Transcript Highlights:

• fees in this case or not.
• fees in this case or not.
• fees incurred in bringing the action.
• The Supreme Court said, okay, 9-0, that's not okay.
• And finally, that attorney's fees provision, and five and six, if attorney's fees provision and five

Committee: Senate State Affairs

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It deems a plaintiff who files a complaint in Superior Court that asserts a property right claim or seeks
• Requires the court within 10 calendar days of filing the complaint to conduct an initial case management
• But what's interesting is fees are regressive. Fees are aggressive. If the... Fees are regressive.
• But what's interesting is fees are regressive. Fees are aggressive. If the are regressive.
• Fees are regressive.

Summary: The Senate met in multiple Committee of the Whole sessions and considered a large number of bills, many related to digital assets and cryptocurrency, including SB 1042, SB 1043, SB 1044, SB 1045, SB 1432, SCR 1003, SCR 1033, and SCR 1028. Members discussed whether the state should accept cryptocurrency for payments, tax or exempt virtual currency, ban central bank digital currency, and support digital assets in retirement systems. Senator Epstein repeatedly argued against the measures and tried to offer amendments targeting data center tax exemptions, but one such amendment was ruled not germane and the ruling was upheld on a division vote. The bills and resolutions in that group generally advanced with do-pass recommendations, with SB 1043 and SB 1044 amended before advancing. The Senate also advanced several bills on family law, public records, scholarship organizations, property conveyances, underground facilities, and environmental and energy issues, including SB 1039, SB 1139, SB 1147, SB 1148, SB 1328, SB 1078, SB 1142, SB 1184, SB 1254, SB 1278, SB 1281, SB 1418, SB 1445, and SB 1566. Some measures drew discussion and amendments: SB 1254 received a clarifying amendment for deeds handled by title and escrow professionals; SB 1278 had a floor amendment withdrawn; SB 1281 was amended by committee and floor changes; SB 1418 prompted questions about small modular reactors and concerns about uranium mining and health impacts; and SB 1566 was amended to address malicious delay enforcement and judicial review. Most of these bills received do-pass recommendations. In the health and human services calendar, the Senate advanced SB 1052, SB 1115, SB 1149, SB 1193, SB 1233, SB 1345, SB 1346, and SB 1631, with SB 1124 retained on the calendar. Debate centered on ACCESS and remote work, administrative deficiency cure periods, anonymous complaints, fee-for-service claims, and DCS-related hearings and investigations. Senator Gonzales opposed several ACCESS-related bills, arguing they lacked appropriations, could disrupt services, or conflicted with federal Medicaid law, while sponsors said the bills addressed agency performance and provider complaints. SB 1115, SB 1149, SB 1193, SB 1233, and SB 1345 were amended before receiving do-pass recommendations, and SB 1345’s sponsor said ACCESS was removed from the bill. The final calendar included regulatory and veterinary-related bills such as SB 1137, SB 1144, SB 1205, and SB 1286. SB 1205, dealing with motor vehicle booting fees, received a floor amendment requiring an appeals process for private parking lots. SB 1286, on veterinary telemedicine and prescriptions, drew the most extended debate, with a committee amendment and a Kavanagh floor amendment restoring a 14-day prescription extension and adding flea and tick treatment; Senator Leach opposed the floor amendment, describing prior stakeholder negotiations and changes in committee support. The transcript ends while that debate is still underway, after several bills have already been reported out with do-pass recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• and into a civil court.
• </c><00:11:56.279><c> then</c><00:11:56.480><c> in</c> court and into a civil court then in court and
• I’ve read the court transcripts. I was there at the court hearing. I watched it firsthand.
• This bill allows witness fees for criminal proceedings for civilian witnesses who appear in court to
• It's been a long time since I was in federal court, so what is the witness fee under 28 U.S.C. 1821?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Judiciary Committee opened with a hearing on CACR 7, a proposed constitutional amendment to explicitly state that defendants are innocent until proven guilty in all cases and suits brought by the state. The prime sponsor argued the amendment would strengthen due process, prevent government overreach, and extend the presumption of innocence beyond criminal cases into civil and administrative matters such as forfeiture and family court proceedings. In testimony and questioning, the sponsor cited New Hampshire constitutional provisions, historical examples, and concerns about courts shifting burdens onto individuals. Committee members raised questions about the amendment’s wording, its relationship to existing law, and whether it would have practical effect if current statutes already place the burden on the state. The hearing was then closed without further witnesses. The committee next moved to executive session on House Bill 480, which establishes a procedure for restoring competency and creates a pilot forensic liaison position in Merrimack or Strafford County to assist with that process. After discussion about prior concerns, including an email from the Disabilities Rights Center and whether enough members were present, the committee voted to adopt Amendment 2025-61H and then voted ought to pass as amended. The amendment passed unanimously, and the bill passed on a 10-1 roll call, with Representative Andrew voting no. The chair noted the bill would not go on consent and that no minority report was planned. Finally, the committee opened a hearing on House Bill 666-FN, which would add restitution for violations of library-use confidentiality and expressly include library cards and membership status among confidential records. The sponsor said the bill was intended to strengthen privacy protections after a local dispute and to provide a remedy and deterrent for improper disclosure. Committee questions focused on whether the restitution penalty would apply to accidental disclosures, how the bill interacts with existing exceptions such as court orders or investigations, and whether the language was consistent with current confidentiality law. The hearing remained open at the end of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• So with every new writ issued by a court, an attorney for the debt collector can add attorney's fees
• This would increase fees if you’re having to file separately, one for medical debt and one for non-medical
• So more cases would be filed, more time and cost for the courts, double filing fees, higher attorney
• Section 12, 14, and 16, and 18 all require notice to the court within 120 hours of filing.
• So effectively, the moment someone is detained, a filing has to go to the court.

