Transcript Highlights:

• So I am a non-smoker as well.
• Well, yeah, different and the same. Yeah.
• Well, they got to pass a budget first, right? Well, that was my question. Thank you.
• Yeah, well, this is pretty easy. Okay.
• Well, that's obviously a new technology.

Committee: House Commerce

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Have we been tracking numbers on SB6 as well?
• "Well, I already made..." "What would those be? Well, I already mentioned what I would do.
• Well, many people say not nearly enough.
• Well, good morning.
• And you say, well, we're not sure. And then they say, well, then I guess we've got to do rental.

Summary: The hearing was an outcome review of AB 2011, the Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022, focused on whether the law is being used as intended to speed housing production on commercially zoned land while maintaining labor and affordability standards. Chair Haney and Assembly Member Wicks emphasized that the point of the review was not to relitigate the bill, but to assess implementation and results. The first panel of researchers and policy experts said AB 2011 has had real but still limited uptake so far, with roughly 5,800 homes proposed, entitled, or permitted under the law through 2024, concentrated mainly in San Francisco and Los Angeles counties. They also noted that the broader housing market remains constrained by high construction costs, interest rates, and flat rents, making it hard to isolate the bill’s effects from overall market conditions. Witnesses generally agreed that AB 2011 has been most effective for 100% affordable projects and for projects already using public subsidies or prevailing wage, where the ministerial process and CEQA streamlining help move developments forward. Several speakers described the law as a useful bargaining tool that can push jurisdictions to rezone or approve projects more quickly even when AB 2011 is not formally invoked. At the same time, developers and advocates said the mixed-income pathway is much less usable in most of the state because prevailing wage and the 15% affordability requirement add significant cost, especially in lower-rent markets. They also pointed to implementation issues such as narrow site eligibility rules, the “substantially surrounded by urban uses” test, industrial-use exclusions, and confusion about whether the law applies to homeownership projects. The second panel, made up of practitioners using the law, described specific projects that moved forward under AB 2011, including affordable housing developments in the San Joaquin Valley and large mixed-use projects in San Francisco. They said the law’s biggest benefit is certainty: projects that once took years to entitle can now move in months. However, they repeated calls for changes such as clarifying homeownership eligibility, loosening density and site restrictions, narrowing the industrial-use exclusion, and making the law easier to understand for developers and local staff. Members also raised concerns about uneven use across regions, especially the relative lack of AB 2011 activity in Los Angeles and Santa Clara County, and about the accuracy and lag in annual progress report data. The final panel, including the original sponsors, said they remain supportive of the law but are open to adjustments to reduce costs and improve usability while preserving labor protections and affordability goals.

Transcript Highlights:

• I worked very well with Dr.
• It is very well intentioned to throw off more and more people from social services.
• Thank you to those of you who are advocating for that as well.
• Just want to make a quick note as well about 105.
• It'll go to great projects across our state and will be well used and well needed.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee held an informational hearing on the September budget package, which included SB 105 and a series of trailer bills covering health, human services, education, resources, child care, transportation, labor, public safety, housing, revenue, background checks, collective bargaining, and a special election. The Department of Finance described the package as largely technical and clarifying, but also responsive to state and federal changes, especially H.R. 1. Key items included roughly $3.3 billion in Proposition 4 climate and environmental spending, $540 million in discretionary greenhouse gas reduction funds, and major responses to H.R. 1 such as CalFresh error-rate mitigation, food bank support, and Medicaid-related changes. Other notable provisions included vaccine policy flexibility, an Abortion Access Fund, a gender-affirming care program, community college basic-needs and aid changes, CEQA and coastal permit exemptions tied to the 2028 Olympics, invasive mussel prevention funding, a civic media program, labor and pension-related provisions, and special election administration changes. Members raised questions and concerns about several parts of the package. There was support for climate, water, transit, offshore wind, food security, and health investments, but also significant criticism of the lack of cleanup language for SB 131 and its advanced manufacturing exemptions, with multiple members saying promised fixes had not materialized and expressing concerns about tribal consultation, labor standards, and environmental protections. Members also questioned the scale and timing of some Proposition 4 allocations, including fairground upgrades, regional conveyance, and a UC Davis alternative protein research center. The Department of Finance said some programs would roll out over time and that certain funding levels reflected current implementation capacity. The hearing also featured discussion of Bay Area transit financing, with Finance saying SB 105 directs the department and CalSTA to examine loan or other financing options rather than immediately providing loans. Members and public commenters also discussed the state’s response to H.R. 1, with advocates supporting food bank, health care, and immunization provisions while warning of ongoing harm to immigrants, foster youth, and other vulnerable groups. Public testimony broadly supported the health, food, water, offshore wind, and golden mussel provisions, while many speakers echoed legislative concerns about SB 131 and urged cleanup action in the next session. No votes were taken because the hearing was informational only, though the chair noted votes on the bills were expected later that night or the next morning.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, the bill is pretty clear.
• What you're saying is very broad as well.
• Well, let's move on to the medical schools.
• And to just say, flippantly, that, well, we don't And to just say, flippantly, that, well, we don't need
• Nice to see you as well.

