Transcript Highlights:

• We are making progress, unclear if this bill helps any of that process along.
• I look forward to continuing that part of the conversation with you as well. Thank you very much.
• this process, especially.
• And I just wanted to circle back to the conversation around undergrounding.
• legislative process and make some decisions about how we're going to manage the liability risk.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy heard two bills focused on electricity affordability and utility costs. AB 745, by Assembly Member Irwin, would restructure the California Climate Credit by shifting it from lump-sum payments to direct reductions in volumetric electricity rates and moving the credit to the summer months when bills are highest. The author and UC Santa Barbara economist Dr. Kyle Meng argued this could significantly lower summer rates and better help households during extreme heat. Supporters, including UCS, NRDC, and some labor representatives, favored the concept, with some urging that the gas climate credit also be redirected. No opposition testimony was presented, and the bill passed 18-0 to the floor. The committee then considered AB 825, also presented as an affordability package aimed at reducing electric bills by addressing wildfire mitigation costs, transmission financing, permitting delays, and a review of ratepayer-funded programs. The bill would authorize securitization for undergrounding expenses, remove the first $15 billion in undergrounding capital investments from the rate base for return purposes, create a public transmission financing program using Proposition 4 funds and IBank support, revive the California Power Authority as a public sponsor, and establish a task force to review energy efficiency and demand response programs. The author and witness Matt Friedman of The Utility Reform Network said the bill could save ratepayers billions over time through lower-cost public financing and securitization. Testimony on AB 825 was mixed. Support came from several consumer and clean-energy groups, while utilities and labor raised concerns about the bill’s impact on utility financial stability, wildfire fund participation, liability, and whether the $15 billion securitization cap could discourage undergrounding. Some witnesses also objected to the task force’s potential effect on energy efficiency and demand response programs. Committee members discussed the need to balance affordability with utility creditworthiness and wildfire safety, and several asked for more analysis of market impacts and liability issues. Despite those concerns, AB 825 passed the committee 13-0 and was sent to the floor.

Transcript Highlights:

• This conversation is meaningful.
• This conversation is meaningful. This conversation is meaningful.
• their day that work through the process. their day that work through the process.
• broader conversation about this issue. broader conversation about this issue.
• > worth<01:35:20.719> having This is a conversation worth having This is a conversation

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House debated Representative Long’s motion to suspend the rules so House File 5084 could be recalled from committee, given second and third readings, and brought to final passage. The bill was described by opponents as an extreme anti-abortion measure that would create a right to life from fertilization, potentially criminalize abortions except in narrow cases, and could affect IVF, miscarriage care, and treatment of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Supporters said the bill was about protecting unborn life and giving Minnesotans the chance to decide the issue themselves through the ballot box. Several members spoke against the motion, arguing that Minnesota has already settled reproductive rights through court decisions and recent legislation, and warning that the bill would put government into deeply personal medical decisions. They cited stories from other states where women were investigated or arrested after miscarriages or self-managed abortions, and said the proposal could treat people as criminals for seeking reproductive care. One member emphasized that the bill could be especially dangerous in cases like ectopic pregnancy, where treatment delays could threaten the pregnant person’s life. Members in favor of the bill framed the issue as one of conscience, democracy, and protection of human life from conception. They said every abortion is an act of violence against a distinct human being and argued that Minnesotans should be allowed to vote on the question. Some speakers also shared personal experiences with miscarriage, infertility, premature birth, or pregnancy loss to explain why they viewed the issue as morally serious and emotionally difficult. The debate became broader and more partisan, with some members criticizing both sides for using the issue as a political weapon rather than focusing on legislative work. The transcript does not include the final vote result, but the motion was clearly under a roll call and the chamber proceeded with extended floor debate over House File 5084.

Transcript Highlights:

• conversations and consent, with no profit motive at all.
• Conversations going on internally, so we were in a mess over there.
• It's been, I think, a very enlightening conversation.
• This is done through a progressive process of training.
• He is a friend and was also in the process of dying.

