Transcript Highlights:

• >> Well, either restricting spending or increasing their revenues to—that's what they are required to
• >> Well, either restricting spending or increasing their revenues to—that's what they are required to
• </c> state balance its budget and restrict state balance its budget and restrict spending<00:20:58.000
• </c><00:21:01.919><c> or</c> &gt;&gt; Well, either restricting spending or &gt;&gt; Well, either restricting
• At the same time, there were laws restricting smoking in certain places.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• on access to we've seen restrictions on access to abortion<01:14:14.120><c> uh</c><01:14:14.840><c>
• restrictions on speech at the receiving end, not universal restrictions at the source.
• :50.000><c> Universal</c><01:39:51.080><c> restrictions</c><01:39:52.080><c> at</c><01:39:52.239><c>
• the</c> end not Universal restrictions at the end not Universal restrictions at the source source source
• The importance of restricting minors' access to obscene material, such as pornography.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 232, which would protect health care workers’ conscience rights in connection with certain procedures, especially abortion and sterilization, and also referenced contraception. The prime sponsor, Rep. Mark Pearson, said the bill is meant to prevent medical professionals from being forced to participate in procedures that violate their beliefs, while still prohibiting discrimination against patients based on protected characteristics. He said the measure was intended to help retain health care workers in New Hampshire and noted he had added an amendment to address concerns about people taking jobs only to later refuse duties, as well as emergency situations where a provider is the only one available. Committee members raised concerns about how broadly the bill and amendment were written. Questions focused on whether the protections could apply to non-physician staff such as schedulers, receptionists, or pharmacy employees; whether a provider could refuse to schedule, refer, or otherwise assist with services; and how “emergency” would be determined in practice. Several members also questioned whether the bill could affect access to contraception, including pharmacy sales and procedures such as tubal ligation, and whether the language was clear enough to prevent confusion or unintended refusals of care. Pearson said the bill was not intended to allow refusal of emergency care or general patient discrimination, and he acknowledged some language could be tweaked. Rep. Paige Boerman, a maternal-child health nurse, testified in opposition, saying she had seen pharmacists question prescriptions related to miscarriage care and that the bill could create barriers to contraception and other reproductive health services. She warned that the lack of a disclosure requirement and the broad definitions could create risks, especially in rural areas with limited providers. She also pointed to problems she said had occurred in other states, arguing the bill could lead to delayed care in emergencies. The hearing ended after questions and discussion; no vote or final action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Heintzeman, the bill does not allow restrict speech.
• Representative Heintzeman, the bill does not allow restrict speech.
• Representative Heintzeman, the bill does not allow restrict speech.
• Representative Heintzeman, the bill does not allow restrict speech.
• Representative Heintzeman, the bill does not allow restrict speech.

Bills: HF4133, HF3419

Keywords: homeowner's insurance, peace officer, property damage, just compensation, exclusion policy, corporate powers, entity law, business corporations, nonprofit corporations, LLC, limited liability company, cooperative, partnership, trust, foreign entity, campaign finance, election spending, political spending, ballot measure, ballot initiative

Transcript Highlights:

