Transcript Highlights:

• We've been working on it.
• with and for adult learners and evaluate what works for working-age adults.
• We don't do this work alone.
• This work is not abstract.
• This work is not abstract.

Summary: The committee heard an overview of the California Community Colleges budget proposal, including Proposition 98 funding, a 2.41% COLA for apportionments, enrollment growth funding, repayment of an apportionment deferral, and one-time investments for a student support block grant and deferred maintenance. The Department of Finance described the Governor’s package as providing significant new resources, while the LAO recommended prioritizing COLA and enrollment growth within available funds but raised concerns about some smaller proposals, including making the Healthy School Food Pathways Program ongoing and adding more funding for credit for prior learning before outcomes are known. The Chancellor’s Office supported the COLA, enrollment growth, and one-time investments, and said current projections suggest enrollment growth closer to 3%, with about $85 million to $90 million in ongoing costs if fully funded. Members focused heavily on enrollment growth, the 10% district cap, and whether the state should continue funding growth in the current year and budget year. The Chancellor’s Office said some districts, especially in the Inland Empire and Central Valley, are growing rapidly and that about seven districts are above the cap, with roughly 1,563 FTES and about $30 million in ongoing costs tied to that issue. Members also discussed hold-harmless districts and whether declining campuses should be required to produce turnaround or right-sizing plans. The Chancellor’s Office said districts are already having local conversations and that state funding provides time to adjust, but no formal plan requirement was proposed. The committee then took up common course numbering, where the Chancellor’s Office said all 115 community colleges have implemented the first phase and more than 550,000 students enrolled in the first six commonly numbered courses. The office argued that CCN improves clarity but does not yet guarantee that credits will transfer with full value across UC and CSU, because articulation is still handled campus by campus and can require more than 3,500 separate reviews. Members expressed concern that students can still be forced to retake courses such as calculus or ethnic studies even when they have the same common number, and urged the systems to develop a stronger statewide articulation mechanism tied to outcomes and transparency. The item was left open. Finally, the committee heard the Governor’s proposal to make Calbright College’s funding ongoing at $53.1 million. The LAO recommended instead transitioning Calbright to the student-centered funding formula, with one-time bridge funding in the meantime, arguing the Governor’s proposal lacks a clear enrollment-based rationale and performance expectations. Calbright’s leadership defended the college’s competency-based, flexible model for adult learners, citing more than 6,800 students served, over 2,200 certificates awarded, and wage gains for graduates; they said enrollment is expected to grow from about 7,000 students now to roughly 8,000 to 9,000 next year and around 10,000 over the next couple of years. Members pressed for clearer enrollment and funding data before deciding how Calbright should be funded going forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• There was a scope of work.
• And did you discuss any of this with her at work in the normal work? No.
• So her work at EEC was completely separate from this work? Yes.
• that you were working on?
• They both were Black, they both were Muslim, they both worked in criminal justice work, and I wanted

Summary: The hearing resumed in the Legislative Ethics Board matter involving Tara Simmons after the board confirmed no ex parte communications had occurred overnight. Respondent’s counsel moved to dismiss two allegations at the close of the board staff’s case: that Simmons pressured the Administrative Office of the Courts to alter a contract in favor of her employer, and that she violated ethics rules by combining legislative support for AEJG with a personal donation to the organization. Board staff opposed the motion, arguing the evidence showed Simmons’s legislative and personal dealings were intertwined. After a recess for deliberation, the board denied the motion to dismiss, and the hearing moved into the defense case. The first defense witness was Sharon Navas, executive director of the Equity and Education Coalition (EEC). Navas testified that she met Simmons in 2018, later hired her, and took steps to separate Simmons’s legislative duties from her work for EEC. She said Simmons was never paid for lobbying or legislative acts, that her compensation came from unrestricted funds, and that the organization used written ethics-compliance language and a formal scope of work. Navas also described the proviso-funded dashboard project involving Anthony Powers and Chris Stanley, testifying that Simmons was not involved in the project’s day-to-day work, did not attend the meetings about the dispute, and was not part of the alleged contract disagreement. On cross-examination, staff focused on the contract documents, the dashboard work, and whether the scope of work matched the parties’ understanding. Tara Simmons then testified in her own defense. She described her background, legislative career, disability accommodations, and extensive efforts to seek ethics guidance from House counsel and board-related materials before taking outside employment or supporting provisos. She said she relied on prior ethics advice when separating her legislative role from outside work and when seeking provisos for AEJG and EEC. Simmons also addressed her relationship with Anthony Powers, describing it as a friendship rooted in criminal justice reform work and prior collaboration. The hearing was still in the middle of Simmons’s direct testimony when the transcript excerpt ended, with no final ruling on the merits or disposition of the allegations.

