Transcript Highlights:

• Are these all issues you think are going to be assessed in the technical evaluation?
• What other alternatives might get evaluated? Do you have a sense?
• But you were talking about the technical evaluation itself needs to be independent.
• . ...like RAND or some outside auditor or outside technical evaluator.
• Right now regarding the technical evaluation.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:04:08.480> through<00:04:08.720> the evaluated through the evaluated through the through
• :55.880> permits<00:10:56.440> and uh although evaluation of permits and uh although evaluation
• . evaluation. evaluation. 1189<00:38:47.560> doesn't<00:38:47.880> weaken<00:38:48.840>
• that we want from the Site Evaluation that we want from the Site Evaluation Committee<00:59:13.280
• solid waste facility site evaluation solid waste facility site evaluation committee<01:01:17.880

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So now you're evaluating a patient, and it's not covered, which makes it pretty difficult to evaluate
• So now you're evaluating a patient, and it's not covered, which makes it pretty difficult to evaluate
• So now you're evaluating a patient, and it's not covered, which makes it pretty difficult to evaluate
• So now you're evaluating a patient, and it's not covered, which makes it pretty difficult to evaluate
• <00:43:30.960> and care where that evaluation and care where that evaluation and management

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• we evaluate those permit applications. we evaluate those permit applications.
• So please evaluate your uh end.
• <00:42:36.240> accurately<00:42:36.720> evaluate order to evaluate accurately evaluate
• order to evaluate accurately evaluate water<00:42:37.520> usage<00:42:38.000> and<00:42
• to evaluate that. to evaluate that.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:16:21.759> has is it custom to say your evaluation has is it custom to say your evaluation
• simply a notice saying uh re-evaluations simply a notice saying uh re-evaluations have<00:16:27.920
• re-evaluate properties every two years. re-evaluate properties every two years.
• to the this process of re-evaluating to the this process of re-evaluating properties. properties
• I doubt that uh the re-evaluation.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• evaluation for the teachers relating to how they are evaluated.
• to the performance evaluation for the teachers relating to how they are evaluated, we're changing it
• A decrease in the testing, we're looking at evaluation.
• And for the teacher evaluation, the old VAM model, in ways that we just jacked up teachers with evaluation
• But we give some flexibilities to districts to be able to evaluate teachers.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Pre-K-12 Education met with a quorum present and observed a moment of silence for Senator Geraldine Thompson. The committee first took up CS/SB 102, a bill by Senator Gates directing the Department of Education to develop a workforce credential program for students with autism spectrum disorder or students on a modified curriculum, in coordination with the Florida Center for Students with Unique Abilities and OSHA. Supporters said the bill would help autistic students gain job skills and workplace safety credentials, while an opponent argued the bill should clearly make participation voluntary, expand to other exceptional student groups, include funding, and add stronger accountability. The bill was reported favorably. The committee then considered SB 166, the Administrative Efficiency in Public Schools bill by Senator Simon. The bill would reduce or remove several state mandates and give districts more flexibility on testing, teacher evaluations, contracts and certification, school board operations, instructional materials timelines, audits, facilities planning, emergency make-up days, federal fund use, and public VPK oversight. Senators asked about the impact on student proficiency, teacher evaluations, and the transfer of public VPK oversight to districts; Simon said the tests would remain but count as 30 percent of the grade, districts would retain flexibility in evaluation measures, and only public VPK would shift to districts. Public testimony was largely supportive, with some speakers praising reduced testing and local control, while one senator cautioned that Florida still has a math proficiency problem. The bill was reported favorably. Finally, the committee heard CS/SB 296 by Senator Bradley, which would repeal the 2023 statewide mandate requiring later middle and high school start times and return the decision to local districts, while still requiring districts to inform the community about the health, safety, and academic impacts of sleep deprivation and consider later start times. Supporters argued the mandate created transportation, staffing, and scheduling problems and that local control was more practical, while opponents emphasized sleep science and the benefits of later start times for teens. Several senators discussed the tension between research and district resources, and the bill sponsor said the measure preserves the conversation about sleep while allowing local scheduling decisions. CS/SB 296 was reported favorably, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• But it has a new evaluation component.
• But it has a new evaluation component.
• All schools in the district are affected by that evaluation at the LEA level.
• And then what are the standards of evaluation for that evidence?
• Evaluation criteria, the compendium of all the most detailed criteria for evaluation, distinct for each

Transcript Highlights:

• My question is around competence evaluations.
• Do we have 5 actual evaluators at the moment? 70.
• How much were we given in total for those evaluations?
• We should evaluate the idea of doing it by contract.
• How many on-contract evaluators do you have? How many juvenile competency evaluators?

