Transcript Highlights:

• So, no, sir, at this time.
• Thank you so much for your time today.
• There is no limit on the number of times that the emergency rule can be renewed, nor is there a timeframe
• , Don't raise issues not raised by the parties, get your orders done on time, get them done timely.
• Don't raise issues not raised by the parties, get your orders done on time, get them done timely.

Summary: The Joint Administrative Procedures Committee heard a presentation from Representative Esposito on a proposal to strengthen oversight of agency rulemaking under Chapter 120. The bill would require cost-benefit analysis at the front end and after implementation, create an eight-year sunset and review process for rules, and require express legislative authority for agency rulemaking. Members questioned the lack of concrete examples of burdensome rules, the effect on already slow rulemaking, the choice of an eight-year sunset, and the bill’s origin; Esposito said she was working with stakeholders and cited her chamber-of-commerce background and research with the Cicero Institute. No vote was taken on the bill itself. Staff then reported on legislatively mandated rulemaking from 2023 and 2024, noting that most required rules had been adopted, proposed, noticed, or scheduled, with a few agencies still outstanding. The Department of Financial Services explained a delayed notice of rule development for the MySafe Florida Home condominium pilot program as an oversight that has since been corrected, and the Department of Education said it did not proceed with rulemaking for the Fostering Prosperity grants because the program received no funding in the 2025 budget. The Department of Health described delayed rulemaking for the sickle cell disease and trait registry, saying the registry and opt-out forms were being implemented and that notices of rule development had now been filed. Members pressed the department on why rules took so long and discussed the need for statutory deadlines. The Department of Children and Families reported on two 2023 human-trafficking-related rules: signage requirements for residential treatment facilities and children’s safe homes, and a new certification process for adult safe homes. DCF said the signage rule is now moving forward and the adult safe home certification rule has been submitted for final review after workshops and stakeholder feedback. Senators questioned the lengthy timeline and the lack of oversight during the interim, while the chair emphasized the need for time-certain deadlines in legislation and for JAPAC oversight hearings. The committee also considered staff-proposed amendments to Chapter 120 addressing emergency rules pending legislative ratification and the process for initiating ratification, including a one-year limit and notice to JAPAC. After discussion, the committee voted to forward the proposed amendments to the Senate President and House Speaker. Finally, members discussed a proposed amendment to the administrative law judge appointment and retention process under Section 120.65. DOAH’s interim director opposed the change, saying ALJs and workers’ compensation judges have different functions and warning against shifting appointment power to cabinet officers whose agencies appear before DOAH. Members raised concerns about timeliness, consistency, and accountability in DOAH decisions. The committee voted to forward this proposal as well, with Senator Smith voting no on that motion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Someone must must access is limited.
• <00:40:45.480> and data requests that can be timely and data requests that can be timely and
• saying, "Nothing in this section limits saying, "Nothing in this section limits application<00:45
• Full-time<00:57:17.840> employees? Full-time employees? Full-time employees?
• somehow, but with incredibly limited somehow, but with incredibly limited access. access. access

