Transcript Highlights:

• facilitate the goal of hearing as much from the public within the limits of our time, we will not permit
• Public comment may be provided only at the designated time and place and as permitted by the Chair.
• Our constitutional amendment doubles the number of student seats on the UC Board of Regents.
• When the Regents voted for cohort tuition, I was able to make critical amendments.
• The motion is due pass as amended and re-refer to the Committee on Appropriations. Fong? Aye.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Higher Education Committee met for its sixth policy hearing of 2026 and considered one measure, ACA 18, the “student empowerment amendment.” The authors, Assemblymembers Solache and Arends, said the constitutional amendment would expand student representation on the UC Board of Regents by adding a second voting student regent, with both undergraduate and graduate representation. They argued this would better reflect the student body, improve decision-making, and align UC with the California State University and Community College systems, which already have two student voting members. Supporters, including current and former UC student leaders and representatives from the UC Student Association, testified that students are the primary stakeholders in the university system and should have more meaningful voting power on issues such as tuition, housing, basic needs, free speech, and campus policy. They said the current single student regent cannot adequately represent the diversity of UC students and that the proposal would strengthen shared governance and accountability. No opposition testimony was presented. Committee members voiced support, with several noting the importance of student voice and representation. The committee accepted the authors’ amendments, then voted the measure out on a due pass as amended motion to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. The roll call ultimately finished at 9-0 in favor, and the chair adjourned the meeting after announcing the next hearing date.

Transcript Highlights:

• Public comment may be provided only at the designated time and place and as permitted by the chair.
• I will be accepting the committee amendments today.
• I want to start by accepting the committee's amendments.
• So we have asked the author to take an amendment to repeat.
• And the chair of RECO is due pass as amended. Thank you.

Summary: The Local Government Committee met on March 26 and heard four bills, beginning as a subcommittee until quorum was established. The chair opened with housekeeping rules, including that testimony would be in person only and that disruptive conduct would not be tolerated. AB 59 by Assemblymember Aguiar-Curry was heard first; it would remove the sunset on Reclamation District 108’s authority to participate in hydropower projects. The author, Colusa County representatives, and water district officials said the change would support long-term financing, lower energy costs, and help the district continue water stewardship. No opposition was presented, and the bill was later reported out 7-0. AB 417 by Assembly Member Carrillo was then presented as a measure to streamline and clarify laws governing enhanced infrastructure financing districts (EIFDs) and community revitalization and investment authorities (CRIAs). Supporters, including the sponsor and planning, city, and flood control representatives, said the bill would improve local governments’ ability to fund affordable housing, climate adaptation, transit, fire mitigation, and other infrastructure without raising taxes. One opponent objected to the CRIA provisions, arguing that CRIAs retain eminent domain authority and asked for an amendment to remove that authority. The bill was passed after quorum was established, with the chair noting it would improve functionality while preserving transparency and public participation. AB 533 by Assembly Member Flora reauthorized health care districts that own or operate hospitals or clinics to use the design-build process for construction projects after the prior authority sunset on January 1, 2025. The author and supporters from the Association of California Health Care Districts, the Design-Build Institute of America, and engineering and hospital groups said the measure would restore a useful financing and construction tool without changing public contracting requirements. There was no opposition, and the bill passed 7-0. The committee also approved AB 1030 on the consent calendar, and after roll calls on the remaining items, all measures were reported out of committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• A motion was made and seconded, and the amendment carried.
• Thank you very much. amendment into the House committee amendment into the House committee substitute
• We do have a title amendment. Um, do I have a motion to approve the title amendment?
• We do have a title amendment. Um, >> Okay. We do have a title amendment.
• amendment? We have a motion. amendment? We have a motion.