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The confidentiality surrounding his evaluation was not arbitrary.
• So unfortunately, the evaluation was done in, you know, all personnel evaluations are done this way in
• Rothman that evaluation, I was reading from my notes.
• Were those evaluations clear in his mind?
• Were those evaluations clear in his mind as to job well done?

Keywords: 970, all

Transcript Highlights:

• . evaluated.
• And they are obligated to do those evaluations. They are obligated to do those evaluations.
• There's no state funding for. to cover the evaluation.
• We have to evaluate them.
• We can't evaluate ourselves just based on STAR scores.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The evaluation offers... evaluation of a tax expenditure so again evaluation of a tax expenditure so
• <00:47:54.200> first include in their evaluations first include in their evaluations first
• <00:48:30.599> must and efficiency each evaluation must and efficiency each evaluation must
• evaluations.
• <00:52:31.520> all directed The lbo to evaluate all directed The lbo to evaluate all 45<00

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The legislature will ensure that experienced decision makers evaluate.
• Meteorological meteorological evaluation towers are used to evaluate locations for future wind turbines
• House Bill 2898 requires notice of intent to build a meteorological evaluation tower to be provided to
• DOD and FAA draw their information for issuing NTAMS and doing safety flight evaluations to impact the
• Operate or people who intend to put up meteorological evaluation towers will have to register with the

Transcript Highlights:

• There's a lot of things to evaluate there, but. Are we evaluating whether people can read? Mr.
• I know it's something that the evaluation team is looking at for their learning time evaluation, which
• Is that part of the evaluation? What can we do about it?
• Is that going to be any part of this evaluation?
• Madam Chair, this evaluation brief has two components: the written document.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:11:40.880> committee have that sighting evaluation committee have that sighting evaluation
• Uh moratorum site evaluation committee.
• third party to engage in the evaluation third party to engage in the evaluation that<00:34:36.639
• before the site evaluation committee. before the site evaluation committee.
• think it's it bears some evaluation think it's it bears some evaluation here.<01:06:18.720> I