Bills: SB1406, SB1681, SB2480, SB2721

Keywords: body donation, medical science, forensic science, willed body program, informed consent, boarding home, boarding home facility, adult care home, group home, assisted living, county reporting, municipal reporting, annual report, reasonable accommodation, fair housing, disability accommodation, local ordinance, permit requirement, Texas Health and Human Services Commission, HHSC

Transcript Highlights:

• The conversations we had with the Senate in reaching a negotiated agreement on the physician compact.
• And so, the process, just so you understand how we're doing it, is I go through, I compare it to the
• And so I thank them for their help in being part of that process. Okay.
• That's not been a factor in our conversations. It's not like it's millions of dollars or anything.
• The medical society is in full support of the process.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The conversations we had with the Senate in reaching a negotiated agreement on the physician compact.
• And so, the process, just so you understand how we're doing it, is I go through and compare it to the
• Your second question: if we want to leave, there is a process in every compact. by which disputes are
• That's not been a factor in our conversations. It's not like it's millions of dollars or anything.
• The medical society is in full support of the process.

Transcript Highlights:

• traditional rate case recovery process. traditional rate case recovery process.
• An example of that would be process.
• traditional regulatory process. traditional regulatory process.
• keep that conversation going. Thank you. keep that conversation going. Thank you.
• account, part of a larger conversation. account, part of a larger conversation.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think that's a fair conversation to have. Thank you.
• I'm open to that conversation. It sounds like the co-sponsors are open to the conversation.
• Carter's open to that conversation.
• That's a conversation to be had as well.
• That's a conversation to be had as well.

Bills: HB2076, HB2135, HB2175, HB2186, HB2223, HB2345, HB2364, HB2417, HB2440, HB2666, HB2763, HCR2043

Keywords: school safety, employee training, firearm certification, crisis response, school policies, reimbursement fund, local law enforcement, HB2135, Arizona, civil liability, private right of action, DEI, diversity equity and inclusion, critical race theory, anti-racism, race stereotyping, sex stereotyping, race scapegoating, sex scapegoating, gender identity

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard and advanced several bills. HB 2763 would require legislative approval before the Arizona Game and Fish Commission could close a state-run shooting range. Supporters, including the sponsor, a Prescott doctor, gun-rights advocates, and Game and Fish, argued that range closures can push shooting into unsafe desert areas and that the legislature should have a voice; the bill passed 8-1. HB 2417 would let courts, at a defendant’s request, use speed-inhibiting devices instead of license suspension for certain speeding and racing offenses. The sponsor and supporters said it would help people keep working and reduce recidivism, while an Arizona Trucking Association representative warned the bill was overbroad and conflicted with federal law; the committee adopted an amendment and passed the bill 7-2. HB 2345 created a felony for unlawfully present persons possessing falsified CDLs and imposed vehicle forfeiture and employer penalties; trucking industry testimony said it was preempted by federal law and unenforceable, but the sponsor said he would keep working on it, and the bill passed 5-3 with one present after amendment. The committee also considered HB 2666, which increases penalties for sexual extortion involving victims ages 15-17. The sponsor and supporters from the anti-trafficking community and county attorney’s office said the bill responds to a serious and growing online exploitation problem affecting teens. Defense and juvenile-justice concerns focused on whether the bill could sweep in minors, create mandatory consecutive sentences, and fail to account for age-related defenses; the sponsor and supporters said they were open to discussing amendments, but the bill passed 8-0 with one present. HB 2175 would add political expression and political affiliation to Arizona’s bias-crime sentencing enhancements and create new misdemeanor-level enhancements for certain bias-motivated offenses. The sponsor, ADL, and county attorney’s office said it fills gaps and targets conduct, not speech; the ACLU and defense testimony warned it could chill speech and give prosecutors too much discretion. The bill passed 6-2 after amendment. HB 2186 would allow a passenger in a traffic stop to satisfy identity requirements by verbally providing name and date of birth rather than producing physical ID. The sponsor said it was meant to fix an unconstitutional-vagueness problem and clarify the law after a prior court issue; there was little opposition, and it passed 7-0 with one present. The committee also began hearing HB 2364, which would add penalties for distributing or receiving abortion-inducing drugs by courier, delivery, or rail service; the sponsor said it would strengthen enforcement of existing Arizona restrictions, but the transcript cuts off before testimony, debate, or any vote on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• IT IS ALREADY IN PROCESS.
• MY HOPE IS THE PROCESS BECOMES LESS COMPLICATED.
• SO THERE IS AN EXTENSIVE PROCESS THAT WE FOLLOW UP.
• I WANT THE PROCESS FOR PEOPLE TO BE LESS COMPLICATED.
• Kincart Jonsson: THANK YOU FOR HAVING THAT CONVERSATION, THERE ARE PEOPLE IN THE PROCESS THAT ARE BEING

