Transcript Highlights:

• make the Texas justice system the best in the nation, starting and ending with public safety and the rule
• Basically the way it's being conducted in every other county in the state. That's what it does.
• There's a lot of things that are different in the federal rules.
• The clerk will call the rule.
• The clerk will call the rule. Chair Flores. Aye. Vice Chair Parker. Aye. Senator Hinojosa. Aye.

Bills: SB330, SB663, SB1020, SB1152, SB1164, SB1896, SB2111, SB2196, SB2383, SB2581, SB2797, SB2798, SB2371

Keywords: county funding, prosecutors' offices, elections, law enforcement, local government, community supervision, budget approval, corrections department, strategic plan, judicial oversight, SB 1020, Texas, personal bond office, pretrial release, electronic monitoring, GPS monitoring, global positioning system, bond conditions, probation, parole

Summary: The committee heard several criminal justice bills, with testimony largely focused on public safety, court procedures, and local criminal justice administration. SB 2371 would expand mandatory skimmer-reporting requirements from gas pumps to ATMs, point-of-sale systems, and virtual currency kiosks, with the Texas Financial Crimes Intelligence Center saying centralized reporting would improve investigations, preserve evidence, and help identify organized criminal groups. SB 2581 would repeal a special law governing commissary funds in certain large counties; the sponsor and the Sheriff’s Association said it would restore parity with other counties while keeping spending subject to audit and inmate-benefit limits. Both bills were laid out and left pending after testimony, with no public witnesses opposing them at the hearing. The committee also heard SB 330, which would require voter approval before counties over a certain size reduce prosecutor funding, similar to an existing law for law enforcement budgets. Supporters argued prosecutors are essential to public safety and need stable funding, while an opponent from the Texas Civil Rights Project said the bill would restrict local budget flexibility and impose costly elections. SB 663 would remove district judges’ approval role for community supervision and corrections department budgets, replacing it with judge review after TDCJ-CJAD approval; probation officials said the change would reduce delays and confusion without reducing judicial oversight. SB 1020 would require more immediate sharing of ankle-monitor violation information and clarify that such records are not judicial work product; the Harris County DA’s office and Crime Stoppers supported it, citing inconsistent local practices and delays that can hinder prosecutions. The committee then took up SB 1164 on emergency detention and court-ordered mental health services. The bill, from the Texas Judicial Commission on Mental Health, would update emergency detention forms, clarify officer duties, allow filings in the county where a person is apprehended or located, and add a factor related to a person’s inability to recognize symptoms or appreciate treatment risks. Supporters included family members, law enforcement, and mental health and judicial witnesses who described cases where earlier intervention might have prevented tragedy; opponents warned the broader language could be misused and emphasized due process and the need for dangerousness to remain the standard. SB 2111 on indigent defense would expand access to counsel at first hearings, strengthen managed assigned counsel programs, create internships and fellowships, and adjust other defense-related procedures; the Texas Indigent Defense Commission and county defense program leaders supported it, while the committee substitute removed some provisions to reduce fiscal impact. Finally, SB 2383 would let recently retired DPS officers return to work in limited roles to help address staffing shortages, and SB 2797 would create reciprocal discovery requirements for criminal cases; prosecutors and some committee members said it would reduce trial surprise and improve truth-seeking, while others questioned whether the bill fully matched the state’s disclosure obligations and whether it could burden defense rights. Several bills were left pending after testimony, and the committee established a quorum later in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for the could rule on this?
• That was pointed out in the ruling by the judge.
• <01:52:21.119> Um<01:52:21.760> also in the ruling um by the judge.
• Um also in the ruling um by the judge.
• <01:57:32.000> in responses to the judge's uh ruling in responses to the judge's uh ruling

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The amendment for our consideration is Amendment SR00001 to Senate Rule 001, Rule 15, maintaining public
• You would not prohibition of this rule.
• from other members of the Senate Rules from other members of the Senate Rules Committee<00:10:12.240
• Senate rule 0001 >> Roll call vote. Senate rule 0001 amendment.<00:10:48.399> Anderson.
• ,<00:42:42.240> and with all state federal laws, rules, and with all state federal laws, rules

