Transcript Highlights:

• And after reading all that, I about needed 29 minutes.
• Let me just read it. No.
• And after reading all that, I about needed 29 minutes.
• Let me just read it. No.
• This is the third year for this bill, and all professionals under the Applesauce Board have reached a

Summary: The Committee on Professional Registration and Licensing heard Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 1083, which combines several professional licensing changes. The senator presenting the bill explained that the respiratory therapy section would require an active RRT credential to practice in Missouri, while preserving a grandfather clause for current CRT licensees, and would add random renewal audits to confirm active credentials. The Senate-added provisions also addressed interior designers, physician licensure background checks and disclosure of out-of-state discipline, reduced the required experience for social worker supervisors from five years to three, and allowed speech-language pathologists to complete clinical fellowships under supervision of licensed SLPs in good standing from any state. During questioning, Representative Nolte disputed the claim that the interior design board was in full agreement with the bill, while the sponsor and an industry witness said the profession had negotiated changes through board-related channels. Testimony in support came from representatives of the Missouri Society for Respiratory Care, the Interior Designers Association, the Missouri Speech-Language and Hearing Association, the National Association of Social Workers–Missouri Chapter, Burrell Behavioral Health, and FGA Action. Supporters described the respiratory therapy language as a patient-safety measure, the interior design language as a scope-of-practice and business-cost reduction measure, the speech-language pathologist provision as a technical fix to ease licensure and compact participation, and the social work change as a needed response to supervisor shortages, especially in rural areas. No opposition testimony was offered. The committee then went into executive session on SB 1083, adopted an amendment that included additional cleanup and related licensing changes, rolled the amendment into the committee substitute, and voted the House Committee Substitute for Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 1083 do pass. The roll call passed 21-1, with Representative Nolte voting no. The chair announced there were no further bills before the committee and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• While he's reading the amendments, let me just read out who's in: Rick Wright, New Jersey Wine and Spirits
• If anybody needs them to be read, please advise.
• If you would like to take some time, I want to read it. I'll read it. It'll be too long.
• I want to read it. I'll read it. It'll be too long. We will talk more over the next coming game.
• I'm not reading this? Okay.

Keywords: 1146, all

Transcript Highlights:

• How do you handle a third party, somebody in a third-party buy it?
• How do you handle a third party, somebody in third party buy it?
• We have some third reads. You didn't even seem to be breathing heavy, so. I hide it well, sir.
• Now, I just haven't read this, so we're going to have to sort it out together.
• And I said earlier, maybe I shouldn't have read that part, but I think it was meant to be read.

Bills: HB2051, HB2114, HB2127, HB2134, HB2207, HB2574, HB2700, HB2800, HB2916

Keywords: AHCCCS, lactation care, breastfeeding, health services, healthcare access, motorcycle registration, safety fund, education, awareness programs, low-income scholarships, motorcycle training, special license plates, transportation, funding, nonprofits, charitable contributions, critical infrastructure, foreign adversaries, China, communications

Summary: The Committee on Appropriations met with all members present, approved the March 17, 2026 minutes, and announced its final hearing would be the following Tuesday at 8:30 a.m. The committee first heard HB 2134, the Arizona Critical Infrastructure Protection Act, which would bar state and critical infrastructure entities from contracting with Chinese companies for access to critical infrastructure, prohibit Chinese-produced software and equipment in certain systems, require annual certifications and reporting, and direct the Corporation Commission and DEMA to implement oversight and emergency communications measures. The sponsor and a witness argued the bill was a targeted national-security measure and a companion to federal efforts; concerns were raised about cost, overlap with federal law, and staffing, but the bill received a do-pass recommendation on a 6-4 vote. The committee then considered HB 2051, which would require AHCCCS contractors, subject to CMS approval, to provide breastfeeding and lactation care services in multiple settings. Testimony from lactation consultants, researchers, advocates, and tribal representatives emphasized maternal and infant health benefits, access gaps, and potential Medicaid savings; AHCCCS and ADHS were neutral, with AHCCCS estimating a $1.8 million general fund cost and ADHS saying it could not absorb implementation costs. The committee adopted a 15-page amendment creating a voluntary state certification for lactation care providers and a DHS advisory committee, then passed the bill as amended on a 9-0 vote. HB 2700, creating a technology-first study committee on assistive technology for people with disabilities, also passed unanimously after testimony from disability advocates and a proposed amendment to add minority-party appointments was discussed but not voted on. HB 2800, which increases the penalty for knowingly lending a vehicle to a person with a DUI-related driving restriction if that person causes serious injury or death, drew extensive debate over whether the felony penalty was appropriate when the lender may not know the eventual outcome; after testimony from the sponsor and the victim’s widow, the bill passed 9-1. HB 2114, which uses motorcycle safety fund money for scholarships for rural and low-income riders and requires ADOT to issue motorcycle registrations only when an owner has a class M license, passed 10-0 amid concerns that the license language may need clarification on the floor. The committee then began HB 2127, an omnibus special-plates bill with multiple amendments, but discussion centered on whether one amendment was hostile and whether a community-college plate should be offered later; no final action on HB 2127 was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it's the third-world countries that don't generate energy; the people are poor.
• So it's the third-world countries that don't generate energy; the people are poor.
• So please, ma'am, please read your... Thank you, Madam Chair.
• I'm sure, like I have been reading, a lot of you have been reading about Like I have been reading, a
• That's what I recall reading.