• the most restrictive whatever the most restrictive procurement<00:29:35.679><c> requirement</c><00:29
• I think um I think oftentimes what we find as the most restrictive barrier is at the local level.
• I think um I think oftentimes what we find as the most restrictive barrier is at the local level.
• </c><00:31:49.039><c> barrier</c> we find as the most restrictive barrier we find as the most restrictive
• State and local law is more restrictive, and so it is going to be controlling.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The task force met with a quorum, approved the minutes from the August 20 meeting, and then heard testimony from Representative Steven Doan on House Bill 439, a school nutrition bill aimed at restricting certain ultra-processed foods in schools. Doan said the bill was inspired by his own health journey and his work in agriculture, and he described the measure as targeting specific chemical additives in foods served during the school day, not concession sales or after-hours activities. He said the bill would phase in later to give schools time to adjust and noted that the list of restricted additives was drawn from efforts in other states and advocacy groups. Members asked about the chemical abstract numbers, fiscal impact, summer meal programs, fundraisers, and whether the bill would affect parent-provided items; Doan said he had not done a fiscal note and explained that the bill was intended to apply only during instructional time on school property. Committee members generally reacted favorably, with some raising practical concerns about cost and implementation. One member asked about high fructose corn syrup, which Doan said was not included because it is too pervasive in the food system. Another member noted that schools already limit some homemade items and asked about the line between school-provided and parent-provided food. Doan also said the list was based in part on Turning Point USA materials and similar laws in other states, and he referenced federal efforts to define ultra-processed foods. The committee then heard from Kentucky Department of Education officials Matt Ross, Lauren Moore, and Katie Embry on school meals and nutrition programs. They outlined Kentucky’s school lunch, breakfast, summer meals, and other USDA child nutrition programs, including participation and reimbursement figures, and explained how community eligibility provision schools, meal patterns, offer-versus-serve, smart snacks, and local wellness policies work. They said USDA and FDA are currently seeking public input on a uniform definition of ultra-processed foods, that there are no current USDA requirements specifically on ultra-processed foods, and that schools already operate under federal and state rules governing competitive foods, including a state time restriction on smart snacks. They also discussed local purchasing, noting its benefits but also the procurement and staffing challenges schools face. No votes or final actions on the bill were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's no restriction there.
• , no buyer restriction, they could ship it.
• But if they can stick in that product of the farm, then there's no restriction.
• product of the farm no sales restriction no<01:06:47.400><c> buyer</c><01:06:47.839><c> restriction<
• </c> Cottage Foods then that's what restricts Cottage Foods then that's what restricts them<01:07:54.559

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Or is it because of our state policies and restrictions?
• I know it's a very generalized question, but I'm just curious at this point. ...policies and restrictions
• same time, maintaining our existing fleet has become increasingly difficult due to proprietary restrictions
• Difficult due to proprietary restrictions on parts and technical information.
• These exorbitant cost overruns, multi-year delivery delays, and restrictions on access to proprietary

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This built-in restriction prevents the use of sensitive data for secondary or unrelated purposes, whereas
• insurers use lawfully collected data, the bill in print remains, as Allison mentioned, the most restricted
• Collected data, the bill in print remains, as Allison mentioned, the most restrictive globally.
• And, as we've kind of mentioned, it exceeds the European model and puts a lot of restrictions on us that
• This would be the most restrictive standard in the world. I know.

Summary: The Assembly Insurance Committee heard several bills, with most of the discussion focused on insurance transparency, claims handling, privacy, and regulatory enforcement. SB 877 and SB 878 by Senator Pérez addressed post-disaster claims practices: SB 877 would require insurers to disclose original and revised loss estimates and related claim materials to policyholders, while SB 878 would add automatic interest penalties for delayed claim decisions or payments and require written identification of disputed items. Fire survivors, consumer groups, AARP, the Department of Insurance, and other advocates supported both bills, while insurer groups moved to neutral after amendments. Both bills were voted out on roll call and reported to the Committee on Appropriations. The committee also considered SB 1054 by Senator Cabaldon, which would expand data sharing and reporting to improve workforce program evaluation and help counties verify work requirements for Medi-Cal and CalFresh using employer-reported hours worked. County officials, workforce advocates, and the Department of Insurance supported the measure, and no opposition was heard. The bill passed on a due-pass-as-amended motion to the Committee on Labor and Employment. SB 1209 by Senator Allen, presented with Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, would give the commissioner stronger enforcement tools to require insurers to carry out corrective actions identified in market conduct examinations, including fines and hearings for noncompliance. The commissioner and author said the bill would close an enforcement gap and improve accountability; there was no opposition testimony, but the bill was left on call after the roll. The committee also heard SB 354 on insurance privacy, presented by Senator Padilla on behalf of Pro Tem Limón, which would modernize insurance privacy rules by expanding consumer rights over personal data, limiting sale and use of sensitive information, and increasing disclosure requirements. Supporters said the bill updates outdated 1980s-era rules, while insurers, agents, and business groups raised concerns about scope, compliance burdens, and small-business impacts. Members indicated the bill was still being negotiated and would return in a revised form in the Privacy Committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• It restricts PBM income to a flat dollar service fee charged either per person per month or a per prescription
• It restricts PBM income to a flat dollar service fee charged either per person per month or a per prescription
• that specialty drug, my goal in doing this is to be able to help and provide broader access, not restrict
• Finally, by dictating formulary design, prohibiting certain contracting practices, and restricting how
• To the point where federally some of those restrictions have been agreed to bring those and repatriate