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• that's the rule that's the rule here<00:06:59.599> so<00:07:00.160> please<00:07:00.440
• I do not rule on the constitutionality.
• concerns after that the people who rule concerns after that the people who rule on<03:01:47.200>
• <03:03:37.200> I reiterate she does not make a ruling I reiterate she does not make a ruling
• <03:12:54.080> um subject to administrative rules um subject to administrative rules um assuming

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The House Children and Family Law Committee opened its February 4, 2025 hearing with a business item on House Bill 553, appointing a subcommittee chaired by Representative Greg and including several named members. The committee then took up House Bill 486, which would revise New Hampshire’s grandparents’ visitation law. The prime sponsor said the bill is intended to address gaps in current law, especially in situations involving divorce, separation, kinship care, and parental substance use, so that children can maintain important relationships with grandparents or other kin caregivers. He emphasized that the proposal was meant to supplement existing law rather than replace it, and said the language was modeled on statutes from other states. Several witnesses testified in support of HB 486, describing painful family separations and arguing that current law can be interpreted too narrowly. One grandmother said the existing statute had been used to dismiss her visitation case because she was restricted while the parents were separated, and she asked for language changes so courts could still order visitation in similar circumstances. Another witness, testifying online, urged passage of the bill as being in the best interest of children. A third witness described a family living arrangement in which grandparents had been a consistent presence in their grandchildren’s lives but were later cut off during a contentious separation, and said the bill would help repair those relationships. Committee members asked about the six-month timeframe in the bill, whether the proposed language would affect cases where a grandparent does not live with the child but is still a regular caregiver, and whether the sponsor had written amendment language; the sponsor said the six-month language was taken from other states’ statutes and that the new language would not change existing visitation rights but would add to them. After hearing the testimony, the chair said the committee would hold HB 486 aside for a week or two while awaiting additional information before voting. The hearing then moved to House Bill 320, an act relative to enforcement of marital property settlements. The sponsor explained that the bill would require courts to enforce final property decrees and would clarify the difference between enforcement and contempt, arguing that courts should have clear authority to fashion remedies and that litigants, especially self-represented parties, need clearer statutory guidance. Committee members questioned the legal distinctions the sponsor drew, including whether the bill was aimed at enforcement rather than contempt and how the proposed language would operate in practice. The transcript cuts off before any vote or further action on HB 320.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we'll note that other questions may be ruled out of order.
• Ruled out of order.
• Department of Veterans Affairs conducted its annual long-term care survey.
• The rules are complex. But I see people getting better every day relative to this.
• The rules are complex. But I see people getting better every day relative to this.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing opened with remarks from Senate Chair Robyn Kennedy and House Chair Chynah Tyler, who emphasized that the fiscal year 2026 hearing was focused on the Health and Human Services budget, asked members to keep questions budget-related, and noted that no public testimony would be taken. They also highlighted the choice of Doherty Memorial High School as the venue to showcase Worcester’s investment in career and technical education. Committee members then introduced themselves before the first panel, the Executive Office of Veterans Services and the state veterans homes, began testimony. Secretary John Santiago said the governor’s FY26 proposal would support implementation of the HERO Act, which he said is now about 95% implemented, including higher disabled veteran annuities, expanded behavioral health benefits, and other service expansions. He described efforts to reduce veteran homelessness, including nearly $20 million in ARPA-funded housing and outreach initiatives, and said the agency has delivered more than 100,000 supportive services to nearly 8,500 veterans. Leaders from the Chelsea and Holyoke veterans homes reported on staffing, quality measures, electronic medical records, and major construction projects at both facilities, including a new Chelsea campus and the new Holyoke home. Members asked about funding transfers, geographic equity in access to the homes, outreach to women veterans and veterans of color, suicide prevention, Gold Star family support, and the impact of federal uncertainty; Santiago said the homes are now licensed and certified, that the current budget is sufficient, and that the agency is expanding engagement and data collection. The second panel, the Office of the Veteran Advocate, testified that its FY26 request is about $3.3 million, up from the current $2 million, to cover staffing, a larger office, and higher technology costs. Veteran Advocate Bob Notch said the office is a new independent oversight agency created in 2022 to examine systems, coordinate with local veteran service officers, and investigate fatalities or serious harm involving veterans in state care. He said the office’s work depends on research, data, and collaboration with other agencies, and that current funding is only enough for minimum operations. In response to questions, Notch and Deputy Commissioner David O’Callaghan discussed the difficulty of tracking veteran suicides, the need for better data across agencies, and the office’s role as an oversight body rather than a direct service provider. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:16:05.560> a<00:16:05.640> full of the Senate will conduct a full of the Senate
• Clerk. >> The veto message asked the President of the Senate, me, to conduct a full investigation.
• [Applause] Rules, Senator Kirby. Pass and retain Senate. That's page one and two.
• Suspend the rules for that. Anyone object to that? All in favor signify by saying I. Opposed, no.
• I'd like to call a Rules Committee meeting in the Pro Tem's office at 2:30 today. >> 2:30 today, Rules