Committee: Senate Governmental Oversight and Accountability

Summary: The committee first confirmed Heather L. Turnbull to the Florida Commission on Community Service, with the motion adopted and the confirmation recommended favorably. Members then took up SPB 7022, which sets Florida Retirement System employer contribution rates beginning July 1, 2025, updates rates to address unfunded actuarial liability, and allows certain elected officers to elect a DROP accumulation; a technical title amendment was adopted, the bill was submitted as a committee bill, and it was reported favorably as a committee bill. The committee then heard extensive debate and public testimony on SB 1710, which would restrict diversity, equity, and inclusion-related policies, trainings, and activities in state agencies, state-funded contractors and grantees, and medical institutions of higher education. Sponsor Senator DiCeglie said the bill is intended to prevent state agencies and contractors from using state funds for DEI programs and to limit state agencies from adopting DEI-related official positions; he also said the medical-school portion would likely be amended out later. Senator Polsky and others questioned the bill’s breadth and how it would affect health-related grants, public universities, historically Black institutions, recruitment, and contractor training. Public testimony was overwhelmingly opposed, with speakers arguing the bill would harm health care, education, access, and inclusion; a few supporters said DEI is ideological, can undermine merit, and should not be used by state agencies or publicly funded institutions. After debate, Senator Polsky argued the bill was confusing, overbroad, and harmful to serving diverse communities, while Senator Arrington said it was an overreach into private business and could have significant fiscal impacts. Chair Fine closed by saying DEI is political ideology and that the bill is meant to ensure government focuses on talent rather than identity. SB 1710 was then reported favorably on a roll call vote, with Senator Arrington voting no and the remaining members voting yes. The committee then began SB 1678, relating to entities that boycott Israel, and heard the sponsor’s explanation of a delete-all amendment that would expand and clarify state restrictions on dealings with entities engaged in boycotts of Israel, including certain nonprofits, foreign educational institutions, and grants; the amendment was adopted, and the sponsor and a witness began answering questions when the transcript cuts off.

Transcript Highlights:

• Pensacola is positioned well.
• Pensacola is positioned well.
• Pensacola is positioned well.
• Well, it's an honor to be here today.
• White-wing scholars as well.

Bills: S1570 , S1376

Committee: Senate Appropriations Committee on Higher Education

Keywords: missing persons, special needs, autism, search-and-rescue, Florida, voluntary program, funding, genetic counseling, education grants, state universities, faculty recruitment, student financial assistance

Summary: The committee heard and approved two bills before moving to a long confirmation agenda. SB 1570, by Sen. Gates, would restore Project Leo, a previously sunset program that helps locate missing persons with special needs through voluntary tracking devices and coordination between CARD centers and local sheriffs; it was praised as a proven tool for families and first responders and was reported favorably. CS/SB 1376, by Sen. Burgess, would create grants to support genetic counseling education and help address Florida’s shortage of genetic counselors; testimony noted the state’s limited supply of licensed counselors and the need to expand clinical training, and the bill also passed favorably. The committee then considered a block of reappointments to university and college boards of trustees, including institutions such as UWF, Broward College, Chipola College, FIU, Pasco-Hernando, Polk State, St. Petersburg, Valencia, FAMU, FAU, UCF, FSU, New College, UNF, USF, and others. No one requested separate votes on the reappointments, and the block was confirmed unanimously for recommendation to the next committee. A series of new appointees then appeared and largely emphasized workforce training, nursing, military support, and local economic development at their institutions. Witnesses included appointees to Pensacola State, Polk State, St. Petersburg College, UNF, FIU, UWF, Valencia, the College of the Florida Keys, and others; several highlighted strong NCLEX pass rates, dual enrollment, and partnerships with employers or military communities. One nominee, Florida Poly reappointment Ilya Shapiro, faced pointed questioning from Sen. Bracey Davis about past comments regarding race and the Supreme Court; he said his remarks were about hiring criteria, not a specific justice, and reiterated opposition to race- or sex-based selection. The committee also briefly struggled to reach Sherry Young by phone before hearing her testimony for Chipola College, where she said she wanted to give back as an alumna and nurse practitioner. Most new appointees were recommended for confirmation in a block, while Thomas Zachary Smith of UWF was pulled for separate consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair, I want to thank you for your engagement on this bill as well, and the rest of your staff, as well
• AB 259 allows flexibility as well as safety for elected officials.
• I know Jody has some comments, but I will comment as well.
• Well, good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members.
• Well, we'll work with you on that. Well, thank you so much for that. Any other committee members?

