Transcript Highlights:

• The law outlined the conduct expected of the charitable fundraising platforms and platform charities,
• Protected through charitable fundraising platform laws.
• AB 488 and Regulation Section 316 require charitable fundraising platforms or platform charities to not
• As part of a broad coalition of charitable fundraising platforms, platform charities, As part of a broad
• coalition of charitable fundraising platforms, platform charities, recipient organizations, and other

Summary: The Assembly held its first-ever outcome review hearing, focused on AB 488, Assemblymember Irwin’s 2021 law regulating charitable fundraising platforms and platform charities. Chair Bauer-Kahan and Irwin described the hearing as part of a new oversight process meant to evaluate whether enacted laws are working as intended and to identify implementation problems. Irwin reviewed the bill’s purpose: updating California’s charitable solicitation rules for online fundraising, requiring platform registration and reporting, setting disclosure and conduct rules, and creating protections for charities and donors. The Attorney General’s office said the implementing regulations took effect in stages in 2024 and 2025 after extensive rulemaking, and argued the law was needed because online fundraising had outgrown older solicitation laws. The office highlighted enforcement concerns, including unregistered platforms, delayed remittances, and unauthorized fundraising pages, and said the new online filing system should improve processing and compliance. Nonprofit representatives and platforms generally supported the law’s transparency goals but said implementation has created major burdens, especially around “good standing” determinations, slow registry response times, and disruptions to fundraising when charities are flagged as delinquent. PayPal Giving Fund and GoFundMe both said they complied with the law but urged changes to better fit platform operations, reduce delays, and ease requirements for small or micro-donations. Committee members pressed the witnesses on donor protection, due process, and whether California should shorten the time to resolve good-standing issues. Several members said the law has helped stop misleading or unauthorized fundraising practices, while also acknowledging unintended consequences for nonprofits. Irwin said she is preparing follow-up legislation to address implementation problems and balance the interests of charities, platforms, donors, and the Attorney General’s office. During public comment, Candid praised the review and the DOJ’s efforts to improve the process, and a PG&E representative described an unintended consequence in employee giving where donations were redirected because recipient charities were not in good standing.

Transcript Highlights:

• are platforms of free speech, and they are speech platforms.
• are platforms of free speech, and they are speech platforms.
• are platforms of free speech, and they are speech platforms.
• are platforms of free speech, and they are speech platforms.
• are platforms of free speech, and they are speech platforms.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Everything you look at on a platform and how you look at it, how quickly you move through the platform
• It doesn’t ban these platforms. It gives parents and students more control.
• Platforms are already implementing to help keep kids safe.
• Third, platforms are using personalization to increase safety, not just engagement.
• Thank you. make platforms less safe and less usable for families. Thank you. Thank you.

Summary: The Senate Business, Trade and Economic Development Committee first held a work session on protecting children online. Testimony focused on a proposed Kids Online Protection Act that would limit addictive algorithmic feeds for minors and restrict push notifications during school hours and at night. Supporters included a former tech executive, a Meta whistleblower, and a psychology researcher, who argued that social media design exploits adolescent development, harms well-being, and that the bill gives parents and children more control without banning access to content. Industry and trade group witnesses opposed the approach, arguing it would violate the First Amendment, create privacy risks through age verification, and could reduce useful personalization and safety tools; they said companies are already implementing teen protections and parental controls. The committee did not take a vote during the work session. The committee then held a public hearing on Senate Bill 5928, sponsored by Senators Warnick and Short at the request of the Insurance Commissioner. The bill would require property insurers using wildfire risk scores or models to disclose more information to consumers, explain adverse factors, provide appeal and rescoring processes, and account for mitigation actions in rate filings and discounts. The Office of Insurance Commissioner, a Colville Tribal representative, fire district testimony, climate advocates, realtors, hospitality businesses, and insurance agents generally supported the bill as a transparency and consumer-protection measure, with some urging inclusion of commercial lines and stronger recognition of local fire mitigation. Several insurance trade groups opposed or were neutral, warning that the bill goes too far, could expose proprietary underwriting information, increase regulation and costs, and should be narrowed to align with other states’ approaches. No vote was taken, and the chair adjourned after the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And finally, for those online platforms, it was the rules of the road.
• The law outlined the conduct expected of the charitable fundraising platforms and platform charities,
• AB 488 and Regulation Section 316 require charitable fundraising platforms or platform charities to not
• Charitable fundraising platforms are critical infrastructure.
• As part of a broad coalition of charitable fundraising platforms, platform charities, recipient organizations