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, please take your conversations to the aisles or the retiring room. >> Thank you, Madam Speaker
• Members, please take your conversations Members, please take your conversations to<00:01:21.280>
• And a delay can only tell Minnesotans one thing. fullthroated conversation around things fullthroated
• But it is along in the process.
• that we're having this conversation that we're having this conversation because<00:18:27.840>

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House considered a motion by Representative Nash to recall Senate File 856 from the Committee on State Government, Finance, and Policy and re-refer it to Judiciary, Finance, and Civil Law. Nash argued the bill, which concerns creating or empowering an inspector general to address fraud, had already received two hearings and should move quickly because time was limited. Supporters of the motion said the bill needed further work on constitutional and data-practices issues in Judiciary, and that holding it in State Government would delay or effectively kill it. Opponents of the motion, led by Representative Cleorne, argued the bill should remain in State Government because that committee was the proper place to address constitutional concerns and other substantive changes. Cleorne said the committee had already considered a delete-everything amendment and nine amendments, with only two adopted, and maintained the bill as amended raised separation-of-powers concerns. Other members said the bill had bipartisan support in the Senate, passed 60-7, and that further negotiations should happen in a working group rather than through floor maneuvering. The debate focused heavily on whether the bill’s structure for selecting an inspector general was constitutional and whether the motion was an attempt to speed the bill along or to block it. Representative Norris said nonpartisan staff, the legislative auditor, and Senate and House authors had all indicated the bill needed fixes to be constitutional. After a roll call vote, the motion failed 67-66, so Senate File 856 remained in the Committee on State Government, Finance, and Policy.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I've simplified this process, but I highlight it because And I've simplified this process, but I
• And so there are good actors in this conversation. Thank you.
• without a conversation on that.
• without a conversation on that.
• I do encourage that, and we will continue the conversation.

Summary: The Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee met for its first meeting of the 2026 session and took up impact fees, with an opening overview from Eric Poole of the Florida Association of Counties. Poole explained that impact fees are one-time charges on new development used only for new infrastructure capacity, not existing deficiencies or maintenance, and must satisfy the dual rational nexus test. He traced their history in Florida and described how comprehensive plans, concurrency, and later mobility fees relate to local infrastructure funding. He argued that impact fees are restricted, tied to capital improvements, and are one tool for paying for growth. Panelists representing counties, cities, builders, and community developers largely agreed that growth creates real infrastructure costs but differed on how those costs should be allocated. County and city representatives said impact fees are a necessary, targeted way to fund roads, water, sewer, fire, schools, and parks without spreading costs across all taxpayers. They pointed to long periods without fee updates, rising construction costs, and examples of large increases justified by studies. Builder and developer representatives argued that fees are often unpredictable, can be doubled or tripled, and contribute to housing affordability problems; they also said the system can be inconsistent across jurisdictions and may encourage sprawl. Several witnesses emphasized that fees must be transparent, proportional, and tied to actual benefits, and some suggested a statewide framework or mobility-fee model with more consistency and peer review. Members asked about how long local governments can hold fee revenue, whether fees can generate profit, what they can be spent on, and whether they can pay for police stations, fire stations, or other public safety facilities. Witnesses said the funds must be used for capital projects and cannot be used for salaries or unrelated purchases, and that refunds may be required if money is not spent within the local ordinance’s timeframe. The discussion also covered examples of local fee increases, the use of impact fees versus direct construction or “pipelining” of infrastructure, and concerns about level-of-service changes and extraordinary-circumstance increases. No votes were taken; the meeting ended after the panel discussion and member questions, with the chair noting the conversation would continue.