Summary: The committee began with Senate Bill 5962 on spring blade knives, first suspending the five-day notice requirement. Staff explained the bill would remove spring blade knives from the list of dangerous weapons while keeping restrictions on carrying them in schools, child care, and other protected locations. Proponents, including Knife Rights and the prime sponsor Sen. T’wina Nobles, described the measure as a modernization and cleanup bill that would reduce confusion and support lawful use and manufacturing; one testifier strongly objected to the bill’s added location-based restrictions. Public testimony was overwhelmingly in support, and the hearing then moved on without a vote. Senate Bill 6105 would raise the wage exemption from garnishment for medical debt judgments from 30 to 60 times the state minimum wage, while keeping the 80% disposable earnings exemption and adding notice requirements identifying the debt as medical. Sen. Marko Liias said the bill is intended to protect low-wage workers from severe financial hardship and reduce incentives to work off the books. Supporters from patient, consumer, AARP, and anti-poverty groups said medical debt is often unexpected and garnishment can destabilize families; opponents from collectors and trade groups argued the bill was too broad, lacked stakeholder input, could hurt providers, and should define medical debt more clearly. The hearing closed with no action taken. The committee then heard Senate Bill 6203, which would clarify that out-of-state convictions can include foreign-country convictions for offender scoring if obtained with sufficient due process safeguards. The sponsor, Sen. Matt Boehnke, said the bill closes a gap in sentencing law; prosecutors supported the concept and suggested simplifying the language, while the Sentencing Guidelines Commission, defense attorneys, and public defense opposed it, citing undefined standards, difficulty verifying foreign convictions, and due process concerns. The committee also heard Senate Bill 6296 on involuntary treatment, which would expand who may petition for detention, change rules for assisted outpatient treatment and police assistance, require firearm surrender compliance procedures, and make other ITA changes. The sponsor and several providers and family members supported the bill as a needed modernization, while DCRs, disability advocates, behavioral health organizations, hospitals, and others raised concerns about due process, implementation, rural transport, capacity, and unintended consequences. No votes were taken on either bill during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• It says beginning July 1, 2026, the municipal court is a court...
• It says beginning July 1, 2026, the municipal court is a court of record. That can be debated.
• court discretion.
• record, much like a district court appeal to the Supreme Court.
• And so that would then clarify for every court, including the Supreme Court. Correct.

