Transcript Highlights:

• So I went in with an open mind, looking at what these facilities can do, because I know some facilities
• facilities are punitive.
• Done in those facilities.
• ' and clarifies the term does not include any jail or correctional facility or any other facility funded
• My understanding is, in this bill, under the definition of facility and secure facility, it cannot include

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held its fourth public hearing of the 2025-2026 session on bills dealing with involuntary commitment and access to addiction treatment, especially proposals to move Section 35 civil commitments away from jails and prisons and into facilities licensed or approved by DPH or DMH. Chairs Velis and Domb framed the hearing as a discussion of how to support people in crisis with compassion, while also warning against using involuntary commitment as a way to remove unhoused people from public view. The hearing also touched on related concerns about discharge practices, treatment capacity, and the need for a broader continuum of care. Testimony split largely along two themes. Addiction researcher Keith Humphreys argued that many people enter treatment under pressure, that involuntary treatment can be ethically justified in the face of overdose risk, but that it should not be mandated unless high-quality services exist first; he emphasized the need for inpatient care when someone is a grave danger, followed by case management and outpatient support. MAMH’s Kate Alicante supported the bill, saying Massachusetts is the only state that commits people with substance use conditions to jails or prisons and that carceral settings add trauma and stigma; she pointed to prior legislative steps, including the Section 35 commission and the planned closure of DOC’s MESAC facility, as evidence that the Commonwealth is moving toward health-based settings. A major portion of the hearing focused on Stony Brook, a sheriff-run stabilization and treatment center in Hampden County. Boston City Councilor John Fitzgerald, several committee members, and multiple people in recovery described the facility as humane, well-run, and effective, with longer stays, medical monitoring, medication-assisted treatment, counseling, and warm handoffs to aftercare. Several witnesses said Stony Brook saved their lives or helped family members recover, and they argued that the sheriff’s office model should be expanded rather than eliminated. Others, including family members and advocates, countered that even a well-run correctional setting remains stigmatizing and that people should not be treated in facilities run by sheriffs or corrections when they have committed no crime. No vote was taken. The hearing concluded with continued testimony, including Senator Friedman’s support for Section 35 as a civil commitment tool but not in a criminal justice setting, and her separate support for a bill to speed inpatient mental health treatment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Existing facilities.
• Since child care facilities are not defined as public facilities under the GMA, many local governments
• itself and reducing potential outdoor space for the facility.
• For a facility itself and reducing potential outdoor space for the facility.
• So that closes the section on child care facility siting.

Summary: The committee held a work session on form-based codes, child care facility siting, and street standards/frontage improvements. On form-based codes, Commerce’s Dave Anderson explained that these codes emphasize building form, orientation, and the public realm more than traditional use and density tables, and that they are typically applied in specific districts rather than citywide or statewide. Lacey’s Vanessa Dolby described the city’s Woodland District code, developed through community charrettes, fiscal and market analysis, and subdistrict-specific standards to create a walkable downtown. She said the approach has helped produce a more desirable built environment and more flexibility in permitted uses, but also noted it can be less user-friendly for applicants and still requires some use restrictions; both presenters said a hybrid approach is often best. The committee then heard from DCYF and multiple providers about barriers to opening child care facilities. DCYF officials said Washington has more than 6,500 licensed providers and that a new pre-licensing support team is helping applicants navigate licensing, but local zoning, building, fire, parking, utility, and occupancy requirements still create delays and confusion. Testifiers described long permitting timelines, inconsistent local interpretations, costly upgrades, and utility hookup delays; one Yakima provider said county requirements, a floodplain-related elevation certificate, and a private well issue stopped her in-home child care proposal, while others described traffic impact fees, parking mandates, and zoning barriers that made projects infeasible. Enterprise Community Partners highlighted examples of successful local reforms, including fee waivers, expedited permitting, and zoning changes in several cities, and DCYF said it is working toward a 2026 action plan and a resource guide for providers. In the final section, planners and developers discussed how street standards and frontage improvement requirements can undermine infill and middle housing. Poulsbo’s planning manager said current standards were designed for greenfield subdivisions and often force costly curb, gutter, sidewalk, stormwater, and utility upgrades on small infill sites, sometimes adding tens of thousands of dollars and causing projects to be abandoned. A Seattle-based developer made similar points about small middle-housing projects being burdened by frontage work, curb ramps, buried standards, and EV-ready parking requirements that can trigger expensive undergrounding. Committee members asked about possible state-level changes, including whether child care should be treated as an essential public facility and whether parking requirements had already been reduced; one senator noted that minimum parking requirements for child care facilities were eliminated in prior legislation, with implementation phased in over the next few years.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now, how facilities choose to kind of staff their facilities and what services they might provide as
• So, right, facilities that have higher occupancy will end up with a lower rate, Facilities that have
• So maybe for the physical facility, before this change, you'd have this physical facility and the cost
• And Sarah, if there was a modified rate for the facility to offset A modified rate for the facility to
• And then our facility management software, and I am looking at Chris, he is our facility director.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 2399, concerning therapeutic leave days for psychiatric residential treatment facilities (PRTFs). Sarah Aker from the Department of Health and Human Services explained the current Medicaid rate-setting methodology, how occupancy affects rates, and why paying the full rate for leave days would create additional fiscal impact. Members debated whether the bill should pay the full Medicaid rate, a flat reduced rate, or a tiered rate, and discussed whether a cap or department authorization should be used to control use of leave days. The department said it was not supporting the change as it was not in the governor’s budget, though it supported family engagement in care. After discussion, the committee settled on a compromise motion to set therapeutic leave days at a $500 daily rate and require department authorization of the number of leave days. The motion passed 6-2, with Representative Anderson voting no and the rest of the recorded members voting yes. The committee then moved on to Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation budget materials, where Michelle Zander walked through detailed population and rate calculations for women’s and men’s facilities, county holds, deferred admissions, transitional facilities, work release, and proposed reentry, man camp, and Grand Forks-related costs. Members asked about the county jail reimbursement rates and the overall pool of funds, and Zander explained the calculations and noted the proposal was roughly break-even depending on assumptions. The committee also heard an overview of DOCR IT requests from Amy and NDIT staff, including data processing, medical modules, a new client management system, body scanners, data management tools, facility management software, medical software upgrades, college solutions, and body cameras/tasers. Staff explained that the new client management system would likely be a multi-phase project with a wide cost range based on vendor selection and scope, and that the current request was for phase one. Members emphasized the importance of better data tracking, staff safety tools, and information that could help explain programming and release outcomes to the public. The committee planned to continue with Veterans Affairs the next day and then return to Senate Bill 2015.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those facilities are county-grown and in this region of the country that go directly into those facilities
• When you think about that facility, those are 1,200 to 1,400 jobs in each one of those facilities and
• Those facilities not only have those jobs that are there directly created at those facilities, but you're
• around poultry each of those facilities around poultry each of those facilities process<00:04:44.639
• /c><00:05:07.880> and in each one of those facilities and in each one of those facilities and

