Transcript Highlights:

• want to take at the end of this process want to take at the end of this process that<00:26:11.320
• in this process. That is my motion. in this process. That is my motion.
• this process. That's our only concern. this process. That's our only concern.
• proposal to reform the MINNCOR process proposal to reform the MINNCOR process and<01:10:17.800><
• process in both bodies. process in both bodies. >> Yes,<01:27:45.440> Mr.

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The Public Safety Policy Conference Committee met on May 8, 2026, with all conferees present. The chair opened with decorum instructions, explained that the meeting was policy-only, and noted that no public testimony had been signed up. Members then introduced themselves, with several noting they were retiring at the end of the session or year. The committee adopted a series of provisions, mostly by unanimous voice vote, including House language on identity theft and financial crimes updates, supervision abatement and restitution considerations for corrections, protective-order enhancements for murder penalties, prediction markets, victim-notification requirements for plea and sentencing hearings, research data privacy, ignition interlock and impaired-driving license changes, DOC licensing and sanctions for juvenile/adult community-based residential facilities, criminal-conviction employment and licensing standards, jail medication procedures, domestic abuse law changes, and a grant-use extension for dual-status/crossover youth funding. Several items were described as technical or clarifying changes, while others updated law to address AI-related identity theft, foreign protective orders, victim privacy, and corrections oversight. The committee also heard discussion on a Senate provision allowing victims of domestic violence to petition for wireless account and phone-number transfers. A witness supported the concept but urged changes to better align the state language with existing federal law; members noted the issue might need another vehicle or further work. For the domestic abuse item, staff explained that an A15 amendment would later adjust the warrantless-arrest window from 28 days to 14 days. On the jail-medication item, a member emphasized the changes were clarifying and not an admission that last year’s law was flawed. All adopted provisions passed by voice vote without opposition.

Transcript Highlights:

• So right now, Class VI is an EPA process, Class II, OCD.
• The process at OCC very soon.
• The exact same process is contemplated here.
• The exact same process is contemplated here.
• I can tell you we are monitoring that process, and if they're following the right process and have the

Summary: The committee first heard a presentation from the Environment Department on PFAS contamination in private wells in La Cienega, Santa Fe County. Staff said the plume likely came from historic use of firefighting foam associated with airport and National Guard fire-training activities, with possible additional contribution from septic systems and consumer products. They described the contamination as affecting about 200 private wells, the short-term response of providing residential filters through a $2 million legislative appropriation, and ongoing work to define the plume’s full extent, identify responsible parties, and consider longer-term regional water solutions. Members asked about filter costs, replacement schedules, disposal of used cartridges, follow-up testing, health studies, and whether cleanup or containment had begun; the department said cleanup would follow once the plume is fully mapped and that DOH is soliciting interest in a blood study. The committee also discussed the need to track disposal of PFAS filters and the possibility of broader statewide capacity for similar work. The committee then took up abandoned uranium mine cleanup. NMED and EMNRD staff reviewed the new uranium mine reclamation program created by HB 164, the state dashboard tracking sites, and the FY26 appropriation of $20 million for neglected contaminated sites, of which $12 million is being used for neglected uranium mines and the remainder for other contaminated sites. They said six contractors were hired, three priority sites in Grant County are moving forward quickly, and additional sites are being prepared for possible FY27 work. Members pressed for details on how funds are spent, why the revolving fund remains unfunded, how federal, state, tribal, and landowner requirements are coordinated, where contaminated material will be moved, and whether cleanup could also address homes built with contaminated materials. Staff said the work is governed by multiple regulatory layers, that the state is seeking an additional $25 million for FY27-FY28 plus a time extension, and that partnerships with tribes would require longer-term agreements. The committee also discussed federal cleanup efforts and the new Good Samaritan law, with members urging stronger advocacy for New Mexico sites, including tribal lands, and asking whether the Attorney General should pursue legal action against federal parties responsible for legacy contamination. Staff explained that some sites are already covered by settlement funds tied to responsible parties, while neglected sites are those with no responsible party and no other cleanup program. The committee then heard from EMNRD on Class VI carbon sequestration primacy. Staff said New Mexico currently has no operating Class VI wells, about 27 Class II acid-gas injection wells are operating, and only a small number might be candidates for conversion. They explained that the state’s primacy application would require more public outreach than federal rules alone, and that cost estimates for post-injection site care are based on long planning horizons, with some costs borne by operators and some by the state after closure. No votes were taken on the substantive items discussed; the committee approved the prior meeting minutes and took a brief recess between presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Following this process as required by Article 48, there's an additional signature-gathering requirement
• These need to be resolved prior to any subsequent steps in the election process.
• Our preference would have been to resolve these through the legislative process.
• What is the process, right? Is it, you know, majority cards and recognition?
• criticism that the process is now a moneyed prospect, right?