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Taxing social media advertising is not an attempt to make the platforms fully pay for every harm that
• The governor even highlighted this very issue in last week's State of the State address. the platforms
• Why didn't we just put the tax on everybody on radio, print, and internet?
• This does not exist outside of the internet itself.
• This does not exist outside of the internet itself.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Revenue and Taxation heard two bills. AB 796 by Assembly Member Lowenthal proposed a California Social Media Accountability Act that would impose a recovery fee on social media platforms’ advertising revenue and direct the proceeds to a Social Media Safety Trust Fund for education, mental health care, research, and social services related to youth harms from social media. The author and supporters, including a Long Beach Unified School District administrator and a pediatric emergency physician, argued that social media is contributing to youth mental health crises, cyberbullying, self-harm, and related school and health system costs, and that platforms should help pay for mitigation. Opponents, including taxpayer, business, and industry groups, argued the fee would raise costs for businesses and consumers, especially small businesses that rely on targeted digital ads, and warned of likely legal challenges under federal law, including the Internet Tax Freedom Act. Committee members discussed the bill’s legal distinctions from Maryland’s digital advertising tax, the potential pass-through of costs to advertisers, and whether the proposal would meaningfully address youth harms. Several members expressed support for the bill’s goal and concern about social media’s effects on children, while others raised questions about how the revenue would be allocated and whether the tax burden would fall on small businesses. After testimony and debate, AB 796 was held in committee and referred to the suspense file. The committee also took up AB 1265 by Assembly Member Haney, which was already on the suspense file. The chair recommended an aye vote on the bill as amended, with a clarification to reporting requirements, and the committee approved it 5-0, sending it to Appropriations.

Transcript Highlights:

• The image she used was from family pictures on basic social media platforms.
• </c> bill simply requires that apps platforms bill simply requires that apps platforms and<00:03:20.799
• And because these images are created using a third-party platform and the internet, once these images
• </c><00:09:43.160><c> of</c><00:09:43.360><c> me</c> on the internet of me on the internet of me forever
• <00:13:27.480><c> but</c><00:13:28.120><c> that's</c> internet but that's internet but that's horrible

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill requires platforms to conduct affordability checks.
• Platforms are making pretty good money.
• They have pretty easy access to the platforms, even though the platforms will say that’s not the case
• Please reject this bill and any other internet gaming bills.
• And by every measure, internet... ...public policy failure, and by every measure, internet casino gambling

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies, chaired by Rep. Carole Fiola and Sen. Barry Finegold, held a lengthy hearing on a range of gambling-related bills. Testimony first focused on H. 496 to allow the Massachusetts Gaming Commission to authorize Plain Ridge Park Casino to add table games and more slot machines. Supporters, including Rep. Jeffrey Roy, Sen. Finegold, Rep. Barry R. Finegold, Rep. Brian Vaughn, and Plainville officials, argued the change was needed to keep Massachusetts gaming dollars from flowing to Rhode Island, protect jobs, and preserve local tax revenue. They described Plain Ridge as a strong community partner and cited host-community benefits such as municipal infrastructure projects and local aid. Opponents or skeptical witnesses later argued that expanded gambling, especially online, would increase harm and cannibalize existing casinos and local economies. The committee also heard testimony on bills related to sports betting restrictions and online gambling. Sen. John Keenan presented a “Better Health Act” proposal to ban prop bets and in-play bets, require affordability checks, prohibit hosts, raise the sports betting excise tax, expand funding for problem-gambling services, and increase research and data sharing. He and supporters framed the bill as a public-health response to addiction, suicide, bankruptcy, and other harms. Rep. David Nangle, speaking from personal experience with gambling addiction, strongly opposed internet gaming, warning that it would intensify addiction and expose children and families to 24/7 gambling on phones. In contrast, Rep. David Moradian and industry witnesses supported H. 4431 to legalize and regulate internet gaming, arguing it would bring illegal activity into a regulated market, generate new revenue, and include consumer protections such as age verification, deposit limits, self-exclusion, and responsible-gaming tools. The committee also took testimony on H. 4238, which would expand fundraising options for fraternal organizations, especially the Elks. Rep. Bruce Ayers and Elks representatives said the bill would help lodges raise money for scholarships, veterans’ services, and community programs after COVID-related losses and declining membership. On H. 480, Rep. Kathleen LaNatra, Rep. Badger, and representatives of veterans organizations and gaming-machine operators urged allowing qualified veterans groups to participate in certain video gaming activity, saying it would provide a sustainable revenue source to keep posts open and support veterans’ services. Dr. Rachel Volberg testified that expanding gambling, especially online gambling and slot machines at veterans organizations, would likely increase gambling harm, and she urged stronger harm-prevention measures, data reporting, and research funding. Other witnesses, including anti-gambling advocates and industry representatives, sharply disagreed over whether legalization would reduce illegal gambling or worsen addiction and social costs. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.