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• it's needed at this time. Um, I move it. it's needed at this time. Um, I move it.
• So there are limited times that the committee meets.
• So uh there are limited<04:05:49.600> times<04:05:49.920> that<04:05:50.160> the
• <04:05:50.399> committee<04:05:50.880> meets limited times that the committee meets limited
• And we are right on time.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee first took up House Bill 1598 and an amendment, 2026-0463H. Elliott Barry and Nick Norman testified that the amendment reflected a hard-fought compromise balancing concerns from all sides, and they urged no further changes. With no questions from members, the subcommittee voted unanimously to recommend the bill with the amendment to the full committee, 3-0, and closed the subcommittee. The housing committee then moved through several executive session bills. HB 1010 was amended with 2026-0274H, described as clarifying and implementing prior housing law (HB 631) governing residential units above office and retail space; the amendment was adopted unanimously and the bill was reported ought to pass as amended on a 17-0 vote and placed on consent. HB 65 was then voted ought to pass and also placed on consent, with members saying it was duplicative of the compromise reached on HB 1010. HB 1349 was reconsidered for a clarifying vote and again received unanimous support for its prior disposition, 17-0, and was placed on consent. The committee next took up HB 1523, which concerned homeowners associations. An amendment, 2026-0380H, removed Section 5’s Attorney General enforcement mechanism, added HOA conflict-of-interest approval language, and delayed the effective date to give stakeholders more time; it was adopted unanimously. The bill then passed 18-0 as amended and was put on consent. The committee also voted ITL on CACR 16, a constitutional amendment related to sleeping or homelessness issues, after debate over unintended consequences and whether it protected a basic right; the vote was 10-8, with a majority report assigned and a minority report to be written. Later, HB 108, dealing with inclusionary zoning, was voted ITL 10-8 after members argued the bill imposed unrealistic burdens and could halt development; a minority report was noted with amendment 0149H. HB 7, concerning ADUs and restrictive covenants, was also voted ITL 10-8 after discussion of unintended consequences and a proposed amendment to encourage second ADUs; it was sent to the regular calendar with a minority report and amendment 0289H. HB 1120, on water-related subdivision requirements, was ITL’d 17-1 and placed on consent, with one member noting a study amendment had been offered. HB 1143, addressing housing-provider obligations and municipal enforcement powers, was ITL’d 17-1 and placed on consent. Finally, HB 1145, a fee/tax proposal tied to housing development, was ITL’d 11-7; members debated whether it would discourage development, and a minority report was assigned.

Transcript Highlights:

• To ensure we get to hear from everyone, testifiers should limit their remarks to the specified time limit
• much for your time. much for your time.
• few moments of your time. few moments of your time.
• Thank you for your time.
• times, so I'm trying different ways. times, so I'm trying different ways.

Bills: HF3661, HF2380, HF3468, HF3483

Keywords: facial recognition, privacy, government surveillance, public safety, data protection, civil liberties, disability rights, discrimination, accommodations, employment, housing, public services, education, civil action, failure to render aid, damages, Minnesota Statutes, legal liability, trespass, civil immigration enforcement

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from February 24 and February 26. It then took up House File 3661, a bill originally authored by Representative Gomez and presented by Representative Feist, which would ban government use of facial recognition technology and be re-referred to the Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee. The committee adopted the A1 amendment, described as a technical amendment based on House Research recommendations, before hearing testimony on the bill. Representative Feist said the bill is aimed at preventing serious privacy and civil-liberties harms, including secretive surveillance, racial and gender bias, and the lack of statewide rules governing government use of facial recognition. Supportive testimony came from Chad Marlo of the ACLU, who argued the issue is bipartisan, the technology has accuracy problems, and government use is expanding against vulnerable groups. Chris Wayland of Restore the Fourth Minnesota also supported a ban, emphasizing the inability to opt out of facial recognition and the lack of standards, disclosure, and community input. Rich Newmeister urged stronger transparency measures, including agency policies and public notice in buildings using the technology. Major Spencer Baky of the Hennepin County Sheriff's Office opposed an outright ban, saying facial recognition is used only as an investigative lead, not for positive identification or real-time surveillance, and that results are corroborated before use. He said the office has used the tool in hundreds of investigations and supports a statutory framework with safeguards instead of a ban. In member discussion, Representative Hudson argued a blanket ban was too broad and suggested a more targeted evidentiary approach, while Representative Moller and Representative Kurr expressed concern about misuse and the federal government's use of the technology. Representative Durant asked whether there was a current Minnesota problem and whether stakeholders and law enforcement had been involved in drafting the bill. No final vote on the bill was taken in the portion provided, beyond adoption of the amendment and the committee’s continued consideration of HF 3661.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for your time.
• Thank you for your time.
• Envision this: slower 911 response times, less time for violent investigations, less time for training
• <01:15:02.199> less<01:15:02.480> time this slower 911 response times less time this
• they're ask you said there was limit they're ask you said there was limit limitations<01:24:45.280

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• At this time, I move to suspend the regular order.
• So they can do real-time feedback.
• For the first time in a long time, our farmers...
• US safe in Texas will not be encountered a second time.
• One more time, Senator.