Summary: The House Insurance Committee met on April 29 with a quorum present and took up several insurance and health care-related bills. SB 192, a dental reimbursement bill, was amended to allow dentists to opt in electronically to credit-card payment methods and to clarify applicability and effective date; it was reported as amended. SB 84 would require prostate cancer screening coverage for men over 40 under current clinical guidelines and prohibit cost-sharing; supporters from the American Cancer Society said Louisiana has a high incidence of prostate cancer and that out-of-pocket costs deter early screening. The committee adopted amendments and reported the bill as amended. SB 275, dealing with reimbursement and network participation for certified registered nurse anesthetists, drew support from nursing and hospital groups and was reported favorably. SB 169, a cleanup bill on biomarker testing, was also amended and reported. The committee spent substantial time on SB 401, which creates a temporary prescription drug affordability board to review pricing data on selected drugs and report findings to the legislature. Supporters said the board would improve transparency and help lawmakers understand drug pricing trends; opponents raised concerns about confidentiality, market effects, and the lack of a defined policy outcome beyond reporting. Amendments narrowed the scope, added confidentiality protections, and removed opposition cards, and the bill was reported as amended. SB 387, a major PBM reform bill tied to SB 401, would change PBM compensation, rebate handling, formulary practices, audits, and appeals, while excluding ERISA plans after discussion and amendment. Supporters argued it would curb spread pricing and other practices that raise costs, while opponents from the Pelican Institute and PCMA warned it would interfere with private contracts, reduce flexibility, and could raise premiums or disrupt city, school board, and small-group plans. After extensive debate and a roll call, SB 387 was reported with amendments by a 10-4 vote. The committee also considered SB 241, which requires certain insurance adjusters and public adjusters to include license numbers in written communications. After amendments limiting the requirement to individual licenses and removing one statutory reference, the bill was reported as amended. Throughout the meeting, members and witnesses repeatedly discussed the need for transparency in drug pricing and PBM practices, the role of ERISA and non-ERISA plans, and potential impacts on public employers and consumers.

Transcript Highlights:

• It restricts PBM income to a flat-dollar service fee charged either per person per month or on a per-prescription
• It restricts PBM income to a flat dollar service fee charged either per person per month or a per prescription
• The legislation also requires full pass-through of rebates and restricts how PBMs structure their compensation
• Finally, by dictating formulary design, prohibiting certain contracting practices, and restricting how
• To the point where federally some of those restrictions have been agreed to bring those and repatriate

Keywords: 965, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, we want to restrict transfers.
• You know, anything that restricts transfers unfairly, we don't want that to happen.
• Anything that imposes restricts transfers unfairly. We don't want that to happen.
• they reveal the fact that the individual is purchasing an interest instead of the home and the restrictions
• And on the top of page three, you talk about they cannot restrict the transfer of the interest, imposing