Keywords: MS Senate Floor - 24 March, 2026; 10:00 AM, 925, all

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum present, opened with an invocation and the Pledge of Allegiance, and then dispensed with the reading of the journal and committee report titles. The main business was a lengthy exchange over Senate Bill 2632, the local governments disaster recovery emergency loan program bill. The governor’s veto message argued that the enrolled bill had been materially altered after conference adoption, specifically over the interest-rate language, and called for an investigation. Senate leaders responded that the veto message was inaccurate, saying the word “monthly” had been removed earlier by unanimous consent to avoid an unintended 12% rate and that the bill was intended to provide disaster relief financing for local governments affected by Winter Storm Erin. Senators McCaughn and others defended the process, criticized the governor’s accusations as false and offensive, and emphasized that the legislation was meant to help struggling cities and counties with no interest until FEMA reimbursement, followed by a 1% rate. After the veto discussion, Senator McCaughn moved to refer the bill back to the committee from which it began, and the motion carried. The Senate then moved through routine business, including introductions and recognition of guests. Visitors included the Mississippi Farm Bureau Federation Peanut Committee, the Mississippi School for the Deaf and Blind, the doctor of the day, and an NCSL representative, along with a National Ag Day milking champions presentation and a large group of junior pages. The chamber also honored the Starkville Oktibbeha County School District’s varsity boys and girls basketball teams. Senate Resolutions 64 and 65 were called up to commend the Starkville High School girls and boys teams for winning the 2026 Class 7A state championships, and both coaches addressed the Senate briefly to thank members for the recognition.

Transcript Highlights:

• Supreme Court ruling called the Relich Ruling, and a 2024 Texas— Attorney General opinion that requires
• Importantly, the Supreme Court ruling clarified that states can regulate certain activities of ERISA
• Supreme Court ruling, the Relich ruling in 2020. spoke regarding, spoke very clearly and unanimously
• It's changes their rules, or changes that market share.
• We're going to have these rules over here.

Bills: SB502, SB513, SB622, SB670, SB731, SB732, SB916, SB961, SB1122

Keywords: SB 502, Texas peace officers, Health and Human Services Commission, HHSC Office of Inspector General, OIG investigators, law enforcement classification, Schedule C, state employee benefits, injury benefits, peace officer status, commissioned officers, state auditor classification, Government Code, Code of Criminal Procedure, human services, health and human services, law enforcement compensation, public employee benefits, Texas state law enforcement, child welfare

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:07:55.440> requirements<00:07:56.199> if additional teaching rule requirements
• if additional teaching rule requirements if they<00:07:56.520> meet<00:07:57.000> this<
• Every year we have one of these, you know, and we change rules at meetings.
• Every year we have one of these, you know, and we change rules at meetings.
• Every year we have one of these, you know, and we change rules at meetings.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• First, a reminder about our committee rules. Signs are not permitted in the committee room.
• <00:59:02.000> their embryos and how to how to conduct their embryos and how to how to conduct
• <01:21:18.800> um the system and we have laws and rules um the system and we have laws and
• We have multiple different eligibility rules depending on what program the person is seeking.
• <01:29:35.520> um<01:29:35.679> eligibility are conducting um eligibility are conducting