Bills: SB27, SB1494, SB2121, SB2373, SB2431, SB1, SB8, SB12, SB13, SB15, SB30, SB37, SB260, SB268, SB331, SB379, SB441, SB447, SB457, SB568, SB650, SB763, SB1405, SB1506, SB1540, SB1566, SB1610, SB1637, SB1660, SB2018, SB2024, SB2217, SB2308, SB2337, SB2601, SB2753, SB2878, SB2900, SB2972, SB3059, HB4, HB40, HB46, HB119, HB145, HB300, HB493, HB705, HB1545, HB2011, HB2017, HB2067, HB2516, HB2885, HB2963, HB2974, HB3071, HB3372, HB3556, HB3595, HB3642, HB3909, HB5138, HB5246, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SCR12, SCR39, SB2023, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB507, SB1434, SB1772, SB2016, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB209, SB2429, SB1085, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB1200, SB1845, SB2458, SB801, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB2797, SB2076, SB2876, SB1640, SB1449, SB1181, SB1234, SB2926, SB2841, SB1528, SB1854, SB317, SB1250, SB2082, SB1237, SB2819, SB629, SB2608, SB1602, SB2009, SB867, SB640, SB1698, SB2680, SB913, SB1071, SB1086, SB1087, SB1483, SB1444, SB1553, SB1556, SB1703, SB2133, SB2297, SB2298, SB2622, SB2955, SB2334, SB1367, SB2044, SB2363, SB2565, SB1888, SB3036, SB3057, SB3043, SB3063, SB3035, SB203, SB2688, SB2522, SB2459, SB2655, SB2251, SB1884, SB2928, SB2566, SB2549, SB2553, SB2919, SB1944, SB1232, SB1798, SB2603, SB2607, SB2683, SB1319, SB3045, SB3071, HB796, HB1523, HB5294, HB748, HB3395, HB180, HB3171, HB146, HB5596, HB5694, HB1135, HB3225, HB186, HB1449, HB3793, HB112, HB104, HB3336, HB3520, HB3320, HB5663, HB2399, HB111, HB3483, HB4580, HB3748, HB632, HB4730, HB5690, HB5689, HB3385, HB4359, HB5381, HB123, HB5606, HB1057, HB3664, HCR141, HCR40, HCR59, SR634, SR687, SR703, SR709, SR715, SB1494, SB2121, SB2373, SB2431, HB46, SB1, SB8, SB12, SB13, SB15, SB37, SB260, SB331, SB379, SB441, SB447, SB457, SB568, SB763, SB1405, SB1540, SB1566, SB2018, SB2308, SB2337, SB2878, SB3059, HB705, HB2017, HB2067, HB3071, HB3372, HB3556, HB3595, HB3909, HB5246

Keywords: elections, local governance, political subdivisions, general elections, Texas Election Code, data brokers, personal data, regulation, business entities, consumer protection, financial exploitation, artificial intelligence, phishing, legal liability, criminal offense, civil penalty, foreign language, study abroad, higher education, language credit

Transcript Highlights:

• I thank you for your time and I close at this time.
• An outside rule limiting you?
• but looking forward in time.
• the peak, four times.
• The time is 2:37.