Transcript Highlights:

• So when we award a contract, there is a formal process that includes a readiness review.
• There's a quality improvement process. process, our utilization review process with the CANS assessment
• Then there is a reconciliation process to where we're owed money because of that blend.
• From the... conversations, and I definitely don't want to put words in your mouth.
• A lot of those conversations for us and get our feedback and communicate that.

Bills: SB596, SB961, SB1398, SB1183, SB1952

Keywords: DFPS, Department of Family and Protective Services, child protective services, foster care, child welfare, Family Code, conservatorship, managing conservator, parental child safety placement, authorization agreement, temporary authorization order, child abuse, child neglect, placement reporting, court-ordered removal, investigation, family preservation, transparency, public reporting, data reporting

Transcript Highlights:

• So, they're not really watching; they're part of the conversation.
• This expedited process allows for an immediate determination of Medicaid eligibility.
• So they would do the initial process to get the treatment started.
• Go into the standard processes. Representative Keillor.
• It includes tribes in the process now.

Transcript Highlights:

• I've had some conversations with a variety of people.
• I myself have had some conversations with a variety of people.
• Any further conversation? Senator Klein. Mr.
• So, all right, any further conversation? Senator Kessel? Well...
• And that's part of that process.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Senate Industry and Business Committee met to take up remaining business, focusing mainly on House Bill 1191, which would create an Office of Entrepreneurship within the Department of Commerce, and noting that House Bill 1584 on pharmacy benefit managers would be held until amendments were ready. Members discussed whether the entrepreneurship effort should be housed in Commerce, whether it would duplicate existing private and nonprofit resources, and whether the state should be creating a new government function at all. Supporters said Commerce is the right place, the bill contains no appropriation, and the office would mainly direct small businesses and startups to existing resources and report back on demand and staffing needs. Opponents warned it could grow into another government entity and argued private industry and existing programs are better suited to provide coaching and mentorship. Testimony and discussion referenced small business development centers, the Kauffman/Right to Start model, and other startup support programs already operating in the state or elsewhere. Members also cited a local entrepreneur’s experience as an example of the value of mentorship, networking, and guidance from private-sector groups, while others stressed that government should focus on pointing people to those resources rather than running the assistance itself. The committee emphasized that the bill would ask Commerce to identify how it could support entrepreneurship with existing staff and to report on its efforts. A motion for a do pass recommendation on House Bill 1191 was made and seconded. The committee voted 3-2 in favor, with Senators Klein, Kessel, and Chairman Barta voting aye and Senator Inget voting nay; Vice Chair Bame’s vote was not recorded in the final tally as read. Senator Kessel was designated as the carrier. The committee then noted it would reconvene later in the day after floor session, with the PBM bill expected to be taken up once amendments were available.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I look forward to our conversation today. Mr.
• And those are the conversations that, again.
• There is a waiver process.
• So we should have a follow-up conversation. Yeah.
• I can tell you how I went about the process at OPM.

Transcript Highlights:

• process.
• And a new model starts with a new process.
• The waiver process, the SIPSAL process, we have existing mechanisms to deal with.
• Look forward to the productive conversations on this bill as it moves through the process.
• The first piece is moving from a one-year application and grant process to a four-year process.