Bills: HB679, HB1764, HB1788, HB2186, HB2204, HB2418, HB2885, HB2983, HB2996, HB3250, HB3352, HB3756, HB3816, HB3913, HB3928, HB4077

Keywords: environment, regulation, land use, public health, community development, alcohol, Sunday sales, local option election, Texas, business hours, alcohol sales, liquor, off-premise consumption, alcoholic beverages, CPA, Certified Public Accountant, licensing, accountancy, state regulation, continuing education

Transcript Highlights:

• Ensures that Internet access is not a taxable service.

Bills: SB75, SB715, SB776, SB1299, SB1405, SB1968, SB2021, SB2077, SB2148, SB2321, SB2330, SB2411

Keywords: electric generation, reliability, ERCOT, Public Utility Commission, penalties, performance requirements, energy policy, construction contracts, compensatory damages, government delays, contractor, legislation, nonprofit donor privacy, membership lists, supporter confidentiality, volunteer privacy, association rights, public records exemption, Texas Public Information Act, government transparency

Transcript Highlights:

• The following category is 'Join Now,' where it mentions an online platform new members can use to join
• It then says NEA e-Dues, which is an online platform that only active members can use to update their

Bills: SB75, SB715, SB776, SB1299, SB1405, SB1968, SB2021, SB2077, SB2148, SB2321, SB2330, SB2411

Keywords: electric generation, reliability, ERCOT, Public Utility Commission, penalties, performance requirements, energy policy, construction contracts, compensatory damages, government delays, contractor, legislation, nonprofit donor privacy, membership lists, supporter confidentiality, volunteer privacy, association rights, public records exemption, Texas Public Information Act, government transparency

Transcript Highlights:

• And then the next category is join now, where it says an online platform new members can use to join
• And then it says NEA e-dues, NEA's online platform that only active members can use to update their dues
• And then the next category is join now, where it says an online platform new members can use to join
• And then it says NEA e-dos, NEA's online platform that only active members can use to up. e-dues, NEA's
• online platform that only active members can use to update their dues payment method.

Bills: SB75, SB715, SB776, SB1299, SB1405, SB1968, SB2021, SB2077, SB2148, SB2321, SB2330, SB2411

Keywords: electric generation, reliability, ERCOT, Public Utility Commission, penalties, performance requirements, energy policy, construction contracts, compensatory damages, government delays, contractor, legislation, nonprofit donor privacy, membership lists, supporter confidentiality, volunteer privacy, association rights, public records exemption, Texas Public Information Act, government transparency