Summary: The committee heard a long agenda focused heavily on housing, local government, Brown Act teleconferencing, and public agency administration. Early bills included AB 39, which would require larger cities and counties to adopt electrification planning for EV charging and building decarbonization; AB 76, which clarifies Chula Vista’s university innovation district housing requirements; AB 259, AB 409, and AB 467, which extend or modernize Brown Act teleconferencing provisions for local agencies, community college student bodies, and Los Angeles neighborhood councils; and AB 428, which would let water corporations join joint powers authorities for pooled insurance. Supporters emphasized climate planning, housing access, public participation, safety, and cost savings, while several bills were amended to address stakeholder concerns. Most of these measures advanced on bipartisan votes, generally 6-1 or 7-0, and were left open for additional members to add on later. The committee also heard AB 632, which would strengthen local enforcement tools for serious code violations, fire hazards, illegal cannabis operations, and unsafe housing by allowing unpaid administrative fines to be converted into money judgments and liens. Local government and code enforcement groups supported the bill as a way to improve compliance and reduce costly litigation. AB 670 would let local governments count investments in preserving naturally occurring affordable housing toward housing element reporting and require broader reporting of demolitions and replacement housing compliance; supporters argued preservation is essential because many unsubsidized affordable homes are at risk. AB 761 would allow Monterey-Salinas Transit to place a future sales tax measure on the ballot with approval from two-thirds of its board, rather than separate approval from each member jurisdiction, to preserve transit funding for seniors, veterans, and people with disabilities. These measures also moved forward, with the committee noting amendments and sending them to the next committees of referral. Another major item was AB 810, which would require special districts and joint powers authorities to migrate public-facing websites and email addresses to .gov or CA.gov domains by 2031. The author argued the change would reduce fraud and improve public trust, especially after emergency-related scams, while opponents from special districts and IT organizations said the transition would be costly and difficult for smaller agencies. Several school-related opponents withdrew after amendments, and committee members discussed possible aliases and tribal-government language. The bill passed 7-1 to the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee. Finally, AB 1206 proposed a pre-approved design catalog for single-family homes and small multifamily developments, modeled on a prior ADU bill, to speed rebuilding and reduce design costs; supporters from Habitat for Humanity and housing advocates said it would help both wildfire recovery and broader housing production, and the bill drew at least one opposed-unless-amended position as the committee moved into further discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• , as well as a daughter who just started high school this week.
• And so it really did open my eyes to other areas as well, too.
• And it was one of those things as well, right?
• And it was one of those things as well, right?
• And consume those types of products as well, right?