Bills: HB158, HB714, HB 1198, HB1630, HB1998, HB3509, HB3788, HB3875, HB3948, HB3977, HB4097, HB4313, HB4314, HB4317, HB158

Keywords: housing, veterans, surplus government property, affordable housing, funding sources, housing assistance, homeless prevention, landlord incentives, rural housing, domestic violence, community development, tenant readiness, program participants, financial assistance, homelessness, rental support, Texas Tenant Readiness Program, tenant assistance, housing stability, Texas Department of Housing

Transcript Highlights:

• In order to facilitate the goal of hearing as much from the public within the limits of our time, we
• But often without regard to weight limits, any sort of restrictions, school zones, slower speed limits
• ; the second time, you know, I don't know, maybe you're just... but a third time means that you...
• So now would be an appropriate time.
• So now would be appropriate time.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It cost him lots of money and time.
• And by the time that they were done, their estimate was three to five times more likely to be audited
• You've just wasted your time.
• We've heard a little bit about the tests involving virological knowledge and time-limited questions involving
• We've heard a little bit about the tests involving virological knowledge and time-limited questions involving

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on AI risks and mitigation, beginning with automated decision systems and then moving to frontier models. The chair emphasized that California has already passed some targeted AI bills, but broader regulation has stalled, and argued that a federal 10-year moratorium on state AI regulation would be reckless. The hearing was framed as a way to distinguish between narrow predictive systems used in areas like hiring, health care, and criminal justice, and more powerful frontier models with broader capabilities and potentially catastrophic risks. On the first panel, Professor Arvind Narayanan described automated decision systems as often relying on historical data that reflects past bias, producing only limited predictive accuracy and sometimes arbitrary or harmful outcomes. He cited examples including welfare fraud, criminal risk tools, hospital discharge estimates, and job-candidate scoring, and said policymakers should require effectiveness standards, explanation, contestability, impact assessments, and public inventories of government systems. Alondra Nelson focused on algorithmic discrimination as a spectrum of harms, including allocative discrimination, surveillance and privacy harms, targeting and profiling, and cultural misrepresentation. She gave examples involving IRS audits, data sold through apps and brokers, facial recognition misidentification, and biased employment and health-care systems, arguing that harms often compound across multiple systems. Cathy O’Neill described her auditing work as building a “cockpit” for AI—identifying who could be harmed, measuring disparities, and setting thresholds for action—and said audits, consent decrees, and public accountability can push companies toward better practices without banning innovation. Members of the committee asked about international competition, especially China, whether AI is more biased than humans, the cost of compliance for businesses, and whether California should move ahead despite federal uncertainty. The panelists said regulation should focus on high-stakes uses rather than all AI, that transparency and third-party auditing can be low-cost or cost-effective, and that good actors are already using impact assessments. They also noted that state-level action in places like Colorado, Connecticut, Utah, New Jersey, and others is helping set standards. The chair and members stressed that the goal is not to stop innovation but to build trust and reduce discrimination in consequential decisions. The second panel turned to frontier models. Joshua Bengio warned that model capabilities are improving rapidly, especially in reasoning and planning, while alignment and safety are not keeping pace. He cited recent research suggesting models can behave deceptively, including attempts to avoid shutdown, fake compliance during training, and even blackmail in simulated scenarios, and said companies must measure and disclose these risks before deployment. The discussion underscored the committee’s broader concern that California should continue leading on AI safety and accountability while preserving beneficial uses of the technology.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, I know our time is limited, and I don't want to hold you up any more than I need to.
• , and our response can't be timely.
• Um, a couple times. Good you up here. Um, a couple times.
• anyways uh during the same time frame. anyways uh during the same time frame.
• allowed<02:15:47.360> the limited limited research allowed the limited limited research allowed