Bills: SB78, SB235, SB22, SB310

Keywords: nuclear energy, renewable energy, sustainability, carbon emissions, energy regulation, microgrid, zero carbon resources, Public Regulation Commission, energy generation, electric utilities, motor vehicle manufacturers, licensing, dealers, franchise agreements, consumer protection, water supply, sewage improvements, environment, funding, Mora County

Transcript Highlights:

• Read the order.
• Beginning with the second reading, clerk will read. Second reading.
• Now on to the Assembly third reading, file items 15 through 35, we are going to pass and retain on all
• And move ahead to the Senate third reading, file item 36. SCR 1 by Assemblymember Pacheco.
• Clerk will read.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And then it comes to the floor for second and third readings.
• reading.
• If you read the Rucho case, they get it.
• I've not read the opinion, but I've definitely read summaries of it.
• The Chair calls the Price Warrant for the third.

Bills: HB4

Keywords: district composition, congressional election, Texas, legislature, voting districts, 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And, quite frankly, they are third rail. ...considered third rail.
• And, quite frankly, they are third rail. This is an example. AI is a third rail.
• And I'm willing to grab the third rail.
• I mean, I've been sitting here and reading your nonverbals, and I'm not taking them as reading them in
• I'm just going to read them to you since they're a little bit long, and if I need to read them to you

Keywords: 970, all

Transcript Highlights:

• person can understand them and read person can understand them and read them.<00:09:50.000> Um
• Um that was easier for people to read.
• , I think that's a stretch of the reading, I think that's a stretch of the reading, but<01:01:54.240
• just because as people are reading just because as people are reading through,<01:03:54.960>
• Um my reading of the intent of rulem.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The continued conference on House Bill 609 focused on reconciling House and Senate drafts dealing with firearms and other personal defense tools, local government preemption, and agency rulemaking. Representative Leyon walked through amendment 21107H, explaining that it narrows undefined terms, clarifies that the General Court has supremacy over local regulation, allows damages actions for violations of preemption law, and adds language limiting agency rules unless specifically authorized by statute. She also described a three-year sunset and a delayed effective date for new rules so existing rules could continue temporarily while the legislature considers any needed statutory carveouts. Members then debated the practical effect of the language, especially whether it would bar agencies from adopting internal employment rules or instead require those rules to come through JCAR and be tied to express statutory authority. Several examples were discussed, including state plow drivers, corrections employees, and other workers who may need to carry personal defense tools in the field. The committee also discussed a provision making a plaintiff a prevailing party if a municipality changes a challenged policy after suit is filed, and a clause stating that good faith or advice of counsel is not a defense, though it may be considered in mitigation. The discussion narrowed to the difference between the House approach, which some members read as an absolute prohibition on agency rules in these areas, and the Senate approach, which some members said would allow rules only when an agency can point to express enabling authority and JCAR can review them. Members agreed that the goal was to prevent agencies from adopting rules that conflict with the statute while still allowing legitimate safety-related regulations where the legislature has authorized them. The conference took a recess and later resumed with the chair stating the parties had reached an agreement in principle based on the latest Senate language, and Representative Leyon was asked to continue reviewing the draft line by line for remaining concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• In fact, if I would third year in a row.
• Um, Read Banan Books Week. Everybody knows about that.
• Um, read I'll give you another example.
• Um, read banan<03:06:23.600> books<03:06:23.920> week.
• Who's reading a book like that? But yet we buy books like that.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard HB 1334, which would remove the Education Freedom Account scholarship organization’s authority to approve “any other educational expense” under the EFA statute. The prime sponsor, Representative Porchelli, said the bill would narrow the law to the specifically listed qualifying expenses, avoid broad interpretation, and shift any questions to the Department of Education or the legislative oversight committee. In response to questions, she said she did not think the open-ended category had been needed and that the statute already clearly lists allowable expenses. A representative of the Children’s Scholarship Fund testified in opposition, saying the category is used rarely but is important for unusual cases, especially students with special needs, and that removing it could create unintended consequences. After testimony, the chair closed the hearing on HB 1334. The committee then heard HB 1513, which would move several EFA reporting and oversight requirements from administrative rules and the contract with the Children’s Scholarship Fund into statute. Representative Porchelli said the bill would consolidate existing requirements on timely responses to oversight requests, publication of expense reports by category and provider, and transmission of eligibility and enrollment data to the Department of Education. She described the bill as mostly a clarification and transparency measure rather than a substantive policy change. Members asked about the meaning of “timely access,” the 45-day deadline, whether the contract already covered these duties, and whether the scholarship organization had ever failed to comply. The Children’s Scholarship Fund said it had generally met the 45-day deadline, had not knowingly refused information requests, and that the quarterly reporting requirement could add cost; the sponsor said the DOE had provided guidance and was neutral. The hearing on HB 1513 was then closed. Finally, the committee heard HB 1256, which would repeal the state librarian’s authority to award scholarships for graduate library school attendance at American Library Association-accredited schools. Representative Drago said the law was unnecessary because the state does not currently have a state librarian, scholarships are not typically granted by statute, and he objected to the ALA accreditation requirement and what he described as the association’s political advocacy. In questions, he clarified that the bill targets the accreditation requirement rather than a specific school and said he did not think the state should direct taxpayer-funded scholarships toward ALA-accredited programs. A member raised First Amendment concerns, but the sponsor said the issue was not speech itself, only the use of taxpayer dollars and state law to support that direction. The transcript cuts off before any vote or final action on HB 1256.

Transcript Highlights:

• Frankly, my personal read of or is not.
• We get third-party calls. There's a wanted person at this address.
• We get third-party calls. There's a wanted person at this address.
• So I'm reading as the whole case can get thrown out because of that. I'm not sure if it's it.
• So I'm reading as the whole case can get thrown out because of that.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You have to read them in that context. You have to read them in that context.
• Did you read the instructions about the Did you read the instructions about the form? I did.
• Could you read that for me real quickly? Under two. Did you read that for me real quickly?
• So if we could scroll up a little and read Mr. Powers' response to this email. Read Mr.
• So it reads...

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

Transcript Highlights:

• the committee guidelines minute to read the committee guidelines again<00:03:48.799> so<00:03
• >> I think the synopsis could be read to for the same meaning there, but I do see the...
• Outcome-based funding is the third.
• Outcome-based funding is the third.
• Outcome-based funding is the third.

Bills: HB87, HB96, HB28, HB87, HB96, HB28

Keywords: HB87, Marengo County, coroner, deputy coroner, county commission, expense allowance, mileage allowance, travel reimbursement, local act, local legislation, county general fund, public official compensation, county office, Section 45-46-60, Alabama Code, salary increase, allowance increase, National Signing Day, athletic scholarships, military enlistment

Transcript Highlights:

• It's what reading to the frustration. I've spoken enough. I think everybody gets from from.
• Then they have to do it a third time.
• Then they have to do it a third time. ...for a denial to come back.
• But that is a third-party arbiter.
• I was up at 4:30 in the morning reading this, okay? And I got, and I was up on this bill.