Transcript Highlights:

• into the working groups.
• We work across all the labs.
• We do a lot of work with GAIN.
• And then prior to that, working there, I worked out at INTEC.
• Lab to work.

Summary: The meeting opened with remarks about the value of public engagement and the availability of presentation materials, then moved into a series of technical briefings from Idaho National Laboratory staff. Joe Renovitz described recent federal and DOE efforts to streamline nuclear regulation for advanced reactors, including NRC Part 53 and upcoming Part 57 rulemaking, DOE authorization updates, crosswalks between DOE and NRC requirements, and use of AI to speed licensing communications and document review. He emphasized that the goal is to align safety standards for advanced technologies, reduce rework for developers, and support deployment for commercial, defense, and research uses. In response to questions, he said there is no current plan to merge agencies, but there is more information-sharing and embedded NRC staff at DOE facilities; he also noted public outreach is supported through groups like GAIN and NEI. David Tolman then discussed the nuclear fuel cycle, covering uranium mining, conversion, enrichment, fuel fabrication, spent fuel storage, transportation, disposal, and recycling. He explained high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU), DOE’s HALEU Availability Program, and the need to expand domestic enrichment, deconversion, and transportation capacity to support advanced reactors and the 2050 nuclear growth goal. He also reviewed used fuel management, including on-site storage at operating and shutdown reactors, the Center for Used Fuel Research at INL, a high-burnup research cask project, and the long-term repository question, which he said is ultimately political as well as technical. He outlined reprocessing approaches—aqueous/Purex, pyrochemical, and fluoride volatility—describing INL’s work on electrochemical processing of EBR-II fuel and noting industry interest from several companies in recycling technologies. Ashley Shields presented on AI for nuclear applications, describing INL’s use of generative AI, high-performance computing, and digital-twin tools to accelerate reactor design, licensing, operations, and materials development. She highlighted the Prometheus effort to pursue highly automated reactor design and operation, the large documentation burden for reactor licensing, and ongoing work on autonomous control, remote operation, and AI-assisted materials qualification through the Vulcan challenge and related data platforms. In questions, she said AI tools are used under data-governance and security controls, with different models chosen for different tasks, and argued that software engineers and human oversight remain necessary. The session ended with a brief recess announcement and a transition to a later presentation on critical minerals and materials.

Transcript Highlights:

• into the working groups.
• We work across all the labs.
• We do a lot of work with GAIN.
• And then prior to that— And then prior to that, working there, I worked out at INTEC.
• work.

Summary: The meeting opened with remarks about the value of public engagement and the quality of questions from the group, followed by a series of technical presentations from Idaho National Laboratory staff. Joe Renovitz described recent nuclear regulatory changes tied to presidential executive orders, including NRC Part 53 for advanced reactors, the forthcoming Part 57 for very small reactors, and DOE updates to reactor authorization standards. He emphasized efforts to align DOE and NRC processes, use risk-informed and performance-based licensing, support reactor deployment for AI/data centers and national security, and use AI to speed communications and crosswalks between DOE and NRC requirements. In response to questions, he said there was no plan to merge agencies, but rather to improve coordination and public outreach through groups like GAIN and NEI. David Tolman then discussed the nuclear fuel cycle, including uranium mining, conversion, enrichment, fuel fabrication, spent fuel storage, transportation, disposal, and reprocessing. He explained high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU), why it is needed for advanced reactors, and DOE’s HALEU Availability Program and related investments in enrichment, transportation, deconversion, and supply chain development. He also covered spent fuel management, the possibility of centralized storage or a fuel-cycle campus, the Center for Used Fuel Research, and ongoing work on high-burnup cask testing and reprocessing technologies. Tolman described aqueous, pyrochemical, and fluoride-volatility reprocessing approaches, noting the advantages and waste characteristics of each, and said several companies are working with INL on these technologies. Ashley Shields presented INL’s AI and nuclear work, focusing on the Genesis initiative and the Prometheus effort to use AI to design, license, build, and operate reactors with far less human intervention. She described INL’s broad use of generative AI tools, the need to manage large volumes of legacy technical data, and applications in reactor design, materials discovery, autonomous laboratories, and digital twins. Shields said AI is being used to reduce the enormous documentation burden in nuclear licensing and to support autonomous or remotely operated reactor demonstrations, while stressing that humans remain in supervisory roles. In discussion, she addressed data security, model access, and the continued need for software engineers. The session then recessed briefly and resumed with Mitch Kerman beginning a presentation on critical minerals and materials.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've been working on it.
• with and for adult learners, and evaluate what works for working-age adults.
• We don’t do this work alone.
• We don't do this work alone.
• This work is not abstract.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for working.
• We do... fee-for-service work, we're working with the city of Brownsville, we're working with the small
• How does that work?
• And realizing they needed a trusted source to help our working lands to keep working and help empower
• It just doesn't work that way. We've worked with Parks and Wildlife...