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• 40 time 45 people we have a full-time 40 time 45 people we have a full-time and<00:45:10.440>
• There's a period of time and expectations and limitations to when and who it could be sold for.
• time and expectation<00:49:14.880> and<00:49:15.400> and<00:49:15.599> limitations<
• Sorry, do we have a time limit?
• Expansion of ATCs is limited.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The work session focused on HB 54, which would allow New Hampshire’s alternative treatment centers to operate for profit. Chair David Nagel opened by identifying the main concerns: whether members agreed with the bill conceptually, whether the proposal could be shaped to avoid a gubernatorial veto, and whether it could lead to “big cannabis” taking over. He also emphasized that the bill would not change the existing oversight structure, which remained under RSA 126-X. Representative Wendy Thomas said the governor’s objections in past sessions appeared to center on the state’s preference for a state-run model and broader policy concerns, but no one present knew the current governor’s position. Several speakers argued the bill was primarily about financing and access, not expanding the number of dispensaries. Matt Simon of Granite Leaf Cannabis said the current nonprofit structure makes it difficult to raise capital, pay down debt, and open additional access points, and that the bill would be a corporate restructuring rather than a change in day-to-day regulation. Brandon Pollock of TASCAL Wellness said medical cannabis programs in most other states are for-profit, and that New Hampshire’s nonprofit requirement has left ATCs burdened with high-interest debt and higher prices that push patients to Maine, Vermont, or the street market. He said converting to for-profit status could allow conventional financing, lower prices, and help keep patients in the regulated program. Members also discussed whether for-profit ownership would invite outside corporate control. Witnesses said the bill would not open the market to new operators, would not change advertising rules, and would include restrictions on ownership transfers for a period of time; “foreign corporation” was explained as an out-of-state entity. One speaker noted that the bill is similar to earlier versions that passed both chambers with strong support but never became law. No vote was taken during the work session; the discussion was informational and aimed at addressing concerns before the bill moved forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• I worked full-time, went to school full-time.
• :14:09.600> full-time.
• <01:14:10.080> In full-time, went to school full-time.
• In full-time, went to school full-time.
• rate three times inflation. rate three times inflation.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 4252 and first heard a walkthrough of a DE2 amendment that largely incorporated Office of Higher Education technical and statutory cleanup items, including reporting consolidations, updates to postsecondary registration and licensing statutes, and an anti-fraud provision. New provisions in the DE2 would require public postsecondary institutions to explain developmental courses before enrollment and obtain a written acknowledgement, revise the state grant tuition cap, add a $1.5 million ongoing appropriation in FY 2027 for an identity verification system to combat enrollment fraud, and provide $5,000 one-time funding for reforestation at Bemidji State University. Fiscal staff also noted additional special revenue fund revenue and expenditures tied to licensing and registration litigation response. The main debate centered on the A8 amendment offered by Representative Rarick, which would require the governor to appoint University of Minnesota regents only from candidates recommended by the joint legislative committee if the legislature fails to elect regents. Rarick argued the amendment was needed to address what he described as conflicts of interest and pay-to-play concerns in recent gubernatorial appointments. Several members questioned whether the language was constitutional, whether it actually addressed conflicts of interest, and whether it should instead refer to ARCAC-screened or ARCAC-recommended candidates. Nonpartisan staff said the governor’s appointment power is addressed in the university charter, not directly in the constitution, but could not definitively assess constitutionality if challenged. Members were divided: some supported the goal of cleaner governance but said the amendment was not ready or did not match the problem being described; others argued the legislature had failed to complete its own regent appointments and that the amendment was a response to that failure. No vote on the A8 amendment or the bill was reached in the portion provided, though a roll call was requested on the amendment and the chair indicated the bill would continue through amendment consideration before final discussion and vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• What are the limitations?
• I'm up to 15 full-time faculty.
• There's no limit.
• high school junior and a full-time load as a college freshman at the same time.
• Some institutions might have a full-time FTE; some it might be a quarter-time person.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Sunset surcharges are usually done for specific purpose with a limited time frame.
• Sunset surcharges are usually done for specific purpose with a limited time frame.
• Sunset surcharges are usually done for specific purpose with a limited time frame.
• Sunset surcharges are usually done for specific purpose with a limited time frame.
• member for their time. member for their time.

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And so she got time and a half on the second 40.
• And for the first time in a long time, It's on the way to the governor's office.
• And for the first time in a long time, our farmers are going to get the relief that they need when times
• One more time, Senator. Has that changed? One more time, Senator.
• It takes a long time to process.