Summary: The hearing was the inaugural meeting of the Assembly Select Committee on Developing Pathways to Purpose for Young Men, chaired by Assembly Member Avelino Valencia. In opening remarks, Valencia and several committee members described concerns about boys’ and young men’s disconnection from school, work, and relationships, and tied the committee’s work to technology, mentorship, education, and suicide prevention. Members repeatedly noted the effects of COVID-era screen use, the importance of positive male role models, and the need to think beyond funding alone toward broader policy and cultural changes. The first panel focused on the state of men online. Testimony from David Sakaki of the American Institute for Boys and Men, Vihon Bardwaj of Generation Up, and Dr. Alok Kanojia (“Dr. K”) emphasized that pornography, gaming, gambling, social media, and AI can meet real needs for belonging, status, and relief, while also encouraging addiction, isolation, distorted sexual expectations, and harmful comparisons. Witnesses argued that young men are especially vulnerable to algorithm-driven content, that online systems often amplify misogyny and other harmful behavior, and that public policy should address design defaults, age-appropriate sex education, gambling-like game mechanics, and offline alternatives such as sports, mentorship, and social-emotional skill building. Committee members asked about pornography, loot boxes, gambling ads, and how to create healthier substitutes for the immediate gratification these products provide. Witnesses said the answer is not to match the addictive pull of harmful content, but to build more fulfilling offline pathways and teach practical social and emotional skills. Assembly Member Brian also spoke about the need for policy frameworks that help young men and boys be seen and supported, while acknowledging that these issues affect women and girls as well. The second panel shifted to design and health impacts. Dr. Ravi Iyer, drawing on his experience at Meta, said platforms are often optimized for engagement rather than users’ aspirations, which can increase exposure to nudity, violence, hate, and unwanted sexual content; he also warned about emotionally manipulative chatbot interactions and suggested stronger rules and public tracking of app harms. Dr. Jason Nagata of UCSF described research linking problematic social media use to later ADHD symptoms in boys, and explained how social media can intensify muscularity pressures, body dissatisfaction, eating disorders, and risky appearance-modification trends such as “looksmaxxing.” No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• vessel issue as well.
• vessel issue as well.
• We all agree with that concept as well.
• We all agree with that concept as well.
• As well as they do trenchless technology.

Bills: S0558 , S1294 , S1468 , S1474 , S1682 , S1628

Committee: Senate Environment and Natural Resources

Keywords: stormwater systems, environmental standards, municipal infrastructure, engineering certifications, local compliance, Florida Department of Transportation, biosolids, agronomic rate, land application, environmental protection, Florida statutes, nutrient management, recordkeeping, farming, compost products, wastewater treatment, environment, sewage disposal, pollution control, reporting requirements

Summary: The committee took up several environmental bills, beginning with SB 1682 on local administration of vessel restrictions. Senator Trumbull said the bill would give cities and counties tools to address abandoned, derelict, and long-term anchored vessels while following state standards and FWC guidance. Members from affected areas spoke in support, citing recurring derelict vessel problems and the difficulty and cost of removal once vessels sink. The bill was reported favorably. The committee then heard SB 1468 on advanced wastewater treatment, which would require DEP to compile a detailed statewide report on wastewater treatment plants, including construction age, treatment levels, contaminant data, spill history, flood risk, and receiving waterbody impairment information. Florida Rural Water Association testified that any move to require advanced treatment for all plants over one MGD could create major financial burdens without dedicated funding. The bill was reported favorably. The committee also considered CS/SB 1294 on biosolids management, with a strike-all amendment adopted. Senator Bradley said the revised bill would require bulk Class AA biosolids fertilizer and compost products to be land applied only at agronomic rates and, absent a bona fide sale, only at permitted DEP-approved sites, with a transition date moved to July 1, 2028. Supporters said it would protect water quality and legitimate fertilizer and compost markets, while rural utilities asked for funding and flexibility. The committee reported the bill favorably. Next, the committee took up CS/SB 1628 on net zero policies by governmental entities. Senator Avila said the bill would prohibit local governments and other governmental entities from adopting or funding net zero policies, imposing related fees or taxes, or operating cap-and-trade or carbon trading programs. The committee adopted an amendment clarifying the definition of carbon dioxide. The bill drew extensive debate: supporters argued it would protect residents and businesses from higher costs and preserve predictability, while opponents said it would block local climate and clean-energy policies, including electric buses, energy-efficiency measures, and climate resilience planning. After public testimony on both sides, the bill was reported favorably. The committee also approved CS/SB 1474 on biosolids management, which Senator Gates said would require biosolids and septage to be treated at the highest practical level when wastewater treatment facilities are reasonably accessible and would bar Class B land application within 50 miles of a permitted wastewater facility. An amendment applying the statutory definition of septage was adopted, and the bill was reported favorably. Finally, the committee heard SB 558 on stormwater system standards. Senator Burgess said it would create statewide standards for municipal and county stormwater systems using FDOT guidelines and third-party inspections, with an amendment making technical changes and broadening who may perform inspections. Supporters said uniform standards could improve safety and reduce failures, while contractors, engineers, and industry groups warned it could raise costs, delay projects, and preempt stronger local standards. The bill remained under discussion as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Pensacola is positioned well.
• Pensacola is positioned well.
• Well, it's an honor to be here today.
• So as we prepare people for workforce education, they can obtain well-paying, They can obtain well-paying
• White-wing scholars as well.