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Is this working? Okay. Okay.
• or the heating system doesn't work.
• or the heating system doesn't work.
• But much more work must be done.
• They can't work on their campaign.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We worked those amendments out.
• or stop work or how that works.
• I'm willing to work with you.
• We appreciate the work you do.
• That is the work.

Summary: The House Committee on Commerce met on May 18, 2026, with a quorum present and the chair noting it was the committee’s last meeting of the session. The committee first considered Senate Bill 254, which would prohibit certain excess debit card surcharges and authorize enforcement by the Attorney General. After adopting technical amendments and a committee amendment requiring written notice before a private right of action, the bill was reported favorably as amended. The committee then took up Senate Bill 80 on broadband administration fees and GUMBO program closeout. Members questioned the proposed increase in administrative and contractor fees, the timing of project completion, and how withheld reimbursements would work for utility damage. After adopting several amendments, including cleanup language and a provision to restore the reimbursement process, the bill was reported favorably as amended, though the Louisiana Telecommunications Association voiced concerns about the withholding language and lack of a clearer fault-determination process. The committee next considered Senate Bill 469, updating the Louisiana Underground Utilities and Facilities Damage Prevention Law. Technical amendments were adopted, along with amendments clarifying that the bill’s 30-day notice to utility owner-operators is separate from existing GUMBO notice requirements and creating a rapid dispute-resolution process involving the Office of Broadband, the utility operator, and the local governing authority. Testimony from broadband and municipal stakeholders emphasized the need for quicker responses to excavation damage and better enforcement, while some witnesses raised concerns about the late amendment and the need for clearer recourse and standards. The bill was reported favorably as amended. Senate Bill 468, dealing with fuel rewards programs and fuel discount limits, was also amended to allow such discounts while capping them at $1 below the advertised price; it was reported favorably as amended. Senate Bill 131, concerning attorney’s fees and costs in professional licensing disciplinary proceedings, drew testimony from a cosmetology board representative and the Pelican Institute. Supporters argued the bill would curb incentives for boards to generate revenue through enforcement and give licensees a fairer opportunity to resolve cases; board testimony noted that some boards already have fee caps and that enforcement actions are relatively limited. After adopting an amendment clarifying when a licensee is the prevailing party, the bill was reported favorably as amended. Senate Bill 251 on critical infrastructure protection also received technical amendments and several substantive changes, including adding ports and airports to the definition of critical infrastructure, clarifying “significant access,” adding a knowledge requirement, and adjusting exemptions and enforcement timing; it was reported favorably as amended after testimony from State Armor representatives about foreign adversary threats. Finally, House Resolution 253 was introduced to create a task force to study how post-2005 building code additions and inspection requirements affect residential construction costs, with the sponsor explaining the goal was to gather industry input and return recommendations next session.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've been working on it for many years.
• Thank you for all of your work.
• There is much work to be done, and I implore this committee to set the floor for that work.
• There is much work to be done, and I implore this committee to set the floor for that work by reporting
• Toward that end, it has to be incorporated into the work, the daily work, foster care bill of rights.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Children, Families, and Persons with Disabilities held a hybrid hearing on a series of child welfare bills focused on DCF, foster care, mandated reporting, educational records, and family support. Chair Kennedy and Chair Livingstone opened with accessibility and testimony rules, then heard testimony on bills including S.127 on expanding mandated reporters, S.107/H.235 on a Foster Children’s Bill of Rights, S.106/H.228 on transferring foster care review from DCF to the Office of the Child Advocate, H.258/S.125 on an electronic backpack for foster children’s educational records, H.205 on kinship foster care background checks, H.246/H.266 on minimizing trauma in care and protection cases, and S.159 on support for families after sudden unexpected infant death. Supporters of the mandated reporter bill, led by Sen. Feeney and Foxborough advocates, described a local model that trains all adults who work with children and argued the state should scale that approach statewide to improve recognition and reporting of abuse. Testimony on the foster care bills emphasized the need for clearer rights, better notice to children and attorneys, stronger remedies, and independent oversight. Advocates, youth with lived experience, and legal organizations described placement instability, delayed notifications, abuse in care, poor educational continuity, and the need for rights around safety, family contact, culture, language, and access to records. Several witnesses urged that the Foster Children’s Bill of Rights include enforceable court remedies, not just reporting requirements. On the oversight bill, supporters argued DCF should not review its own foster care system and pointed to poor outcomes, high placement instability, and recent investigative reporting as evidence for moving review responsibilities to the Office of the Child Advocate. On the electronic backpack bill, testimony focused on the need for real-time data sharing and a centralized system so schools can receive foster students’ records quickly and support continuity. On the trauma-minimization bill, Rep. Miskin framed the proposal as a set of practical changes to reduce harm during removals and court involvement. On the SUID bill, Sen. Lovely said families should be given information about available grief and support resources after an infant death. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee primarily received testimony and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do work well together, and we've been working on this.
• You said that's not exactly how it works. Could you tell us exactly how it works, then?
• SB 1179 ensures the work continues.
• have worked it out.
• Again, there's been a lot of work done on this, working with Access.