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 2522 / H. 5909, which would amend state labor law to treat the Committee for Public Counsel Services (CPCS) as a public employer and allow its employees to seek collective bargaining rights. The chair explained the Article 48 initiative process, noted that no opponents or members of the public had signed up to testify, and said written testimony would be accepted through March 20. The hearing focused on whether CPCS staff should be brought within the public-sector bargaining framework and how that would interact with the agency’s statutory duties. Expert testimony began with an NCSL analyst, who gave a national overview of public employee bargaining rights and examples of public defender unions in other states and localities, including Colorado, New York City, Indianapolis, Cook County, Maryland, and Illinois. Department of Labor Relations officials then reviewed prior failed organizing efforts at CPCS and its predecessor, explaining that earlier petitions were dismissed because the agency was not considered a public employer under existing law. They said passage of the initiative would not automatically unionize employees, but would allow a union to petition for an election or written majority authorization, with normal unit-appropriateness and supervisory/confidential employee issues still to be resolved. CPCS Chief Counsel Anthony Benedetti testified that the agency supports providing information to the legislature but is not taking a position for or against unionization. He described CPCS’s statutory responsibilities, size, and current efforts to expand staffing after recent indigent-defense crises, and said any new bargaining framework would need to operate alongside the agency’s obligations to provide counsel. Proponents from SEIU Local 888 and allied labor groups argued that CPCS employees have long been denied the same collective bargaining rights as other public workers, and that a union would provide just-cause protections, a voice on staffing and working conditions, and better support for recruitment and retention. CPCS attorneys and staff testified in favor of the measure, citing heavy caseloads, rapid expansion, inadequate supervision and office support, and the need for representation in disciplinary and workplace disputes. Committee members asked about bargaining-unit composition, the role of the DLR, the effect of unionization on attorneys’ ethical duties, and the use and cost of paid signature gathering. The hearing ended with no votes taken and no opposition testimony presented.

Transcript Highlights:

• process, which is a new concept that allows for...
• process, which is a new concept that allows for... ...for an enhanced COLA process, which is a new concept
• , a fair disciplinary process.
• It's a very opaque process. It's a process that isn't fair.
• The process of contract ratification is a grinding and painstaking process, where management goes through