Committee: Senate Appropriations Committee on Higher Education

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, I say that when I get on the Fox website.
• Well, no, I want to read those, but I don't want to pay the money.
• Basically, a geothermal company can... drill a well in the ground, or a series of wells, or they can
• use an abandoned oil and gas well or a combination.
• It's well tested.

Bills: HB1951 , HB2715 , HB3092 , HB3237 , HB3278 , HB3511 , HB3592 , HB3675 , HB3778 , HB3782 , HB3826 , HB3970 , HB4016 , HB4049 , HB4341 , HB4344 , HB4406 , HB4427

Committee: House State Affairs

Keywords: collective bargaining, public works, government contracts, labor agreements, state funding, removal from office, political subdivisions, local government, judicial proceedings, administrative judicial region, electric transmission, public convenience, landowner consent, utility regulation, energy infrastructure, energy consumption, higher education, governmental entities, sustainability, electricity reduction

Transcript Highlights:

• So we'll do That as well.
• Well, it shouldn't.
• Okay, well, then I'll just pass because I have a potential amendment, Yeah, well, one tiny little one
• Well, it might have been.
• Well, that's a good point.

Committee: Senate Senate Judiciary

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, isn't it obvious?
• That's not equity for all, that's abandonment.
• I did as well.
• Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.
• Committee and the Appropriations Committee as well.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, I want to thank Senator Perry as well.
• We're going to do that with rural kids as well.
• Well, we have to find... No, go ahead.
• Well look, this is interesting.
• Well, if it's so rare, why isn't the bill stripped?

Bills: HB18 , HB37 , HB116 , HB388 , HB879 , HB913 , HB1151 , HB2216 , HB2358 , HB2809 , SB577 , SB1590 , SB1782 , SB1887 , SB2744 , HB18 , HB37 , HB116

Committee: Senate Health & Human Services

Keywords: rural health, hospital funding, healthcare access, mental health services, financial stability, perinatal bereavement, healthcare, hospital training, bereavement support, maternal care, fetal demise, stillbirth, neonatal death, parent-child relationship, involuntary termination, family law, child welfare, child protection, HB 388, HB388

Transcript Highlights:

• and divided, as well as often and increasingly mean-spirited.
• Well below the historical average of 30%.
• Well, we don't like Congress, but we like our member.
• Well, I'm happy to talk to you more after the hearing about other dynamics at the national level as well
• Well, they were partly based on a 1928 Kellogg-Briand Pact or beyond. Oh.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Veterans and Federal Affairs

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing of the Joint Committee on Veterans and Federal Affairs was opened by Chair Joe McGonagle and Vice Chair Senator Mike Rush, who noted that Chair John Velis was deployed with the Massachusetts National Guard. The chairs explained the hybrid format, three-minute testimony limit, live streaming, and filing deadlines, and said the committee would hear 11 House bills and eight Senate bills dealing with federal and overseas issues. Much of the hearing centered on competing resolutions about Article 5 constitutional conventions, along with related resolutions on D.C. statehood, child labor, Citizens United, and Cambodia. Supporters of H. 4692 and S. 284, a joint resolution to rescind all prior Massachusetts Article 5 convention applications, argued that old resolutions from the 1930s and 1970s could be used to count Massachusetts toward the 34-state threshold for calling a federal constitutional convention. Testifiers from Common Cause, the League of Women Voters, the ACLU, Reproductive Equity Now, labor groups, and others warned that a convention would have no clear rules, could not be reliably limited to specific topics, and could put civil rights, reproductive rights, labor protections, and other constitutional protections at risk. Several speakers also cited a recent federal lawsuit and said the safest course was to remove outdated applications from the books. A large opposing panel testified in support of H. 3888, a resolution calling for a Convention of States to propose amendments limiting federal power, imposing fiscal restraints, and establishing term limits. Supporters argued that Article 5 provides a lawful way to address federal overreach, debt, and congressional stagnation, and said the process would be limited by state applications and ratification by 38 states. Some committee members and witnesses raised concerns about a runaway convention, broad language in the resolution, and whether Congress could or should set rules for such a convention. Representative Gentile also testified in support of several related resolutions on overturning Citizens United, D.C. statehood, and the child labor amendment, while Representative Howard and Representative Tongue supported a Cambodia resolution condemning political oppression and urging free and fair elections. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, look, this can be the will of the committee.
• Well, that's fine, but you're adversely affecting Mr.
• Well, now they're here, you know, the one and around.
• Well, now it's here and everybody's freaking out.
• Now, if you want to just say, oh, well, we're just going to do it here, well, that's all that's happening

