Transcript Highlights:

• However, I would appreciate the support of this committee in modifying this bill to establish the application
• A few other things that I wanted to touch on, the idea of retroactive application.
• And the retroactive application issue would be significant. I heard the buzzer.

Committee: House Emerging Issues and Professional Registration

Summary: The committee met in executive session and first adopted a House committee substitute for House Bill 1611, then voted the bill do pass on a roll call vote. House Bill 2032 was also taken up in executive session; after adopting a substitute, members discussed concerns about liability, age verification, data retention, and the $100,000 per-case aggregate, and the committee voted the bill do pass by a 9-3 roll call. The committee then considered House Bills 3393 and 2392 together, adopted a committee substitute and a further amendment after a point of order challenge was rejected, and voted the combined substitute do pass by 12-1. The committee then held a public hearing on House Bill 1747, which would address AI-generated images, video, and audio by creating a cause of action for damages when realistic synthetic content causes harm, while also allowing optional labeling or watermarking to provide legal protection. The sponsor said he intended to change the labeling requirement from mandatory to permissive, partly due to First Amendment and cost concerns, and emphasized that the bill was aimed at photorealistic content that could be mistaken for reality. Members asked about standing, global enforcement, the definition of artificial intelligence, incidental sharing by users, and possible application to political content. Testifying in opposition, the Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry said it appreciated the sponsor’s willingness to work on the bill but argued that even a permissive watermarking approach would still create significant liability and uncertainty for businesses unless the cause of action was also narrowed or removed. The chamber also raised concerns about retroactive application and the burden of going back to watermark existing AI-generated content. After public testimony, the chair closed the hearing and adjourned the committee, noting there might be a quick hearing later in the week.

Transcript Highlights:

• However, I would appreciate the support of this committee in modifying this bill to establish the application
• A few other things that I wanted to touch on, the idea of retroactive application.
• whole host of artificially generated content that is out there, that has been out there, and the retroactive
• application issue would be significant.

Committees: House Emerging Issues , House Emerging Issues and Professional Registration

Transcript Highlights:

• So we hope that that will also be helpful in timeliness related to application processing.
• That will also be helpful in timeliness related to application processing.
• It's retroactive pay, but you're still asking a low-income It's retroactive pay, but you're still asking
• With regards to applicant intakes or all of it?
• All of it is applicable for remote services. That all...

Summary: The subcommittee heard an overview of the governor’s IHSS budget proposals and extensive testimony from the Department of Social Services, Department of Finance, the Legislative Analyst’s Office, county representatives, labor, consumer advocates, and advocates for older adults and people with disabilities. The administration described IHSS as a large and growing program serving more than 900,000 recipients, and outlined three proposals: shifting the cost of growth in authorized hours per case to counties, eliminating the backup provider system, and aligning IHSS terminations with Medi-Cal terminations. The LAO said the overall budget estimates appeared reasonable but raised concerns about the hours-per-case proposal, including the lack of a comprehensive root-cause analysis, the limited control counties have over statewide cost growth, and uncertainty about how the baseline and savings would work. CWDA, SEIU, and consumer advocates strongly opposed the hours cost shift, arguing that counties use state-designed tools, that demographic changes and rising need explain much of the growth, and that the proposal would pressure counties to cut services and destabilize care. The chair and members repeatedly questioned the administration about the proposed baseline, the claimed savings, and whether the measure effectively circumvents the county maintenance-of-effort agreement. On the backup provider system, the administration said the statewide program is underutilized and administratively expensive, and proposed eliminating it to save about $3.5 million. The LAO suggested the Legislature consider whether administrative costs could be reduced while preserving some version of the program. County and consumer advocates opposed the cut, saying the system is a critical safety net when regular providers are unavailable, especially in rural areas and for people with complex needs. They argued that low utilization reflects the difficulty of finding emergency backup care, not lack of need, and that many counties already rely on local backup systems or other models. Committee members also pressed for better data on requests, fulfillment, and administrative costs, and discussed whether the state could support local alternatives instead of eliminating the program. The final topic was the proposal to align IHSS terminations with Medi-Cal terminations by automating the process when recipients fail to complete Medi-Cal redeterminations. The administration said this would reduce General Fund costs by about $86 million by preventing payment of IHSS in the residual program when recipients are no longer eligible for Medi-Cal, while also automating reinstatement when Medi-Cal is restored. The LAO noted the proposal has been rejected in prior years and suggested improved notice and communication to recipients as an alternative. CWDA and advocates warned that the change could create gaps in care, especially for people who lose Medi-Cal for procedural reasons, and urged additional safeguards such as better notices, faster reprocessing, and automatic reinstatement. Members questioned how many people would be affected, how the residual program currently works, and whether providers could go unpaid during the gap; the department said the automation is already built and would be activated if the proposal is approved. No votes were taken during the discussion, and the committee moved through public comment and questioning without final action on the proposals in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The answer is you just pay a sort of late fee and it's retroactive to the time of your last filing.
• It's a few bucks and then retroactively you're reinstated. And that was my next question.
• </c><01:24:16.480><c> to</c> sort of late fee and it's retroactive to sort of late fee and it's retroactive
• </c><01:24:40.480><c> you're</c> few bucks and then retroactively you're few bucks and then retroactively
• So if you want the application material.