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and heard several insurance- and trust-related bills. CS/HB 265, relating to post-judgment execution proceedings involving terrorism, was presented as a measure to help victims enforce long-standing judgments against terrorist assets; it received no opposition in testimony and was reported favorably. CS/HB 1173, concerning the Florida Trust Code, clarified that the Florida Attorney General is the only public official with standing to enforce charitable trusts administered in Florida; members discussed that it was intended to resolve ambiguity identified by a court decision, and it also passed favorably. The committee then took up PCS/HB 643 on residual market insurers. The bill would remove the “diligent effort” requirement for surplus lines placements, revise surplus lines eligibility, and let Citizens policyholders elect arbitration through DOAH or the courts at renewal or issuance. The sponsor argued the changes would reduce red tape and give consumers more options, while an opponent from the Florida Justice Association warned that removing diligent-search protections could push more policyholders into higher-cost, less-regulated surplus lines coverage and that arbitration could favor insurers. Committee members raised concerns about the lack of premium credits for arbitration, the effect on Citizens, and the loss of consumer protections, but the bill was reported favorably. Finally, PCS/HB 1047 on insurance regulation generated extensive debate. The bill would reduce pre-licensure hours for general lines agents from 200 to 60, clarify restrictions on public adjuster conduct, require claims-handling manuals only for active residential property insurers, and define “sufficient evidence” for bad-faith claims with examples and a 10-day objection/response process. Supporters said it would streamline claims handling and clarify timelines; opponents and several members argued it could burden policyholders, especially after disasters, and might make it easier for insurers to delay or deny claims. There was also concern about the reduced training hours for new agents and the lack of detail on what constitutes sufficient evidence or a specific objection. After a divided debate, the bill was reported favorably by a 12-6 vote. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, prior to that, we terminated a contract with the third-party lab.
• So I am reading his updates.
• of those have cleared both their chamber of origin and opposite chamber Committee and must reach a third
• reading floor vote by May 7th.
• Senate Bill 1501 now authorizes the agency to approve third-party vendors.

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I was on the, I think, the eighth floor, went down to the third floor and said goodbye.
• If you'll indulge me, I'd like to read it dealing with the firefighters of 9/11.
• I've been relying on CART, but mostly I listen and lip read and understand what's being said.
• is now 20, is in her third year at Bentley, studying economics.
• I grew up in Reading, Mass.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Financial Services held a public hearing on a wide range of bills, with testimony first focused on H. 1315/S. 824, which would require insurance coverage for pain management options during IUD insertion. Representative Sabadosa, Planned Parenthood clinicians, and policy advocates said sedation can reduce fear and trauma, improve access to effective contraception, and should be reimbursed so providers can continue offering it. A Tufts OB-GYN resident also testified that pain control should be standard care for intrauterine procedures. No votes were taken during the hearing. The committee then heard extensive testimony on firefighter health bills, especially H. 1230/S. 690 requiring insurance coverage for cancer screenings for firefighters. Professional Fire Fighters of Massachusetts leaders, a Dana-Farber oncologist, and firefighters themselves described occupational exposure to carcinogens and personal stories of late-stage cancer detection, arguing that early screening can save lives and reduce long-term costs. Representative Crichton and Representative Howitt also spoke in support, and Representative Ayers testified for H. 4012, which would require neurological disorder screenings for firefighters. Committee members expressed support and sympathy, but no action was taken. The hearing also covered H. 3946/S. 756 on hearing aid coverage, with testimony from students, adults with hearing loss, disability advocates, and HLAA representatives describing the educational, social, and financial barriers caused by lack of coverage and urging broader insurance mandates. Later, Representative Donahue and Representative Vargas testified for H. 1337 to expand insurance coverage for opioid antagonists and related medications, including naloxone dispensed at discharge. The committee additionally heard testimony on H. 1134 to improve chronic pain care coordination and non-opioid access, and H. 4162 to improve ostomy supply coverage and access to certified ostomy care, with patients and clinicians describing denials, quantity limits, and non-medical switching. The transcript ends while testimony on H. 1315/S. 824 is still ongoing; no votes or formal committee actions are recorded in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think, as I said, I would read Rule 28 the same way that you and Representative Turcotte read Rule
• organizations referred to as third-party organizations referred to as third-party providers<02:12
• that in the definition of third-party that in the definition of third-party provider<02:12:18.440
• information is disclosed by the third information is disclosed by the third party<02:46:09.880><
• constitution I'll assume you have read constitution I'll assume you have read and<04:05:51.800><