Summary: The Assembly Education Committee heard several education bills, with AB 887 by Assemblymember Berman proposing that every school district and charter school adopt a plan so all high schools offer at least one computer science course by 2029-30. Supporters, including a teacher and student, argued California is falling behind other states and that computer science is essential for student opportunity and workforce readiness. ACSA opposed the bill, citing the shortage of qualified computer science teachers and administrative burden. The bill passed the committee on a 6-0 vote and was sent to Appropriations. The committee also heard AB 1390 by Assemblymember Solache, which would allow local and county school boards to raise trustee compensation above long-standing statutory minimums that have not changed in decades. Supporters said the current stipends are too low to make board service accessible to working families and younger community members. There was no opposition testimony, and the bill passed with five votes, with the roll left open for additional members. AB 865 by Assemblymember Gonzalez would create a $5 million, three-year grant program for dual-language immersion instructional materials, split between high-demand languages and other languages. Supporters said districts often lack standards-aligned materials in languages beyond Spanish, forcing teachers to create their own. The bill passed 7-0 to Appropriations. AB 857 by Assemblymember Gibson, requiring annual cultural competency training for K-12 staff, also passed 5-1 after supporters linked it to the state reparations task force report and argued it would improve trust and student outcomes. The committee additionally approved AB 677 by Assemblymember Bryan, which would make it easier for unhoused students to access school-based vision and dental screenings by allowing directory information to be used for that purpose with an opt-out process; it passed 8-0. AB 903 by Assemblymember Avila Farias, directing the Department of Education to develop best practices on education technology and digital equity, passed after amendments and with some opponents indicating they would remove opposition once the amendments were in print. Finally, AB 917 by Assemblymember Avila Farias, extending permanent-status protections to certain educators in small districts and county programs, drew significant opposition from small districts and regional occupational programs over flexibility and funding concerns; the bill still passed 5-2 with the roll held open for additional votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:17:27.280> in for coffee that is grown in process in for coffee that is grown in process
• that process in well under a year.
• <01:59:21.679> issue not um there was a due process issue not um there was a due process issue
• Conversation and defer the date to July 1, 3000.
• We do want to continue the conversation on this measure.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And conversely, what that means is that they're typically on the street.
• I'm just curious if y'all have had any conversations with them.
• Keep having those conversations. This is a great group of people. Thank you, Madam Chair.
• That process. You would also have those others.
• So I haven't had those conversations, but I think that's just a very fair statement to say.

Summary: The committee first approved a motion, then heard a lengthy presentation on homelessness policy and behavioral health. Testimony focused on the view that Arkansas should shift toward more data-driven, outcomes-based responses to homelessness, including stronger treatment options for serious mental illness and substance use disorder, better data collection, provider accountability, and possible statewide use of the Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinic (CCBHC) model. Speakers from Fort Smith, Restore Hope, Our House, and Western Arkansas Counseling described local work, the need for better coordination across providers, and the role of crisis services, ACT teams, and employment support. Members asked about sex offender tracking, the difference between sheltered and unsheltered homelessness, how to scale successful programs statewide, and whether Arkansas could apply for a statewide Continuum of Care or CCBHC planning grant. The discussion also touched on camping bans, civil commitment, and federal funding changes, with several speakers urging the state to pursue the CCBHC planning grant and more transparent reporting systems. After the homelessness discussion, the committee moved through a series of Department of Energy and Board of Nursing rule reviews. DEQ proposed updating the post-closure cleanup threshold for solid waste matters from $50,000 to $2 million to match Act 791 of 2025, and members asked about financial assurance and oversight; the rule was reviewed without objection. The Board of Nursing then presented multiple rule changes tied to recent acts, including adding fees for dialysis patient care technician registration, expanding contact-information requirements, implementing APRN delegation authority to unlicensed workers, clarifying APRN authority for death certificates and durable medical equipment prescriptions, updating certified medication assistant training and insulin-injection authority, and conforming independent-practice rules for clinical nurse specialists. Each rule was reviewed without objection. Near the end of the meeting, Senator Irvin announced that UAMS had completed its NCI designation submission for the Winthrop Rockefeller Cancer Institute, calling it an important milestone for the state. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• The grants reimbursement process does not work very well.
• The grants reimbursement process does not work very well.
• So I think a better grants reimbursement process would help.
• But now the conversation, and I turn it to you all to set the policy is, Now the conversation, and I
• So that is an interesting conversation to have.