Keywords: 965, house, all

Summary: The committee continued discussing recommendations for chronic wasting disease (CWD) surveillance and response in Louisiana’s wild and captive deer herds. Members and staff reviewed current surveillance results, noting that LDWF had met goals in 32 of 64 parishes and that voluntary hunter-harvest sampling was falling short in other areas. Several ideas were raised to improve sample collection without making it broadly mandatory, including incentives for hunters, taxidermists, and possibly processors; use of DMAP properties and mobile sampling units; and targeted sampling of older bucks and other higher-risk animals. Members also discussed whether to use parish-level or other geographic control areas, and whether to mirror aspects of Arkansas’s approach, including testing to reduce or remove restrictions when prevalence remains low. The committee also heard from LDWF and LDAF about captive herd surveillance and reporting. LDAF described its licensed deer facilities, a 2024 positive in Jeff Davis Parish that led to depopulation and quarantines, and follow-up testing that has remained negative at quarantined farms. Witnesses said the agencies currently share information informally and through USDA/NVSL channels, but there is no specific law or regulation requiring 24-hour notification between agencies. The Wildlife Federation and several members recommended mandatory enrollment in the USDA herd certification program, mandatory reporting of positives, and clearer coordination between LDWF and LDAF. Members also discussed the cost of testing, with LDWF saying USDA grants covered diagnostic testing for the last two deer seasons, while department self-generated funds covered earlier costs. A major portion of the meeting focused on how to respond when a positive wild deer is found. Some members favored immediate restrictions, while others argued for keeping existing season rules in place through the season and using the positive as a trigger for intensified sampling, with the goal of avoiding unnecessary penalties and encouraging hunters to submit samples. There was also discussion of whether baiting should be prohibited, allowed during hunting season, or phased based on testing results, with Arkansas’s statewide baiting allowance and county-based disease management zones used as a comparison. The chair emphasized that no final recommendation would be adopted at this meeting; instead, staff was directed to compile the discussion and written recommendations for consideration at the April meeting, when the committee expects to vote and the commission may need to act quickly through its notice-of-intent or emergency rule process before the next hunting season.

Transcript Highlights:

• Pensacola is positioned well.
• Pensacola is positioned well.
• Well, it's an honor to be here today.
• So as we prepare people for workforce education, they can obtain well-paying, they can obtain well-paying
• White-wing scholars as well.

Summary: The committee on Higher Education Appropriations heard and favorably reported two bills: SB 1570, which revives the former Project Leo program to help locate missing persons with special needs through voluntary tracking devices and coordination with sheriff’s offices, and CS/SB 1376, which creates a grant program to support genetic counseling education in response to a statewide shortage of genetic counselors. Both bills drew supportive comments, with the genetic counseling bill also receiving public support from a university representative. The committee then took up a large slate of confirmations. It first approved a block of reappointments to various university and college boards of trustees, including institutions such as UWF, Broward College, Chipola College, FIU, Pasco-Hernando, Polk State, St. Petersburg College, Valencia, FAMU, FAU, UCF, FSU, New College, UNF, USF, and Broward College. It then heard from numerous new appointees and some requested reappointments, many of whom emphasized workforce training, nursing, military and veteran support, dual enrollment, and local economic development as priorities for their institutions. Several nominees highlighted their personal ties to the schools and communities they would serve, including appointees to Pensacola State, Polk State, St. Petersburg College, UNF, UWF, FIU, the College of the Florida Keys, Valencia College, and Chipola College. Committee members repeatedly asked about nursing NCLEX pass rates, workforce alignment, and institutional growth. One reappointment, Thomas Zachary Smith to the UWF board, was pulled from the block for separate questioning about his past public comments and his role in Project 2025; he said he would serve in his personal capacity and treat all students equally. The committee also separately heard from a Florida Poly reappointment, I. Shapiro, who was questioned about prior remarks regarding race and Supreme Court nominations, and from a New College reappointment, Mark Bowerlaine, who described campus improvements and enrollment growth. The meeting ended amid ongoing confirmation processing and separate votes on the remaining nominees.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's my honor to be on this campus, which is your campus as well.
• I’m at Craig School MBA in entrepreneurship as well.
• There’s that—well, I’m not going to, let me get off of my soapbox.
• And just wanted to mention we are there as well.
• in this process as well.