Bills: HF4609, HF4401

Keywords: infertility, fertility treatment, fertility preservation, IVF, assisted reproductive technology, ART, oocyte retrieval, embryo transfer, egg freezing, sperm freezing, reproductive health, maternity coverage, health insurance mandate, health plan benefits, Medical Assistance, Medicaid, MinnesotaCare, family planning, oncology fertility preservation, chemotherapy

Transcript Highlights:

• previous committee substitute to introduce language that references a single instance or a one-strike rule
• and Senator Perry, this bill relates to the expulsion of a public school student for engaging in conduct
• This bill relates to the expulsion of public school student for engaging in conduct that constitutes
• I know you were waiting on that ruling. Yes.
• Presidents conduct an annual review of upper-level administrative positions and report to the board,

Summary: The committee heard and discussed several higher education and public school bills. Senator Burwell presented SB 1242 to remove an outdated Coordinating Board approval requirement for Texas State Technical College land and facility acquisitions, and SJR 59 to create a constitutionally dedicated endowment for TSTC capital needs; both drew strong support from industry and workforce groups and were left pending. SB 757, by Senator Middleton, would create a debt-to-earnings accountability system for public college programs, with supporters saying it would protect students from low-value degrees and opponents warning it could unfairly penalize programs with long-term value, especially graduate, medical, and public service fields; it was also left pending. SB 1241, by Senator Millington, would expand acceptable college entrance exams beyond the SAT and ACT, including the Classic Learning Test, and was left pending after testimony from CLT, homeschool, and student groups in support. SB 1085, by Senator Blanco, would let Sul Ross State University offer lower-division courses at its satellite campuses in the Middle Rio Grande region; it too was left pending. The committee then took up a series of public school and higher education measures, voting several out favorably. SB 605, as substituted, limits commissioner approval of charter school expansion amendments for schools under conservatorship or a management team and was reported favorably 9-0. SB 1871 and SB 1873, both by Senator Perry, were revised to narrow teacher immunity, clarify removal and suspension procedures, require periodic review of in-school suspension placements, and align discipline rules; both substitutes were adopted and reported favorably. SB 1872, SB 1874, SB 762, SB 1962, SB 1750, SB 2252, SB 2253, SB 2365, SB 1924, and SB 37 were also considered, with most reported favorably on party-line or near-unanimous votes. SB 1750 would replace a flat charter school facilities funding cap with an attendance-based formula; SB 2252 and SB 2253 address kindergarten readiness, early literacy/numeracy, and educator preparation; SB 2365 concerns student phone use during instructional time; SB 1924 restores local citation authority for certain school offenses and adds reporting, notice, and completion requirements; and SB 37 would expand state oversight of higher education curriculum, governance, faculty senates, and compliance with state law. Other measures heard included SB 769, which would require a Coordinating Board report on barriers faced by students with disabilities in higher education; supporters emphasized the need for better data and accessibility, while witnesses suggested broader reporting on race, disability types, and K-12-to-college transitions. SB 2231 would designate a Free College Application Week in October and was left pending. SB 1878 would modernize the Josie School statute and provide formula funding and aid eligibility for Polytechnic College. SB 1409 would authorize universities to offer self-funded student health benefit plans, with Rice University and Texas 2036 supporting the measure as a way to lower costs and expand coverage. SB 2431 would require universities to give foreign language credit for study abroad programs, SB 2314 would require schools to inform students about opting in or out of record sharing for direct admissions through My Texas Future, and SB 2138 would extend the state’s anti-ESG contracting restrictions to public higher education endowments and governing boards; these later bills were introduced and left pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• The rules for witness testimony are that each side will be allowed two main witnesses each.
• The rules for witness testimony are that each side will be allowed two main witnesses each.
• that we'd like to think are the good rules.
• Mere injunctive relief that only stops conduct going forward is not.
• Mere injunctive relief that only stops conduct going forward is not.