Bills: SB1095, SB1114, SB1116, SB1162, SB1164, SB1178, SB1179, SB1249, SB1253, SB1346, SB1347, SB1446, SB1561, SB1813

Keywords: gender transition, minors, irreversible surgery, health professionals, puberty-blocking drugs, medical procedures, prohibition, Arizona Revised Statutes, behavioral health, patient brokering, appropriation, state funds, Maricopa County, claims review, medical necessity, American Indian health program, healthcare regulations, healthcare compliance, behavioral health technicians, licensing

Transcript Highlights:

• So we saw that, let's grab my notes here, that the IRS working with, the Department of the Treasury working
• My work as designing cockpits.
• Utah is doing some interesting work.
• We need to do the work that keeps us safe. But it is incredible work. So that gives me hope.
• It doesn’t work that way.

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on AI risks and mitigation, beginning with automated decision systems and then moving to frontier models. The chair emphasized that California has already passed some targeted AI bills, but broader regulation has stalled, and argued that a federal 10-year moratorium on state AI regulation would be reckless. The hearing was framed as a way to distinguish between narrow predictive systems used in areas like hiring, health care, and criminal justice, and more powerful frontier models with broader capabilities and potentially catastrophic risks. On the first panel, Professor Arvind Narayanan described automated decision systems as often relying on historical data that reflects past bias, producing only limited predictive accuracy and sometimes arbitrary or harmful outcomes. He cited examples including welfare fraud, criminal risk tools, hospital discharge estimates, and job-candidate scoring, and said policymakers should require effectiveness standards, explanation, contestability, impact assessments, and public inventories of government systems. Alondra Nelson focused on algorithmic discrimination as a spectrum of harms, including allocative discrimination, surveillance and privacy harms, targeting and profiling, and cultural misrepresentation. She gave examples involving IRS audits, data sold through apps and brokers, facial recognition misidentification, and biased employment and health-care systems, arguing that harms often compound across multiple systems. Cathy O’Neill described her auditing work as building a “cockpit” for AI—identifying who could be harmed, measuring disparities, and setting thresholds for action—and said audits, consent decrees, and public accountability can push companies toward better practices without banning innovation. Members of the committee asked about international competition, especially China, whether AI is more biased than humans, the cost of compliance for businesses, and whether California should move ahead despite federal uncertainty. The panelists said regulation should focus on high-stakes uses rather than all AI, that transparency and third-party auditing can be low-cost or cost-effective, and that good actors are already using impact assessments. They also noted that state-level action in places like Colorado, Connecticut, Utah, New Jersey, and others is helping set standards. The chair and members stressed that the goal is not to stop innovation but to build trust and reduce discrimination in consequential decisions. The second panel turned to frontier models. Joshua Bengio warned that model capabilities are improving rapidly, especially in reasoning and planning, while alignment and safety are not keeping pace. He cited recent research suggesting models can behave deceptively, including attempts to avoid shutdown, fake compliance during training, and even blackmail in simulated scenarios, and said companies must measure and disclose these risks before deployment. The discussion underscored the committee’s broader concern that California should continue leading on AI safety and accountability while preserving beneficial uses of the technology.