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Environment and Agriculture Committee held a hearing on a non-germane amendment to SB 302, a Senate bill originally requiring background checks for solid waste and hazardous waste facility owners. Representative Patenza explained that the amendment was intended to preserve and separate out language developed for the governor’s budget proposal and HB 2 concerning a solid waste facility site evaluation committee, a moratorium, and related public-benefit/site-benefit provisions, so the policy would still have a vehicle if the budget language did not advance. He said the proposal reflects extensive work by the House, the governor’s office, and DES, and he was open to further changes to align with any budget conference committee outcome. Dr. Adam Finkele testified in support of the amendment and the underlying site evaluation concept, arguing that landfill siting decisions should be based on cost-benefit analysis that includes public harms, local impacts, and regional impacts rather than only private benefits. He praised the committee process and prior legislation requiring agencies to respond substantively to public comments, and said the new language improves on the governor’s version by moving the committee’s review earlier in the process and requiring more complete application information, including alternatives and impacts on nearby wells and aquifers. He also supported a three-year moratorium on new landfill applications, saying it would give the state time to address leachate, PFAS, waste reduction, and weak siting rules. Members asked about possible conference committee changes, the value of having a separate review body, and whether the new rules would invite litigation. Dr. Finkele said he would likely sue over the rules because he считает them too weak, but also said the legislature could fix the problems through other bills such as HB 77. He acknowledged that the site evaluation committee is not a perfect solution, but said it is a useful intermediate step between the agency and the courts and likely would meet only rarely if capacity need remains the main trigger for future landfill decisions. No vote or final action was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• They provide some evaluation.
• So they're facilitating... evaluation evaluation uh,<01:00:10.160> program.
• the role of this neutral case evaluator. the role of this neutral case evaluator.
• neutral case evaluation? neutral case evaluation?
• coming in to be evaluated for juries. coming in to be evaluated for juries.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee met to continue its review of recommendations for New Hampshire’s family court, with the chair emphasizing a collaborative approach and noting that the group would focus on the origins of the family division, recurring problems identified in earlier reports, and comparisons with other states. Members discussed organizing testimony into three broad topics: the court hearing process and pro se litigant preparation, mediation/arbitration/counseling, and the interaction of domestic violence issues with family court and related criminal proceedings. The chair also noted that the subcommittee would not meet again for two weeks and encouraged members to review materials from Judge Michael Mace and NCSL research on other states’ family court systems. Attorney Heather Culp, senior administrator for the judicial branch’s circuit court, testified about New Hampshire’s ADR programs. She explained that the Office of Mediation and Arbitration, created by statute in 2007, oversees more than 12 statewide ADR programs across the Supreme, Superior, and Circuit Courts, including family division programs such as divorce-parenting mediation, neutral case evaluation, guardianship, termination of parental rights, and voluntary adoption mediation. She said the divorce-parenting mediation program is the largest family division ADR program, with about 3,400 mediation sessions in 2023 out of roughly 6,700 cases, and that most cases involving minor children are referred to mediation soon after the first appearance session. Culp described the family division process as beginning with a first appearance session led by a case manager, who provides information, helps with paperwork, and schedules mediation, usually within 30 to 45 days. She said mediation is strongly encouraged in parenting and divorce cases, but there is no requirement to reach agreement, and parties may settle some issues while leaving others for court. She also explained that mediation is prohibited or limited in certain domestic violence cases: cases with active civil protection orders may proceed only with both parties’ consent and possible safeguards, while cases involving criminal protective orders are not sent to mediation. Mediators in court-referred family cases are contracted with the court and must be certified by the executive branch’s mediator certification board; mediators do not communicate with judges, except through a brief ADR report noting whether the case settled or what the next procedural step is. Members asked about referrals, timing, and the meaning of “neutrals,” and Culp said the court uses in-house contracted neutrals for family division ADR and does not refer divorce-parenting cases to outside providers.

Transcript Highlights:

• SB 1016 would allow Care Courts to subject certain respondents to an evaluation under the LPS Act.
• The evaluation has happened.
• The evaluation, I see your hand up. I'll let you respond as well. The evaluation has happened.
• That converts the dismissal into a care court petition, or sorry, into a 5200 evaluation.
• It bypasses the state, voluntarily detain them and then evaluate them.

Summary: The committee heard several bills. SB 911, by Senator Becker, would require notification and verification of defensible-space compliance when homes in high wildfire severity zones are transferred, using the preliminary change of ownership report; supporters said it would improve wildfire resilience and insurance availability, while county assessors opposed the use of the PCOR and urged a different recorded document. Members generally supported the bill but raised concerns about the 12-month compliance window and the need to keep working with assessors; the bill was held pending a quorum and later placed on call. SB 1016, by Senator Blakespear, would create a pathway for a higher-level mental health evaluation when a Care Court petition is dismissed because the person is too ill to participate or otherwise needs more intensive care. Supporters, including psychiatrists, family members, and local officials, said Care Court is leaving many severely ill people untreated and that the bill would connect them to existing LPS processes. Opponents, including Disability Rights California, county behavioral health directors, counties, and other advocacy groups, argued it would expand involuntary detention, bypass existing pre-petition screening safeguards, and undermine Care Court’s voluntary nature. The bill passed the committee on a roll call vote and was placed on call. SB 1112, by Senator Archuleta, would create a faster court process for victims of illegal or excessive “bandit towing” to recover their vehicles by posting a bond and obtaining a release certificate. Support came from Enterprise Mobility and the author, who said the bill targets bad actors and helps equalize leverage for vehicle owners; the California Auto Body Association sought an amendment to exclude auto repair shops. The committee passed the bill as amended to Appropriations and placed it on call. SB 1119, by Senator Padilla, would impose child-safety requirements on AI chatbots, including risk assessments, crisis-response protocols, parental controls, limits on time and data use, reporting, audits, and a private right of action. The bill was driven by testimony from the mother of a teenager who died by suicide after prolonged chatbot interactions; industry and business groups opposed or sought amendments, citing overlap with recent law, vague standards, and prescriptive design mandates. Members expressed strong support for the bill’s goals while urging tighter definitions, and the bill was moved on a roll call vote and placed on call.