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:

• It does say conduct a formal investigation. Conduct a formal investigation.
• Uh, I will also say that you folks asked for and we had a study conducted on salaries, and the salary
• on salaries and the salary conducted on salaries and the salary study<00:20:06.160> basically
• They're creating the rules and, you know, they're working with the DOE.
• and you know they're working with rules and you know they're working with the<00:24:43.919> do

Bills: SB3179, SB2872, SB2391, SB3282, SB2836, SB2181

Keywords: educational workers, harassment, workplace safety, temporary restraining orders, investigation procedures, retired education employees, teacher shortage, rehired retirants, entry level salary, collective bargaining agreements, pension benefits, education, teacher salaries, automatic increments, collective bargaining, teacher retention, workforce development, Pell grant program, short-term education, eligibility

Summary: The joint committee first heard SB 3179, which would require the Department of Education and charter schools to report harassment incidents involving educational workers and adopt procedures for handling them. DOE supported the bill, while the Attorney General recommended clarifying amendments to limit the measure to harassment directed at workers because of their position, to limit DOE legal assistance to temporary restraining order actions, and to clarify whether the harassment must come from outside the school system. Members also discussed whether the bill should cover non-DOE individuals on campus, whether investigations could be handled in-house, and whether training should be embedded in existing workday or school-year training rather than added as a separate requirement. The committee later voted to pass the bill with amendments as SD1. The committee then took up SB 2872, which would require retired teachers or administrators rehired into shortage or hard-to-fill positions to be paid the entry-level salary for that position. DOE supported the bill, and the Attorney General requested clarifying language about its effective date and that it would not affect already matured rights and duties. The Employees’ Retirement System administration emphasized that the bill should retain a 12-month break in service to preserve the pension system’s tax-exempt status and noted the importance of consistent classification of eligible positions. Members expressed support for using retired educators to help fill staffing gaps, but no final action was taken in the portion provided. The committee also heard SB 2391, which would provide annual step increases for public school teachers under bargaining unit 5, subject to funding. The Attorney General said the bill could conflict with collective bargaining procedures and Chapter 89, while DOE said unit 5 includes more than teachers and asked that the benefit be considered for other bargaining units as well, with funding provided if enacted. HSTA strongly supported the measure, arguing that annual step movement is already recognized in the collective bargaining agreement as a recruiting and retention tool. Testimony totals were noted as 16 in support, two in opposition, and three comments. Finally, the committee heard SB 3282, which would establish a statewide framework for the federal workforce Pell Grant program to fund short-term workforce education and training. The Attorney General suggested clarifying that the matter is one of statewide concern because UH is involved. UH and the Chamber of Commerce supported the bill, and DLIR testified that it is coordinating with DOE, the Workforce Development Council, and national groups on implementation. Members questioned whether the Workforce Development Council or DLIR should handle rulemaking and administration, and DLIR said the council is advisory while the department has grant administration expertise. The committee then moved into decision-making after discussion of possible amendments and implementation concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• This birthday rule allows seniors to switch, of their birthday month.
• Rules are set aside by the department.
• But if you want A1 quality care, you'll abide by the rules. You'll set up.
• I appreciate the comments regarding this bill when it comes to rule.
• making a rule on how much money these particular workers can make?

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:17:08.160> I'd >> You'd like to call a rules committee. All right. Rules committee.
• But if you really dive down into this amendment, under line 14 says the conduct shall be conducted on
• conduct conduct shall<00:36:07.680> be<00:36:07.839> conducted<00:36:08.320> on
• You have of the gaming commission rules.
• ,<01:08:42.880> although Yes, the 10day rule exists, although Yes, the 10day rule exists,

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That rule should be allowed to go forward.
• I can think of five rules that the Bureau has: their contract rule, their UDAP or unfair discriminatory
• practices rule, their larger participant rule, which would give them authority over places like Venmo
• I like rules. I like following rules. And so we've always followed all the rules and regulations.
• Rule? That rule was revoked on January 20th, 2021. Tell me, who revoked that?