Summary: The joint informational hearing of the Assembly Committees on Economic Development, Growth, and Household Impact and Agriculture, held at Fresno State, focused on cost pressures in California’s food system, household affordability, and the Central Valley’s role in agriculture. Opening remarks emphasized Fresno State’s regional importance, the Central Valley’s outsized contribution to food production, and the connection between agricultural health, food security, and the broader economy. Members also noted the impact of the federal shutdown on CalFresh benefits and the state’s efforts to respond with food assistance funding and National Guard support for food banks. The first panel featured academic and policy experts who described agriculture’s economic importance in the San Joaquin Valley and the rising pressures on farms and households. Dr. Conduro highlighted agriculture’s large share of regional GDP, farm receipts, jobs, exports, and food manufacturing, while identifying water scarcity, SGMA-related land fallowing, labor shortages and rising labor costs, market volatility, invasive pests, and production cost inflation as major barriers. Caroline Danielson of PPIC said food prices remain about 30% above 2019 levels, food insecurity affects about 1.8 million California households, and nutrition programs such as CalFresh, WIC, and school meals are essential in reducing poverty, especially in the Central Valley. Susie Pryor of the Central California Small Business Development Center described technical assistance, capital access, and training for small food and farm businesses, while warning that reduced funding limits support for rural and immigrant entrepreneurs. The second panel brought testimony from a small produce business owner, a food entrepreneur, and the Fresno County Farm Bureau. They said input costs for fertilizer, fuel, irrigation, labor, land leases, and compliance have risen sharply while commodity prices have remained flat or fallen, squeezing small farms and food businesses. Panelists stressed the need for small-batch processing facilities, local supply chains, education on food manufacturing compliance, land access for small farmers, and more pathways into agriculture through trade programs, community colleges, and FFA. Ryan Jacobson said California agriculture is facing a prolonged downturn, with farm bankruptcies, weak commodity prices, export-market uncertainty, water reliability problems, and costly ag-burning rules all contributing to financial strain. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken; the hearing was informational and concluded with discussion of possible policy solutions and continued engagement with stakeholders.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, that's pretty simple. They con us. Georgia, $17... Well, that's pretty simple. They con us.
• Well, ...exposure, if you will, to nuclear power on a submarine.
• Well, I'm a little broken, but it's not from the nukes. No, we're old.
• It is well respected.
• Well, the definition of 192, what would an animal welfare... Reporting?