Bills: HF1151 , HF1239 , HF1240 , HF2020 , HF2514 , HF2515 , HF2451

Committee: House State Government Finance and Policy

Keywords: Compensation Council, salaries, state officials, judicial compensation, legislative process, public funds, misuse, law enforcement, accountability, state government, legislative auditor, compliance, transparency, retirement benefits, health insurance, dependents, state employees, Medicare, legislative studies, government oversight

Transcript Highlights:

• As our colleague has said, there are concerns about discriminatory application.
• The bill applies retroactively.
• I think there's a sweet spot here, but I also have issues with the retroactivity.
• I think there's a sweet spot here, but I also have issues with the retroactivity.
• Two of our colleagues have specifically mentioned the retroactivity in the bill.

Summary: The committee heard several bills and took action on a number of them. SB 1234 by Senator Alvarado-Gil would require fentanyl to be included in drug tests ordered by juvenile courts for parents or guardians in dependency cases; there was no opposition, a committee member confirmed it would apply to caregivers rather than children, and the bill was supported for moving forward. SB 1257 by Senator Arreguín would require the Attorney General to publish an annual public report on immigration enforcement incidents at designated safe locations such as schools, hospitals, courthouses, and places of worship; supporters from immigrant advocacy and health groups testified about fear and chilling effects in communities, while questions focused on how data would be collected and concerns were raised about sanctuary policies. SB 1176 by Senator Choi would bar foreign adversary entities from buying California agricultural land; supporters cited national security concerns, but committee members pressed on enforcement, straw buyers, and who would be responsible for identifying prohibited purchasers, and the bill was held on a 2-4 vote after debate. The committee also heard SB 1146 by Senator Gonzalez, which would require clear disclosure when AI-generated or altered images, audio, or video are used in health-related advertisements depicting health care providers. The California Medical Association and California Dental Association supported the bill, describing deepfake health ads as deceptive and harmful; it passed the committee 7-0 to Appropriations. SB 988 by Senator Grayson would regulate auto glass insurance practices by restricting assignment of benefits, requiring claim numbers and itemized estimates, and addressing steering and billing practices; supporters said it would curb fraud and stabilize premiums, while independent glass businesses worried about steering and market concentration. After discussion of consumer choice and small-business impacts, the bill passed 7-0 to Appropriations. SB 1288, presented by Senator Grayson on behalf of Senator Laird, would require financial institutions to make a good-faith effort to notify beneficiaries of non-probate assets and would reduce barriers to claiming those assets, especially for nonprofits. Nonprofit witnesses described long delays and burdensome account-opening requirements, while SIFMA and bankers opposed the bill unless amended, citing conflicts with federal and industry obligations and concerns about retroactivity and verification. The bill passed 8-0 to call. The committee also heard SB 941 by Senator Padilla, which would cap commissary markups in private immigration detention facilities at 35% above vendor cost; the Attorney General’s office and immigrant advocates supported it as a response to exploitative pricing and poor conditions, and it passed 8-0 to call. Finally, SB 909 by Senator Smallwood-Cuevas would raise and index public works contractor fees and penalties and dedicate more penalty revenue to enforcement; labor supporters said stronger funding is needed to address wage theft and backlogs, while contractors opposed the fee and penalty structure as uncapped and costly. The bill was moved forward on a vote and remained on call after committee discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• So when we think about retroactive, let's think about some of the steps we've taken with the group two
• </c> projects and half to the retroactive projects and half to the retroactive payments<00:43:49.040>
• ><c> about</c><00:45:16.240><c> some</c><00:45:16.400><c> of</c> retroactive, let's think about some
• But for $5 million under $5 million for 20 years, we could pay down the retroactive part.
• s received in the prior of applications s received in the prior fiscal<00:49:04.913><c> [snorts]</c>

Committee: Senate Education Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Four percent of the total authorized tax credits were retroactively applied, $1,105,000.
• This only allows it to be applied retroactively.
• FY 2025, 4% of the total authorized tax credits were retroactively applied $1,105,000.
• This only allows it to be applied retroactively. But, I mean, that's a million dollars that would.
• This only allows it to be applied retroactively.