Transcript Highlights:

• So an evaluation of that should also be included.
• Our program evaluators are here today to provide an update on the Child Care Services Program evaluation
• We are advertising for another program evaluator position.
• The purpose of the program evaluation The purpose of the program evaluation is to determine whether the
• like program evaluation to return to these types of evaluations, and that's a conversation that's probably

Summary: The committee first approved the February 11, 2026 minutes and then received an update from the North Dakota Housing Finance Agency on the interagency council on homelessness and continuum of care funding. Testimony described rising homelessness tied to tight housing markets, low incomes, aging homelessness, barriers to rental assistance and public benefits, and limited shelter and case-management capacity. Members discussed the need for more affordable housing, continued one-time funding for the North Dakota Homeless Grant and Housing Incentive Fund, better coordination with Health and Human Services on economic assistance and human service zones, landlord engagement, recovery housing, and reentry housing. The committee also heard that federal continuum of care funding remains uncertain, with possible shifts away from permanent supportive housing and housing-first models; members asked for a future update on the impact if federal rules reduce the share available for permanent housing. The committee then took testimony on accessibility of government services for people who are blind or visually impaired. Paul Olson of North Dakota Vision Services School for the Blind described current screening and service delivery, including infant referrals, regional staff, short-term programs, and collaboration with vocational rehabilitation. He said the targeted screening system is working, recommended maintaining the current model, and noted ongoing challenges with staffing, public awareness, and accessible state websites and documents. Public testimony from a visually impaired resident and a deaf resident emphasized barriers such as CAPTCHAs, inaccessible PDFs, employment forms that screen out applicants based on driver’s license status, shortages of interpreters, and the need for video remote interpreting and video relay services, along with training for users and agencies. Finally, the committee heard a final report on the study of child care provider licensing from HHS Early Childhood Director Kay Larson. The report summarized provider input and committee discussion on simplifying North Dakota’s child care licensing structure, reducing administrative burden, and balancing that with health and safety standards. Key topics included licensing categories, child care assistance eligibility, food program sponsorship, staff qualifications, training requirements, ratios and group size, age bands, and preschool exemptions. The committee’s recommendations included streamlining to three provider types plus a preschool designation, revising ratio and age-band rules, and carrying forward certain preschool outdoor-space exemptions. Larson noted that any changes would require statutory changes, rulemaking, and a transition period before new licensing rules could take effect.

Transcript Highlights:

• It requires state agencies to submit an accountability and evaluation plan for programs and projects
• to support any questions. ...and Program Evaluation Function, here to support any questions.
• and then report on that evaluation on the back end.
• So, Madam Chair, Representative, right now there are no specific requirements in terms of evaluation
• LFC staff asks state agencies to develop evaluation plans and we report on what is presented by state