Summary: The Senate Committee on Business and Commerce heard Senate Bill 2021 by Senator Johnson, as substituted, on distributed energy resources (DERs). Johnson said the bill was intended to create a regulatory framework for DERs and virtual power plants, address interconnection and registration issues, and prevent regulatory capture as the industry grows. Testimony was split: Texas Electric Cooperatives asked for clarification so co-ops would not be unintentionally excluded from owning or operating DERs; AECT supported the bill as providing needed rules and customer protections; TABA, Texas Solar and Storage Association, Sierra Club, Texas Solar Energy Society, and several others opposed it or raised concerns that it was too utility-centric, imposed red tape, and could burden homeowners and small businesses with registration and interconnection requirements. Johnson repeatedly said the bill was not meant to stop rooftop solar or backup systems and that he was open to specific redlines and further changes. SB 2021 was left pending after testimony. The committee then took up Senate Bill 2330 by Senator Parker, which would end government payroll deduction for dues to certain public employee organizations, while exempting first responders under Chapters 143 and 147 and making other conforming changes in a committee substitute. Parker argued the bill was about government neutrality, transparency, and employee freedom from coercion, and said organizations can collect dues directly using modern payment methods. Supporters from Texas Public Policy Foundation, Texas Business Coalition, Freedom Foundation, ABC Texas, and Texans for Fiscal Responsibility said taxpayer-funded payroll systems should not be used to collect dues for private organizations, especially ones involved in political activity. Opponents, including ATPE, Texas Classroom Teachers Association, Texas Public Employees Association, and correctional employees, said payroll deduction is a convenient, secure service that helps professional associations and employee groups, and argued the bill would burden teachers and other public employees. Several witnesses and senators focused on the bill’s exemptions and whether it treated teachers differently from first responders. Senator Menendez questioned why some public employees were excluded while others were not, and a Houston police union representative said he moved from opposing to supporting the bill after being told the substitute would preserve meet-and-confer deductions under Chapters 143 and 147. Senator Parker closed by saying the bill was not meant to eliminate associations or payroll deduction entirely, only to remove the state as a middleman. SB 2330 was left pending, and the committee then recessed subject to call.

Transcript Highlights:

• And four, it ensures that internet access is not a taxable service.

Bills: SB75, SB715, SB776, SB1299, SB1405, SB1968, SB2021, SB2077, SB2148, SB2321, SB2330, SB2411

Keywords: electric generation, reliability, ERCOT, Public Utility Commission, penalties, performance requirements, energy policy, construction contracts, compensatory damages, government delays, contractor, legislation, nonprofit donor privacy, membership lists, supporter confidentiality, volunteer privacy, association rights, public records exemption, Texas Public Information Act, government transparency

Summary: The committee first took up pending business and favorably reported several bills without objection or by recorded vote, including SB 783, SB 1238, SB 1706, SB 1791, SB 458, SB 1644, and SB 1810, with some of them also sent to the local and uncontested calendar. The committee then moved into hearings on additional bills. SB 1968, by Senator Schwertner, would update the Real Estate License Act by repealing subagency, requiring written buyer-agent agreements before showings, and clarifying when a formal buyer representation agreement must be signed. Texas Realtors testified in support, saying the bill modernizes agency rules and increases transparency, while a committee substitute corrected drafting issues. SB 2411, the annual update to the Texas Business Organizations Code, was also laid out and left pending after supportive testimony from the Texas Business Law Foundation and drafting committee representatives. The committee also heard SB 2321, which would codify ERCOT’s current practice of notifying TCEQ when backup generation needs enforcement discretion for grid reliability; Sierra Club and a chamber of commerce witness supported it with suggestions for clearer emissions reporting, and the bill was left pending. SB 2077 would broaden eligibility for the Texas Mutual Insurance Company board by narrowing conflict restrictions tied to insurance-related interests; Texas Mutual supported the change and the bill was left pending. SB 1405, a broadband bill, would align state law with FCC standards and streamline Broadband Development Office processes; it was left pending after supportive testimony. SB 1299, protecting nonprofit donor privacy, drew support from privacy advocates and concerns from one witness about transparency for publicly funded nonprofit operations; it was left pending. The committee then heard SB 776, which would bar government construction contracts from shifting delay damages to contractors when delays are caused solely by the public owner. Contractors, surety representatives, and water infrastructure advocates supported the bill, arguing it would improve fairness and reduce inflated bids, while water utilities and critical infrastructure entities opposed it, warning of more litigation and higher costs; the bill was left pending. Finally, SB 715, which would apply reliability requirements retroactively to all generation resources in ERCOT, drew opposition from renewable and storage groups and support from some critics of renewable subsidies, with witnesses split over whether it would improve reliability or raise costs; testimony was underway when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• recording of reasonable quality of each regularly scheduled open meeting and post these records on the internet
• , most districts prepare, um, and post audio and video records of their official meetings to the internet
• When they're trying to avoid social media as the platform to host the video, OK, but I just want to make
• But they don't have the access to the internet to do this.
• To post financial and operating data on the internet, including meeting agendas, uh, and minutes.