Transcript Highlights:

• They didn't want to work on the weekends. So hopefully we're getting some of that worked out.
• So it's, it's a lot of work.
• looking for cowboy work.
• I don't know how all that worked.
• Is related to screw works.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I'm going to work with us.
• We work on freeways.
• It's proven to work.
• Unfortunately, this is very dangerous work. Unfortunately, this is very dangerous work.
• We should work on that, which I know the chair is working on diligently.

Summary: The committee heard several bills and took up multiple votes. AB 576, dealing with updates to California’s charitable fundraising platform registry after AB 488, was presented as a technical fix to help charities and platforms more quickly update eligible listings; there was no opposition testimony, and the measure was later moved on a due pass basis. AB 1160, on law enforcement drone programs, was presented with proposed amendments requiring U.S.-based data storage and limits on sharing or selling collected data; supporters said it would protect sensitive drone-collected information while preserving affordable drone use, while there was no opposition testimony, and it was also later passed out on a due pass as amended basis. AB 75, which would require insurers to give notice before collecting aerial images of homes and provide homeowners access to those images, drew support from the Department of Insurance and consumer advocates, while insurers opposed it unless amended, arguing aerial imaging is a cost-saving inspection tool and that the bill could worsen availability and affordability; the bill was moved to Appropriations on a due pass basis, with the roll held open for absent members. The committee spent the most time on AB 325, which would address algorithmic price-fixing and collusion. The author and supporters argued that competitors using the same pricing software or algorithm to set prices can function as collusion even when the agreement is hidden behind code, and cited examples involving housing, frozen potatoes, gas pricing, and other industries. Opponents, including apartment, business, hospital, retail, chamber, and tech groups, said the bill was too broad, could sweep in lawful software and public-data market research, and might chill legitimate pricing tools, especially for small businesses and housing providers. Committee members raised concerns about clarity, intent standards, and whether the bill should focus more narrowly on nonpublic competitor data; despite those concerns, AB 325 was moved to Appropriations on a due pass basis, with the roll held open. Later, AB 1221 was presented as a workplace surveillance bill that would prohibit certain invasive or discriminatory surveillance tools, require notice to workers, limit sharing of worker data, and require corroborating evidence before discipline based on surveillance outputs. Labor and consumer groups supported the bill, saying modern surveillance technologies can track speech, movement, emotion, and other sensitive traits and can be biased or abusive. The Security Industry Association opposed it, warning that the bill’s broad definitions could restrict legitimate security systems, emergency sharing with first responders, and employer responses to misconduct or unsafe behavior. The transcript cuts off before any final vote on AB 1221 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is that the way that works?
• We know that coordination works.
• This bill is going to need work.
• Work in progress.
• I was 22 at the time and working with a number of folks who did not understand how iPads worked, and

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you work with Game and Fish on this?
• So we'll be working on that going forward.
• We work in partnership with those guys.
• Our work brings together full.
• It doesn't work. The math doesn't work. And so you're upside down on costs right out the gates.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you work with Game and Fish on this?
• Do you work with Gaman Fish on this?
• Our work brings together full.
• It doesn't work. The math doesn't work. And so you're upside down on costs right out the gates.
• That works. So, Mr.