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Agriculture met with a quorum present and opened with the Pledge of Allegiance, led by guest Bob James of Barren County. The chair recognized visiting groups, including the Kentucky Leadership Program and the Kentucky Cattleman’s Leadership Program, before turning to the day’s only agenda item, Senate Bill 28. The committee adopted a committee substitute for SB 28 by motion and second, with no opposition recorded. The chair explained that the bill creates the framework and parameters for distributing $5 million in economic development funding included in the 2024 budget through the Department of Agriculture. Commissioner of Agriculture Jonathan Shell testified in support of the bill and described it as enabling legislation to help Kentucky attract more end users, processors, and further-processing operations. He highlighted the importance of existing agricultural processing in the state, especially poultry, citing growth in agricultural cash receipts from $3.1 billion in 1996 to $8.3 billion more recently, with poultry rising from 5% to 25% of the total. He also pointed to major processing facilities, job creation, and the broader impact on farmers and corn markets, including examples from Hopkinsville and other regions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Many of the facilities that call home.
• <00:16:09.519> on an example, in one of our facilities on an example, in one of our facilities
• I assume you facilities in Kentucky.
• Um they do do individualized facility.
• So that's going operated u facilities.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Health and Family Services heard a presentation on Kentucky personal care homes from representatives of the Kentucky Association of Healthcare Facilities, Management Systems of Kentucky, and Elder Care Partners. Witnesses described personal care homes as a lower-cost, 24/7 residential option for adults with serious mental illness who do not qualify for nursing home care but need structured support, medication assistance, meals, housekeeping, transportation, and supervision. They said the homes are regulated by the Cabinet for Health and Family Services, are not Medicaid-funded, and rely on a state supplementation rate of about $50.70 per day, which they argued no longer covers operating costs because of rising food, labor, insurance, and maintenance expenses. The presenters said the sector has shrunk significantly over time, citing a drop from 64 homes in 2002 to 34 today among the homes serving this population, with 30 closures over 23 years and two more closures since August. They argued that the closures have contributed to homelessness, hospital overcrowding, and longer stays in psychiatric hospitals, and they gave examples of residents who had spent many months in hospitals before stabilizing in a personal care home. One provider also described spending more than $800,000 on capital improvements after acquiring Kentucky facilities and said reimbursement is too low to sustain safe operations. They asked for an incremental reimbursement increase over two years and said they have also proposed an assisted-living model for people with mental illness. Members asked about staffing, reimbursement, and the number of people still needing placement. The presenters said there is no requirement for licensed or certified staff in these facilities, though some homes use medication technicians and occasional LPNs. They estimated they are currently serving about 2,000 residents and said they receive roughly 30 referrals for every one person admitted, with many referrals involving people whose needs exceed the personal care home level. Senator Meredith and Representative Fleming said any funding request would need documentation of savings and corresponding budget offsets, while Representative Duval expressed support and asked about possible staffing and program improvements. The witnesses also compared Kentucky’s flat-rate reimbursement to a more individualized reimbursement model in Minnesota, saying a needs-based system would better match staffing and reduce hospitalizations.