Keywords: 00:00 - Call to Order/Roll Call 02:05 - Discussion of 26RS HB 178 14:05 - Roll Call Vote on 26RS HB 178 15:05 - Discussion of 26RS HB 280 20:00 - Roll Call Vote on 26RS HB 280 22:00 - Discussion of 26RS HJR 24 24:30 - Roll Call Vote on 26RS HJR 24 26:00 - Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The Health Services Committee met for the first time in the 2026 session and established a quorum before taking up three measures. House Bill 178, sponsored by Rep. Kim Moser with support from the Kentucky Psychiatric Medical Association, was presented as a budget-neutral collaborative care model to improve access to mental health treatment in primary care settings. Testimony emphasized workforce shortages, long wait times, stigma, and the potential for the model to reduce costs and improve outcomes by having primary care providers work with behavioral health care managers and psychiatric consultants. The bill received a favorable recommendation by roll call vote. The committee then considered House Bill 280, also sponsored by Rep. Moser. The bill and committee amendment were described as cleanup and policy updates affecting Kentucky Board of Nursing licensure standards, including restoring language related to abuse, neglect, and exploitation in the central registry, preserving the board’s ability to investigate out-of-state applicants, and adding an emergency provision. The bill also updated school medication provisions to allow certain prescribed rescue medications, including bronchodilator inhalers, nebulizers, glucagon, Solu-Cortef, and updated epinephrine delivery. The committee adopted the amendment, approved the bill with favorable expression, and then approved a motion to roll the committee amendment into the House committee substitute. Finally, the committee took up House Joint Resolution 24, sponsored by Rep. Ken Fleming, with a committee substitute adopted first. The resolution was explained as a request for the cabinet to withdraw a previously submitted Medicaid-related waiver application so it could be resubmitted under new requirements tied to House Resolution 1. The committee approved the resolution with favorable expression and also adopted a title amendment. The meeting concluded with notice that the next committee meeting would be Thursday, January 22nd at noon.

Transcript Highlights:

• for this meeting, with the intention that they would be amended before it goes to taxes.
• We think that, you know, having a targeted program—and I believe also in the amendment we're going to
• <00:30:22.320> we're believe also in the amendment we're believe also in the amendment we're
• <00:31:16.519> to<00:31:16.679> the be amended to the be amended to the bill<00:31:
• And then you add on the process of having to go through building permits and planning and those types

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• There is an amendment, so if there's no objection, I'd like to have the senator present that amendment
• Amendment barcode 521708 by Senator Wright. Please explain your amendment. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr.
• For that reason, we're opposed to the amendment and the bill. Thank you.
• All in favor of the amendment say yay. Any opposed say nay. Okay, show the amendment adopted.
• We're back on the bill as amended. We're back on the bill as amended.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Transportation, Tourism, and Economic Development met with a quorum present and considered two bills. The first, CS for SB 88 by Senator Wright, would create a framework for local governments to allow or prohibit utility terrain vehicles (UTVs) on certain low-speed roads, define UTV equipment and driver requirements, and make violations noncriminal traffic infractions. An amendment was adopted to correct the insurance requirement to match automobile-style minimums of $10,000 personal injury and $10,000 property damage liability. Testimony on SB 88 was divided. The Florida Justice Association and the Recreational Off-Highway Vehicle Association opposed the bill, arguing UTVs are designed for off-road use, do not meet federal safety standards, and could increase crash risk on public roads; Honda’s letter was cited as opposing road use. Supporters, including the sponsor and agencies waiving in support, argued the bill would address an existing loophole, provide insurance and licensing requirements, and help rural users and law enforcement by creating a clear legal pathway. Senators raised concerns about nighttime visibility, taillight spacing, speed limits, and whether the bill should be more restrictive, but the committee ultimately voted to report CS for SB 88 favorably. The committee then heard SB 274 by Senator Arrington, which designates a portion of International Drive in Orange County as Harris Rosen Way in honor of hotelier and philanthropist Harris Rosen. The sponsor and several senators praised Rosen’s business success, philanthropy, and support for education, cancer research, veterans, and the Central Florida community. There was no opposition, and the bill was reported favorably by roll call vote. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• THE AMENDMENT IS ADOPTED. BACK ON THE BILL AS AMENDED. FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THE BILL AS AMENDED?
• ANY OPPOSED THE AMENDMENT IS ADOPTED. WE ARE BACK ON THE BILL AS AMENDED.
• QUESTIONS ON THE AMENDMENT? >> I WILL WAIT UNTIL THE BILL IS AMENDED.
• AMENDMENT IS ADOPTED. BACK ON THE BILL AS AMENDED. QUESTIONS ON THE BILL AS AMENDED?
• ALL IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDMENT SAY YEA. THE AMENDMENT IS ADOPTED.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• if you have a permit you're okay?
• example so that if you have a permit example so that if you have a permit you're<00:40:03.200>
• that authority to create a permit that authority to create a permit process?
• It's going to need some kind of an amendment.
• It's going to need some kind of an<02:23:49.040> amendment. an amendment. an amendment.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I was thinking about the DEIS part on the site evaluation committee and the permitting.
• I was thinking about the DEIS part on the site evaluation committee and the permitting.
• I was thinking about the DEIS part on the site evaluation committee and the permitting.
• I was thinking about the DEIS part on the site evaluation committee and the permitting.
• <04:56:10.760> to Lyn and myself made an amendment to Lyn and myself made an amendment to