Transcript Highlights:

• with the witnesses and public comment, I want to make sure everyone understands that the Assembly has rules
• We apply these rules consistently to all people who participate in our proceedings, regardless of the
• We will not permit conduct that disrupts, disturbs, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of legislative

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Agriculture met with two bills on the agenda. The chair opened the hearing with procedural reminders and a brief welcome back for the new year, then moved to AB 52 by Majority Leader Aguiar-Curry, which would codify the California BIPOC Producer Advisory Committee and the California Small-Scale Producer Advisory Committee in statute. The author and a supporting witness said the committees are important to implementing the Farmer Equity Act and ensuring farmers and ranchers of color and small-scale producers have a meaningful role in CDFA policymaking; several organizations testified in support, and no opposition was heard. The committee then heard AB 230 by Assemblywoman Ransom, which extends the sunset of the Pierce’s disease control program and the Pierce’s disease glassy-wing sharpshooter board to 2037. The author and a representative of the wine grape industry described the program as essential to controlling a disease that threatens grapevines and to supporting research and field efforts funded by federal, industry, and grower assessments. Testimony from the Wine Institute, Family Winemakers of California, California Fresh Fruit Association, and the California Farm Bureau was in support, with no opposition. Both bills were moved on due pass motions to the Appropriations Committee and approved by the committee. AB 230 received eight aye votes and AB 52 later received seven aye votes after the roll was held open for absent members. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, under the WAC administrative rules, there are relaxed rules of evidence regarding hearsay.
• I don't know if this is a violation of the ethics rules.
• And so that's why I did it. a violation of the ethics rules.
• But, you know, she was in Rules. I was worried about the bill being pulled.
• You know, she was in Rules.

Summary: The hearing opened in a Washington State Office of Administrative Hearings matter involving Legislative Ethics Board complaint 2025-5 against Representative Tara Simmons. The ALJ outlined the process, the issues on appeal, and the burden of proof, which centered on whether Simmons violated the Ethics Act by using her legislative position for others’ benefit and by holding outside employment that conflicted with her duties, and what sanction would be appropriate. Several exhibits were admitted by stipulation or without objection, while Exhibit 2 was initially held for later ruling but was ultimately admitted after testimony from the witness who prepared it. The board also granted a motion to sequester witnesses and took under advisement a motion to exclude three defense witnesses until after the staff case-in-chief. In opening statements, board staff alleged Simmons violated RCW 42.52.020 and RCW 42.52.070 by sponsoring a proviso that benefited her outside employer, Equity and Education Coalition (EEC), by using campaign surplus funds to help hire a friend, by intervening in a dispute over the proviso-funded work, and by sending text messages to influence others. Staff said it would seek penalties of up to $5,000 per violation plus costs. Defense counsel argued the allegations were technical ethics issues, denied Simmons profited personally, and contended the proviso funding her employer was permitted under prior board guidance; counsel also argued the campaign donation and later contract dispute were lawful and context-dependent. The first witness, Kimberly Gordon of American Equity and Justice Group (AEJG), testified that AEJG received state proviso funding and donations from Simmons, including $10,000 and later $40,000, which Gordon said were intended to fund the hiring of Antoine Coleman, Simmons’s romantic partner. Gordon said AEJG returned the donations and terminated Coleman after learning of the relationship and potential conflict of interest. She also testified about a later 2024 proviso involving EEC, a subcontract between AEJG and EEC, and a dispute over EEC’s performance under that subcontract. Gordon said AEJG raised concerns with the Administrative Office of the Courts, met with contract manager Chris Stanley, and ultimately rewrote the subcontract after Stanley, allegedly after speaking with Simmons, directed them to do so. The hearing then recessed for lunch, and cross-examination of Gordon was set to continue afterward.

Transcript Highlights:

• situation how does the uh Court ruling situation how does the uh Court ruling affect affect affect
• This new rule is only unprecedented.
• This new rule is not only unprecedented in this state, as far as I am aware, the rule has never been
• This new rule is not only unprecedented in this state, as far as I am aware, the rule has never been
• This new rule is not only unprecedented in this state, as far as I am aware, the rule has never been