Summary: The hearing focused on California wildfire resilience, with the first panel discussing statewide funding, policy, and strategic priorities, and the second panel shifting to home hardening and defensible space. The LAO outlined the state’s wildfire risk, the large increase in resilience spending in recent years, and the fact that most funding has been one-time rather than ongoing. Testimony emphasized that wildfire risk varies greatly by region, that the state must balance response spending with prevention, and that success should be measured more carefully than by acres treated alone. Witnesses also noted the importance of local, federal, utility, and Proposition 4 funding sources, as well as the need for long-term maintenance and strategic prioritization rather than scattered projects. Cal Fire leadership and other witnesses stressed that California’s wildfire problem is not uniform: forested areas, chaparral, and wildland-urban interface communities require different strategies. In Northern California and forested watersheds, speakers emphasized fuels reduction, prescribed and cultural burning, strategic fuel breaks, watershed protection, and maintaining forest health. In Southern California, testimony focused on wind-driven fires, ember intrusion, ignition prevention along roads and power lines, and the limits of large-scale vegetation clearing. Several witnesses argued that the state should invest where it can leverage local and regional partnerships, support capacity-building programs like Regional Forest and Fire Capacity, and improve data systems to track treatment effectiveness and project outcomes. Members repeatedly pressed witnesses on how to prioritize limited funds, asking what should be done more of, less of, and first. The chair argued that protecting homes and communities through hardening and defensible space should be a major priority, especially near structures, while also acknowledging the need for broader landscape work and watershed protection. There was discussion of incentives such as insurance discounts, property tax treatment, and community certification for hardened homes, along with the need for multiple payers rather than relying on the state alone. Cal Fire reported new and expanding data tools, including treatment trackers, defensible space inspection dashboards, and a fuels treatment effectiveness program that evaluates whether nearby treatments affected wildfire behavior. No votes were taken because the hearing was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think it’s really, you know, a sort of multi-step process.
• Like everybody processes PTSD or whatever it may be differently.
• She's just beginning the healing process.
• This bill, 1415, is directly connected to that conversation as well.
• This bill 1415 is directly connected to that conversation as well.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Mental Health, Substance Use and Recovery opened its first public hearing of the 2025–26 session with remarks from the Senate and House chairs outlining the committee’s priorities. They noted recent work on addiction and recovery legislation, the ongoing youth behavioral health crisis, and that members might need to leave periodically for floor votes. The chairs explained hearing procedures, including three-minute testimony limits, written testimony deadlines, and reporting deadlines for Senate and House bills. The hearing then focused on several bills related to youth mental health, overdose prevention, and psychedelic treatment research. A major portion of the hearing centered on bills to improve youth crisis response and overdose prevention. Testimony strongly supported bills to print the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline on student ID cards, with speakers from mental health organizations, crisis centers, and individuals sharing personal stories of depression, suicide attempts, and the importance of making 988 as familiar as 911. Another set of bills would require schools to stock naloxone and provide overdose prevention education. Physicians, harm reduction advocates, students, and grieving family members testified that school-based Narcan access and education could save lives, reduce stigma, and help students recognize overdoses and understand Good Samaritan protections. Senator O’Connor and Tamika Perry also testified for a bill to strengthen substance use prevention education and reduce overdose abandonment, emphasizing the need to teach students about overdose risks and the legal protections for calling 911. The committee also heard testimony on a bill to authorize a pilot program for psychedelic treatment in licensed facilities. Senator Friedman and several medical and behavioral health professionals argued the proposal was a narrow, research-based approach distinct from the broader ballot question rejected in 2024. They said the bill would allow only a small number of supervised clinics to use psychedelics for conditions such as depression, PTSD, anxiety, and substance use disorders, with data reporting and Department of Public Health oversight. Supporters described it as a cautious way to study promising treatments while avoiding unsupervised or commercialized use. Finally, the committee heard support for a bill to create a special commission and five-year strategic plan for children’s behavioral health services, with testimony that the current system is fragmented, difficult for families to navigate, and strained by workforce and funding challenges. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing; the committee primarily received testimony and questions on the bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• ARE CONVERSATIONS HAPPENING ABOUT THAT.
• AND IT WAS NEGLIGIBLE FROM THE FEDERAL PROCESS.
• AS EXAMPLES NEARLY 40 PERCENT FEDERAL DISPUTE PROCESS DID NOT QUALIFY FOR THE PROCESS BUT THEY STILL
• I DISAGREE WITH WHAT SHE IS SAYING ABOUT THE FEDERAL PROCESS THAT HAS BEEN IN PLACE.
• WHAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW IS COSTS ARE DRIVEN UP BY GOING THROUGH THE LITIGATION PROCESS.