Bills: HB1455

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Keywords: tribal consultation, Indian Affairs Commission, tribal governments, tribal sovereignty, state-tribal relations, Native American, tribal nations, consultation requirement, legislative process, jurisdiction, sovereignty, North Dakota tribes, government-to-government consultation, tribal chairpersons, 908, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee first heard House Bill 1455, which would require the North Dakota Indian Affairs Commission to review introduced legislation for tribal implications and conduct consultation with affected tribes. Rep. Collette Brown said the bill was intended to formalize and strengthen tribal consultation, and Standing Rock Sioux Tribe representative Ross Bell testified in support. Brad Hawk, executive director of the Indian Affairs Commission, testified neutrally, saying the office already does much of this work but that the bill would add structure; several senators raised concerns about duplication, possible future staffing costs, and whether the bill was necessary. The committee amended the bill to replace “each measure” with “all legislation,” then passed a do-not-pass recommendation on HB 1455 by recorded vote, with Sen. Luick designated as carrier. The committee then took up House Bill 1032, dealing with municipal courts, appeals, and judge qualifications. Legislative Council and court staff walked through proposed amendments, including making municipal courts courts of record on a delayed effective date, clarifying appeal procedures, and adding standards for municipal judges. Members discussed whether to use the term “ethical standards” or “judicial conduct”; after questions about definitions and enforcement, the committee settled on replacing the language with “judicial conduct” in the amended bill. The committee adopted the amendments and then passed HB 1032 as amended on a do-pass vote, with Sen. Cory to carry. Later, the committee heard House Bill 1263, which would make it easier for people with criminal records to seek sealing after a denial by allowing an appeal and reducing the waiting period for a new petition from three years to one year. Rep. Nels Christensen, Christopher Davis, Travis Fink, and Brad Peterson all supported the bill’s goal of giving people a better path to rehabilitation and employment. The main point of disagreement was whether to keep the statutory presumption that the benefit to the petitioner must outweigh the presumption of openness of criminal records; several witnesses urged removing that language, while others said it was part of the compromise that created the current law. The committee closed the hearing without taking final action and said it would review the House discussion before deciding later.

Transcript Highlights:

• We call this the farewell file, and I think we've sent around a hard copy file.
• California caps attorney fees, New York caps attorney fees, Massachusetts caps attorney fees, Illinois
• caps attorney fees.
• It goes to fees.
• Your report, your number one suggestion is we cap fees on legal fees.

Committee: House Courts, Corrections & Justice Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• and renewal fees for mortgage brokers.
• So, in this, As I understand it, when normally a district attorney files an information and files charges
• I believe the courts would be doing that. Follow up.
• I'm sure it would be buried somewhere within the court fees that we have in our state. Follow up.
• Yes, somewhere in the court fees, you will have an Assessment and that assessment will include a payment

Bills: SCR17 , SB2104 , SB2155 , SB1428 , SB1250 , SB1651 , SB1794 , SB444 , SB1061 , SB1327 , SB1425 , SB1455 , SB1458 , SB1460 , SB1480 , SB1530 , SB1543 , SB1555 , SB1593 , SB1209 , SB1730 , SB1733 , SB1769 , SB1805 , SB2069 , SB2095 , SB1503

Keywords: Oklahoma Ireland relations, Ireland, Irish heritage, St. Patrick's Day, Choctaw Nation, Choctaw famine relief, Irish-American, cultural resolution, concurrent resolution, ceremonial resolution, economic development, trade commission, international relations, Tulsa IrishFest, ShamROCK the Gardens, Oklahoma City St. Patrick's Parade, Irish ancestry, Senate of Ireland, Aubrey McCarthy, Phil Thompson

Transcript Highlights:

• It would be the court fee for court automation. It would be from 7 to 10.
• automation fee, which deals... ...better than I can, but it goes into the court automation fee, which
• We have to pay fees for every court to use those software fees.
• Court fee was not moved forward through the process.
• Through court costs, fees, or surcharges.