Summary: The Senate opened with an invocation and then took up several conference committee matters and resolutions. It granted the House request for a conference committee on House Bill 46 and adopted a conference report on Senate Bill 37, which was described as higher education governance reform, including stronger board authority, changes to faculty senates, general education requirements, and a new ombudsman office. Senators also adopted a large package of resolutions and HCRs by voice vote. A major focus was Senate Bill 12, the “Parental Bill of Rights,” whose conference report was adopted after extended questioning. The bill was described as giving parents more access to school materials and grievance procedures, requiring parental consent for student clubs, and restricting school district employees from assisting with social transitioning or related gender-identity instruction. Senators raised concerns about effects on students already socially transitioned and on parental rights in medical or psychological decisions; the author said the House language was retained in key areas and that districts would need policies and parent notification. The report passed 20-11. The Senate then adopted a resolution allowing the conference committee on Senate Bill 1, the state budget for fiscal years 2026-2027, to go outside the bounds, and later adopted the budget conference report. Senators highlighted major funding for public education, property tax relief, public safety, health and human services, child care, water and transportation infrastructure, and the Texas Energy Fund. The budget discussion also covered higher education, mental health facilities, community attendant wages, rural hospitals, DFPS case management, child care assistance, and a study rider on TRS. The report passed unanimously, 30-0. Finally, the Senate suspended rules to take up Senate Bill 8 and adopted its conference report. The bill requires counties with jails or jail contracts to participate in the federal 287(g) immigration enforcement program, with sheriffs choosing among available models and counties receiving tiered grants to help cover costs. Supporters framed it as a public safety measure targeting criminal illegal aliens, while opponents questioned whether it would divert local resources and increase fear in immigrant communities. The report was adopted after debate.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, what's the limit here?
• Is it up to the police limit here?
• Limiting residential parking plan.
• Thank you. time, passed a zoning act. So over a time, passed a zoning act.
• We put ours up last time.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It places time limits on the disposition of summary judgment motions and adds to the definition of willful
• It places time limits on the disposition summary judgment motions and adds to the definition of willful
• And there's something to be said about time in that saddle or time in that seat.
• Time limits are a wonderful thing. I've always been a proponent of them.
• Time limits are a wonderful thing. I've always been a proponent of them.

Bills: HB40

Keywords: law enforcement, sheriffs, constables, contracts, county authority

Summary: The Committee on Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence met to hear House Bill 1761, a broad judicial package focused on increasing judicial compensation and adding accountability and efficiency measures. The chair explained that HB 1707 and HB 2100 were withdrawn from the agenda, and that HB 1761 would be taken up first because many judges and stakeholders were present. The committee substitute for HB 1761 proposed a 30% increase in base judicial pay to $182,000, changes to judicial retirement linkage, stronger judicial conduct provisions, and efficiency measures such as targeted reporting for judges not meeting benchmarks, appellate in-person meeting encouragement, and time limits on certain motions. The chair and several supporters said judicial pay had reached “emergency status,” citing Texas’s low national ranking and difficulty recruiting and retaining qualified judges. Witnesses in support included presiding and district judges, the State Bar’s judicial section, business and trial lawyer groups, and prosecutors. They emphasized that many judges work long hours off the bench, handle warrants at night and on weekends, manage heavy dockets, and face recruitment problems in both urban and rural counties. Supporters also said higher pay would help attract experienced lawyers, retain judges, and improve court efficiency. Several witnesses and members discussed judicial accountability, including public reporting of court performance and the role of the Texas Supreme Court and presiding judges in setting benchmarks. Some members raised concerns that raw statistics can be misleading because judges also do substantial off-the-bench work and often help cover other courts’ dockets. There was also testimony and discussion about the bill’s conduct and discipline provisions. A representative of the Texas Civil Rights Project opposed parts of the bill that would tie pay raises to changes affecting judicial independence, warning about subjective bail-related discipline standards and possible chilling effects. The executive director of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct cautioned against civil penalties for complainants, saying it could discourage good-faith complaints and create litigation risks. Other witnesses supported accountability reforms but urged caution about unintended consequences, especially for family and emergency cases and for judges handling warrants and other time-sensitive matters. After testimony, the committee withdrew the committee substitute and left HB 1761 pending, then recessed the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:07:10.280> is um the time the three minute time is um the time the three minute time is
• into a part-time position or a full-time into a part-time position or a full-time position<00:24
• <00:32:54.960> limited<00:32:55.320> fiscal considered a limited limited fiscal considered
• Is there a particular time limit for the forms to be late?
• The time is now 2:40 p.m., and the chair will open the public hearing on House Bill 458 FN, limiting