Committees: House Emerging Issues , House Emerging Issues and Professional Registration

Transcript Highlights:

• We would like the committee to consider including some kind of retroactivity for sentences, and I know
• Retroactivity for sentences, and I know that that is not something you're in favor of.
• And by the way, sir, it's not retroactive, and I do not intend to bring a bill to make it retroactive
• Smithman will have a comment or question after sending you Senator, I think the question about retroactivity
• license upon the issuing of an order of limited relief and provides procedures for the review of applications

Bills: HB43 , SB81 , SB178 , SB138 , SB89 , SB183 , HB27 , HB188 , HB199 , HB190 , SB117 , HB43 , HB27

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Keywords: criminal procedure, split sentencing, probation, Class A felony, Class B felony, minimum confinement, custodial sexual misconduct, sexual misconduct, inmate abuse, prisoner exploitation, correctional staff, jail staff, detention center, probation officer, parole officer, Department of Corrections, Department of Youth Services, sheriff, county jail, municipal jail

Transcript Highlights:

• Competitive pay broadens the pool of applicants, including younger workers.
• And so you would contact your clerk, Doug Welburn, and you can get an application on our website.
• Is this going to be retroactive? No, ma'am, not retroactive, just going forward.
• Is this going to be retroactive? No, ma'am, not retroactive, just going forward.
• So right now, there would be no applicants, and that would continue for probably several months until

Committee: House Appropriations

Summary: The committee first considered House Bill 350, which would extend the grade levels at Ecole Pointe-au-Chien from fourth through eighth grade. The sponsor and several members emphasized the school’s importance to Terrebonne Parish, French immersion, and school choice. An amendment was adopted making the bill subject to appropriation, and the bill was reported favorably as amended. Members then approved House Bill 749, which authorizes the Louisiana Tuition Trust Authority to contract with a program manager for certain savings programs, including ABLE, START, and START K-12, in response to a prior cyber incident and to improve security and customer service. An amendment simplified the bill’s effective-date language so provisions would take effect upon execution of the contract. The bill was reported favorably as amended. The committee also advanced House Bill 979 to increase the survivor benefit for law enforcement officers and firefighters killed in the line of duty from $250,000 to $350,000. Testimony from the governor’s office said the increase could be covered within existing appropriations and that the amount was consistent with inflation since the benefit was last set. The bill was reported favorably. Later, House Bill 42 creating a phased retirement option for public post-secondary employees in the Teachers’ Retirement System was reported favorably, and House Bill 205 to allow local clerks of court to supplement election commissioner pay by up to $100 per election was also reported favorably after extensive testimony about staffing shortages and stagnant pay. The committee additionally reported favorably House Bill 12 extending survivor benefits to reserve officers killed in the line of duty, and House Bill 324 on judicial salaries, after amending it to remove future COLA provisions and leave only the permanent stipend increase.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:18:01.120><c> bill</c> broader more generally applicable bill broader more generally applicable
• </c> population for purposes of application population for purposes of application of<00:21:26.400><c
• Um, but I believe the word 'appliable' should be 'applicable.' Oh, good. How do you find that?
• And there is a section just making sure that it is retroactive to August 1st, 2023.
• it is retroactive to August 1st,<00:26:30.279><c> 2023.

