Transcript Highlights:

• Kola Kahiolalo, individual, testifying in support. Richie, individual, testifying in support.
• Department of Transportation in support. Robin again, stand by written testimony and support.
• Boy Disability Rights Center in support on Zoom. Good morning.
• Thank you, Virgil Stanet, in support. Katie Kim, in support.
• Retail Merchants of Hawaii in support on Zoom, and one individual in support.

Summary: The House Committee on Transportation met on January 28, 2025, and heard testimony on a series of bills dealing with vehicle titles, motor vehicle taxes, window tinting, license plates, electric bicycles, insurance penalties, vehicle inspection fines, and transportation discrimination. For HB 532, which shortens the time to forward a transferred vehicle title from 30 days to 14 days and allows a letter of attestation to serve as an endorsement certificate, testimony was listed in support from Councilmember U. Hajin and the City and County of Honolulu Department of Customer Services, and in opposition from Maui Mayor Richard Bisson and Sylvie Madison. HB 655 would require payment of unpaid motor vehicle taxes, fees, and penalties for the most recent five consecutive years of delinquency; the Tax Foundation of Hawaiʻi stood on written comments, with Tim Rymer and Robert Souza providing comments/support. HB 368, which would exempt certain medically sensitive drivers from sunscreen-device tint limits, drew opposition from the Department of Transportation and support from several individuals. HB 226, lowering allowed windshield tint from 35% to 20%, drew opposition from the Department of Transportation and support from TNT Tinting Specialists; members asked about federal preemption, and DOT said federal guidance applies to manufacturers while states retain authority over aftermarket tinting. The committee also heard HB 543, prohibiting license plate flipping devices and imposing a $2,000 fine, and HB 228, authorizing counties to adopt rules for electronic license plates, repealing flipping devices, and setting a minimum fine for obscuring plates; both measures had DOT support, comments from the Honolulu Department of Customer Services, and opposition from Sylvie Madison. HB 70 would require insurance for electric bicycles and create a regulatory framework effective January 1, 2026. The Office of the Public Defender opposed it, arguing the bill improperly distinguishes e-bikes from mopeds; PeopleForBikes and the Hawaiʻi Bicycling League opposed it as costly and unnecessary, while the Insurance Division said the bill could conflict with existing no-fault definitions and might fit better in the motor scooter/moped insurance framework. HB 231, increasing the fine for violating motor vehicle insurance requirements from $500 to $1,500, was opposed by the Office of the Public Defender, which argued it would burden low-income residents and add to court congestion; members debated whether higher fines would improve compliance. Later, HB 227 would add fines for operating a vehicle without a current inspection certificate and had DOT support. HB 184 would require operators of low-speed electric bicycles to have a driver’s license, instruction permit, or provisional license; Kawaii Path, PeopleForBikes, and Get Fit Kauaʻi opposed it as a barrier to low-cost transportation and noted concerns for riders with disabilities, while DOT later said it would support the measure and was asked to research whether other states have similar licensing requirements. The final major measure discussed was HB 468, which would require the Civil Rights Commission to investigate discrimination complaints involving transportation network company drivers and riders with service animals and allow DOT to issue penalties to the companies. The National Federation of the Blind of Hawaiʻi, the Disability Rights Center, and individual riders supported the bill, saying current protections lack enforcement and that denials still occur; Uber and Lyft opposed it, saying they already prohibit discrimination, train drivers, investigate complaints quickly, and that the bill would duplicate existing law and create unnecessary penalties. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> of the committee speak to their support of the committee speak to their support or<00:18:30.880>
• c> support the support of the support the support of the commerce<00:25:38.880><c> department</c><00:
• </c> supported it's a friendly amendment. supported it's a friendly amendment.
• We all supported it. I support it again. Any other questions or comments on the A8?
• </c> support to add the A17. I'm a yes. support to add the A17. I'm a yes.

Committee: Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection

Transcript Highlights:

• Are there any other witnesses in support?
• Are there any more witnesses in support?
• Are there any more witnesses in support?
• We have sufficient votes. to be supported.
• Kimberly Rosenberger with SEIU in support. Thank you. Mitch Steiger with CFT also in support.