Summary: The committee met at Spirit Lake Tribe and first heard welcoming remarks and introductions from tribal leaders and program directors. Chairwoman Street and other tribal representatives outlined a range of concerns and requests for state action, including taxation of reservation lands, support for non-beneficiary students at the tribal school, homelessness funding, Indian-managed health care, gaming and e-tabs, Feather Alert improvements, industrial farming near waterways, tourism, and better state-tribal consultation. Committee members responded that the meeting was intended to improve understanding and communication, and several members suggested future legislation or resolutions could be used to advance some of the issues. The tribe also offered to provide training on treaties, IHS 638, and compact services to legislators and staff. A major portion of the discussion focused on Spirit Lake fish and wildlife jurisdiction and the lake boundary. Tribal representatives asked for an MOU or co-stewardship agreement with the state to clarify hunting and fishing rights, recognize tribal licenses, and reduce recurring disputes over “gray areas” on the reservation and lake. Committee members discussed whether to draft a bill or resolution directing the executive branch and state agencies to negotiate such an agreement, and asked that North Dakota Game and Fish be invited to a future meeting. Related concerns included aquatic nuisance species prevention, with both sides agreeing that more aggressive boat inspection and cleaning measures would be beneficial. The committee also discussed taxation and county relations. Tribal leaders raised concerns about county resistance to fee-to-trust transfers and about property and vehicle taxation affecting members living on or near reservation lands. Committee members and tribal counsel reviewed federal treaty principles and court cases, and one member noted that the committee had previously taken no formal action on similar issues. Later, Benson County’s tax equalization director explained how the county values taxable land, handles inundated land applications, and tracks land coming off the tax rolls when the tribe repurchases acreage. The discussion ended with a presentation from the president of Sisseton Wahpeton College, who described the college’s programs, economic impact, and funding needs, followed by an HHS presentation on 1115 Medicaid waivers and the IMD exclusion as the committee moved to its next topic.

Transcript Highlights:

• Works in practice.
• Appreciate your work. Thank you.
• To cover the cost of the employees missing work and to pay them while they're not working.
• Mesnard, I appreciate the time coming up and actually having that opportunity to work the floor, to work
• work.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We worked very closely with the criminal justice system, and through a lot of work, he's now in a group
• Thank you for your work in our collective fight for rights.
• “I have worked hard most of my life to be as independent as possible.
• My voice matters, and this time around, it worked.
• Thank you so much, Javon, for your testimony and for your work.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Children, Families and Persons with Disabilities held a hybrid hearing focused largely on DDS-related bills, with chairs Kennedy and Livingstone outlining strict time limits, accessibility procedures, and a 5 p.m. stop to preserve ASL and CART services. The committee heard testimony on several measures, including a bill from Sen. Mike Moore to create a centralized electronic education records system for students in out-of-home placements, which supporters said would improve communication, preserve IEP continuity, and reduce missed services. Paul DePaulo also testified in support, describing the educational and justice-system harms that can follow when foster youth do not receive coordinated records and supports. A major portion of the hearing centered on H. 242/S. 149, a bill to enhance standards of care for people with autism and intellectual and developmental disabilities. Rep. Garballey and many advocates, parents, clinicians, and disability leaders supported the bill, saying it would require provider training, statewide standards, and better emergency department practices to reduce misdiagnosis, trauma, and unnecessary ER boarding. Testimony described sensory and communication barriers in medical settings, lack of provider training, and the need for continuing education and license-related requirements. Related testimony also supported H. 213/S. 111, which would improve access to behavioral health services for children involved with state agencies by requiring better discharge planning, coordination with hospitals and agencies, and more appropriate post-hospital placements. The committee also heard strong support for H. 256/S. 102, requiring universal changing stations in public buildings, from parents, advocates, and the Massachusetts Developmental Disabilities Council. Witnesses said current restroom accommodations often force unsafe or undignified changes on floors, in cars, or in inaccessible spaces, and argued the cost of adding changing stations to new or renovated buildings would be modest compared with the benefits to dignity, safety, and community access. Another major topic was H. 261/S. 155 on supported decision-making agreements for certain adults, which supporters described as a less restrictive alternative to guardianship that preserves autonomy while providing trusted support. Finally, testimony on Tommy’s bill (S. 168/H. 282) described a preventable death after a hospital discharge and urged clearer communication and training requirements for residential staff handling life-sustaining equipment; the bill was presented as a safeguard for people with disabilities relying on such equipment.

Transcript Highlights:

• with TEA and with the school to actually have a pathway that works for.
• their work and, uh, family needs to be met.
• hard, and they're a great reflection of the work you all are doing here.
• They're working parents.
• We're also working hard to work with, aligning with workforce needs, and we work to align educational

Transcript Highlights:

• So what works and what doesn't work? Or do we just start all over?
• and what's not working.
• What are the programs that are working? Which are not working? Where can we make those cuts?
• And in a four-day school, it worked for some kids. And it doesn't work for others.
• working on, we should be celebrating those.