Transcript Highlights:

• portions of the facility.
• complete the remainder of the facility. complete the remainder of the facility.
• Thank you. type of facilities? That's a great type of facilities?
• come to the facilities. come to the facilities.
• money to to to run all these facilities. money to to to run all these facilities.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:00:09 Approval of Minutes 00:01:10 Welcome New Members 00:01:26 Information Items 00:01:49 COT Special Report 00:02:38 Review of Executive Branch Agency Plans 00:07:41 A. Department of Military Affairs 00:08:07 B. Department of Veterans’ Affairs 00:20:34 C. Kentucky Infrastructure Authority 00:25:54 D. Tourism, Arts, and Heritage Cabinet 00:35:05 E. Transportation Cabinet 00:55:53, 958, all

Summary: The Capital Planning Advisory Board met with a quorum, approved the May 21 minutes, and welcomed a new executive branch member, Secretary Keith Jackson of the Justice and Public Safety Cabinet. The board also received two informational items: agency responses to prior questions and amendments made to capital plans after the last meeting. It then heard the Commonwealth Office of Technology’s report on executive branch IT capital project scoring, which reviewed 16 IT requests totaling about $330.5 million. COOT said projects were ranked through an independent panel using standardized criteria focused on feasibility, statewide alignment, readiness, impact, and risk; the CIO recommended moving an enterprise application and artificial intelligence inventory system from rank 11 to rank 4 because of its enterprise-wide impact and connection to Senate Bill 4. The Department of Military Affairs presented its capital plan, describing 43 million in projects for the current period and 13 projects totaling $65 million for 2026–2028, with most funding coming from federal sources and restricted agency funds and no general fund request in the latter period. Its projects included maintenance pool adjustments, a statewide Army master plan, the Somerset readiness center, Shelbyville and Ashland armories, a future home for the Kentucky Army National Guard band, and other facility upgrades. Members asked about the Somerset project’s cost growth and federal delay; the department said the project remains in conceptual design, is awaiting federal MILCON action, and would require a state match of about $9.8 million against $29.6 million federal funding if it is approved. Members also asked about staffing levels, and the department said state employee and Title 32 numbers have been relatively steady, while technician positions have declined. The Department of Veterans Affairs outlined seven projects for 2026–2028, led by a Radcliff Veterans Center HVAC replacement that needs an estimated additional $16 million to finish phase two after phase one was already funded. Other requests included a maintenance pool increase, renovations and exterior upgrades at Eastern and Western Kentucky veterans facilities, a cooling tower replacement at Thompson Hood, and parking lot and lighting improvements. The department said some projects were already in the six-year plan and that the Radcliff phase two could be bid in June 2026 if funded. Members confirmed that a columbarium wall project at Grayson is federally funded. The Kentucky Infrastructure Authority presented its six-year capital plan, citing more than $3 billion in loan commitments since 1988 and over $5 billion in supported infrastructure projects. KIA requested $298.439 million in the first biennium, including $27.742 million in state match for federal clean water and drinking water revolving funds, $25 million for its state Infrastructure Revolving Fund, $185.697 million in federal capitalization grants, and $30 million in leverage bond authorization for each year of the two federally assisted loan programs. Members asked about drinking-water quality, and KIA said that function is handled by the Energy and Environment Cabinet’s Division of Water, not KIA. KIA also said its loan rates currently range from 0.5% to 2.25%, averaging just under 1%, and that its revolving loan programs have had no defaults. The Tourism, Arts, and Heritage Cabinet began its presentation at the end of the transcript, with staff identifying themselves, but no project details or board action from that presentation were included in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• The proposed aggregate facility is located within five miles. Of our $3.5 billion facility.
• There are already mining facilities in and around the facility that you have.
• That's correct, at the existing facility. On the next facility, we will do the same thing.
• This facility from the phase one phase two facility for sure. No, you're exactly right.
• Some that are even larger than the Global Wafers facility that are in proximity to that facility are

Bills: SB1757, SB1758, SB1898, SB2050

Keywords: rock crushing, permits, air quality, environmental monitoring, aggregate production, seismicity, public meeting, land use, SB 1758, cement kiln, portland cement, aggregate production operation, aggregate quarry, semiconductor wafer manufacturing, chip fabrication, semiconductor plant, vibration, seismic disturbance, liability limitation, TCEQ

Transcript Highlights:

• for athletic facilities from just a broad swath of communities.
• Really hard to even modernize a facility with that funding.
• They're maybe not as safe as current school facilities.
• able to fully modernize or rebuild that entire facility.
• So what's recommended, fully modernize or rebuild that entire facility.