Summary: The committee heard several labor and employment measures. AB 465 would require local public employers, at a union’s request, to negotiate minimum disciplinary and grievance procedures in MOUs, including progressive discipline, just-cause protections, grievance appeal rights, and paid release time for representatives. Supporters, including AFSCME and SEIU, said it would create fairer and more consistent due process protections for local government workers; opponents from county and city groups argued it would impose binding arbitration and rigid discipline rules that could undermine local flexibility and accountability. The bill passed on a 5-0 vote and was re-referred to Appropriations. AB 792 would allow court interpreter bargaining to be consolidated when multiple regions are negotiating at the same time. The author and the California Federation of Interpreters said the change would reduce repeated bargaining, improve efficiency, and help address interpreter recruitment and retention. There was no opposition, but some members questioned whether the proposal would really solve wage and staffing problems; the bill passed 5-0 and was placed on hold. AB 1309, which would improve Cal Fire firefighter compensation by tying salaries more closely to comparable local fire departments, drew strong support from firefighters and no opposition. Members praised Cal Fire’s work and the bill passed 7-0 and was held for add-ons. The committee also approved AJR 8, a resolution urging protection of Social Security and opposing federal cuts or office closures. Supporters said Social Security is essential to seniors, veterans, people with disabilities, and children, and warned that reductions would increase poverty and homelessness. One member objected to naming political figures in the resolution, but the measure still passed 7-0 and was held. AB 1247, which would require contracted-out school classified workers to meet the same training and qualification standards as direct hires and address related retirement contributions, passed 5-2 despite opposition from county superintendents and school administrators who said it would add costs and limit contracting flexibility. Finally, AB 288, which would authorize PERB to act when the NLRB fails to remedy labor claims by a deadline, passed 6-0 with strong union support and no opposition.

Transcript Highlights:

• Primary witnesses in support must be those in the author’s office or otherwise registered in support
• Primary witnesses to support must Thank you.
• Primary witnesses and support must be those in the author’s office or otherwise have registered a support
• Really pleased to support SB 247.
• I would just like to ask for your support.

Summary: The committee heard several measures focused on economic development, procurement, workforce equity, federal infrastructure funding, and food security. SB 1044 by Senator Reyes would raise and then index to inflation the cap for streamlined state contracts awarded to certified small businesses, microbusinesses, and disabled veteran business enterprises for services and IT work; supporters said the current cap is outdated and limits access, while opponents representing goods suppliers and some small business groups argued the bill could disadvantage goods contractors and should preserve lower thresholds for those contracts. After discussion about the ceiling versus floor effect of the cap and the impact on different types of businesses, the bill was approved as amended and sent to Appropriations. SB 247 by Senator Smallwood-Cuevas would create a bid preference for projects that hire workers from disadvantaged communities; supporters framed it as a way to connect public infrastructure spending to family-sustaining jobs, while union construction employers opposed it because they said they cannot control worker dispatch through hiring halls and the bill would be difficult to implement. The committee advanced the measure to Appropriations despite those concerns. The committee also approved SJR 6 by Senator Cortese, which urges the federal government to honor commitments under the bipartisan infrastructure law, CHIPS and Science Act, and Inflation Reduction Act, with supporters emphasizing the importance of certainty for California infrastructure, clean energy, and semiconductor investments. SB 1025 by Senator Hurtado would establish an Office of Food Security and Affordability to coordinate food assistance efforts and develop a statewide food security strategy; supporters from a Kern County food bank and the University of California said the state’s response to hunger is fragmented and needs better coordination, while committee members asked about deliverables and timelines. The bill was sent to Appropriations. The committee also took up consent items SB 700 and SB 1340, which were moved on consent to Appropriations, and the hearing ended with the remaining votes recorded and the bills advanced. Throughout the hearing, members repeatedly discussed the need for clearer implementation details, data on program impacts, and how to balance equity goals with operational realities for state agencies, contractors, and small businesses.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any further witnesses in support of this measure?
• Any further witnesses in support of this measure?
• I'm late for the support line.
• Girls strong support of AB 715. Thank you. Thank you.
• We are in support. Hi, my name is Clary Schumann.