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• Constitutionally applicable any sort of practical guidance that we can take back to our law?
• Do Massachusetts statutes generally grant prospectively or retroactively?
• Generally grant prospectively or retroactively? In your opinion, what does that mean here?
• Well, the SJC has held that unless it specifically says that a statute will apply retroactively, it only
• possible question about retroactivity, I don't know that you couldn't, that that office couldn't ask

Summary: The subcommittee hearing focused on whether the Office of the State Auditor may constitutionally audit the Massachusetts Legislature under Chapter 250 of the Acts of 2024 and what such an audit could include under generally accepted government auditing standards. Chair Cindy Friedman opened by explaining the background: voters approved Ballot Question 1 in November 2024, the law took effect in January 2025, and the Auditor then initiated audits of both chambers. The chair said the subcommittee was seeking expert testimony because the proposed audit scope, constitutionality, and possible bias concerns remained unresolved. Public testimony was invited, but no members of the public pre-registered; written testimony remained open for a short period after the hearing. The hearing then proceeded with invited experts on constitutional law/state government and auditing-related issues. Professor Lawrence Friedman testified that the ballot initiative’s approval by the Attorney General and by voters did not resolve constitutional questions, and he argued Chapter 250 violates the Massachusetts Constitution. He said the Legislature has constitutional authority to set its own rules and manage its proceedings, and that an executive-branch audit would intrude on legislative deliberation, speech and debate protections, and separation of powers. He also warned that even audits of supposedly administrative matters could become a vehicle for repeated document demands and litigation that would indirectly burden legislative functioning. In questioning, senators pressed him on the line between administrative and deliberative functions, the role of the Attorney General versus the courts, the possibility of retroactive audit scope, and whether prior legislative consent to audits mattered; he said prior consent would not bind future legislatures and that constitutionality is ultimately for the courts. Professor Ray La Raja also opposed the audit, framing it as a threat to institutional independence and representative democracy. He argued that allowing an executive-branch official to audit the Legislature without consent would upset separation of powers, chill internal debate, and create a precedent for broader executive intrusion. He said voters often support “transparency” reforms without fully appreciating institutional consequences, and that legislatures should defend their autonomy, especially amid what he described as broader executive overreach nationally. Senators asked about chilling effects, the practical distinction between administrative and core legislative functions, and whether the courts or the Legislature should resolve the issue; he said the courts would ultimately adjudicate disputes, but the Legislature should not waive its constitutional authority lightly. Jean Kempthorne took the opposite view, arguing the audit is permissible and should proceed. She said the state auditor is a constitutional officer accountable directly to the people, that the audit power can be expanded by statute, and that separation of powers does not require watertight compartments. She contended the audit would not displace core legislative powers because the auditor can only evaluate operations, report findings, and make recommendations. She also argued the Legislature itself already conducts audits of other branches, so it is inconsistent to claim an audit of the Legislature is unconstitutional. In response to senators’ questions, she said there are guardrails against truly intrusive requests, but that the administrative-versus-legislative distinction is not a workable bright line; she suggested disputes should be handled case by case, with objections, negotiation, or litigation if specific requests go too far. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill is in no way a retroactive bill.
• The bill is in no way retroactive.
• it adds the definition of "covered entity" from the Texas Medical Privacy Act and changes the applicability

Committee: Senate Health & Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill contains an emergency clause, a Prop. 105 clause, and is retroactive to December 31, 2025.
• The bill contains an emergency clause, a Prop 105 clause, and is retroactive to December 31st, 2025.
• amendment that creates a supervised work route for a veterinary technician certification that allows an applicant
• It also adds a nonprofit organization to the list of entities from which an applicant can provide evidence
• It also adds a non-profit organization to the list of entities from which an applicant can provide evidence

Summary: The caucus reviewed a long list of Senate and House bills, many of them on consent or with strike-everything amendments. Topics included advanced air mobility for border security (SB 1457), raising the off-highway vehicle weight limit to 3,500 pounds while striking a proposed law enforcement fund (SB 1519), school property leases and a trampoline court safety citation change (HB 2383), electronic monitoring in health care facilities (SB 1041), dental school complaint handling and board jurisdiction limits (SB 1168), pharmacist-authorized testing and HIV prevention guidance (SB 1713), school district insurance/self-insurance requirements (SB 1497), reporting-requirement cleanup for education statutes (HB 2203), historic neighborhood housing zoning (SB 1118), construction contract payment protections in revitalization districts (SB 1189), timeshare salesperson licensing (SB 1274), workers’ compensation notice and recordkeeping (SB 1428), property tax disability exemption clarifications (HB 2120), insurance modeling/data organization requirements (HB 2174), HOA rules on chickens and pet breed restrictions (SB 1582), first responder death benefits for law enforcement pilots (SB 1503), and changes to virtual veterinary prescribing periods (SB 1286). Members generally asked clarifying questions, and several sponsors were said to intend to concur or refuse amendments, with HB 2010 headed to conference because the sponsor would not accept the Senate’s five-year refund window. On the second calendar, the committee heard HB 2176 on health facility complaint investigations, allowing DHS to investigate older complaints involving alleged abuse; HB 2050 on radiologic technologists and radiologist assistants, restoring direct supervision requirements with limited general-supervision exceptions; HB 2010 on digital goods, where the Senate reduced a refund window from 10 years to five and the sponsor planned to refuse; HB 2875 on unmanned aircraft, expanding airport drone-delivery buffer rules from one mile to two and a half miles and requiring airport consultation; HB 2428 on county certification of emission reduction credits, clarifying participation is voluntary and limiting new credits if fleet participation becomes mandatory; and HB 2877, which was struck and replaced with a veterinary technician certification pathway requiring 4,000 supervised work hours and allowing nonprofit curriculum evidence. Several members noted support or opposition based on prior votes or policy concerns, but no roll-call votes were taken in the caucus itself.