Summary: The Capital Budget Committee heard presentations from the Department of Commerce, the Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO), and a consultant on the School Construction Assistance Program (SCAP) study. Commerce officials described their agency’s role in housing, energy, local government, broadband, and other capital programs, and reported on a $5 million pilot under Senate Bill 5200 that used trusted community messengers and technical assistance to help historically excluded organizations prepare for capital funding. They said 18 organizations received direct support and 79 smaller projects were also funded, but emphasized that statutory match rules, reimbursement-based payments, site-control requirements, insurance and audit costs, and extensive contracting rules remain major barriers. Commerce outlined efforts to expand outreach, digital modernization, internal contracting improvements, tribal MOUs, and innovation centers, and members asked about small business support, housing program placement, and outreach to Eastern Washington and communities of color. RCO described its grant programs for recreation, conservation, education, and salmon/orca recovery, and reviewed equity work done before and after a 2021-23 proviso. The agency had already created a small-communities carve-out in youth athletic facilities, piloted stipends for advisory committee members, and reduced match requirements where allowed. Under the proviso, RCO completed an equity review and a planning program that funded 54 projects across 34 counties, with many applicants being new or long-absent grantees. Staff said the review led to changes in scoring criteria, clearer application guidance, more objective data measures, expanded technical assistance, and targeted community engagement. Members asked about application burden, project sizes, outreach, and how the agency is broadening participation and representation on advisory committees. The final presentation summarized a planning study on SCAP, which examined rising construction costs, fragmented grant programs, local funding barriers, and uneven district capacity. The report recommended nine major changes, including stronger planning support, a new minor-modernization category, a mechanism to use unused funds more quickly, an education-specification prototype, a SCAP enhancement program for low-capacity districts, acceptance of non-SCAP funds, phased modernization, streamlined D-form and reimbursement processes, and revisions to the SCAP formula to better account for grade-band differences, enrollment projections, and regional cost factors. Additional recommendations included ongoing monitoring and evaluation, facilities-impact reviews, matching SCAP increases to construction-cost inflation, earlier locking of funding estimates, flexible program spaces, and updated statewide building-condition assessments. No votes were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• and incompetent defendants to the facility.
• He's in a facility, but it's not secure.
• He's in a facility, but it's not secure.
• So it will be at the state hospital in a secure facility.
• Or until a facility is built, which we should be doing; we put money aside for a facility that would

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The caucus briefly reviewed House Bill 2307, which addresses the placement and treatment of dangerous, incompetent defendants when no secure mental health beds are available in Arizona. Staff explained the Senate amendments would allow one such defendant to be housed temporarily at the Arizona State Hospital in a secure setting, require DHS to study the cost of building or converting a secure facility on ASH grounds, create a study committee on long-term secure mental health facility options, and include an emergency clause. The sponsor said the bill is intended as a temporary fix while the state works toward a permanent secure facility, and noted the individual would receive mental health treatment aimed at restoring competency to stand trial. Members asked about where the person would be housed, whether treatment would be provided, and whether out-of-state compacts might be used if needed. The group then discussed House Bill 272, which as passed the House would have created an optional state certification program for lactation care providers and a related advisory committee under the Arizona Department of Health Services. Staff reported that the Senate adopted a strike-everything amendment turning the bill into an emergency measure repealing Dr. Cesar Estrada Chavez Day. The sponsor, Representative Fink, was reported to concur with the Senate amendments. No votes were taken during the caucus discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• ABOUT 33 OF THE FACILITIES IN THE STATE MET THE CRITERIA, THOSE TEND TO BE MUCH SMALLER FACILITIES.
• SO OF THE 162 FACILITIES THAT ARE BASELINE FACILITIES, THE 33 EXEMPTIONS.
• OUR WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY IS A ONE 1 MILLION GALLONS A DAY FACILITY LOCATED ON THE OTHER SIDE
• IT WILL BE THE FIRST FACILITY AND WE ARE HOPING OTHER FACILITY SET UP THE PROGRAM SO WE VERY INVOLVED
• FACILITY AND WE ARE HOPING OTHER FACILITY SET UP THE PROGRAM SO WE VERY INVOLVED ON A STATEWIDE.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So when we try to consolidate facilities, we have to renovate a facility to take on the load from the
• DAR facility that we have there.
• or university cash for that uh facility. or university cash for that uh facility.
• Uh this is also a 1975 facility.
• <02:02:35.040> Um, facility. It's 104,000 square ft. Um, facility.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:00:55 Approval of Minutes 00:02:01 Information Items 00:02:10 Review of Executive Branch Agency Plans 00:02:20 A. A. Eastern Kentucky University 00:02:48 B. B. Kentucky Community and Technical College System 00:15:21 C. C. Kentucky State University 00:31:43 D. D. Morehead State University 00:41:44 E. E. Murray State University 01:01:56 F. F. Northern Kentucky University 01:16:09 G. G. University of Kentucky and Hospital 01:25:00 H. H. University of Louisville 01:42:52 I. I. Western Kentucky University 01:56:17, 958, all