Summary: The committee first considered House Resolution 1016, presented by Rep. Marcus Richmond, which sought permission to file a bill aimed at consumer protection in certain housing arrangements where buyers purchase an interest in an entity rather than the property itself. Richmond said the measure was intended to improve transparency, prevent deceptive real estate practices, and ensure disputes would be handled in Arkansas or federal courts rather than private tribunals. Members raised concerns about overlap with existing law, possible effects on homeowners associations, arbitration clauses, hunting clubs, religious organizations, and the bill’s 25-acre exemption. After discussion, the committee voted down the resolution. House Resolution 1006, by Rep. Bart Schultz, proposed increasing the homestead tax credit by $75, from $600 to $675, using a fund created for property tax relief. Schultz argued the increase was supported by the annual report on the fund and was timely because of higher costs for gas and groceries. Members asked about using special language instead, whether the increase could be made retroactive later, and whether the governor had included it on the call. The committee approved the resolution. The committee then heard House Resolution 1007, presented by Sen. Brian King and Rep. James Eaton, which would have changed how turnback sales tax revenue is distributed to counties, with the first $150 million of sales tax revenue going into a fund for county infrastructure and each county receiving an equal share. Supporters said it would help counties with roads, jails, water, sewer, and other critical needs, while opponents questioned whether taking revenue off the top would harm other state services and whether the issue was urgent enough for a fiscal session. The resolution failed. House Resolution 1008, by Rep. Jim Wooten and Sen. King, sought changes to the LEARNS Act and school choice funding, including performance-based eligibility and reporting requirements. Wooten argued the program was financially unsustainable and that accountability was needed; members questioned whether the proposal would create a larger emergency and whether it should instead be handled through budget language. The resolution failed after a point of order interrupted the closing remarks. Finally, House Resolution 1009, presented by Rep. Ron McNair and Sen. King, aimed to restore local control over crypto mines and data centers, citing concerns about water use, electricity demand, Chinese ownership, and litigation tied to prior legislation. Members questioned whether the issue was truly emergent and whether the resolution was the right vehicle. The resolution failed. House Resolution 1015, by Rep. Howard Beatty, proposed amending the prior IDA bill to address concerns raised by constituents, including board accountability and removing eminent domain authority. Supporters said it would improve the bill before next session, but the resolution also failed. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• No, there's no restriction on who can apply for the program.
• There's no restriction on who can apply for the program.
• The more criteria we put, the more restrictions we would put, the less likely we are to have a fully
• So no, there are no restrictions after graduation to do a residency in our state.
• There are no restrictions after graduation to do a residency in our state.

Summary: The committee approved the March 18 and 19 minutes and heard a presentation from the University of Arizona College of Medicine Phoenix on its new tuition-free, three-year regional medical school branch in Yuma. The presenter said the program is designed to address Arizona’s primary care shortage by training students in a high-need rural area, with 18 months in Phoenix and 18 months in Yuma, and members asked about residency placement, applicant eligibility, and whether students would be required to remain in rural Arizona after training. The program was described as open to applicants from in and out of state, with no post-graduation practice commitment, but with an emphasis on recruiting students already interested in rural care. The committee then heard several health and child welfare bills. HB 2923 would expand judicial review procedures for court-ordered mental health treatment, add timelines and counsel protections, and require clear and convincing evidence to continue treatment; supporters said it updates outdated 1970s law and preserves due process. HB 2434 would change the controlled substances prescription monitoring program by requiring updated patient utilization reports before opioid or benzodiazepine prescribing, tightening reporting rules, and replacing a task force with a compliance workgroup. HB 2035 would broaden kinship foster care to include extended family, strengthen sibling and family placement preferences, require written findings when kin placement is denied, and shift the standard from promoting to presuming kinship placement as in the child’s best interest; DCS said the policy largely matches current practice but raised an implementation concern about a report deadline before preliminary protective hearings. The committee also heard HB 2611, which would expand foster youth rights and safety protections in group homes, including anti-retaliation rules, drug-screening requirements for staff, and new safety rules for DCS and DHS; foster youth and group home staff testified in support, while DCS was neutral and noted possible fiscal and operational impacts. HB 2732 would continue the Arizona State Board of Pharmacy until 2032, and HB 2733 would make various pharmacy regulation changes, including medication delivery flexibility, continuing education timing, change-of-ownership permits, and wholesale distribution permitting. HB 2830, as amended, would require instruction on fetal and prenatal development and initially restricted abortion-provider materials in schools, but the amendment removed that prohibition; testimony split between supporters who framed it as educational and opponents who objected to its implications for reproductive rights. HB 2932, as amended, would require AHCCCS contractors to reimburse noncontracting providers for referred lab services and limit prior authorization and retaliation; health plans opposed it as a threat to managed care tools, while lab providers supported it as fair payment for covered services. Finally, HB 4004 would require DCS to investigate credible abuse or neglect reports even when one parent is considered protective, and to report annually on cases where it declined to intervene. Parents testified that abuse was minimized or left uninvestigated because of the “protective parent” concept, while supporters said the bill would close a dangerous gap. The committee also considered HB 2086, which would bar government and businesses from imposing mask or vaccination requirements, though an amendment removed the business prohibition; supporters framed it as bodily autonomy and opponents argued it would weaken public health protections. The committee voted to give do pass recommendations to HB 2035, HB 2086 as amended, HB 2434, HB 2611 as amended, HB 2732, HB 2733, HB 2830 as amended, HB 2923, HB 2932 as amended, and HB 4004, with recorded no votes on some measures, including opposition from members on HB 2086, HB 2830, HB 2932, and HB 4004.