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Service heard testimony on a wide range of retirement, municipal workforce, and public employee labor bills. Early testimony focused on H. 2749, a Plymouth home rule petition to classify Plymouth harbormaster employees as Group 4 for retirement purposes. Supporters, including local officials and retirement board representatives, argued the employees perform law-enforcement and rescue duties comparable to police and fire personnel, that the change would be fair, and that it would have little or no fiscal impact on the town. A separate harbormaster-related bill, H. 2743, was also introduced later in the hearing. The committee also heard testimony on provisions of the Municipal Empowerment Act (H. 56), including a temporary critical-shortage exemption allowing retired state or municipal employees to return to work in hard-to-fill positions, and a renewed OPEB commission to study retiree health care costs. Administration and municipal officials said the measures were needed to address staffing shortages and rising benefit liabilities, while emphasizing the shortage exemption would be time-limited and require proof of recruitment efforts. Related retirement bills drew support and caution: advocates for higher COLA bases and enhanced COLA benefits urged relief for retirees, but some asked the committee to wait for recommendations from the special COLA commission before acting. A major portion of the hearing concerned labor rights at the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority and the Committee for Public Counsel Services. Union representatives and employees backed bills to extend just-cause protections, promotional rights, and collective bargaining rights to MWRA and CPCS workers, arguing they currently lack protections available to most other public employees. Testimony described unfair discipline, delayed promotions, and high turnover, and committee members indicated prior favorable action on similar MWRA bills and expressed support for addressing CPCS labor rights. The committee also heard from representatives of the Massachusetts Municipal Association and public higher education employees in support of H. 2820, which would require timely funding of ratified state employee contracts, with witnesses describing long delays in receiving negotiated raises and back pay. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chair repeatedly invited written testimony and closed each panel after questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• We want our process to play out. We want our due process for folks that are in Massachusetts.
• They have been tremendous throughout this process.
• That is what this process was about, and that is what this bill is.
• It reinforces due process.
• And there's also the issue of due process in our Constitution.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The House first handled several routine matters, including adoption of a birthday resolution honoring Caroline San Martino Moran and suspension of Joint Rule 12 to allow consideration of a petition involving the City of Waltham and the Veterans Memorial Rink. It also advanced two local bills: one authorizing DCAMM to release a sewer line easement in West Roxbury, and another relative to the town administrator of Carlisle. Both bills were amended by Ways and Means and ordered to third reading or engrossed as amended. The chamber also passed a memorial-marker bill for fallen law enforcement officers in Milton and Canton. The main floor debate centered on House Bill 5305, the “Protect Act,” which was presented as a measure to limit state and local involvement in federal civil immigration enforcement, restrict ICE access in courthouses and other sensitive locations, strengthen notice and language-access protections for detainees and workers, and expedite U and T visa certifications. Supporters, including members of the Black and Latino Caucus and other legislators, argued the bill would protect due process, encourage victims and witnesses to come forward, preserve public trust, and keep local police focused on criminal matters. They cited courthouse arrests, fear in immigrant communities, and the need for clearer boundaries between state and federal authority. Several amendments were offered and voted on during consideration of H.5305. An amendment to strike Section 4 was rejected, as were amendments seeking to alter the courthouse enforcement provisions and to recognize immigration judge warrants. Other amendments were adopted, including one clarifying sheriff-related provisions, one expanding language around release dates, one adding protections related to school settings, and one expediting U visa certification for family members aging out. A roll call was taken on the bill and on multiple amendments, with the House ultimately adopting the amendments described and continuing consideration of the bill as amended.

Transcript Highlights:

• multi-hazard mitigation planning process multi-hazard mitigation planning process uh<00:12:54.880
• <00:13:11.040> of experienced is because the process of experienced is because the process
• The planning process includes a description of the plan methodology and development process, committee
• :25:39.120> of<00:25:39.279> the Planning process a description of the Planning process
• methodology and development process methodology and development process committee<00:25:47.039><

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Public Safety held an informational briefing on hazard mitigation planning and recent tsunami and wildfire threats. Chair Dela Buladi opened by framing the meeting around the need for iterative disaster planning and lessons learned from events such as the Lahaina wildfires, the Puna Coast earthquake/tsunami, and recent wildfire activity. The committee heard first from Hawaii County Civil Defense Administrator Tomage Magno, who explained the federal and local hazard mitigation planning process, including the requirement for an active five-year mitigation plan to qualify for federal disaster funds. He described the plan as a living document built from prior plans, public and agency outreach, risk and capability assessments, and ongoing updates, with county departments, state agencies, and subject matter experts participating in the process. Magno outlined several FEMA-related mitigation funding programs, including flood mitigation assistance, post-fire assistance, pre-disaster mitigation, revolving loan funds, and dam safety grants. He emphasized that the Hawaii County plan was recently approved by FEMA, that the county council approves the plan, and that the county reviews it annually with a formal revision process beginning in the fourth year. Members asked about how the plan tracks project status, how priorities and funding changes are handled, and whether federal funding programs might be affected by HR1; Magno said the county is proceeding on the assumption that funding will remain available and noted some sources have been reestablished. He also said the county encourages council participation in meetings and planning. Department of Transportation Director Ed Sniffen then addressed the committee on DOT’s response to a recent tsunami threat, saying the agency had about four hours to prepare before the first wave arrival and was focused on its own operational response rather than the broader statewide planning process. In response to questions, he stated that FHWA funds cannot be used for evacuation routes, which is why prior legislative funding was important. Members also discussed specific mitigation projects such as fire breaks, bridge retrofits, and the Singing Bridge, with DOT noting that work is underway and that a replacement bridge upstream is being planned to carry traffic during repairs. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the informational briefing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Right, so they have not yet unlocked that process.
• The federal government is very early in its process.
• Compared to a potential state hearing process or the patchwork of existing processes that are currently
• That process, like the proposal at hand, details local processes for handling disputes between parents
• service delivery and establishing a new process.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And that’s an important process if I remember correctly, that EPI process. **Senator**: Correct.
• And that's an important process if I remember correctly, that **EPI** process.
• You have things in process.
• Applications and processes.
• But we try to do the best we can through the waiver process and through the enforcement process.