Committee: House Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence

Summary: The House Judiciary Committee met with a quorum, announced that House Bills 3304, 2777, and 3054 would not be heard that day, and then moved into executive session. In executive session, the committee considered House Bill 1910, which concerns child maintenance/child support obligations for certain persons convicted of DWIs. Representative Davis offered an amendment changing mandatory language from “shall” to “may” to preserve judicial discretion; the amendment was adopted 5-2 with one present. The committee then adopted a substitute and voted the House Committee substitute for HB 1910 do pass 7-0 with one present. The committee next took up House Bill 3116, a civil jurisprudence bill. An amendment was adopted to incorporate provisions from three previously heard bills: HB 1711 (Uniform Deposition Act), HB 1713 (allowing circuit courts to dissolve LLCs), and HB 3072 (workers’ compensation changes). The committee rolled the amendment into a substitute and voted the House Committee substitute for HB 3116 do pass 8-0. The committee also considered House Bill 3289 on court operations. An amendment was adopted to add treatment court administrators in certain circuits, subject to appropriations, then rolled into a substitute. The House Committee substitute for HB 3289 was voted do pass 8-0. In public hearing, Representative Dolan presented House Bill 3443, which would raise the court automation fee from $7 to $10 and add a CPI-based annual adjustment. Supporters from the Judicial Conference of Missouri said the fee has not been updated since the 1990s, that court automation costs continue to rise, and that the surcharge covers only a portion of the system’s expenses; they also noted that salaries are generally funded through general revenue rather than fees. Committee members asked about the new fee amount, what the revenue would support, and the collection-rate assumptions in the fiscal note. No opposition testimony was offered. Representative Parker then presented House Bill 2865, which would remove the statutory cap of $75 per hour for attorney’s fees in certain agency/licensure proceedings and replace it with “reasonable” fees. He and supporters said the current rate has not been updated since 1989 and is too low to attract attorneys for cases involving licensed professionals defending their licenses. Testimony in favor came from a private attorney who practices in this area, the Missouri Bar, and another supporter who said the bill would improve representation for Missouri licensees. No opposition testimony was presented, and the hearing on HB 2865 was concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• shall award attorney's fees.
• to criminal courts.
• Everybody wanted a different court date.
• Everybody wanted a different court date.
• criminal courts.

Committee: House Special Committee on Rural Issues

Summary: The Special Committee on Rural Issues heard House Bill 3375, sponsored by Rep. Koslow, a broad eminent domain reform measure aimed at protecting landowners, especially farmers and ranchers. The bill would create protections for beginning farmers and ranchers, require 15 days’ notice before surveyors enter property, extend the response period in eminent domain cases from 10 days to 60 days, bar eminent domain for wind and solar facilities, require land restoration and maintenance after construction, increase compensation to 125% of fair market value in certain cases, add tax-liability compensation, change treatment of heritage and blight-related compensation, and allow attorney’s fees when a landowner wins a higher award than the condemning authority offered. Members raised concerns about the bill’s scope, its effect on energy development, and several drafting and implementation issues, including surveyor access, maintenance standards, and whether the bill could create conflicts with existing attorney-fee provisions. The sponsor said he was open to changes and noted that an HCS would address some drafting errors and feedback. Testimony in support came from the Missouri Farm Bureau, Missouri Cattlemen’s Association, a landowner/banker, and attorney Brent Hayden, who argued that landowners are often pressured into quick, low offers and should be treated as partners rather than obstacles. Supporters said the bill would improve transparency, due process, compensation, and restoration standards, and that it would not stop infrastructure development. Hayden described current eminent domain practice as giving landowners little leverage over route selection or restoration and said the bill would create needed discipline for condemning authorities. Several supporters also defended the wind-and-solar restriction as a response to the amount of land those projects can require and to concerns about using eminent domain for generation projects. Opposition came from the Missouri Energy Development Association, municipal utilities, and MoDOT. Opponents said they agreed some reforms may be reasonable but warned the bill, as written, could increase costs, delay projects, and create litigation risk that would ultimately be passed on to customers and taxpayers. MoDOT said the fiscal impact could be substantial, potentially doubling annual right-of-way spending. Utility representatives also cautioned that the bill could conflict with existing attorney-fee rules and should be aligned with compromise language from other legislation. The hearing ended without a vote or committee action, with the sponsor and witnesses indicating further negotiations and possible revisions were expected.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you see that, like, outside of having to go to court? Sure.
• According to court filings, Flip Cause had only $70,000 in the bank at the time of filing, but owed $29
• The current CSA fee system is also 16, at least 16 years old.
• And the courts are at the very beginning of this.
• I know for charities filing, it has to be done online.