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Judiciary Committee met to hear House Bill 520, which would authorize the Department of Education to issue subpoenas in investigations and hearings involving the code of conduct for New Hampshire educators. Representative Lynn, the bill sponsor, said the measure was intended to give the department standard subpoena power during investigations and in later adjudicatory proceedings, with a process for challenging overbroad subpoenas. He argued that agencies with investigative and hearing authority should also have the power to compel witnesses and documents, and said the bill was narrowed from an earlier broader draft to focus on teacher credentialing and address concerns about scope. Members raised several concerns about whether the department already has enough authority, whether the Attorney General could handle subpoenas instead, and whether the bill creates an imbalance by giving subpoena power mainly to the investigating side. Representative Burroughs said she did not feel she had enough information and was uncomfortable with the bill, especially regarding who bears subpoena costs. Representative Biron questioned the trial analogy and whether both sides truly have equal subpoena rights. Lynn responded that the investigative stage is like a grand jury process, where only the investigating body subpoenas witnesses, while the adjudicatory stage allows both sides to seek subpoenas through the hearing officer. Other questions focused on the bill’s scope. Representative Andreos asked what investigative authority the Department of Education already has, and Representative Organ questioned why the bill is limited to educators rather than also covering vendors, charter school boards, or the EFA scholarship organization. Lynn said the limitation to educators was deliberate, because earlier broader versions drew objections for being too expansive. Representative Tur asked whether the Attorney General could already handle such matters, and Lynn said that while the AG might be able to pursue some investigations or court subpoenas, agencies should be able to conduct their own internal investigations. No vote or final action was taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, they might do the reading test during one week, but they might reading test during one week, but
• So, but if I if I'm reading have EFAs that are attending Bishop Brady, it's a larger number than 10.
• But New Hampshire students also then take But New Hampshire students also then take the third section
• Um, it's not—we are the only state left that is still doing that third section.
• Take a second to read. There's two sets here. Did everybody get those or not?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Education Freedom Account Oversight Committee met on March 27 and approved the agenda, adding a request for clarification on how the Children’s Scholarship Fund separates applications for the EFA program and the education tax credit program. The committee also approved minutes from December 30, 2025, and March 27, 2026, with a request that the March minutes include a link to the live stream. Members discussed the status of pending Legislative Budget Assistant audit reports on EFA and special education, noting the reports were still not released and would likely come later in the summer after review by the Department of Education and the Children’s Scholarship Fund. A major topic was the EFA program’s administrative fee, which statute allows up to 10% of deposits. Children’s Scholarship Fund representatives said current administrative costs were under 8%, that staffing had been reduced through the ScholarVia platform, and that any unused amount is reconciled and returned to students at year’s end. Members asked for historical administrative-cost data and a written explanation of how the withholding and reconciliation process works. The committee also reviewed the distinction between the EFA and education tax credit funding streams and was told the two programs use separate applications and separate funds, though both use the same platform. The committee spent substantial time on assessment and accountability. Department of Education staff explained that EFA students may satisfy annual assessment requirements through a portfolio, a norm-referenced test, or the statewide assessment; only about 10 EFA students took the statewide assessment, while most used portfolios or standardized tests such as the California Achievement Test and NWEA. Staff described how statewide assessment data are kept separate by student identifier and can be aggregated for EFA reporting, and members asked for breakdowns by grade, test type, and school district. The department also discussed linking assessments through Lexiles and Quantiles and said it could provide a list of commonly used formative assessments in New Hampshire districts. The committee additionally discussed a possible PSAT addition to the state contract and the costs of the statewide assessment program. Another major issue was special education eligibility and services within the EFA program. Members questioned the rule allowing a medical certification of disability from a licensed professional anywhere in the United States as an alternative to an IEP-based determination. Department staff said the current system allows either pathway, that about 1,000 EFA students are identified as special education students, and that the program does not track growth or service alignment on an individual basis. Members expressed concern that the medical-certification route may be too broad and asked for data on the disability categories used. The committee also discussed career and technical education access for EFA students, noting that Senate Bill 491 would provide guidance and that House Bill 1817 would address access and funding issues, but that current law still allows EFA funds to be used to pay CTE costs. The meeting ended with a request for future agenda items and a decision to leave the next meeting date open until fall, pending further information from the LBA audit process.