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard from the Personnel Appeals Board, which explained that it became an independent state agency after Senate Bill 487 and was presenting its first standalone operating budget. The board described its quasi-judicial role in hearing appeals from classified state employees over disciplinary actions such as warnings, suspensions, and terminations, and said it handles about 25 to 35 cases a year, with some cases lasting longer because of their complexity. Members also outlined the need for a chair and vice chair who are attorneys, the board’s current staffing and space needs, and its plan to move away from reliance on Administrative Services for office support and website functions. The board requested about $353,500 for fiscal year 2026, including startup costs, routine operating expenses, and two new part-time positions: a program director and a paralegal. Members said the budget reflects the new independent status, includes funding for only four board members rather than the authorized five, and is designed to avoid full-time staffing costs and benefits. Legislators asked about the cost per case, the board’s relationship to DAS, whether appeals must go through the board before court, and how often cases are appealed further. The board said appeals must first go through it, that court appeals are infrequent but have increased recently, and that the board’s process is intended to resolve disputes more quickly and less expensively than court litigation. Committee members also asked about the board’s caseload, outcomes, and staffing. The board said that in the prior year there were 22 cases, with four decisions overturned in favor of employees, nine dismissals, and nine settlements, and that many disputes are resolved before reaching the board through a multi-step internal process. A member noted the governor and council had recently approved a new board member and were expected to approve a fifth soon. The discussion ended with questions about the board’s website and records access, which members said would need to be moved from Administrative Services as part of the agency’s transition. The committee then moved to the New Hampshire Council on Developmental Disabilities. The executive director explained that the council is 100 percent federally funded under the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act and develops a five-year plan to address the needs of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. She said the council works with state agencies and advocacy organizations on quality-of-life issues, accessibility, voter rights training, and plain-language or easy-to-read materials, and that 60 percent of its membership must be individuals with disabilities or family members/guardians. She also described the council’s funding structure, including reimbursement to the state for operating costs, and noted that it currently has three full-time and three part-time positions, with no new positions requested but one full-time position being eliminated and replaced after a pandemic-era staffing change did not work out as planned.

Transcript Highlights:

• But as long as we can take that case, I think, you know, that we would be happy to entertain amendments
• Senate Bill 89 addresses two issues in the area of permitting.
• In August, the Energy and Environmental Cabinet proposed amendments to existing regulations that would
• in Kentucky and separate mine permits in Kentucky and impose<00:57:45.640> over<00:57:45.880>
• Also, SB 89 strips Kentucky Energy and Environmental Cabinet the authority to require pollution permits

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:01:28 Introduction of Guests 00:02:08 American Electric Power and Kentucky Power Presentation 00:03:31 SB 89 Discussion 00:53:55 SB 89 Roll Call Vote 01:07:46, 958, all