Summary: The Consumer Protection and Business Committee held a work session on emerging consumer protection issues, focusing on elder fraud, charity fraud, and the impact of artificial intelligence on scams. Assistant Attorneys General from the Consumer Protection Division described the division’s broader enforcement work, including actions on rent stabilization, government imposter scams, service member refunds, senior living facilities, data breaches, and cases involving TikTok and Meta. They said elder fraud is often the same fraud seen in other age groups, but older adults tend to lose more money when victimized, especially in imposter scams and investment scams. The attorneys reviewed FTC data showing rising fraud losses nationwide and in Washington, with social media, bank transfers, cryptocurrency, and gift cards highlighted as especially important channels for losses. Members asked about underreporting, recovery of funds, and what consumers should do when they suspect a scam. The presenters said complaints can be reported to the Attorney General’s Consumer Resource Center and DFI, and that the most effective policy responses would likely target payment methods, especially crypto kiosks and other fast, irreversible transfer systems. They also said the AGO uses enforcement, consumer education, and scam alerts, but that many scams are difficult to pursue because perpetrators are overseas or untraceable. On charity fraud, the Charitable Asset Protection Team described several deceptive practices, including false charities, imposter charities, fundraising-first charities, causewashing, and point-of-sale solicitations. They said charity scams are underreported because donors often do not realize they were misled, and they pointed to concerns about crowdfunding platforms and commercial fundraising processors, including the collapse of Flip Cause and unpaid donations to Washington charities. The presenters recommended modernizing the Charitable Solicitation Act, increasing transparency and disclosure for point-of-sale fundraising, and strengthening public education through the AGO and Secretary of State programs such as Assured Giving and Assured Impact. The presentation closed with a discussion of AI, which the attorneys said is making scams harder to detect through deepfakes, voice cloning, AI-generated messages, and automated scam operations. They said AI can also be used to create fake charities and online ecosystems that appear legitimate, and noted that business and charity registration systems can often be completed without human interaction. No votes were taken; the committee adjourned after questions and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• For filing, for help filing that claim, a consulting company might charge a one-time fee of about $19,000
• That is a one-time fee. We do not touch back pay.
• I had to pay a fee for it.
• Fees should be contingent only on an increase.
• And in addition to those, we would agree to a fee cap, a reasonable fee cap, which we have seen in seven

Summary: The committee heard several bills, with most drawing support after amendments or ongoing stakeholder negotiations. SB 29, by Senator Laird, would extend a sunset on the law allowing pain-and-suffering claims to survive a plaintiff’s death; supporters, including a family member describing a medical negligence case, labor groups, consumer advocates, and disability and elder organizations, argued it prevents defendants from running out the clock, while hospitals, medical groups, and business organizations warned of higher costs and added liability. After extensive debate about data collection, settlement reporting, and the impact on health care access, the bill passed to Appropriations on a divided vote. SB 294, by Senator Reyes and presented by Senator Laird, would require employers to notify a worker’s emergency contact if the worker is arrested or detained and would create a template to inform employees of state and federal labor rights. Labor and worker advocates said the bill would help workers understand and enforce their rights amid weakened federal enforcement; there was no opposition on file, and the bill passed unanimously to Appropriations. SB 697 would modernize water-rights adjudication by allowing the State Water Board to use technology instead of requiring in-person field investigations; with no opposition, it also passed unanimously. The committee also advanced SB 37 on attorney advertising, SB 645 on peremptory challenges in civil cases, SB 303 on bias-mitigation trainings in public workplaces, and SB 464 on expanding pay-data reporting for specified state workers. SB 37 drew support from consumer and legal groups but concerns from Walker Advertising about joint advertising; members said negotiations were ongoing, and the bill passed. SB 645 would extend anti-bias jury-selection rules to certain civil rights cases; criminal-defense and defense groups said they were close to agreement, and the bill passed. SB 303 and SB 464 were both amended to narrow scope and moved forward after several opponents shifted to neutral or removed opposition. The committee also approved a consent calendar of additional bills, all sent to Appropriations.