Summary: The Assembly Education Committee held an informational hearing on AB 715, followed by discussion of SB 48. AB 715 was presented by Assembly Members Zbur and Addis as a response to rising anti-Semitism in California schools. They described incidents involving harassment, swastikas, biased classroom materials, and students feeling unsafe, and said the bill would create an Office of Civil Rights with coordinators to address anti-Semitism and other forms of discrimination, provide prevention resources, and support school districts. Witnesses in support, including a rabbi and a student who described personal experiences with anti-Semitic harassment, urged immediate action to protect Jewish students. Opposition testimony came from the California Teachers Association, county superintendents, school board groups, labor organizations, civil liberties advocates, ethnic studies educators, and many community members. Their main concerns were that the bill was rushed, had not been fully vetted in the Assembly Education Committee, and could chill classroom speech or create constitutional problems, especially around language requiring instruction and materials to be “factually accurate” and not based on advocacy, bias, or partisanship. Several opponents argued that anti-Semitism should be addressed through education, training, and restorative practices rather than new statutory restrictions. Some witnesses also raised concerns about the bill’s impact on ethnic studies and free speech. Committee members then debated the bill’s process and substance at length. The authors said the bill had been narrowed through negotiations with education stakeholders and the Senate, that some disputed provisions would be revisited in cleanup language, and that the urgency of anti-Semitic incidents required action now. Several members expressed support for the bill’s goal but criticized the late release of the final language and the lack of consultation with the Assembly committee. Others emphasized the need to protect Jewish students immediately and argued the bill was a necessary response to a real crisis. The transcript does not show a final vote on AB 715 in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• I can support that. I can't support this piece. Thank you, Representative McDonald.
• I can support that. I can't support this piece. Thank you, Representative McDonald.
• I can support that. I can't support this piece. Thank you, Representative McDonald.
• I can support that. I can't support this piece. Thank you, Representative McDonald.
• I can support that. I can't support this piece. Thank you, Representative McDonald.

Summary: The committee opened with House Bill 184, which would create a committee to study changing school start times. Members discussed Amendment 0394, which made the study committee’s duties more investigative and adjusted reporting recipients, including the Governor. Several members raised questions about whether the committee should review evidence-based studies, local district decisions, and existing district reports; supporters said the amendment would better allow the committee to gather information and recognize local control. The amendment passed 17-0, and the bill as amended also passed 17-0. Representative Litchfield noted that no one had testified in opposition and encouraged the future study committee to review an Oyster River School District report on school start times. The committee then took up House Bill 394, concerning cooperative school district budget committees and board member representatives. Amendment 0476 was adopted 17-0 after discussion that it clarified the bill’s language and reflected work with the School Boards Association. The committee then voted OTPA on the bill, which also passed 17-0. House Bill 738, requiring background checks for employees and volunteers at certain non-public schools or education service providers receiving public funds, was moved inexpedient to legislate. Supporters said the bill would create practical and legal problems for private citizens and homeschooling families, and the motion passed 15-2 with no minority report, placing the bill on consent. The committee next considered House Bill 235, which would amend the educator code of ethics and conduct to add responsibilities to parents. Supporters argued parents should be explicitly included in the code, while opponents said parents were already covered in existing ethics language and statute. The bill passed narrowly, 9-8. The committee then returned to House Bill 532 on alternate dispute resolution and individualized education plan team meeting facilitation. Amendment 0480H clarified that different rules would apply separately to neutral conference, mediation, and IEP facilitation; it passed 17-0, and the bill as amended also passed 17-0. Finally, the committee moved to House Bill 564, concerning adoption of school administrative unit budgets, and voted to retain the bill for further review because members said there was still confusion about how it would apply to single-district and multi-district SAUs.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are two primary programs supported by this funding.
• So again, we remain highly supportive of dual enrollment.
• Again, we remain highly supportive of dual enrollment.
• And then finally, we're in strong support of the extension of the supporting inclusive practices.
• successful in supporting districts to increase inclusion of students with disabilities.