Bills: SB1, SB 1

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So the city will go through a process, usually starting with a planning process, where we engage a bunch
• So, are there, I mean, in that process, you know, is due process being given? Hearings are being...
• So it would take away the process to go to the Board of Adjustment, which is a public process.
• So it's a public process.
• Would remove that process. Thank you.

Bills: HB24, HB2015, HB2149, HB2559, HB2701, HB2797, HB3172, HB24

Keywords: zoning, public notice, local government, residential development, protests, water conservation, municipal utility districts, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, environmental regulation, groundwater management, nonconforming uses, zoning regulations, land use, property rights, municipal authority, municipal moratorium, development moratorium, property development, subdivision, site plan

Transcript Highlights:

• But the reality is there is a process that allows for public input and comment, and a very involved process
• within state regulation approval process?
• within state regulation approval process?
• implement that process within state regulation approval process?
• They have a predictable process, processes that are efficient and ensure that projects are done safely

Keywords: 965, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• committees are not allowing the process committees are not allowing the process to<00:26:39.279>
• quirky as to how that process worked. quirky as to how that process worked.
• and to allow for a process to unfold. and to allow for a process to unfold.
• the budgeting process. the budgeting process.
• process. Right. process. Right. >> Understood.<01:05:44.559> Okay.

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• and this is a consensus based process that we have.
• I have been through a voir dire process here in Travis County. I take that process very seriously.
• that continue to use the grand jury process.
• The Grand Jury process has been eroded both in terms of due process and fundamental fairness.
• And so to take part in this process, they have that responsibility. Can any process be abused?

Bills: HB200

Keywords: HB 200, emergency communication, backup communications, satellite phone, portable satellite equipment, radio, floodplain, 100-year floodplain, FEMA, natural disaster, disaster preparedness, emergency preparedness, vulnerable populations, children, elderly, seniors, people with disabilities, care facilities, residential care, assisted living

Transcript Highlights:

• where we are in the election process where we are in the election process such<00:03:12.640>
• from the secrecy sleeve and is processed from the secrecy sleeve and is processed [music]<00:08:
• on election day but we start processing on election day but we start processing the<00:13:29.760
• or help speed up speed up the process or help speed up the<00:46:36.800> process.
• the process. the process.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• bipartisan process looks like. bipartisan process looks like.
• <00:18:57.039> process<00:18:57.440> was<00:18:58.640> um learned in this process
• process was um learned in this process process was um she<00:18:59.760> asked<00:19:00.080>
• So, um, I have emerge from that process.
• to take a normal legislative process. to take a normal legislative process.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Why couldn't that standard be applied during the escrow process?
• This process requires counties to order the pre-petition screening, and many do not have the processes
• It's actually altering the process.
• Of course, this process can take weeks or months.
• They're trying to navigate the rebuild process.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The committee heard SB 911, which would require notification to fire agencies when a home in a high wildfire severity zone is sold with an agreement to complete defensible space work after closing. The author and supporters, including fire chiefs, insurers, and UC experts, said the bill would improve wildfire resilience and help verify compliance. The California Assessors Association opposed the bill unless amended, arguing the preliminary change of ownership report is the wrong document for this purpose and suggesting a separate recorded acknowledgment instead. Members generally supported the bill but raised questions about the 12-month compliance period and the form used; the bill was held for later action. Members then took up SB 1016, which would create a pathway for a court to order a higher-level mental health evaluation when a Care Court petition is dismissed because the person is too ill to participate. Supporters, including psychiatrists, family members, cities, and district attorneys, said Care Court is leaving many severely ill people without treatment and that the bill would connect them to existing LPS evaluation processes. Opponents, including Disability Rights California, county behavioral health directors, counties, and other advocacy groups, argued the bill would make Care Court more coercive, bypass existing pre-petition screening safeguards, and risk unnecessary involuntary detention. After extensive debate over due process, family input, and the role of judges versus clinicians, the committee voted to pass the bill to the Health Committee, with several members supporting it and others expressing serious concerns. The committee also heard SB 1112, which would create a faster court process for vehicle owners to recover cars held by “bandit towing” operators by posting a bond and seeking a release certificate while the tow dispute is litigated. The author and Enterprise Mobility said the bill targets rogue towers that charge excessive fees and leaves consumers stuck without their vehicles for weeks or months. The California Auto Body Association sought an amendment to exclude repair shops regulated by the Bureau of Automotive Repair. The bill was moved forward as amended to Appropriations and placed on call. Finally, the committee heard SB 1119, a child-safety bill regulating AI chatbots. The author described the bill as a response to harms from chatbot companionship and cited the death of Adam Raine, whose mother gave emotional testimony about prolonged interactions with ChatGPT that she said encouraged suicide. Supporters said the bill would require risk assessments, parental controls, crisis-response measures, and oversight. Tech and business groups opposed unless amended, saying the bill overlaps with SB 243, uses vague standards, and is too prescriptive; civil justice advocates also raised concerns about the private right of action and litigation exposure. Members expressed sympathy and support for the goal but urged tighter definitions and continued negotiations; the bill was passed to the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee and held on call.