Transcript Highlights:

• So at the same time, you've been trying to backfill some of those fee revenues, the courts also have
• Area to both replace the lost fee revenue as well as fund the incremental cost increases for the courts
• We have a program that allows individuals to file certain court forms, like domestic violence forms,
• There's a... $1.5 million to replace discontinued court fee revenue and another $300,000 to develop and
• Folks in crisis in the community, their family or their provider can We can file a petition in court

Committee: House House Appropriations & Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• And the chair recognizes fees.
• </c> the things that we don't use impact fees the things that we don't use impact fees for,<00:06:09.199
• </c> use your impact fee we need this much. use your impact fee we need this much.
• </c> dollars in legal fees. dollars in legal fees.
• </c> permit fee. permit fee.

Committee: House Municipal and County Government

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• file and move to second reading.
• Seeing none, we will proceed to consideration of the daily file. Second reading files.
• File item 37, Senator Grove. 38, sir. 38 and the prior roll call was just substitute out on file item
• consent file.
• that file item 487, that's AB 1929 by Assembly Member Ortega, be moved to the inactive file.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And prior to filing, the circuit court says we have no authority.
• And prior to filing, the circuit court says, we have no authority to remove a candidate who lied on this
• The increased clients we serve infuse additional dollars to the courts, paying filing fees.
• filing fees help maintain court budgets."
• And I believe that, with all respect, the Supreme Court and no court ought to tell banks how much interest

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met with a quorum present and considered several bills. SB 106 on exploitation of vulnerable adults would allow service of process on scammers through the same nontraditional communication methods they use; it passed 8-0. CS/SB 280 on candidate qualification would create an enforceable party-affiliation requirement and a private right of action to disqualify noncompliant candidates; it passed unanimously. CS/SB 948 on flood disclosures was amended to extend disclosure requirements to residential leases, condo developer leases, and mobile homes, with tenant remedies if disclosures are not provided and flooding causes major losses; it passed 8-0. The committee also advanced CS/SB 498 on IOTA interest rates after a lengthy debate over legal aid funding and bank regulation. Supporters argued the bill would restore sustainability and fairness to the program by setting alternative interest-rate benchmarks, while opponents said it would cut funding for civil legal aid and that banks participate voluntarily. After testimony from legal aid leaders and bankers, the bill passed 7-2. SB 774, requiring clerks to electronically transmit certain mental health, substance abuse, and risk protection orders to sheriffs within six hours, was presented in response to a fatal Volusia County incident and passed 11-0. CS/SB 752 on defamation and online publication was amended to require removal from a website rather than the internet, then passed 8-2 after testimony from the media, a private attorney, and supporters who said it would help people harmed by false online reports. The committee also heard SB 832 on former phosphate mining lands, which would create a narrow defense against strict liability claims if notice and gamma radiation survey requirements are met. The bill was amended to clarify notice provisions and received support from industry and technical witnesses describing radiation surveys and reclamation practices. The transcript cuts off before the final vote on SB 832, so no committee action on that bill is shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• California's underlying law or the burden of proof in court, required in court.
• Again, proven in court. when there is proven negligence. Again, proven in court.
• would be presented in court.
• And when we move forward, the courts knock things down.
• Rather than outright banning these fees, as the FCC approved, Rather than outright banning these fees