Transcript Highlights:

• So they're being supported by their subscription.
• I'll go ahead and read in the green cards in support.
• So I would heartily ask for your support. Thank you.”
• Well, you got some good support here. I'll read these cards real quick. Andre Bro, present support.
• President's support, not wishing to speak.

Summary: The House Labor and Industrial Relations Committee met on May 7, 2026, and first deferred several measures, including House Bill 460, Senate Bill 322, Senate Bill 32, Senate Bill 22, and House Bill 561. The committee then took up House Bill 819 by Chairman Cruz, which would replace Louisiana’s current workers’ compensation medical treatment schedule with the Official Disability Guidelines (ODG) by MCG as the primary guideline, while keeping the existing variance and appeal process. Cruz and MCG representative Troy Prevo argued that ODG is more comprehensive, updated more frequently, and used in many states, and said it could reduce delays, disability duration, and costs. Dr. Jason Picard, the state medical director, testified that Louisiana already uses ODG as a secondary reference in many cases because the state schedule lacks coverage for some body parts and treatments, and said the bill would not otherwise change the appeals process or care delivery. Committee members focused heavily on whether the bill would delay care or improve it. Several members questioned the private-company nature of ODG, the $400 annual subscription cost, and whether Louisiana doctors would be forced to rely on an out-of-state guideline. Rep. Glorioso and others raised concerns about preauthorization delays and proposed amendments to create tacit approval when treatment follows the schedule, require payment within 30 days, and make the carrier prove by clear and convincing evidence that care was not medically necessary to challenge it. Chairman Cruz said he was willing to work with those ideas, and the committee also discussed adding an on-ramp or legacy language so current patients would not be disrupted. Opposition testimony came from injured-worker advocates and representatives of medical and labor groups, including Joseph Jola St. and Robin Krumholt. They argued that Louisiana’s current guidelines are already working, that rates have fallen over time, and that the real problem is delay in approval rather than the content of the schedule. They said ODG is overly rigid, cost-driven, and can lead to denials that shift costs to workers, Medicaid, or private health insurance. They urged the committee to keep Louisiana’s existing system and instead adopt tacit approval under current law. The bill was still under discussion at the close of the transcript, with amendments being read and no final vote shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Intellectual and developmental disabilities. Yes, sir.
• the planning list. developmental disabilities so they can developmental disabilities so they can live
• </c><00:10:06.720><c> care</c> significant increases for support care significant increases for support
• We have six of those disabilities.
• </c> community support program. community support program.

Committee: Joint Appropriations

Transcript Highlights:

• In-kind support.
• Without this support, many of these efforts would not exist.
• Disability Advocacy Program.
• continue to prioritize supporting the most vulnerable among us.
• Lastly, building an age- and disability-friendly state for all.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held an informational hearing focused on the impacts of federal HR1 on CalFresh and Medi-Cal, along with related state mitigation efforts. CDSS, DHCS, DDS, county representatives, LAO, and Finance discussed automatic exemptions, data-sharing between departments, county workload, and the timing of implementation. CDSS said about two-thirds of adults ages 18 to 64 are already known to be exempt in CalFresh, and that administrative data matches could newly exempt about 200,000 of the roughly 955,000 adults potentially at risk. DHCS said Medi-Cal work requirements would begin in 2027 and the department is working to automate exemptions, including for IHSS recipients and some caregivers, while DDS said its population is expected to be covered by auto-exemptions. County welfare directors emphasized that individualized worker contact is critical, that counties need more staffing and stable funding, and that without it they expect delays, higher error rates, and reduced exemption screening capacity. Members pressed for written timelines, county-by-county impact data, and clearer guidance; the administration said it would provide follow-up materials and technical assistance. No votes were taken. The committee then heard a separate discussion on a proposed CFAP expansion or “CFAP Plus” concept to provide state-funded benefits to additional populations affected by HR1, including lawfully present non-citizens and ABODs. CDSS said implementation could not occur before October 1, 2027 because of policy and system-design constraints, and that adding unique eligibility rules would increase complexity and cost. Finance cautioned that any expansion would have General Fund impacts likely in the hundreds of millions to multiple billions. Members asked for cost estimates and technical feedback on trailer bill language, and CDSS said it would review the proposal and respond. The hearing also covered CDSS’s CalFresh strategic plan and mandated reporter training updates. CDSS said it is hiring a strategic plan lead to develop a long-term, data-informed CalFresh plan, and that the revised mandated reporter training is on track for launch in fall/winter 2026, ahead of the July 1, 2027 statutory deadline. The training will include updated content on structural racism, ICWA protections, implicit bias, and the distinction between reporting and supporting families. Members praised the work and asked for continued updates. Later panels focused on Promise Neighborhoods, Stop the Hate, and housing programs. Promise Neighborhood advocates and CDSS described the state’s prior $12 million investment, a positive evaluation showing roughly a 4-to-1 return, and a new proposal to support place-based partnerships and community schools through AB 1969. Stop the Hate grantees and CDSS reported that the program has provided direct services, prevention, and statewide coordination to millions of Californians, and urged reauthorization before funding expires; members asked for best-practice language and discussed focusing future funding on solidarity work, harm reduction, legal services, and education. Finally, CDSS presented on the CalWORKs Housing Support Program and Housing and Disability Advocacy Program, saying proposed General Fund investments of $105 million and $55 million would prevent funding cliffs and allow the programs to continue through 2026-27, while the absence of new funding would force reductions in housing assistance, subsidies, and enrollments.