Summary: The committee met for an initial natural resources hearing with a quorum present and introductory housekeeping, including prayer, roll call, and recognition of guests. Chair Smith outlined ground rules for questions and then invited Kentucky Power and American Electric Power representatives to the table to discuss a proposed plan involving the Mitchell Power Plant and future generation needs in Eastern Kentucky. Witnesses Cindy Wiseman, Alex Vaughn, and AEP CEO Bill Fehrman said the company’s goals are to stabilize and lower rates, reduce rate volatility, and expand generation in the Commonwealth. They explained that Kentucky Power seeks legislative authority to securitize its 50% interest in the Mitchell coal plant, describing securitization as a refinancing mechanism that would lower annual plant costs by about $34 million and help offset roughly one-third of the expected cost of adding new generation in Kentucky. They emphasized that the proposal is not intended to close Mitchell, and said Kentucky Power currently has no plan to divest its interest; the company still needs the plant to serve customers while it pursues additional dispatchable generation in Kentucky. Members pressed the witnesses on the plant’s book value versus fair market value, whether the Mitchell interest had ever been assigned a nominal value, how any divestiture proceeds would be handled, whether Kentucky Power owns Wheeling Power, and how long Mitchell can continue operating. The company said it values Mitchell at net book value for accounting purposes, not fair market value, and explained that Wheeling Power is a separate AEP affiliate and that West Virginia affiliates have already proposed securitization of their share. Witnesses said Kentucky Power’s interest cannot technically operate past 2028 without additional environmental control investment, while the West Virginia side is depreciating through 2040. They also described the financing timeline, saying securitization would require enactment of legislation, a PSC financing order, bond issuance, and then parallel work to acquire or build new generation, with any reinvestment terms to be addressed through the regulatory process.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, I will go first with House File 33 and I have an author's amendment. >> We're going to do the amendment
• The A3 amendment is adopted.
• Any discussion to the A3 amendment? Any discussion to the A3 amendment?
• Please describe the A1 amendment. The A1 amendment changes the felony from 5 years to two years.
• to re-refer House File 3402 as amended to re-refer House File 3402 as amended to<01:12:04.239>

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 3433 and House File 3402 together, both aimed at restricting assault-style weapons and high-capacity magazines. The bill authors described the measures as bans on the sale and possession of enumerated military-style semi-automatic weapons and magazines over 10 rounds, while allowing current owners to keep firearms through a BCA certification process. They framed the bills as a response to the Annunciation School shooting and broader gun violence, emphasizing public support and the need to act to protect children and communities. Testimony in support came from Annunciation families and a Hennepin Healthcare emergency physician. Survivors and family members described the shooting’s aftermath in personal detail, including the death of children, severe injuries, long-term trauma, and ongoing medical treatment. They argued that the type of weapon mattered because it increased the speed and severity of the attack, and that limiting access to these weapons could slow future mass shootings and save lives. The physician said the injuries he treated showed how high-velocity rifles cause far greater tissue damage and urged swift action to limit access. Opposition testimony came from the Minnesota Gun Owners Law Center and the NRA. They argued the bills would not have prevented the Annunciation shooting, contended that the 1994 federal assault weapons ban did not reduce crime, and said the legislation would likely face constitutional challenges because the firearms and magazines are in common use and protected by the Second Amendment. They also raised concerns about the bill’s grandfathering, registration, renewal, inspection, storage, and ammunition restrictions, and suggested lawmakers should instead focus on mental health intervention and other upstream causes of violence. The hearing ended with the committee moving into member discussion; no vote or final action was taken in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• That has certainly seen. you know, on amendments through session.
• Roger, we want to add this amendment. They want $10 million.
• And that's what you guys tend to amend in.
• But as soon as they turn around and give us a permit, then we’re out for bid.
• But the money, when these projects move and the permits are acquired...