Summary: The meeting opened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, followed by a roll call establishing a quorum. The committee then approved the prior meeting’s minutes. Members were reminded to silence cell phones, and the chair noted an informational item on capital plan amendments made by state agencies during the latest revision period before moving to university capital plan presentations. Eastern Kentucky University President David McFaden outlined EKU’s enrollment growth, strong Kentucky student retention, and signature programs in nursing, occupational therapy, criminal justice, education, manufacturing engineering, and aviation. EKU’s main capital priorities were a new health innovation project to support a proposed osteopathic medical program, including a $50 million escrow requirement until accreditation; a collaborative center for health innovation to address outdated health sciences facilities; a $5 million startup request for an air traffic control program; aircraft upgrades for the aviation fleet; and continued asset preservation funding. In response to questions, EKU said roughly 40% of the new health facility would be dedicated to the medical school, with shared simulation space for multiple health programs, and that aviation maintenance needs are currently being met through KCTCS partners but could be expanded if demand grows. KCTCS representatives then described the system’s scale and capital needs, noting service to 107,000 students, extensive dual credit and workforce training, and a network of 342 buildings across 70 campuses. They said prior legislative support, including $277 million in asset preservation and $90 million released for approved projects, had helped with safety, roofs, energy efficiency, and campus security. Their current priorities include about $30 million for systemwide safety and security upgrades, renovations tied to consolidation and footprint reduction under Senate Joint Resolution 179, and broader asset preservation needs estimated at roughly $300 million to $325 million. Members discussed the need to preserve and expand skilled trades training, and KCTCS said its plan includes construction trades and flexible, multiuse facilities that can adapt to changing workforce needs. No votes were taken beyond approval of the minutes, and the presentations concluded with questions and discussion only.

Transcript Highlights:

• of our facilities.
• Sheriff's facilities reflect their communities. Sheriff's facilities reflect their communities.
• And humane facility, that's all.
• facilities.
• My facility is the number one dosing agency of an incarcerated facility in the Commonwealth.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The meeting was the third public session of the Special Commission on Correctional Consolidation and Collaboration. Members introduced themselves, and the commission approved the prior meeting minutes. The main presentation came from the Massachusetts Sheriffs’ Association, led by several sheriffs, who described the role of sheriffs’ offices as independently elected county institutions that operate jails and houses of correction, regional lockups, civil process, 911 communications in some counties, school resource officers, and investigative units. They emphasized that most of their population is pretrial, that admissions and releases are far higher than the Department of Correction’s, and that their facilities now house more people overall than DOC despite having a smaller budget. The sheriffs argued that their work has shifted toward rehabilitation, reentry, and public health, highlighting extensive programming in mental health, substance use treatment, medication-assisted treatment, education, vocational training, and gender-specific, trauma-informed services. They said standardized risk/needs assessments and better funding would help make services more consistent across counties. They also described specialized units and models such as regional evaluation and stabilization units, older-adult housing, emerging adult and gang-intervention programs, and reentry centers that connect people to housing, employment, family support, and community services. Several examples were cited, including Suffolk’s Project Evolve, Middlesex’s older-adult unit, Hampden’s MAGIC program, Worcester’s STOP program, and county reentry centers across the state. A major theme was that these programs are expensive but, in the sheriffs’ view, reduce recidivism and improve safety by stabilizing people before release and supporting them afterward. They pointed to COVID-19 as a period when sheriffs adapted facilities for quarantine and medical care, and said they continue to work with public health partners. They also stressed that their facilities are heavily audited by state and federal agencies and that maintaining humane, safe conditions requires significant staffing and operating costs. Commission members responded favorably at points, noting the importance of the turnover in sheriff populations and the need to understand the different correctional mission compared with DOC. The meeting ended with discussion of future commission dates and a note that the presentation materials would be shared electronically.

Transcript Highlights:

• My mom is currently in a facility.
• Somebody can correct me somewhere, but in a facility, other patients do want to... ...facility, other
• Assisted living facilities are not health care facilities.
• devices so that they can decide which facility best fits their needs.
• are there versus a facility, for example, where my grandmother was.