Transcript Highlights:

• No, there's no restriction on who can apply for the program.
• Senator Galbaldon, Chair, there's no restriction on who can apply for the program.
• The more criteria we put, the more restrictions we put, the less likely we are to have a fully committed
• So no, there are no restrictions after graduation to do a residency in our state.
• There are no restrictions after graduation to do a residency in our state.

Bills: HB2035, HB2086, HB2434, HB2611, HB2732, HB2733, HB2830, HB2923, HB2932, HB4004

Keywords: kinship care, child welfare, foster care, relative placement, child protection, vaccination mandates, mask requirements, public health, government entities, COVID-19, controlled substances, prescription monitoring, opioid crisis, healthcare regulations, patient safety, group homes, children's rights, safety protocols, employee training, mental health

Transcript Highlights:

• The restriction of food created intense anxiety for me.
• No, sorry, it is 33: the right to limit, restrict, suspend, or deny visitation by court order.
• On line 31, or rather line 33, it says the right to limit, restrict, suspend, or deny visitation by court
• asked whether it is the department or the state that is going to say they have the right to limit, restrict
• says the right to adequate and appropriate basic essentials no sorry it's 33 the right to limit restricts

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 754, which would add physical therapists to Idaho’s direct primary care statute so they can enter direct payment agreements with patients without those arrangements being treated as insurance contracts. The sponsor and supporters said the bill would improve access, especially for patients who need frequent therapy or live in underserved areas, and emphasized that it would not expand physical therapists’ scope of practice. One member objected that the bill’s wording could blur the definition of primary care and create scope confusion. After testimony from a physical therapy association representative and a small business health care provider, the committee voted to send the bill to the floor with a do-pass recommendation, with several members recording no votes. The committee then took up House Bill 724, which would add and clarify safety-related rights for children in foster care, including safe placement, access to medical and forensic exams after abuse disclosures, basic necessities, and consideration of safety in visitation and placement decisions. The sponsor said the bill is a narrow child-safety measure that does not alter parental rights or removal standards, while foster parents, a psychologist, former foster youth, and others testified in support with accounts of abuse, unsafe placements, and inadequate oversight. Some members raised concerns about enumerating rights in statute and about broad language that could have unintended future consequences; a substitute motion to send the bill to amending order failed on a roll call vote, and the original motion to send the bill to the floor with a do-pass recommendation passed. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 759, a budget-related measure to reduce Medicaid residential habilitation funding and require a new audit/rate study of home and community-based services. The sponsor said the reduction reflects a governor’s budget recommendation and that the audit would help determine appropriate rates and spending. Providers and family members of people with disabilities testified that the bill was too vague, that prior rate studies were not fully followed, and that any reductions could harm staffing and services; they asked for clearer standards, collaboration, and assurance that rate-study results would actually be used. A motion to hold the bill until a later date was offered, but the sponsor opposed delaying the budget item and the committee continued discussion toward a floor recommendation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you think that the restriction on proposition bets... Thank you. You guys are here.
• Do you think that the restriction on proposition bets in the bill is enough to manage the risk of point
• Senate Bill 6137's restriction on this form of prop bets is not symbolic.
• As a reminder, this relates to Lakeland Village records as well as restricted records that are held by
• Unless prohibited or restricted by law, these agencies must refund the application fee if they fail to