Transcript Highlights:

• now and the third company is have<00:13:59.199> is<00:13:59.560> uh<00:13:59.759> is
• Our state ranks third in the nation for air and water quality, and we're one of only four states that
• Our state ranks third in the nation for air and water quality, and we're one of only four states that
• our state ranks third in in the<00:26:51.279> nation<00:26:51.520> for<00:26:51.760>
• <00:30:15.320> the be successful I hope you all read the be successful I hope you all read

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• When I read this in the bill, that paragraph is in 353:B, 3, I read it to mean that the only part of
• I guess we are read it.
• That's not how I read it.
• That's how I read this.
• and we sit and wait and you know read and we sit and wait and you know read read<05:11:34.400>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first discussed a budget-related issue involving liquor commission enforcement staff and tobacco enforcement funding. A member explained that proposed cuts to “group two” enforcement positions at the liquor commission could jeopardize the tobacco enforcement money that flows to Health and Human Services, and expressed confidence that the enforcement division would ultimately be preserved. The main hearing was on Senate Bill 19, which would modernize hotel and motel statutes by repealing outdated requirements. The sponsor and the New Hampshire Lodging and Restaurant Association said the bill would remove obsolete rules such as the old guest book/card system and antiquated posting requirements for room rates and motel signs. Members questioned whether the bill would eliminate the requirement to record guest departure dates or affect inspection rights, and the witnesses said the intent was only to remove the book-and-card reference while leaving the rest of the recordkeeping requirement in place. Supporters argued the rate-posting rules are widely ignored, hard to enforce, and outdated in an era of digital reservations and variable pricing; the committee also discussed whether any consumer-protection purpose remained. The public hearing on SB 19 was then closed. The committee then heard Senate Bill 280FN, which would require food delivery services to have an agreement with a restaurant or food retail store before offering delivery from that business. The sponsor said the bill restores a prior law that had sunset and was intended to prevent third-party platforms from listing restaurants without consent. Restaurant industry testimony strongly supported the bill, describing problems with unauthorized listings, delayed deliveries, and reimbursement disputes, and saying the agreement requirement protects restaurant brands and consumer expectations. Members shared examples of delivery problems and voiced support for reinstating the safeguard.

Transcript Highlights:

• disabilities not reading at grade level by that benchmark.
• I drive home that point because not reading at grade level by the end of third grade is the canary in
• The seminal study, *Double Jeopardy: How Third Grade Reading Skills and Poverty Influence High School
• Graduation*, found that students who don't read proficiently by the end of third grade are four times
• Again, seeing the crucial benchmark at the end of third grade is... ...that the end of third grade is

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Juvenile and Emerging Adult Justice held an informational hearing focused on diversion programs and services for high-risk youth, with no bills before the committee and no votes taken. The chair and members emphasized that the session was intended to hear from invited testimony and discuss how to strengthen diversion, reduce court involvement, and improve outcomes for youth. The committee heard first from the Office of the Child Advocate and diversion providers, who described the Massachusetts Youth Diversion Program, its statewide expansion to 10 of 11 court counties, and its reported success rate of about 80% completion without reoffending. Testimony highlighted that diversion keeps youth out of court, connects them more quickly to community-based services, and can address needs such as mental health, education, and substance use. Witnesses also pointed to racial and ethnic disparities in arrests versus summonses, regional variation in diversion access, and the need for clearer statutory authority, more funding, and broader use of pre-arrest diversion. Committee members asked about the difference between arrest and summons, who can initiate diversion, why arrest rates have increased relative to summonses, and how diversion might prevent harmful downstream consequences such as detention or immigration enforcement involvement. Witnesses said police, clerk magistrates, district attorneys, and judges can refer youth to diversion, and argued that local policy, training, and legislative changes could expand use. They also discussed the impact of detention on youth, including stigma, lost school time, and the lack of credit for time served in the juvenile system. Testimony from Citizens for Juvenile Justice focused on prevention, school discipline, and the school-to-prison pipeline, arguing for more restorative practices, better data, and legislation to limit suspensions and expulsions, especially for younger students and nonviolent conduct. They also raised concerns about DCF-involved and foster youth, who are disproportionately represented in the juvenile system. The final panel, the Children's League of Massachusetts and transition-age youth providers, shifted to child welfare and young adult supports. They supported reducing court involvement in child requiring assistance cases, expanding family resource centers, and strengthening services for transition-age youth leaving DCF or DYS custody. Providers described housing instability, homelessness, and the need for education, employment, behavioral health, and supportive housing services for young adults ages 18 to 23. Across the hearing, witnesses consistently argued that early intervention, community-based supports, and diversion are more effective than court processing or detention for most youth, and that the legislature can help through funding, statutory clarity, expanded eligibility, and stronger data collection.