Summary: The subcommittee first heard HB 103, which would require hospitals and surgical centers to adopt policies using surgical smoke evacuation systems during procedures. Representative Woodson and several nurses and health care advocates testified that surgical smoke contains harmful chemicals and pathogens, poses respiratory risks to operating room staff and patients, and that the bill is needed to protect nurses and address workforce shortages. Members from both parties voiced support, and the bill was reported favorably by a 17-0 vote. The committee then took up HB 223, as amended, which would allow residents of nursing home or assisted living rooms to use fixed cameras, with guardrails on consent, non-rotatable placement, and prohibitions on posting footage online. The sponsor said the measure is intended to help families monitor loved ones and deter abuse or neglect, while supporters from AARP and some caregivers described cameras as tools for accountability and peace of mind. Facility and industry representatives raised concerns about privacy, dignity, roommate consent, and the potential impact on personal care conversations and resident autonomy. After questions and debate, members discussed how consent would work, who could access recordings, and how the bill would handle roommate changes and misuse of footage. The sponsor said the bill would continue to be refined in later committees. HB 223 was reported favorably as amended by a 16-2 vote, with Representatives Campbell and Franklin voting no. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• At best, charter school facility costs are reimbursed at 75% of facility costs, which many cap below
• for state offices, health facilities, daycare centers, as well as educational facilities.
• I think if, and I'm not a charter... facility that was once a public school facility, does the public
• You know, I think that facilities are scarce. District facilities are scarce.
• The Charter School Facility Grant Program is The Charter School Facility Grant Program is a model.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The committee began with public comment and then heard an informational update on the administration’s Career Education Master Plan and the California Education Interagency Council. State agencies described efforts to better align workforce, higher education, and TK-12 systems through data sharing, dual enrollment, e-transcripts, career passports, and regional partnerships. Members asked about the council’s timeline, strategic plan, reporting requirements, and whether it would have authority to act; administration staff said the council is being stood up, its first meeting is due by the end of June, and a strategic plan is due by the end of November. Members also raised broader questions about the relationship of this work to the Master Plan for Higher Education and common course numbering. The committee then took up the Governor’s proposed $100 million one-time expansion of dual enrollment grants. Finance said the proposal would extend grants for middle college, early college, and CCAP programs, add eligibility for regional occupational centers, provide extra support for justice-involved youth, prioritize high-need LEAs, and allow funds for teacher professional development. The proposal would also reduce the minimum instructional day for certain dual enrollment students from 240 to 180 minutes to better align schedules and remove barriers. The LAO recommended rejecting the funding, arguing that dual enrollment is already growing and that the proposal does not address major fiscal barriers. The Chancellor’s Office and CDE supported the investment, emphasizing access, equity, and technical assistance, especially for rural and small districts. Members questioned instructional-minute changes, reporting on outcomes, adult learner access, and whether the funds would support ongoing or one-time costs. Next, the committee considered trailer bill language to align the definition of long-term English learners across data systems. Finance and CDE said the change would simplify identification by using a seven-year definition for LTELs and a six-year definition for students at risk of becoming LTELs, matching the dashboard and research on the typical time needed to reach English proficiency. Some members expressed concern that the proposal could delay intervention for students who have been English learners for four or five years and questioned why the issue was being handled through budget trailer bill language rather than policy legislation. After discussion, the committee voted on a motion to reject the proposal and refer it to the policy committee; the motion received two aye votes and the item was held open. Finally, the committee heard a proposal to extend the Supporting Inclusive Practices Project by one year, from June 30, 2026 to June 30, 2027. Finance said the extension would continue the existing project, while CDE raised concerns about the project’s contract structure, fiscal management, and scalability. A Marysville Joint Unified School District representative testified that SIP had helped the district bring preschool services back into district schools, expand inclusive practices, and reduce reliance on more restrictive placements. Members questioned why funds had not been fully encumbered and whether the project was best positioned to support statewide preschool inclusion goals, with CDE suggesting that existing infrastructure may already be better suited for that work.

Transcript Highlights:

• As of July 25, DOCR facilities will be at 1,464 and in the main facility, 1,753 overall, which is exceeding
• They know they need to build a new facility.
• so they had to purchase the 72-bed facility.
• There's more facilities that will accept males than females.
• There's more facilities that will accept males than females.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee reconvened in the afternoon and took up only Senate Bill 2015, the Department of Corrections budget. Representative Steeman explained that the budget reflected major changes from the Senate version because bed contracts with Grand Forks and Burleigh-Morton were still unresolved when the Senate acted. He described rising inmate populations, added county/regional jail payments, deferred maintenance and repair funding, planning money for a new Missouri River Correctional Center, software and equipment upgrades, victims of crime grants, and a one-time diversion/deflection center grant for Fargo funded through the Community Health Trust Fund. He also outlined funding for body cameras, tasers, and protective vests, and a Native American reentry program/report provision, along with a legislative management study on sentencing, corrections, and parole oversight. Members asked about the possibility of private or design-build alternatives for the new Missouri River Correctional Center. After discussion, the committee adopted language directing the steering committee to oversee design and construction and to explore other options. There was also discussion of the importance of maintaining North Dakota’s correctional rehabilitation culture, the cost and availability of out-of-state placements, and the current number of inmates housed in regional, county, and interstate facilities. The committee adopted the amendment to engrossed Senate Bill 2015 and then approved the bill as amended on a 21-0 vote, with two members absent and not voting. Representative Steeman was designated as the carrier. The chair then thanked members for their work and announced the committee would reconvene the next morning to continue with remaining bills and budget work before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• residential facilities, which serve adults 19 to 59, and a lot of smaller facility types serving mostly
• residential facilities, which serve adults 19 to 59, and a lot of smaller facility types serving mostly
• Within our facilities licensed by CDSS, CDL Within our facilities licensed by CDS, CDL, excuse me, CCLD
• The PIN required facilities to post a nondiscrimination notice in the facility, which is what I'm hoping
• And that requires all health care facilities, including DSS and CDPH facilities, to implement the policies