Transcript Highlights:

• witness I have here to me is former Assembly Member Alberto Torrico, representing the California Applicants
• Assembly Member Ortega, Alberto Torrico on behalf of the California Applicants Attorneys Association
• We didn't, you know, the applicant attorneys, the injured workers, advocates, we had nothing to do with
• There's never been, in our recollection, an instance where benefits were awarded retroactively.
• There's never been legislation or a budget action that would eliminate benefits retroactively, and that's

Summary: The Assembly Insurance Committee met as a subcommittee at first because a quorum was not initially present, then later established a quorum and heard several bills. The main special-order item was AB 1795 (Gibson), which would create statewide standards for testing, inspection, and remediation of wildfire smoke damage in homes, with CalEPA and public health agencies developing science-based standards and insurers required to follow new claims-handling timelines. Supporters, including Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara and wildfire survivors, said the bill would bring consistency and safety; insurers and consumer groups generally supported the concept but sought further amendments on scope, standards, and claim handling. The committee voted do pass as amended and refer AB 1795 to Appropriations, with the roll held open for later additions. The committee also considered AB 1576 (Ortega) on the Subsequent Injury Benefit Trust Fund, which would make changes intended to reduce litigation and employer assessments while preserving the program’s purpose of encouraging hiring of workers with prior disabilities. Labor-side witnesses supported the bill as a reform step, while business, public entity, and insurance groups opposed it, arguing it did not address the core structural problems and that a trailer bill was a better vehicle for broader reform. AB 1576 was voted do pass to Appropriations, with the roll held open. AB 1931 (Papan) would create an optional limited-lines license for utilities to offer home protection products for repairs to appliances and utility service lines. Support came from HomeServe, utilities, and industry groups, who said the bill would clarify current law and add consumer protections such as training, disclosures, and a free-look period; there was no opposition in the room. The committee passed AB 1931 to Appropriations. AB 2361 (Pacheco) would limit vicarious liability for peer-to-peer vehicle-sharing platforms like Turo while preserving insurance coverage requirements; supporters said it would align California with other states, while consumer attorneys opposed it as reducing accountability and consumer recovery. The committee passed AB 2361 as amended to Appropriations. AB 2098 (Kalra), heard later, would require employers to allow leave for workers to attend treatment for occupational injuries during work hours, subject to notice and business-necessity limits; labor groups supported it and business and insurance groups sought narrower standards. It was also voted do pass to Appropriations. The committee then completed roll-call add-ons and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm still concerned, though: what do you think the effect would be if this passes with a retroactive
• So the original retroactive date was set in perpetuity, basically.
• But my other question about it was the retroactive date, and why, I mean, what if someone in—I mean,
• I don't like retroactive in the first place, but I get it sometimes.
• The concern you have is about your exposure, and I feel like the retroactive date, while I don't like