Bills: SB6084, SB6137, SCR8406, SB5892, SB5863

Keywords: elections, double voting, voting twice, multiple voting, same-day election, primary election, general election, special election, cross-state voting, ballot fraud, election fraud, voter misconduct, RCW 29A.84.660, State v. Padilla, civil infraction, class C felony, Secretary of State, Washington elections, election law, voter eligibility

Transcript Highlights:

• critical erosion outside of the existing framework, this may cause ambiguity and unintentionally restrict
• Florida Starter Homes Act, which limits the ability of local governments to Representative Nix: restrict
• bill provides that counties with a population density of at least 500 people per square mile cannot restrict
• So what is the goal of restricting local governments or what is currently happening that we are restricting
• homeowners associations, condominium associations, and cooperative associations as well as deed restrictions

Transcript Highlights:

• For example, ticket issuers may not restrict the transferability of a sole ticket unless the terms are
• that section 10, subsection three, clearly states that there's a sports carve-out and that these restrictions
• respectful opposition to SB 6175, which would entrench market power of dominant ticket incumbents, restrict
• She said the current definition of surge pricing could unintentionally restrict price changes based on
• She said the current definitions of surge pricing could unintentionally restrict price changes based

Bills: SB6149, SB6175, SB6230, SB6248, SB6312, SB6061, SB6137

Keywords: rural county, frontier county, public facilities funding, economic development, local option sales tax, sales and use tax, workforce housing, affordable housing, county tax authority, RCW, Washington state, community economic revitalization board, CED, infrastructure funding, public works, job creation, job retention, job expansion, county planning, state auditor reporting

Transcript Highlights:

• the interpretation was that the district was incorrect: that this support is indeed not the most restrictive
• You can toggle different IDEA violations like least restrictive environment, or you can look up particular
• If this new bill section is enacted, over 12,000 students, 32% who rely on this, will be restricted from
• If this new bill section is enacted, over 12,000 students, 32% who rely on this, will be restricted from
• I urge you to reconsider. ...I urge you to reconsider the provisions of this bill that restrict Running

Bills: SB6130, SB6247, SB6260, SB6268, SB6278

Keywords: voter registration, elections, national holiday, civic engagement, government initiative, school funding, financial management, budgeting, transparency, district governance, SB 6260, public education, K-12, Washington State, OSPI, Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, education finance, school transportation, school buses, zero-emission bus

Transcript Highlights:

• the one-to-one paraeducator as the Because they consider the one-to-one paraeducator as the most restrictive
• and the interpretation was that the district was incorrect: this support is indeed not the most restrictive
• You can toggle different IDEA violations like least restrictive environment, or you can look up Violations
• like least restrictive environment, or you can look at particular disabling conditions.
• I urge you to reconsider the provisions of this bill that restrict Running Start enrollment and to protect