Bills: HB 279, HB 310, HB 365, HB 391, HB 420, HB 422, HB 638

Keywords: HB 279, uranium mining, uranium permit, production area authorization, production zone, Texas Water Code, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, contested case hearing, administrative hearing, groundwater restoration, groundwater baseline, water quality, mining permit, restoration values, natural resources, environmental regulation, in-situ uranium mining, permit amendment, public hearing

Transcript Highlights:

• greatest transparency and participation, is the option to hold videoconference media. meetings on platforms
• bills about how we conduct our meetings, supporting bills about what information. is on the on the internet
• Largely because it is so transparent, it puts so much information on the internet.
• That is in the bills that require us to put things on. the Internet, to be integrated in the SB2 tax
• And you may be able to click on an internet site and all you're gonna find out is what tax rate.

Bills: HB279, HB310, HB365, HB391, HB420, HB422, HB638, HB279, HB310

Keywords: HB 279, uranium mining, uranium permit, production area authorization, production zone, Texas Water Code, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, contested case hearing, administrative hearing, groundwater restoration, groundwater baseline, water quality, mining permit, restoration values, natural resources, environmental regulation, in-situ uranium mining, permit amendment, public hearing

Transcript Highlights:

• recording of reasonable quality of each regularly scheduled open meeting and post these records on the Internet
• requires most districts prepare and post audio and video rec- of their official meetings to the internet
• covered by this section may make available the archived recording of the meeting on an existing Internet
• Why so many attorney firms try to dissuade their districts from setting up a social media platform. platform
• Internet, broadband, etc. That's well documented.

Bills: HB279, HB310, HB365, HB391, HB420, HB422, HB638, HB279, HB310

Keywords: HB 279, uranium mining, uranium permit, production area authorization, production zone, Texas Water Code, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, contested case hearing, administrative hearing, groundwater restoration, groundwater baseline, water quality, mining permit, restoration values, natural resources, environmental regulation, in-situ uranium mining, permit amendment, public hearing

Transcript Highlights:

• So I'm entering into the platform.
• the platform.
• With the platform. I asked a question about this.
• And without affordable internet, students can't do homework.
• parents didn't have affordable access to the internet at home.

Summary: The Assembly Communications and Conveyance Committee heard three bills. SB 371 by Senator Cabaldon would reduce uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage requirements for transportation network companies from $1 million to $100,000 per person and $300,000 per accident, with committee amendments adding findings and declarations, higher limits than originally proposed, and a joint study on UM/UIM impacts. Supporters, including Uber, Lyft, business groups, and some consumer advocates, argued the bill would lower fares and increase driver earnings by reducing insurance costs. Opponents, including consumer attorneys, labor groups, and consumer watchdog organizations, warned it would cut protections for riders and drivers and might not guarantee savings would be passed through. The committee approved SB 371 on a due-pass basis and re-referred it to Appropriations by a 9-0 vote. The committee then heard SB 716 by Senator Durazo, which would create a Home Internet Lifeline Program to let eligible low-income households apply Lifeline subsidies to home broadband service. Proponents said the bill addresses broadband affordability after the federal Affordable Connectivity Program expired, and that it would help students, workers, and families access reliable internet. Opponents from the wireless industry objected to the funding mechanism, arguing the surcharge would fall unfairly on wireless consumers, while one broadband group moved to neutral after amendments. The bill was approved on a due-pass basis and sent to Appropriations, but the roll was held open and later completed with the bill passing 7-1. The committee also took up SB 480 by Senator Archuleta relating to autonomous vehicles as a consent item, with no presentation or debate. It was approved on a due-pass basis and re-referred to Appropriations by a 9-0 vote. Throughout the hearing, members repeatedly focused on affordability, consumer protection, and whether savings from the bills would actually reach riders, drivers, or households.