Transcript Highlights:

• of the private investment requirement. ...in-kind support.
• Disability Advocacy Program.
• Lastly, building an age- and disability-friendly state for all.
• We strongly urge continued support.
• Helping participants feel safer and more supported. As the U.S.

Transcript Highlights:

• I ask for your support.
• This is a support bill.
• Support, support bill.
• I guess I was mistaken about it being a support, support.
• This bill is a support.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we are very much in support of this bill.
• Today we wanted to come and speak in firm support of Senate Bill 1288.
• I would ask you all to vote in support.
• But once supports were in place, everything changed. He went back to school.
• And I am in support of House Bill 624.

Committee: Senate Education

Transcript Highlights:

• This exempts sales made to a free public library supported in whole or in part with money derived from
• I've been a friend and supporter of all of our libraries across the state.
• Supporting the amendment, I think at least the third time since 2008 we've changed our senior disabled
• I would want to make sure that we support that and expand on it. ...want to make sure that we support
• Additional support in terms of property tax exemption, I think, is the least we can do.

Summary: House Finance met in executive session on March 2 and reviewed a series of tax and property-tax bills. Staff described measures including removing acreage limits for nonprofit public assembly hall property tax exemptions (ESSB 5252), extending timber tax distributions to certain school districts (SB 5994), expanding housing-related local sales tax uses (SB 6027), updating Department of Revenue tax administration provisions (ESSB 6113), consolidating the state property tax levy and expanding senior/disabled exemptions (ESSB 6162), extending disaster-related property tax relief (SB 6343), rolling back 2025 estate tax changes (SB 6347), adding tribes to the Conservation Futures Program (SB 6097), and extending a hazardous substance tax exemption for agricultural crop protection products (SB 6244). Members also discussed several amendments, including changes to rental assistance, library and school tax treatment, veterans’ income definitions and application assistance, estate-tax exemption and CPI language, and reporting requirements for conservation futures land acquisitions. The committee adopted some amendments and rejected others. HRA 440 was adopted to allow rental assistance as an eligible use of the local sales tax revenue for all jurisdictions rather than only Snohomish County. On ESSB 6113, the committee adopted the striking amendment H-3718.2 but rejected amendments to exempt investigative services, live presentations for schools and nonprofits, and library-related exemptions. On ESSB 6162, amendments to modernize veterans’ benefit language, require DOR application assistance, and lower the levy rate were all rejected. On SB 6347, the committee adopted an amendment restoring the estate tax exclusion amount to 2.193 million and changing the CPI reference, while the broader bill was later reported out as amended. On SB 6097, an amendment requiring county reporting on conservation futures acquisitions was rejected. The committee then voted to report several bills out with do pass recommendations: ESSB 5252, SB 5994, ESSB 6027 as amended, ESSB 6113 as amended, ESSB 6162, SB 6343, SB 6097, and SB 6244. SB 6347 was reported out with a do pass as amended recommendation after the adopted amendment. Members generally framed the bills as providing tax relief, clarifying tax administration, supporting housing and schools, or extending existing exemptions, while some members raised concerns about fiscal impact, tax burden shifts, and the need for more accountability or broader policy changes. The meeting concluded with thanks to staff and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> Thank you for your support. Thank you for your support.
• </c> its support and and the body. its support and and the body.
• </c> body's support. body's support.
• support.
• </c> and we ask for your support. and we ask for your support.