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several education-related bills. Senate Bill 6130 would move public high schools’ voter registration events from Temperance and Good Citizenship Day in January to National Voter Registration Day in September, with schools offering Future Voter registration to eligible students in history or social studies classes. The sponsor, Sen. Krishnadasan, and supporters from King County Elections, Pierce County, OSPI, and the Legislative Youth Advisory Council said the change would better match student interest and improve youth civic engagement at no fiscal cost. A senator asked about community service opportunities, and the sponsor said that could potentially fit within existing community service recognition programs. Senate Bill 6247 would expand financial oversight and training for school districts, especially those in financial distress or binding conditions. It would require additional ESD involvement, add WASDA training on budgeting and financial health for school directors, and impose stronger consequences for knowing financial misconduct, including future employment bars and state reimbursement of certain unrecovered damages. Sen. Dozier said the bill responds to district financial problems, including Prescott School District. OSPI supported the bill, while the Association of Educational Service Districts, WSSDA, and WEA raised concerns about ESDs being placed in an oversight role, the need to align the bill with other pending training legislation, and whether some enforcement duties should instead rest with the state auditor. Senate Bill 6268 would require OSPI to keep an online record of final special education community complaint decisions for 20 years instead of the current five years on its website. OSPI supported the bill, saying it would improve transparency and help families, educators, and policymakers identify patterns and understand how complaints are resolved; the sponsor said the retention period may be amended. Advocates from Washington Autism Alliance, The Arc, and parent advocates testified in favor, saying the records help families avoid repeated disputes and reveal systemic issues. Senate Bill 6278 would change how PESB reviews teacher and principal preparation programs and adjust student-teaching field placement plan submission timing; the sponsor said the goal is to ensure educators are better prepared, and PESB testified neutral, saying many of the review elements already exist and the bill would add flexibility. The committee also heard Senate Bill 6260, a budget-savings bill affecting public education. It would lengthen school bus depreciation to 15 years, withhold up to 1.9% of MSOC funds to pay for the High School and Beyond Plan platform, and reduce Running Start funding from 1.4 to 1.2 FTE. OFM supported the bill as part of the governor’s budget approach, but many testifiers opposed it, arguing it would cut district resources, keep older buses on the road longer, shift costs to schools, and reduce access to Running Start—especially for low-income, rural, and technical-program students. School district, college, PTA, counselor, and student witnesses said the current 1.4 FTE model has expanded access and completion, while supporters of the bill emphasized state budget pressures and said the changes would preserve other priorities.

Transcript Highlights:

• This restriction was intended to protect student athletes from harassment, collusion, and other forms
• Owners may place reasonable restrictions on the occupants' use of the self-storage facility, including
• Owners may place reasonable restrictions on the occupants' use of the self-storage facility, including
• Owners may place reasonable restrictions on the occupants' use of the self-storage facility, including
• After restricting hours to appointment only so the customer could be monitored well on site, and after

Bills: SB6061, SB5844, SB6079, SB6137, SB5831, SB6031, SB6178

Keywords: tourism, self-supported assessment, funding, statewide promotion, economic development, storage rental, tenancy agreements, tenant rights, landlord obligations, termination notice, insurance, wildfire prevention, policy nonrenewal, cancellation, risk management, sports wagering, sports betting, sports gambling, bookmaking, gambling regulation

Transcript Highlights:

• First, it places four restrictions on the sale of retail products in a grocery store.
• The first restriction requires the business to clearly post the price of goods being sold.
• The second restriction prohibits the business from using surveillance-based pricing to modify the price
• And the fourth restriction prohibits the business from using an electronic shelf label system in stores
• Loyalty or reward programs are excluded from these restrictions, as are businesses with fewer than 50

Bills: HB2278, HB2325, HB2481, HB2503

Keywords: tourism, promotion areas, state funding, economic development, community engagement, tourism promotion, Washington Tourism Marketing Authority, assessment, self-supported assessment, visitor economy, destination marketing, statewide marketing, lodging, hotels, restaurants, travel services, attractions, recreation, retail, beverage producers