Summary: The committee met for an informational hearing focused largely on the state capital outlay process and House Bill 2. Roger Husser and Matt Baker of the Division of Administration/Facility Planning and Control described how the office prepares and administers the capital outlay bill, said the bill has grown substantially over five years, and argued that recent changes in culture, staffing, project management, cash-flow analysis, and use of third-party support have more than doubled project expenditures and improved delivery. Members asked about the use and cost of third-party project managers, delegation of smaller projects to agencies, hiring difficulties, and whether the changes represented better interpretation of existing law versus statutory changes. Husser said some statutes were amended, some internal customs were removed, and the office would provide a list of those changes. He also explained that the office is trying to move away from overly rigid practices and toward faster project completion while still following public-bid and oversight rules. A major portion of the discussion centered on the size and structure of the capital outlay bill, especially the gap between Priority 1 cash capacity and the much larger Priority 5 backlog. Husser said the current annual Priority 1 limit is tied to construction inflation and is about $574 million, with additional surplus funds also available, but that the bill contains far more Priority 5 funding than can realistically move in a five-year plan. He and members discussed dormant projects, scope creep, legacy projects that have sat in the bill for years, and the problem of false expectations for non-state entities. Proposed solutions included limiting Priority 5 to five times Priority 1, requiring annual re-endorsement by members, setting district or project caps for non-state projects, requiring time limits and reporting for grant-like non-state projects, placing matches in escrow, requiring design readiness before submission, and consolidating the many existing reporting requirements into one clearer report. Members also discussed bundling multiple projects under one agency project, which the House had begun piloting for LSU, UL Lafayette, Southern, and DOTD, and which Husser said could improve flexibility, reduce overappropriation, and better reflect actual spending. Baker then explained cash-flow management and the commitment process, saying FPC now analyzes projects annually to estimate what can actually be spent in the next fiscal year and uses commitments to allow projects to proceed when future-year funding is expected. He said overappropriations can result from poor cash-flow estimates, delays, dormant projects, or projects coming in under budget, and that the office is already reworking cash-flow assumptions and reappropriating savings where possible. Members also raised concerns about change orders and low bids; staff said project managers review change orders closely, require concurrence on non-state projects, and sometimes reduce scope to keep projects within budget. After FPC’s presentation, the committee heard the beginning of Louisiana Economic Development’s capital outlay discussion, where LED explained that its projects generally fall into three categories, including the Economic Development Awards Program and Site Readiness Program, both used to support targeted economic development and job creation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Noting all members with amendments.
• amendments. Chair and vice chair vote I. amendments. Chair and vice chair vote I.
• The joint hearing is adjourned. with amendments. Noting all present, are with amendments.
• Uh chair to pass with amendments.
• We're adjourned. proposed amendments in their testimony proposed amendments in their testimony which<

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint hearing of the Senate Committees on Labor and Technology and Public Safety and Military Affairs considered three bills. SB 2141 would reclassify certain Department of Law Enforcement leadership and employees as Class A members for retirement purposes and adjust retirement benefit calculations. DLE supported the bill, saying it would address retirement classification without enhancing benefits, while the Employees’ Retirement System said it had no formal board position but wanted key provisions preserved. The Deputy Attorney General raised a potential title/subject issue and warned the bill could be vulnerable to challenge because the reclassification, contribution changes, and benefit calculations are in separate statutory sections. After questions about the number of affected employees and possible amendments, the committees deferred the bill. SB 2593 would exempt certain Law Enforcement Standards Board positions from civil service and collective bargaining. The board’s administrator said the positions would handle sensitive and confidential information and require specialized experience, and the board chair’s representative said the bill was important to meet certification deadlines. Opposition testimony from HGA argued exempt employees are at-will and suggested civil service protections should remain, with any staffing issues handled through reclassification or other personnel tools. Committee members questioned whether the positions could instead be civil service but excluded from bargaining, and staff explained the distinction between civil service exemption and collective bargaining exclusion. The committees ultimately recommended passing SB 2593 with amendments, including a deferred effective date of January 1, 2077, and the recommendation was adopted. SB 2824 would create a bribery-related reporting duty for public servants. Supporters, including Indivisible Hawaii, said it would establish a clear duty to report known or suspected bribery and strengthen public trust. The Office of the Public Defender opposed the bill, saying it would criminalize an affirmative duty to report another person’s misconduct. After limited discussion, both committees voted to pass SB 2824 with amendments, including a deferred effective date of July 1, 2050, and the recommendation was adopted. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• I have an amendment.
• your amendment? your amendment?
• an amendment. an amendment.
• amendment in an hour. amendment in an hour.
• . amendment. amendment.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, with this amendment, uh, to its enabling legislation, the district can provide counties an opportunity
• Uh, perhaps we can talk about 60 days and allow for an extension of that due to, uh, permitting approval
• Uh, for instance, another utility may prevent excavation or there may be delays due to permitting or
• that you need more time because everything slows up, especially when, um, you're having to deal with permits
• This bill amends the scoring system, allowing the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs to