Summary: The House first approved the previous day’s journal by roll call vote, 112-2, and then spent time on numerous guest introductions and recognitions. Guests included former Rep. Bill E. Kidd, students and school officials from several districts, pharmacy students, community and labor representatives, Alliance for Life members, Link community partners, and the student who led the Pledge of Allegiance. A personal privilege announcement also recognized a legislator’s son’s birthday. The main floor debate centered on House Committee Substitute for House Bills 21, 22, and 1626, the Missouri Nuclear Clean Power Act. Supporters argued the bill would remove a roadblock to small modular nuclear reactors by allowing construction work in progress (CWIP), lower long-term electricity costs, attract industry, and help Missouri meet future baseload demand, especially for data centers and other large users. Opponents said the measure would shift risk and cost overruns to ratepayers, cited past nuclear cost overruns and safety concerns, and argued Missouri voters had previously rejected such financing. After extended debate and several inquiries, the House adopted the committee substitute and ordered the bills perfected and printed. The chamber then perfected and printed House Bill 1881, which would make xylazine a Schedule III controlled substance. The sponsor and supporters said the drug is a dangerous animal tranquilizer increasingly used in illicit fentanyl mixtures, while the bill preserves legitimate veterinary and agricultural uses. Members from both rural and urban districts supported the measure, and the House adopted an amendment clarifying penalties for knowingly starving an animal and false reporting in animal abuse cases. Finally, the House took up House Bill 2292, which would encourage cross-reporting among agencies handling child, elder, and companion animal abuse. The sponsor said abuse in one area often correlates with abuse in the others and that the bill would use existing agencies rather than create a new department. An amendment was also offered to strengthen elder-abuse investigations by allowing post-certified investigators in the Department of Health and Senior Services to assist law enforcement and obtain records. The discussion emphasized protecting vulnerable Missourians and improving coordination among investigators and local police.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think that's something we need to think about as well.
• The Keeping Families Together Act was well intended.
• Yeah, well, thank you.
• Okay, well, it will happen.
• Okay, well, that's good. Well, good afternoon, Chair and members of the committee.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 2511, which would define “imminent physical harm” in the child welfare context as a substantial risk of serious harm arising from home conditions, caregiver conduct, neglect, substance abuse, unsafe environments, or other circumstances likely to cause significant injury. Representative Tom Dent, the sponsor, said the bill was intended to give caseworkers clearer tools to protect children while still recognizing the importance of keeping families together. Supporters, including some foster parents, kinship caregivers, advocates, and individuals with lived experience, argued that the current standard is too vague and has contributed to child fatalities and near-fatalities, especially in cases involving fentanyl exposure, chronic neglect, and abuse. They said clearer language would help courts and caseworkers intervene earlier and more consistently. Opponents, including legal aid, public defense, and child welfare policy groups, argued the bill is legally problematic, could conflict with existing statutes and ICWA-informed language, and would not address root causes such as service gaps, training, and inconsistent implementation. DCYF testified “other,” saying the bill could add clarity but that the language needed refinement; the sponsor said he was open to working on changes. No vote was taken on the bill during the hearing. The committee then heard House Bill 2660, which would allow courts at shelter care hearings to order parents of children under age five to comply with safety-related conditions, evaluations, or services when the child is returned home, with referrals required within seven days and participation not treated as an admission of abuse or neglect. The sponsor, Representative Ortiz-Self, said the bill is aimed at critical incidents and would give caseworkers and courts more ability to require safeguards for very young children when families are not voluntarily engaging in services. DCYF and the Office of the Family and Children’s Ombuds supported the bill, saying it could help prevent tragedies by allowing earlier court-ordered services and safety conditions. Some advocates and parents also supported it, describing cases where removal or court intervention helped protect children. Opponents, including public defense and some family-support organizations, raised constitutional and due process concerns, argued that services are not the same as immediate safety, and warned the bill could shift problems without fixing underlying service shortages. The sponsor and DCYF discussed the need for follow-up on language and implementation, but no committee action or vote was taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• I want a future in which there are well-funded public schools, in which there is a well-funded university
• Do you plan to amend the Constitution as well? This question has been asked multiple times.
• When we do, lives change as well.
• Staffing, materials, and food for the program, as well as for our own families.
• Additionally, I am very highly interested in education as well.

Summary: House Finance held a public hearing on Gross Substitute Senate Bill 6346, a proposal to impose a 9.9% tax beginning in 2028 on Washington taxable income over $1 million for individuals, with related rules for residents, nonresidents, pass-through entities, estimated payments, penalties, credits, and revenue distribution. Staff explained that the bill would also fund several tax changes, including an expanded Working Families Tax Credit, sales tax exemptions for grooming and hygiene products, higher small business B&O credits, an early end to the B&O surcharge on very large businesses, and repeal of most retail services sales tax changes from last session. The fiscal note projected about $2.53 billion in additional state revenue in FY 2029 and $3.21 billion in FY 2030, with local revenue losses and significant Department of Revenue implementation costs. The chair also announced concerns about apparent fraud and duplicate records in the public sign-in system and set testimony rules limiting questions and shortening testimony time as the hearing progressed. The prime sponsor, Senator Jamie Peterson, said the bill was intended to make Washington’s tax system less regressive and to raise revenue for schools, health care, higher education, and other public needs while reducing the burden on lower- and middle-income residents. Supporters from labor, education, health care, child care, housing, poverty-reduction, and social service organizations argued that the bill would help fund essential services, expand the Working Families Tax Credit, and improve fairness by asking the wealthiest households to contribute more. Several individual supporters, including business owners and workers, said they were willing to pay more and described the need for better-funded schools, health care, child care, and public defense. Opponents, including former Attorney General Rob McKenna, business groups, construction and real estate representatives, and taxpayer advocates, argued the measure would function as an unconstitutional income tax, would be unstable and likely expanded over time, and would harm small businesses organized as pass-through entities. They said the bill would reduce investment, discourage entrepreneurship, and could drive businesses and high earners out of Washington. Some local government representatives supported the public defense funding but asked for more dedicated revenue and protection against local revenue losses from the bill’s sales tax exemptions. No committee vote or final action was taken during the hearing.