Summary: The Select Committee on Older LGBTQ Californians held an inaugural hearing focused on the health care and support landscape for older LGBTQ Californians, including people aging with HIV and transgender, gender non-conforming, and intersex seniors. Opening remarks emphasized the long history of discrimination faced by older LGBTQ adults, the growth of the aging LGBTQ population, and the need to translate existing state commitments into concrete services. Senators highlighted concerns about nursing home vulnerability, the aging of people living with HIV, and the impact of federal actions and Medicaid cuts on California’s safety net. The first panel featured Justice in Aging, CalHHS, the Department of Aging, and the Aging and HIV Institute. Testimony described widespread inequities, including discrimination, social isolation, economic insecurity, and gaps in culturally competent care. State officials outlined the Master Plan for Aging, the first statewide survey of LGBTQIA older adults, gender-affirming care protections in Medi-Cal, and efforts to improve coordination across departments. Advocates argued the state has been too slow to respond to federal threats and that services are often hard to find or fragmented. Committee members pressed the departments on how survey findings are being turned into action, how rural and underserved communities are being reached, and whether more formal stakeholder coordination or “no wrong door” access systems are needed. The second panel focused on seniors living with HIV. A long-term survivor gave emotional testimony about the “survivorship penalty,” loss of benefits, housing insecurity, and the need for legal and navigation support, housing assistance, and protection from outdated disability standards. The Department of Aging reported on implementation of SB 258, which added HIV status to the definition of greatest social need for area agencies on aging; it said 20 of 33 area plans now identify HIV as a target population and many include specific strategies, such as LGBTQIA mental health connections programs. The Office of AIDS described Project Cornerstone, Ryan White, ADAP, HOPWA, the Medi-Cal waiver, and PrEP-AP, noting these programs serve thousands of older clients and rely on whole-person case management. Case management testimony underscored persistent needs for medication subsidies, transportation, food, and housing. Committee members questioned how ADAP rebate funds might be used, how SB 258 is enforced across local agencies, and how to reduce administrative barriers and auto-connect eligible people to benefits. The final panel began with the Department of Social Services outlining protections for TGI seniors in licensed care facilities, including SB 219’s nondiscrimination requirements and related provider notices and resident rights materials. The hearing remained focused on identifying service gaps, improving coordination across aging, health, and social service systems, and ensuring state programs better reflect the lived experience of older LGBTQ Californians.

Transcript Highlights:

• swine, sheep, and goats at facilities swine, sheep, and goats at facilities not<00:04:22.320>
• word about is USDA facilities word about is USDA facilities are<00:13:27.680> certified<00
• So we do not inspect the facilities. The only entity that is inspecting those facilities is USDA.
• Uh, so at a custom facility.
• facility and then they can cut it up. facility and then they can cut it up.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Environment and Agriculture Committee held a work session and then executive session on HB 396, which would allow processing of beef cows, swine, sheep, and goats at facilities not certified by USDA. Representative Comtois presented a revised amendment after prior drafting issues were corrected. The changes narrowed the bill to cuts of meat rather than meat food products, clarified labeling for amenable and non-amenable species, removed an exemption from federal law, struck a seasonal date range at Representative Bixby’s request, and reinstated a previously removed section. Supporters said the amendment now had clearer language and better safeguards, while some members still expressed reservations about the underlying policy. Testimony from DHHS food safety officials emphasized that the department does not inspect custom-exempt facilities and would have little oversight unless there were a complaint or foodborne outbreak. They noted concerns about removing the September 1 to April 30 date range, explaining it had been included in the original bill because of temperature and storage concerns for large animals, and they also said the amendment appeared to focus documentation requirements on bison, elk, and red deer. Committee members and witnesses debated whether the proposal would create food safety risks, whether farmers should instead be educated and helped to aggregate processing capacity, and whether the bill would expose farmers, retailers, and restaurants to federal enforcement risk. Rob Johnson of the New Hampshire Farm Bureau said the organization had recently voted down a policy opposing state regulations that would allow uninspected meat sales at retail, and he said he needed to consult further with Farm Bureau leadership before taking a position on HB 396. He suggested the bill should use the broader term “dairy and beef cattle” rather than “beef cows” for consistency. Supporters argued the bill would help small farmers, expand local food access, and reflect an intrastate policy choice despite conflict with federal law. The committee then moved into executive session and voted to approve amendment 2025-3090H, with members stating they would likely have different views on the bill itself.