Bills: SB292, HB351, HB141, HB273, SB292, HB351, HB141, HB273

Keywords: education oversight, subpoena authority, investigation, State Superintendent, school misconduct, ad valorem tax, road funding, local government, referendum, Choctaw County, HB141, Alabama, state employees, salary deductions, payroll deduction, State Comptroller, membership dues, voluntary contributions, insurance premiums, financial instruments

Transcript Highlights:

• for those platforms that already voluntarily collect both the state and various local hotel occupancy
• These figures demonstrate... ...how our platform supports local businesses, creates jobs, and drives
• As I think Justin would agree, between traditional hotels and platforms like Airbnb, this bill allows
• Okay, so it's defined in the bill. ...And that is the platforms.
• Any other short-term rental platform, and I know there are others, the individual host is going to be

Bills: SB209, SB529, SB1265, SB1592, SB1728, SCR37, SCR38

Keywords: SB 529, Texas Tax Code, municipality, hotel and convention center, hotel convention center project, tourism development, economic development, tax revenue pledge, revenue commitment, qualified project, municipal finance, local government, special district, hotel occupancy tax, nearby establishments, convention center financing, city population 130000, Section 351.155, Section 351.157, child care

Transcript Highlights:

• Everything you look at on a platform and how you look at it, how quickly you move through the platform
• The bill doesn't prevent minors from accessing content on platforms that use addictive feeds.
• It doesn't ban these platforms. It gives parents and students more control.
• Platforms are already implementing to help keep kids safe. We want kids to be safe.
• Third, platforms are using personalization to increase safety, not just engagement.

Bills: SB5928

Keywords: wildfire risk, disclosure, safety, environmental policy, risk assessment, 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It depends on each platform because the platforms are so inherently different.
• And, of course, that goes on a platform-by-platform basis.
• Platforms are in a constant battle to protect their users and their platforms from sophisticated bad
• , or is it a per-platform cap?
• And so, of all the platforms that they can go to, that's $100,000 at each of those platforms.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 56, which would require social media platforms to display a warning label about potential mental health harms from prolonged use, with amendments shortening the initial warning and allowing immediate access to the platform. The author and supporters, including a parent who lost a daughter to suicide and a therapist, argued that social media contributes to teen anxiety, self-harm, and other harms and that families need clearer public health information. Opponents from tech and civil liberties groups argued the bill would be ineffective, burdensome, and likely unconstitutional, saying it would create warning fatigue and should be replaced by more targeted tools and digital literacy measures. Several members discussed emergency access concerns, language access, and whether the warning should be more actionable; the bill was moved on a 9-0 vote to the Judiciary Committee. The committee then took up AB 358, which would amend CalECPA to allow law enforcement, with the victim’s consent, to inspect certain abandoned tracking or surveillance devices found in a victim’s home, vehicle, or personal property without first obtaining a warrant. The author and a San Diego prosecutor said the bill is narrowly tailored to devices used solely for spying and is intended to help stalking and domestic violence survivors act quickly before evidence is lost. Opponents from EFF and the ACLU warned the bill would weaken warrant protections, create a loophole around CalECPA, and reduce transparency and accountability. Members debated Fourth Amendment issues, abandonment, and the practical need for rapid access; the bill passed the committee on a 9-0 vote to Appropriations. The committee also heard AB 1137, which builds on last year’s CSAM reporting law by allowing any user to report child sexual abuse material, requiring clearer reporting mechanisms, adding human review in some cases, and mandating third-party audits and public reporting. Supporters, including survivor advocates and a parent of a child victim, said the bill would reduce the burden on survivors and improve removal of abusive content. Tech industry opponents said they support the goal but objected to the human-review mandate, public audit disclosures, and enforcement provisions, arguing they could create security risks and compliance burdens. Members generally supported the bill’s intent but raised questions about audit frequency and human review; the bill was moved on call with seven votes at the time of the transcript.