblymember Haney. The hearing then adjourned with the chair noting that further conversations would continue on the coordinating entity and its responsibilities.

Transcript Highlights:

• As you mentioned, agreement component.
• </c> written in statute and regulations. written in statute and regulations.
• This is not the stuff covered on Part II or the Canada written Part I.
• </c><01:51:43.119><c> part</c> on part two or the Canada written part on part two or the Canada written
• So their written does not equate to our part one basic sciences.

Keywords: 00:00:00 - Call to Order/Roll Call 00:02:17 - Approval of June 18, 2025 Minutes 00:02:33 - Introductions and Discussion on Priorities 00:07:27 - Health Data Discussion-KY Health Information Exchange (KHIE) 00:34:02 - Health Data Discussion-Public Health Data 01:19:24 - Health Data Discussion-Other Health Data Platforms 01:42:40 - Consideration of Referred Administrative Regulations (Except 201 KAR 005:010) 01:44:48 - Discussion of Optometry Regulation 201 KAR 005:010 02:25:29 - Hearing on Unified Community Mental Health and Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant Application for FFY 2026 - 2027 Funds 02:33:40 - Administrative Regulation 201 KAR 005:010 Vote Clarification 02:34:03 - Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The Interim Joint Committee on Health Services met to approve the June 18 minutes and hear introductory remarks from new Cabinet Secretary for Health and Family Services Dr. Steven Stack and new Department for Public Health Commissioner Dr. John Langfeld. Both described their backgrounds and emphasized a shared focus on using health data to improve quality, coordination, and outcomes across Kentucky. They highlighted the Kentucky Health Information Exchange (KHI) as a central tool for connecting hospitals, labs, providers, public health systems, Medicaid, and other state and federal data sources, and said the system supports notifications, immunization records, surveillance, and care coordination. They also outlined priorities such as continued investment in KHI, stronger interoperability, privacy protections, and expanded analytic capacity to turn data into action. Committee members then asked about COVID-19 vaccine recommendations and informed consent, particularly for pregnant women and children. Dr. Stack said informed consent should come through a licensed health care provider, that Kentucky did not mandate the COVID vaccine, and that the evidence still supports vaccination for high-risk groups, including pregnant women, citing professional medical guidance. A follow-up exchange focused on concerns about past vaccine policies and the need for patients to receive full information before making decisions. Senator Heron asked how KIPRC/KIPR could be used to address firearm injuries. Dr. Langfeld said the key opportunity is to make data more real-time and usable for day-to-day response, while Dr. Stack said the department would continue its long-standing partnership with KIPRC and noted his view that gun violence is a public health emergency. He added, however, that because firearms are a deeply divided issue, the Department for Public Health’s current role is mainly to make data available for authorized research rather than to take a broader policy role. No votes or formal actions beyond approving the minutes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• , as they currently stand, should be able to supersede parts of this law so that those agreements that
• And the language in 143 that permits these agreements... these collective bargaining agreements to disclose
• It simply says that an agreement will preempt contrary state law.
• ...And so, because of that, the way it is written, I do think that it threatens to undermine some of
• So we disagree on the meet and confer that you need to have some kind of agreement to be entitled to

Bills: SB 15

Committee: House Homeland Security, Public Safety & Veterans' Affairs

Keywords: law enforcement, department file, employee records, misconduct, confidentiality, Texas occupations code, 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Today, we voted to approve three agreements, and we're aiming to bring the remaining agreements to the
• This is similar to agreements that we already have with our grid operator, the California Independent
• However, part of the agreement is they wanted to see a pathway to eventual ownership of these assets.
• As the Water Code is written today, it would potentially limit the ability...
• Our DWR's contracts with those resources, as written today, are set to expire on December 31st, 2026.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• allows local government to exceed the established fee schedule when necessary, provided it makes a written
• local government to exceed the established fee schedule when necessary, provided that it makes a written
• was charged with sex trafficking children, and the administration granted him a... non-prosecution agreement
• The agreement was a legal shield that kept Epstein's client list a secret and promised him no punishment
• AB 2274 closes this loophole by prohibiting these kinds of agreements in the state of California.

Summary: The Senate convened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, then moved through motions and daily file items. Senator Ashby moved AB 2352 to the inactive file and AB 775 off the consent calendar. The body then considered a long series of concurrence and third-reading measures, with most receiving broad support and passing on largely party-line or unanimous votes. Among the major bills discussed were SB 1192 on domestic violence-related relief, SB 1263 on professions and vocations, SB 872 on water infrastructure and levee/subsidence issues, SB 934 on protecting LGBTQ people from conversion therapy, SB 1159 on artificial intelligence and public comment rules, AB 1573 on housing for survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and human trafficking, AB 52 on farmer equity, AB 1758 on travel seller restitution fees, AB 1544 on court transparency, AB 1738 on virtual inspections for simple home work, AB 1820 on EV charger permit fees, AB 2150 on naloxone training for CPR-certified employees, AB 2274 on limiting secrecy in non-prosecution agreements for traffickers and child molesters, AB 2674 on public access to landfill monitoring data, AB 2010 on high-volume spay/neuter procedures, AB 1793 on cash rounding after the penny’s discontinuation, AB 1818 on CSU bargaining procedures, AB 1655 on CalWORKs support when children are detained by ICE, AB 1743 on firearm trace data sharing, and AB 2011 on preserving mental health parity enforcement. Members speaking in support emphasized consumer protection, transparency, public health, housing, labor rights, and equity; opposition was limited and appeared on a few measures such as AB 1743 and AB 1818. Votes were recorded on each item, with many measures passing unanimously or by wide margins. Notable roll calls included concurrence on SB 1192 (30-0), SB 1263 (36-0), SB 872 (37-0), SB 934 (27-9), SB 1159 (37-0), and AB 2010 and AB 2150 by unanimous roll call. Several Assembly bills also passed with recorded opposition, including AB 52, AB 1758, AB 1820, AB 1793, AB 1818, AB 1655, AB 1743, and AB 2011. The session ended by returning to motions and consent calendars, where SCR 193 and a large slate of consent items were taken up, with SCR 193 granted reconsideration and the desk noting additional requests from members.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm for the bill on behalf of my law firm and certain named clients who are named in my written testimony
• As I mentioned in my written testimony, I'm a communications lawyer.
• Is there a commitment when a Utility for-profit utility says, "All right, we're gonna make an agreement
• On that anticipated projects, when they are entering into this right-of-way agreement, how much visibility
• Just to be clear, there's no specific right-of-way agreement that they enter into.

Bills: HB3713 , HB3953 , HB4055 , HB4272

Committee: House S/C on Telecommunications & Broadband

Keywords: telecommunications, local exchange companies, universal service fund, rate maintenance, business expansion, broadband access, internet service, multiunit residential properties, urban areas, affordability programs, fiber-optic cables, public land, construction permits, environmental impact, notification requirements, municipal projects, infrastructure, facility relocation, public right-of-way, 1184