Transcript Highlights:

• , contracting process, ongoing oversight and evaluation processes, and renewal criteria and processes
• > the<00:07:51.599> school The process for overseeing the school The process for overseeing
• <00:08:09.759> or Um the process for renewing or Um the process for renewing or terminating
• and renewal criteria and processes.
• processes and renewal criteria<00:17:54.080> and<00:17:54.799> processes.

Bills: HF3487, HF3421

Keywords: anonymous reporting, school safety, education, crisis intervention, threat reporting, early literacy, reading instruction, teacher preparation, teacher candidates, teacher licensure, educator licensing, Professional Educator Licensing and Standards Board, PELSB, field experience, supervised practicum, evidence-based reading, science of reading, literacy methods, teacher training, preservice teachers

Transcript Highlights:

• their members to understand this process their members to understand this process there<01:03:48.880
• We went through all the same process.
• this disability determination process this disability determination process takes<01:14:51.320><
• <01:15:09.520> for complex and traumatizing process for complex and traumatizing process for
• they have to start the um smart process they have to start the um smart process the<01:24:32.000

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• To protect the rights of all who participate in the legislative process so that we can have effective
• They must go through a certification process, and they operate under a master contract with the LEA,
• I appreciate the conversations that we've had with the stakeholders throughout this process.
• Educators, teachers, have a binding process with an ALJ. It's an expedited process.
• Some classified employees do enjoy this sort of process as well.

Summary: The Assembly Education Committee heard a long slate of education bills, beginning with SB 685 on nonpublic schools for students with disabilities. Senator Cortese and the California Department of Education described the bill as a response to the Ninth Circuit’s Laughman decision, removing the obsolete “non-sectarian” requirement while preserving secular use of public funds, nondiscrimination protections, background checks, credentialing, and incident reporting. There was no opposition, and the bill later passed 7-0 to Appropriations. The committee also heard SB 1181, a pilot grant program for violence prevention, student wellness, and school safety in Central Valley and other schools. Supporters framed it as a prevention measure, while opponents from EFF, ACLU Cal Action, and community advocates warned it could increase law enforcement involvement, surveillance, and use of fusion centers; despite those concerns, it ultimately passed 5-0 to Appropriations. Members then considered SB 1067, which would create a statewide framework for annual K-2 math assessments starting in 2028-29 to identify students needing early intervention. The author and supporters argued California faces a serious math achievement crisis and that early assessment would help close gaps, while CTA and several educators and administrators sought additional clarity and amendments to ensure alignment with existing diagnostic practices and limits on high-stakes use. The bill drew broad support from educators, parents, and advocacy groups and passed 7-0 to Appropriations. SB 1107, a school shade-structure bill, would expand eligible shade projects and allow bundling through design-build to reduce costs; it received support from LAUSD, school boards, and climate-focused groups and passed 7-0. SB 1128, on take-home devices and screen time for kindergarteners, was presented as a modest first step to give families more flexibility and reduce early screen exposure, with support from early childhood advocates and no opposition, and it passed 7-0. The committee also approved SB 1048, creating a voluntary State Seal of Climate Literacy for students who complete climate coursework and hands-on projects. Supporters, including Ten Strands, students, teachers, and county offices, said it would recognize real-world climate learning and green career readiness; it passed 7-0. SB 1140, sponsored by CFT, would require LEA construction contractors to follow campus security provisions during school projects to reduce unauthorized access; it drew support from labor and gun violence prevention groups and passed 7-0. SB 930, requiring end-to-end encryption for proctoring companies handling K-12 exam data, was presented as a student privacy measure in response to cybersecurity risks and passed 6-0. Finally, SB 1083 was introduced by Senator Perez as a follow-up to last year’s Safe Learning Environments Act, with extensive committee amendments to refine the statewide misconduct data system, disclosure rules, contractor fingerprinting, and access requirements; the transcript cuts off before the bill’s full hearing and vote are shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we still have a committee process, and the committee process is there for a reason.
• And we still have a committee process, and the committee process is there for a reason.
• And we still have a committee process, and the committee process is there for a reason.
• And we still have a committee process, and the committee process is there for a reason.
• And we still have a committee process, and the committee process is there for a reason.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• in this area to make it a more expedient process.
• We engaged in tribal consultation throughout that process.
• The process of organ donation is incredibly complex.
• There's a wide range of time that this whole process can take.
• So how long does the process take? Thank you. Thank you. So how long does the process take?