Transcript Highlights:

• , our developmental disabilities administration.
• Services through long-term care or our disability, our developmental disabilities administration, retaining
• I urge you to continue to support this funding.
• I'm testifying in support of the Governor's budget for our agency.
• The $1.5 million investment supports 50 schools and nearly 19,000 students with timely, targeted supports

Bills: HB2289

Committee: House Appropriations

Keywords: appropriations, budget, fiscal matters, state spending, general fund, supplemental budget, biennial budget, substitute bill, public defense, civil legal aid, courts, judicial branch, homelessness, supportive housing, affordable housing, behavioral health, juvenile rehabilitation, youth services, child welfare, foster care

Transcript Highlights:

• I am supporting the bill.
• I will be supporting it. Thank you. Thank you, Representative.
• She waves in support. Maybe we won't hear from her, but she waves in support. in support, exactly.
• I will support it. Thank you, Representative.
• Within the classroom, the teachers are providing support.

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll take our first proponent in support.
• We would like to go on record in support of this bill.
• Next up in support. Good morning, everyone.
• So there's no additional infrastructure to have to support.
• that are supportive of this.

Committee: House Health and Mental Health

Transcript Highlights:

• The reason for this is that both use the same statutory authority in the Idaho Developmental Disability
• Each of the three provider types offers comparable services to individuals with disabilities.
• I understand that the associations support this.” “To put it here.
• I understand that the associations support this work and the rule.
• My intent is to support the motion. I just really didn't want to let Mr.

Committee: House Health and Welfare

Transcript Highlights:

• you and the conditions that do not support you.
• What conditions support the values you all lifted up, and what conditions don't support the values you
• What conditions support these values, and what conditions don't support these values?
• not support them.
• Would anyone else like to share conditions that support the values we've lifted up or not support the

Summary: The Massachusetts Commission on LGBTQ Aging opened its March quarterly meeting by welcoming its first full-time director, Alison Bauer, who introduced her background in state government, public health, philanthropy, teaching, and LGBTQ family advocacy. Commissioners approved the December quarterly meeting minutes, then turned to a presentation by Adriana Bullen on diversity, equity, inclusion, power, belonging, and intersectionality. Bullen led an interactive workshop using reflection, anonymous polling, and discussion to connect DEI concepts to the commission’s work, including examples from participants’ personal and professional lives and a brief history of intersectionality rooted in Black feminist scholarship and the DeGraffenreid v. General Motors case. The group then applied the discussion to the commission itself, identifying examples of successful DEI work such as listening sessions across the Commonwealth, targeted recruitment, inclusive trainings, the strategic plan, the commission website, and advocacy that helped pass the LGBTQI+ and HIV long-term care bill of rights. Participants also named conditions that support the commission’s power, including collaboration, commitment, openness, empowerment, persistence, and strong relationships, while noting barriers such as invisibility of older adults, limited racial and ethnic diversity, and lack of trans elder representation. Several commissioners emphasized the need for more Black, Latino, immigrant, and trans voices, and discussed recruitment challenges, including the difficulty of asking marginalized people to be the only one in the room. Bullen concluded by introducing an equity-lens tool for evaluating decisions and actions, using the commission’s strategic priority on representation as an example. Commissioners discussed whether to expand membership, create an advisory board, or use a broader network of organizations to cultivate future commissioners, noting that some changes would require legislative or procedural action. The meeting ended with appreciation for the workshop and a commitment to continue the work, with the next quarterly meeting scheduled for June.