Committee: House Appropriations

Summary: The House Committee on Appropriations met on April 7, 2026, with a quorum present. After housekeeping and announcements, the committee noted several bills were voluntarily deferred, including HB 603, HB 619, HB 763, HB 810, HB 222, HB 490, and HB 981. The committee also recognized a visiting Jack and Jill group before taking up legislation. The committee reported favorably HB 82 on DWI penalties, HB 670 on wood pellet manufacturing, HB 672 on brick manufacturing, HB 773 on state procurement preferences for prison enterprises and nonprofits serving blind, disabled, and veteran workers, HB 145 on extraordinary medical and dental expenses for injured police and firefighters, HB 430 on health insurance coverage for families of Lafayette Parish officers killed in the line of duty, HB 143 on the per diem for housing state inmates in parish jails, HB 874 on adding credentials to LA Wallet, HB 160 on penalties for domestic violence strangulation offenses, HB 445 on moving the STEM Advisory Council to Louisiana Works, and HB 781 on fleet vehicle registration. HB 82, HB 670, and HB 773 were amended before passage; HB 430 also received amendments narrowing coverage terms and age limits. Most of the discussion centered on fiscal impact and policy scope. Members questioned whether several bills created new costs or unfunded mandates, and sponsors repeatedly emphasized zero or already-budgeted fiscal notes. HB 773 drew the most debate, with members raising concerns about competition, preferential treatment, and the shift from a 15% cap to fair market value; the sponsor said the bill was intended to give blind, disabled, and veteran-serving nonprofits a fair chance to compete. HB 145 prompted questions from the Louisiana Municipal Association about exposure and whether the benefit should already be covered by workers’ compensation, while HB 430 was narrowed to Lafayette Parish after concerns about statewide costs. The meeting ended with all remaining bills reported favorably and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Could you explain that and how your bill is modifying its application?
• Could you explain that and how your bill is modifying its application?
• is coming through, that it has a retroactive...
• That it is retroactive.
• How does one determine if the group is being spotlighted or the application is unfair?

Summary: The committee first considered CS/SB 1434 on infill redevelopment. A late-filed strike-all amendment narrowed eligibility to certain contaminated or brownfield properties in Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties, added adjacency and density/intensity limits, and excluded agricultural land, park land, land outside the urban growth boundary, and land near military installations. The amendment was adopted without opposition, and the bill was reported favorably on an 8-0 vote, with limited support and opposition noted in waived appearance forms. Members then took up CS/CS/SB 212 on sexual offenders and sexual predators. The strike-all added public swimming pools and related child-centered locations to residency and presence restrictions. Testimony was sharply divided: proponents argued the bill would help protect children and law enforcement, while opponents, including treatment experts and homelessness advocates, said there was no empirical evidence the restrictions reduce abuse and warned of retroactive punishment and increased homelessness. The amendment was adopted, and the bill passed 8-1. The committee also approved CS/CS/SB 686 on agricultural enclaves after an amendment allowing certain enclaves adjacent to interstates to be developed for commercial, industrial, or single-family residential uses and clarifying exclusions for protected areas. Opponents argued it would weaken zoning and comprehensive plans, while supporters framed it as a property-rights measure; the bill was reported favorably 10-0. SB 554 on nonprofit corporations, a technical update to nonprofit law modeled on prior for-profit corporate revisions, also passed unanimously after supportive waived testimony. Later, the committee approved SB 1338 on charitable giving, which creates a donor remedy for endowment restrictions and limits state reporting burdens on certain regulated or exempt organizations; members discussed cy pres and the sponsor said further changes would be worked out later. CS/SB 532 on court fees was amended to let clerks retain all collections above revenue projections rather than half, with supporters saying clerks have been underfunded for years; it passed 10-0. The committee also favorably reported SB 218 on land use regulations, which restores normal land-use authority to counties not affected by recent hurricanes, and CS/SB 692 on cybersecurity standards and liability, which creates a presumption against liability for entities that comply with cybersecurity frameworks and reporting requirements; the cybersecurity bill drew concerns about retroactivity and the adequacy of compliance incentives but passed 9-2.

Transcript Highlights:

• We provided everything requested, but our application was rejected again and again.
• The bill applies retroactively.
• I think there's a sweet spot here, but I also have issues with the retroactivity.
• I think there's a sweet spot here, but I also have issues with the retroactivity.
• Two of our colleagues have specifically mentioned the retroactivity in the bill.

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill, I think it's very important to point out, is solely retroactive.
• It's solely to deal with point out is solely retroactive.
• SB 1560 simply raises the loan limit from $3 million per application to $20 million.
• The $2 million limit on grants per application is unchanged.
• The $2 million limit on grants per application is unchanged.