Transcript Highlights:

• Corrections and public facility Corrections and public facility Authority<00:01:03.600> we'll
• Safety and Security of the facilities Safety and Security of the facilities themselves<00:05:06.400
• other than the oldest facilities.
• live within our Correctional Facilities live within our Correctional Facilities today<00:07:35.879
• It is the DOC's newest facility.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• facility or recycling facility.
• facility or recycling facility.
• Eight counties have more than one facility, and a ninth county is just about to open a second facility
• on the MRW facility map.
• This does not include the cost of new facilities like the collection facility co-located with King County's

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The committee’s interim work session focused first on carbon capture, utilization, and sequestration (CCUS), with presenters from industry, nonprofits, and state agencies describing Washington’s geologic potential, the role of basalt formations, and the difference between point-source capture, direct air capture, utilization, and permanent storage. Industry and project developers emphasized that Washington has major opportunities to reduce industrial emissions, create jobs, and support hard-to-electrify sectors, while state agencies explained current policy touchpoints in the Cap and Invest Program, emissions exemptions for permanently stored CO2, and the Clean Energy Transformation Act. Several presenters urged clearer statutory and regulatory pathways, including rules for pore space, subsurface rights, pipeline siting, and long-term liability; others cautioned that CCUS should be limited to real emissions reductions and not treated as a substitute for broader clean energy measures. Committee members asked about public comment opportunities, whether mineralized carbon would qualify for exemption under the Climate Commitment Act, the energy intensity of capture systems, aquifer protection, and liability if storage later proves problematic. Ecology said it is developing guidance through a public engagement process running through late June and that mineralized or otherwise permanently stored CO2 would likely qualify if it meets the 1,000-year permanence standard. DNR and outside experts also discussed trust lands, water rights, and the need for additional geophysical surveys and test wells. The panel did not take any votes or formal actions. The second half of the meeting turned to hazardous waste and extended producer responsibility. Ecology reviewed existing product stewardship programs for electronics, paint, batteries, and mercury lights, and described how moderate risk waste and household hazardous waste are currently collected through county facilities and events. Ecology said the electronics program is its best model, while the mercury lamp program is currently in transition after the prior stewardship organization exited and a new organization is seeking approval. Ecology recommended that future EPR programs have clear producer and product definitions, full producer funding, convenience standards, annual reporting, and strong enforcement authority. Local government witnesses from King County and Douglas County described rising costs, access barriers in rural areas, and the need for stable funding and flexible local delivery models. King County said it collected over 3 million pounds of hazardous products in 2025 and argued that EPR could reduce costs for ratepayers and improve equity. Douglas County stressed that rural residents are willing to participate when services are available, but travel distance and operating costs make access difficult. An industry representative supported narrowly scoped stewardship programs like PaintCare but warned that broad household hazardous waste EPR systems can become difficult to administer and may require legislative revisions if responsibilities are not clearly defined. No votes were taken on the hazardous waste topic either.

Transcript Highlights:

• And our adult residential facilities, which serve adults 19 to 59, and a lot of smaller facility types
• So the PIN required facilities to post a non-discrimination notice in the facility, which is what I'm
• notice in the facility, which is what I'm hoping you saw when you went to that facility, and to provide
• And that requires all health care facilities, including DSS and CDPH facilities, to implement the policies
• That is called a facility-reported incident.

Summary: The committee held an inaugural hearing on the health care and support needs of older LGBTQ Californians, with members and witnesses emphasizing that this population has made major gains in rights and longevity but still faces discrimination, isolation, economic insecurity, and gaps in services. Opening remarks highlighted concerns about older LGBTQ people entering nursing homes and feeling forced back into the closet, as well as the growing number of Californians aging with HIV. The hearing was structured into three panels, with public testimony considered if time allowed. The first panel focused on the overall health and support landscape. Justice in Aging described survey findings showing discrimination, poor health, difficulty with errands, and economic insecurity among older LGBTQ Californians, and warned that federal Medicaid cuts and broader federal actions could worsen access to home- and community-based services and culturally competent care. CalHHS and the Department of Aging described the Master Plan for Aging, the first statewide LGBTQIA older adult survey, and efforts to support gender-affirming care, PACE, care management, and community supports. Witnesses stressed the need for better outreach, data collection, and a “no wrong door” approach so people can more easily find and access services. The chair and senators pressed the departments on how survey findings are being translated into concrete action and how state agencies are coordinating across silos. The second panel addressed health care for seniors living with HIV. A longtime survivor described severe financial and benefits consequences from a federal clawback and argued that California needs stronger legal, navigation, and housing supports, including HIV-specific housing funding. The Department of Aging reported on implementation of SB 258, saying it has educated area agencies on aging, added HIV data to planning tools, and found that 20 of 33 area agencies identified HIV as a target population, with 16 including specific strategies. The Office of AIDS outlined Project Cornerstone, Ryan White, ADAP, HOPWA, a Medi-Cal waiver, and PrEP-AP, noting these programs serve thousands of older clients and that local case managers are expected to coordinate whole-person care. Case managers and advocates said housing, food, transportation, mental health, and premium assistance remain major needs, and senators asked whether future ADAP rebate funds could support navigation, housing, and other gap-filling services. The final panel turned to transgender, gender nonconforming, and intersex seniors. The Department of Social Services described protections under SB 219, including nondiscrimination notices, resident rights postings, required records for preferred names and pronouns, and annual inspections of licensed facilities. The Department of Public Health and a TransLatin Coalition leader were introduced to discuss additional supports for TGI seniors. Across the hearing, members repeatedly returned to the themes of visibility, coordination, and implementation, asking departments to follow up on how they will better connect services, improve outreach, and ensure that existing laws and programs are actually reaching the people they are meant to serve.