Summary: The committee met to hear introductory briefings from the Department of Health and the Health Care Authority on agency priorities, federal changes, and implementation challenges. Secretary of Health Dennis Worsham said his department’s listening tour is focused on strengthening governmental public health, improving health care quality and access, and responding to federal funding disruptions and the shutdown’s effects on programs such as WIC. HCA Director Ryan Moran said the agency is prioritizing coverage preservation, oversight of major contracts, affordability, behavioral health integration, rural health transformation, and internal agency operations. Members asked about licensure delays; Worsham said the backlog had been reduced from about four months to six weeks and should be caught up by January 1, with possible further process changes if needed. A major portion of the meeting focused on H.R. 1 and its Medicaid-related implementation. Governor’s health policy advisor Caitlin Stafford, HCA staff, and interim Medicaid Director Trinity Wilson said the state is working with DSHS, the Health Benefit Exchange, tribes, and other partners to prepare for eligibility changes, work requirements, and six-month redeterminations. They said the state expects up to 30,000 Apple Health enrollees could lose coverage under the law’s non-citizen eligibility changes, and that the work requirement/redetermination provisions could affect about 620,000 adults, with roughly 80,000 also enrolled in SNAP. HCA said it hopes to automate most verification, but about 15% to 20% of cases may require manual review, with technology costs estimated at up to $30 million. Staff also said they are trying to keep H.R. 1 implementation mostly in budget language rather than statute, and that communication and navigator support will be important to minimize confusion and coverage loss. The committee also received an update on the Rural Health Transformation Program created in H.R. 1. HCA said Washington submitted its application to CMS on November 5 after extensive stakeholder engagement, including more than 310 written comments, webinars, and tribal consultation. The application centers on six initiatives: rural hospital innovation, community care and prevention, tribal investments, technology and data, workforce development, and rural behavioral health. HCA said the state is likely to receive less than the full $200 million annual amount assumed in the federal program, and that an advisory committee may be created to help guide spending over the five-year program. Members asked about palliative care, small business impacts, and communication with enrollees; HCA said it expects to share outreach toolkits and that no 2026 statutory changes are currently anticipated, though that could change. The final panels covered organ donation and transplant services. Department of Health staff explained the 2023 “Lights and Sirens” law for organ transport vehicles, including licensing, driver qualifications, insurance requirements, and use of emergency lanes and traffic preemption; the department said one company is currently licensed and there have been no complaints. LifeCenter Northwest described the organ procurement process, the legal framework under the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act, and the rarity and complexity of deceased donation, noting Washington has seen strong growth in donation and transplants over the past decade. University of Washington Medical Center staff then outlined its transplant programs for kidney, liver, heart, lung, pancreas, and multi-organ transplants, describing the multidisciplinary evaluation and waitlist process and the coordination required with donor organizations and hospitals.