Committee: House House Natural Resources, Energy & Water Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee heard several water and energy-related measures. SB 1200, as amended by a Griffin strike-everything amendment, addressed the Arizona Department of Water Resources’ treatment of certain “conduit lakes” in active management areas. ADWR testified neutral on the bill but opposed the amendment as written, saying it could grandfather in lakes that are currently in violation of the lakes statute and create water-management concerns. HOA and industry witnesses argued the bill would simply clarify and restore a prior interpretation for existing communities that rely on lakes to move groundwater and effluent for irrigation, while avoiding costly redesigns. The committee adopted the strike-everything amendment and then passed SB 1200 with a due pass recommendation by a 6-3 vote. The committee then considered SB 1419, which would tighten consumer protections for residential rooftop solar sales and installations by adding disclosure, inspection, and contractor-responsibility requirements. County and solar-industry witnesses said the bill was the product of a lengthy stakeholder process and was intended to address misleading sales practices and roof-damage concerns, while noting additional floor amendments were still expected. The committee adopted the Griffin amendment and passed SB 1419 with a due pass recommendation by a 6-1 vote, with two members voting present. SB 1447, which extends certain groundwater withdrawal fee exemptions and fund deadlines in the Pinal Active Management Area, was supported by irrigation and municipal water users as a needed bridge for infrastructure and conservation efforts amid Colorado River uncertainty; it passed 7-1. SB 1560, increasing the maximum single loan from the water supply development revolving fund from $3 million to $20 million, was backed by WIFA as necessary to meet larger rural water project needs; it passed 8-1. Finally, the committee heard SCM 1004, a memorial asking Congress to clearly define the EPA’s powers and duties. One speaker opposed it as unnecessary, but the memorial was approved on a 6-2 vote. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• The public hearing and disclosure requirement is if there is a rezoning petition or application for a
• </c><01:14:21.280><c> for</c><01:14:21.440><c> a</c> ...petition or application for a conditional use
• If it's not the author's intent to have the provisions as stated here applicable to the construction
• It talks about impairing or changing contracts retroactively to 2021.
• </c> This is going to really help applicants This is going to really help applicants know<01:36:38.120

Transcript Highlights:

• Applications for the exemption certificate may be accepted from October 1, 2026, until October 1, 2034
• The city may approve an application if the applicant meets certain requirements, including committing
• The bill before you makes changes to the eligibility, application, and notification requirements of the
• to very low... ...application if the project sets aside at least 20% of the units to very low, low,
• So we do have applications and people moving forward, but we don't have any numbers at this point.

Summary: The Senate Housing Committee heard public testimony on several bills. SB 5885 would expand affordable housing on property owned by religious organizations by lowering the density-bonus affordability threshold from 100% to 50% and adding a sales and use tax exemption for qualifying projects. The sponsor and supporters from Redmond, Tacoma, Spokane, faith organizations, and housing nonprofits said the current standard is too restrictive and that churches and other faith groups have underused land that could help meet the state’s housing shortage. A county planning representative raised concern about an unfunded mandate to update local development regulations, and one testifier said the bill should be paired with funding for county planning work. The committee also heard SB 5884, which would expand a sales and use tax deferral program for redevelopment of underutilized property. The bill would broaden eligible land beyond surface parking lots to include vacant, partially used, or underutilized parcels, and would allow cities to approve projects with at least 50% affordable units, or 20% in designated residential targeted areas. Supporters from Spokane, Vancouver, Kent, Bellingham, and the Washington State Association of Counties said the current program is too narrow and should be available in more places, including counties and more cities. Construction industry groups supported redevelopment but objected to a provision tying eligibility to apprenticeship utilization, saying it could disadvantage nonunion contractors and create compliance burdens. For SB 5937, the committee heard testimony on smart access systems in rental housing. The bill would require landlords, upon request, to offer a non-biometric, non-app-based alternative key and to provide privacy policies and limits on data collection for smart access systems. Tenant advocates supported the bill as a privacy and access protection, citing concerns about app-based locks, data tracking, lockouts, and retaliation. Landlord and multifamily housing groups said they were open to the concept but argued the bill was too broad and could impose burdens on small housing providers or simple keypad systems, and they asked for narrower definitions and clearer implementation language. Finally, the committee took testimony on SB 5938, which would make technical changes to the foreclosure prevention fee created last year, including exempting certain reverse mortgages and chattel loans, preventing duplicate charges on some state-backed transactions, and directing Commerce to study a possible state homeowner assistance fund. Homeownership counselors, legal aid, HOA advocates, and equity organizations supported the bill, saying it would clarify fee collection, protect low- and moderate-income buyers from unnecessary costs, and help sustain foreclosure prevention services. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the transcript, and the meeting ended after public testimony.