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm not going to go over all the evaluation criteria.
• All of this evidence is about the tax credit program, and the grant has not been separately evaluated
• So, again, one of the overarching evaluation criteria for CalCompetes is ensuring that this credit or
• Unfortunately, LA RISE, which was evaluated by an external evaluator between 2015 and 2018, did not lead
• The independent evaluation, the Crow study, that was... ...25-26.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee 5 on State Administration heard presentations from Go-Biz and the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation on the Governor’s budget proposals. Go-Biz described California Jobs First, the state’s 10-year economic development strategy, and emphasized support for small businesses, workforce development, and targeted investment in sectors such as ag tech, life sciences, semiconductors, and advanced manufacturing. Members raised concerns about federal policy changes, tariffs, tourism, housing, child care, and whether state incentives are truly additive; Go-Biz responded that it tracks federal actions closely, works with chambers and advocates, and uses programs like California Competes to target jobs that would not otherwise come to California. The committee then reviewed the proposal to restore the California Competes grant program with $60 million. Go-Biz said the grant would help businesses that cannot use the nonrefundable tax credit, and explained the program’s five-year contracts, milestone-based awards, and recapture provisions. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the grant could be effective but recommended stronger oversight and clearer eligibility criteria, while also noting the 30% cap in trailer bill language may be too restrictive given the smaller funding level. Public testimony supported the grant and suggested considering refundability or transferability for the tax credit to broaden access for smaller and startup businesses. Members also heard the CHIPS-related proposal for $25 million to support Natcast’s semiconductor design and collaboration facility in Sunnyvale. Go-Biz and public witnesses argued the state investment would help secure a major federal research facility, retain engineering talent, and leverage billions in broader investment, while the LAO recommended rejecting the item because of its dependence on uncertain federal funding and the state’s budget condition. The committee also considered a $17 million continuation of CA RISE, which supports employment social enterprises; Go-Biz and several grantees cited strong job placement and workforce outcomes, while the LAO recommended rejection absent a more rigorous evaluation, noting prior LA RISE evidence did not show long-term employment gains. Finally, the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation presented budget requests for IT security and rent increases, and a trailer bill to raise fees across several programs. DFPI said decades-old fee schedules, inflation, and new regulatory responsibilities have created a structural deficit and warned the department could face insolvency without adjustments. The LAO recommended approving the fee increases only on a three-year limited-term basis and asked for more detailed revenue plans for programs not covered by the proposal, so the Legislature can assess actual collections and market impacts before making the changes permanent.

Transcript Highlights:

• measure being used to evaluate measure being used to evaluate performance<00:26:11.919> and
• <00:26:55.159> very an English Professor I'm evaluated very an English Professor I'm evaluated
• <00:31:22.880> performance better measures to evaluate performance better measures to evaluate
• Process that's already in place for evaluating faculty.
• or even unintended um evaluation or even unintended um evaluation<00:43:30.920> that<00:43:31.079

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Senate Education Committee met with a quorum and first considered two concurrent resolutions. SCR 76, sponsored by Sen. Amanda Bledsoe, would create a Kentucky School for the Deaf Governance Task Force to examine the school’s future governance and its relationship with the Kentucky Department of Education. Bledsoe described the school’s long history and said the task force would give the small deaf-school community more voice. The committee adopted the resolution unanimously with favorable expression. The committee then took up SCR 131, sponsored by Sen. Max Wise, to continue the Efficient and Effective Districts Task Force from 2024. Wise said the prior task force met about 10 times and focused on student achievement and district policy, and the new version would continue that work as a legislature-only task force. The resolution passed unanimously with favorable expression. Members next considered HB 240 on primary school promotion. Rep. Truitt explained that the bill would require students who are not ready in kindergarten to repeat kindergarten, while a committee substitute softened the approach by allowing a school to hold a child back in kindergarten but requiring action in first grade. He said the bill aligns with existing reading-screening efforts and is intended to strengthen early literacy foundations. The committee adopted the substitute and passed the bill unanimously with favorable expression; Sen. Williams briefly explained his support as favoring performance-based advancement. The committee also approved HB 298, which would change the identification of schools for comprehensive support and improvement from every three years to annually, require KDE recommendations during management audits, add professional development in reading and math, and require effective instructional resources. The committee substitute also allowed districts with multiple CSI schools to contract for a turnaround vendor. The bill additionally carried employee-misconduct provisions from prior sessions, including disclosure requirements for applicants; the only change discussed was removing the word “investigation” from one disclosure section. HB 298 passed unanimously with favorable expression, and the committee also adopted a title amendment. Finally, the committee heard HB 424 on employment at public postsecondary institutions. Rep. Tipton said the bill would require performance and productivity reviews for faculty at least every four years, clarify appointment and removal authority for presidents at certain institutions, and expand “cause” for dismissal to include failure to meet performance and productivity requirements. Dr. Ray Horton, speaking for faculty groups, proposed a small substitute that would tie any performance measures to existing employment contracts to preserve academic integrity and avoid unintended changes to tenure processes. Members discussed how tenure works at Kentucky universities, and the committee was still in the middle of considering the proposed substitute when the transcript ended.