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• says that the subpoena has to do with the violation or possible violation of the educator code of conduct
• educator code of conduct educator code of conduct by<00:38:58.760> a<00:38:59.079> certified
• <00:47:26.240> enforc<00:47:27.079> or<00:47:27.240> disciplinary conduct enforc
• or disciplinary conduct enforc or disciplinary proceedings<00:47:29.119> you<00:47:29.359>
• a wir tap where to in effect conduct a wir tap where nobody<01:07:49.480> was<01:07:49.880>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 313 and, on motion by Representative Perez, voted to retain the bill because members felt it needed further work and was not ready for final action. The motion passed 18-0, and no further action was taken on the bill. House Bill 391, an anti-SLAPP measure, was then discussed; supporters said it addressed a real problem and should move forward, while opponents raised concerns that it was too broad, could affect criminal cases, and might create procedural complications. The committee voted 18-0 to retain HB 391 as well, and it was placed on consent. The committee next considered House Bill 462, establishing a cause of action for unwarranted video imaging of residential properties. Representative McFarland moved OTP, saying the bill raised First Amendment and property-rights concerns. The motion passed 18-0, and the bill was also placed on consent. The committee then turned to House Bill 509, which would require reporting on forfeitures. Supporters argued the information was useful for future legislation, while opponents said the reporting would be costly, duplicative, and potentially split data across fiscal years. The committee voted 11-7 to recommend OTP, with a minority of members opposed. House Bill 520, authorizing Department of Education hearing officers to issue subpoenas, drew the most extended debate. Supporters argued DOE needed the same tools other agencies have, while opponents said DOE already had access to needed information, the Attorney General could handle subpoenas, and the bill would create an unbalanced process and raise due process and student-record concerns. Representative Tur offered Amendment 0842H to shift subpoena power from DOE hearing officers to the Attorney General; after debate, the amendment failed 10-8. The transcript cuts off as the committee begins the roll call on the underlying bill after rejecting the amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• that disrupts, disturbs, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of the legislative proceedings.
• The rules for today's hearing include no talking or loud noises from the audience.
• For today's hearing, the rules include no talking or loud noises from the audience.
• No engaging in conduct that disrupts or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of this hearing.
• So that's a new rule.

Summary: The committee heard a long agenda of local government and housing-related bills, with testimony often centered on regional coordination, permitting reform, and local control. SB 802 by Senator Ashby would require Sacramento-area jurisdictions to form a joint powers authority to coordinate homelessness and housing response; supporters argued the region has long lacked accountability and coordination, while Sacramento County, Folsom, and others opposed the mandate as an unprecedented state-imposed JPA. The bill drew extensive support from local officials, business groups, service providers, and advocates, and opposition from county, city, and nonprofit representatives who said a local process was already underway. Committee members expressed support for the concept, but the bill was held pending a quorum and later discussed again with strong encouragement for regional collaboration. The committee also heard SB 222, SB 677, SB 908, SB 226, SB 828, and SB 1193. SB 222 would streamline permitting for residential heat pump and water heater installations; supporters said it would lower costs and speed clean-energy adoption, while local government groups argued the main barrier is upfront cost, not permits. SB 677 would curb what the author described as abusive appeals and delays in affordable housing approvals, with developers testifying about frivolous subdivision map appeals and TEFRA hearing delays; the California Native Plant Society sought an amendment to preserve appeals on habitat lands. SB 908 would simplify permits for energy-code-compliant window replacements, and SB 226 would clarify financing authority for a West Sacramento baseball stadium proposal; both passed unanimously. SB 828, prompted by the Esparto fireworks warehouse explosion, would tighten fireworks storage and licensing rules, expand inspection and seizure authority, and increase fines; it also passed unanimously after testimony from fire officials and a pyrotechnic operator who opposed it unless amended. SB 1193, a county-specific Alameda County transparency bill, generated the sharpest debate. The author argued it would prevent waste, favoritism, and conflicts of interest in discretionary spending by requiring board approval, a public spending log, and clearer whistleblower procedures. Alameda County and county associations opposed it as overly broad and burdensome, saying existing processes already provide transparency and that the bill would reduce flexibility during fiscal stress. After committee questions about the bill’s purpose and the county’s current practices, the measure passed 7-0, with the author indicating willingness to accept an amendment restoring a four-fifths vote threshold. The committee then moved out of order to SB 1090, which would impose a temporary moratorium on state housing density laws in Altadena through 2030 in response to post-fire displacement concerns. The author said the bill is intended to protect long-term residents from investor-driven redevelopment after the Eaton Fire, while acknowledging amendments to align the moratorium with affordable housing development timelines. The transcript cuts off during the presentation of this bill, so no final action is shown for SB 1090 in the excerpt.