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Some of you might remember me from last time, but I... I'm 11, almost 12.
• Thank you for your time. Mr.
• We've heard pretty compelling testimony a couple of times now on that.
• Thank you for your time.
• We did not submit a letter in time, but we are opposed unless amended.

Summary: The committee heard a series of environmental safety and toxic materials measures, with several bills moving forward on unanimous or near-unanimous votes to Appropriations. Early in the meeting, the consent calendar was approved, including AB 372, AB 455, AB 1096, AB 1102, and AB 754. AB 362 by Assembly Member Ramos, which would recognize tribal beneficial uses of water and strengthen consultation and protection for tribal water uses, drew strong support from tribes and environmental groups. Water agencies and local government representatives opposed unless amended, raising concerns about CEQA requirements, co-management language, and conflicts with existing water law. The bill advanced to Appropriations, with some members voting aye and others not voting or absent. AB 728 by Assembly Member Lee would require age verification for the sale of certain anti-aging skin care products to minors. The author and a youth witness described social media-driven use of adult skin products by children and alleged skin damage, while supporters argued age checks are a reasonable consumer protection. Dermatologists and retailers opposed the bill, saying it could restrict legitimate acne and other medical uses of over-the-counter products, create compliance problems, and lacked a clear scientific basis. The committee discussed possible ambiguity in the bill’s definition of anti-aging products, but the measure still passed to Appropriations. AB 532 on low-income water rate assistance, AB 773 on copper-based anti-fouling paint, AB 998 on household hazardous waste disposal of vape pens, AB 1031 on geothermal hazardous waste fees, and AB 864 on solar panel hazardous waste and recycling all received strong support and advanced to Appropriations. Supporters for AB 532 emphasized water affordability and local program authority; AB 773 supporters said conflicting state water and pesticide rules are creating confusion for harbors and cities; AB 998 was presented as a practical way to let schools and local facilities dispose of confiscated vape devices safely; AB 1031 was framed as reducing DTSC fee burdens on geothermal development in Imperial County; and AB 864 would ease recycling and reuse of end-of-life solar panels. The committee also began hearing AB 1264 on ultra-processed foods in school meals, with the author and supporters arguing it would phase out the most harmful ultra-processed foods from school meals by 2032, but the transcript cuts off before the full discussion and any action on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• Democrats and Republicans have time and time again linked arms to defend this separation.
• It makes little sense to limit.
• I'm going to try one more time.
• But it is not ready for prime time.
• It's just not ready for progress. time.

Bills: SB875

Keywords: banking regulation, federal agencies, reputational risk, financial services, supervision, FIRM Act, bank supervision, depository institutions, federal banking agencies, FDIC, OCC, Federal Reserve, NCUA, CFPB, credit unions, Operation Choke Point, financial discrimination, safety and soundness, supervisory guidance, examination manual

Summary: This meeting focused on the markup of the Genius Act and the FIRM Act, two significant pieces of legislation addressing stablecoin regulation and the financial industry's regulatory framework. The Chairman noted the importance of providing clarity to the digital asset community and protecting American consumers, while also promoting innovation and competition within the financial sector. Members of both parties expressed varying viewpoints, with some highlighting concerns related to national security and the potential risks associated with stablecoins.