Summary: The committee heard several privacy and consumer protection bills, with most of the discussion focused on AI and social media. AB 1405 would create a state registry for AI auditors and set basic transparency, ethics, and qualification standards for those auditors; supporters said it would build trust and provide a foundation for future AI oversight, while some members questioned whether government should define auditor qualifications instead of industry groups. The bill was moved out on a 5-1 vote to Appropriations, with the roll left open. AB 2, by Assemblymember Lowenthal, would impose enhanced financial penalties on large social media companies when their negligence causes harm to children and teens. Supporters, including a grieving parent and Common Sense Media, argued the bill would create accountability for harmful algorithms and design choices, while opponents from TechNet, EFF, CCIA, and CalChamber warned it was vague, could chill speech, invite censorship, and raise Section 230 and First Amendment concerns. Committee members debated private right of action versus public enforcement, possible shakedown lawsuits, and whether the bill should be narrowed; the bill passed 6-0 to Judiciary with the roll left open. AB 410 would expand California’s bot disclosure law so bots must identify themselves up front and truthfully if asked, rather than only prohibiting deceptive bots in limited commercial or election contexts. Supporters said the measure would help users, especially youth and vulnerable people, know when they are interacting with AI and reduce deception online; one privacy group withdrew opposition after amendments, and other industry groups said they were no longer opposed or had no formal position. The bill passed 9-1 to Appropriations with the roll left open. The committee also approved AB 1327, which lets consumers cancel home improvement contracts by email instead of only by mail and requires phone assistance for cancellations; the Contractor State License Board withdrew opposition after amendments, and the bill passed 11-0 to Judiciary with the roll left open.

Transcript Highlights:

• It provides the court with factors to consider, but does not limit the court when considering whether
• Different courts may differ.
• Did you want to go in file order?
• But also, I know that they were talking about toll fees and storage fees and all of that.
• and also storage fees as well.

Summary: The committee heard several public safety bills and took testimony on each, with members often noting amendments and continuing negotiations. SB 1009 by Senator Becker would require juvenile courts to find that less restrictive alternatives are unsuitable before ordering detention, and would require periodic review of continued detention and consideration of alternatives at disposition. Supporters argued it would reduce unnecessary youth detention and improve transparency; probation, judges, and police groups opposed it as an undue limit on judicial discretion and potentially unsafe in serious cases. The chair said he would recommend an aye with amendments, but the bill was held pending quorum and later remained on call. SB 1130 by Senator Gomez Reyes would update privacy law for wearable recording devices such as smart glasses, requiring consent before recording in places where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy and banning devices or accessories designed to defeat recording indicators. Supporters said the bill addresses secret recording and invasive surveillance; opponents from tech and hospitality groups sought clarification to avoid unintended liability for businesses and exempt workplace communication devices. Members discussed those exemptions, and the chair recommended an aye, but the measure also remained on call. Senator Blake Spear presented SB 99, which would let courts consider military protective orders in domestic violence proceedings and require better communication between civilian law enforcement and military authorities. Supporters from the Department of Defense, local officials, and military representatives said it would close protection gaps for military families; the ACLU opposed it on due process grounds because MPOs are issued without judicial process. The chair and author emphasized that the bill only allows consideration of MPOs and does not require civilian enforcement of them. The bill passed out on a vote, though it remained on call for additional members. The committee also heard SB 937 by Senator Gonzalez, restricting flashbang use for crowd control and banning flashbangs and explosive breaching charges in immigration enforcement, and SB 1022, creating a statewide anti-trafficking task force. SB 937 drew support from civil rights and community groups and opposition from police and sheriffs over the use-of-force standard and limits on tactics; it passed out on a vote but remained on call. SB 1022 was supported by survivor and faith groups and opposed by public defenders and sex worker advocates who raised concerns about racial disparities and enforcement harms; it also passed out on a vote. Later, SB 1395, extending criminal protective orders for certain felony sex offenses against minors up to 20 years, and SB 1230, increasing penalties for repeat illegal dumping, were both heard with mixed testimony and were held on call after committee votes. The committee also adopted a consent calendar and several bills were moved forward with amendments.

Transcript Highlights:

• increases fees to cover the workload.
• Supreme Court that suggests that there is a level at which fee revenues could become so high that they
• We note SB 704 allows DOJ to charge a fee.
• Another DROS fee increase at this time is not advisable.
• And so the court agreed with us on that one.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• If the inspection fee is $100, do you think the inspection fee is adequate? Hard to say.
• So let's talk... double the fee so yes okay anybody else double the fee so yes okay anybody else want
• </c> want to represent if the inspection fee want to represent if the inspection fee is<00:11:46.760>
• </c> is $100 do you think the inspection fee is $100 do you think the inspection fee is adequate<00:11
• </c><00:11:57.720><c> are</c> that but again uh these these fees are that but again uh these these fees

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard from the Department of Labor on several House Bill 2 sections. Members discussed raising the annual elevator certificate fee, which had been $50 since at least fiscal year 2014; the commissioner said the Inspection Division generates more revenue than its costs, and members agreed to amend the fee to $75 and later voted unanimously to accept Section 137. The department also explained a proposed change to civil penalty/warning language in Section 139 to align enforcement across labor laws; that section was accepted unanimously. The commissioner then gave a detailed overview of the second injury fund, describing how it is financed by assessments on insurance carriers, how claims are reviewed for reimbursement, and how the fund is intended to reimburse certain workers’ compensation costs. Members questioned whether the program still serves its original purpose, whether it is revenue-neutral, and whether it should be sunset; the department said the fund is a mixed bag for the state and industry, but no sunset language was adopted. Sections 140 and 141 were then accepted unanimously. The committee next heard from the Judicial Council on Sections 125 through 127. The witness said the changes would streamline payment for indigent defense services other than counsel, reduce the number of bills requiring judge review, and expand the council’s ability to contract with providers for services such as translation and evaluations. He also explained a proposed fail-safe allowing the executive director to decline to process questionable invoices and send them to a judge instead. Members generally supported the streamlining, and Sections 125 through 127 were accepted unanimously. Toward the end of the discussion, members asked about the cost impact of changing the misdemeanor/felony threshold from $1,000 to a higher amount. The Judicial Council said felony cases are significantly more expensive than misdemeanors because they involve more hearings, more discovery, and more attorney time, with assigned felony cases costing several times more on average. No action was taken on that question in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• There is one late-filed amendment. Is there any objection to take up the late-filed amendment?
• to the addressing fee.
• There is one late-filed amendment. Is there any objection to take up the late-filed amendment?
• But then when you go down to line 59, it says the court may also award reasonable attorney fees to the
• Then go over and it says, however, the court may not award reasonable attorney fees to a county as the

Summary: The committee first took up SB 1134, which would extend and clarify the use of qualified private providers and computer-based tools in the building permit and inspection process for residential solar energy systems. The sponsor said the bill is intended to reduce long delays in solar permitting and make the process faster and cheaper; Senator Pizzo questioned whether the problem was limited to specific local governments, and a late-filed amendment clarifying the word “application” was adopted. After brief testimony from an industry representative supporting the measure, the committee reported the bill favorably, with Senator Pizzo voting no. Next, the committee considered SB 784, dealing with issuance of addresses and parcel identification numbers for plats and new development. The bill sets a 14-day timeframe, and an amendment was adopted that would allow use of a private provider if the deadline is missed and would bar fee collection if the local government fails to act within five business days. County representatives said they wanted to keep working on the bill and raised concerns about the private-provider language and the short deadlines, while several senators discussed whether the process should be handled earlier on the front end. The committee then reported the bill favorably. The committee also passed SB 1738 on transportation concurrency, which would let counties that previously opted out of concurrency opt back in by maintaining current levels of service. SB 1080, a local government land regulation bill, was described as a measure to speed development approvals by setting stricter timelines, limiting repeated information requests, and imposing penalties for noncompliance; local-government testimony opposed it as a loss of local control, while builders supported it. After debate, SB 1080 was reported favorably. SB 1260, which clarifies county constitutional officer budget procedures and creates an appeal process for clerks and supervisors of elections similar to sheriffs, was also reported favorably after members discussed possible adjustments to avoid burdening county budget negotiations. Finally, the committee took up SB 420, as amended by a strike-all, which would prohibit counties and municipalities from adopting or funding DEI-related ordinances, policies, programs, offices, or contracts, and would expose officials to misfeasance/malfeasance claims and local governments to lawsuits. The sponsor said the amendment removed retroactive language, delayed the effective date, and added definitions and contract-certification requirements, but many senators and public speakers argued the bill was overbroad, vague, and would chill local efforts such as Black History Month, women-owned business programs, minority contracting, and community outreach. Supporters said it would ensure merit-based government action and consistency with state standards. The amendment was adopted, but the bill drew extensive opposition testimony and debate over its scope and potential conflict with federal and state law.