Transcript Highlights:

• The first section in this is the identical amendments. There were three identical amendments.
• <00:01:57.520> by the lunch hour, the biggest amendment by the lunch hour, the biggest amendment
• <00:06:22.560> 18 house second reading amendment 18 house second reading amendment 18 Williams
• And so now it is a $16 million amended.
• technical amendments. Oh, I misspoke. technical amendments. Oh, I misspoke.

Bills: SF0032, SF0010, SF0001, HB0001

Keywords: 911 services, emergency response, grant funding, next generation technology, government accountability, public safety, mental health, detention, competency evaluation, treatment, contractual agreements, Wyoming, budget, funding, education, wildfire prevention, healthcare, community colleges, grants, economic development

Transcript Highlights:

• I urge you to support stronger community-centered amendments before moving this bill forward.
• Were there amendments on this bill? Did you already take amendments?
• Were there amendments on this bill? Did you already take amendments?
• Were there amendments on this bill? Did you already take amendments?
• No, there were no amendments taken. Yeah, I just have a couple of questions and my concerns.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Agriculture heard three bills. SB 18 by Senator Rubio would create a Food Desert Elimination Grant Program at CDFA to help open or improve grocery stores in food desert communities. Supporters said it would improve access to healthy food, create jobs, and help underserved neighborhoods; opponents argued it could favor large chains, lacked community input and accountability, and should better prioritize tribal, BIPOC-owned, and community-led retail. Committee members raised concerns about population thresholds, community engagement, and long-term commitments, and the author said the bill could be strengthened with guardrails. SB 18 passed 7-0 and was sent to Appropriations. SB 312 by Senator Umberg would require out-of-state shippers of dogs to electronically submit health certificates to CDFA and make them available to buyers and enforcement agencies, aiming to improve consumer protection and traceability in the puppy import pipeline. Supporters from animal welfare and humane organizations said the bill would help stop sick or misrepresented puppies from entering California and give investigators a central record. Members asked about privacy and enforcement, and the author indicated amendments could address consumer privacy concerns. The bill passed unanimously and was sent to Appropriations. SB 493 by Senator Becker would change how compensation is set for secretary managers of district agricultural associations and fairgrounds, shifting salary-setting authority to CDFA and requiring periodic salary surveys. Supporters said fairgrounds are critical emergency-response and community facilities and that the bill would help recruit and retain qualified leaders with fairer pay. Some members expressed concern about local control and appointment delays, but clarified the bill only addressed salary, not appointments. SB 493 also passed unanimously and was sent to Appropriations.

Transcript Highlights:

• 456, and this bill is dealing with our workers' comp, a couple different things when it comes to amendments
• The petition that we're working to amend within Revised Statute 23:1311 would basically include names
• of 2012 provided that, notwithstanding any other provision of the section, the employer shall be permitted
• 456, and this bill is dealing with our workers' comp, a couple different things when it comes to amendments
• The petition that we're working to amend for within revised statute 23, 1311, it would basically include

Keywords: 974, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Constitutions do not permit the Constitutions do not permit the government<03:11:17.680> to<03
• . >> I think the amendment— I would like to move amendment 2026-0854H. >> Is there a second?
• <03:37:48.319> The an amendment. I'm I'm sorry. The an amendment. I'm I'm sorry.
• ;> I think the amendment >> I think the amendment >> I<03:37:53.439> would<03:37
• ><03:38:26.479> Representative Um it amends um uh Representative Um it amends um uh Representative

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• as amendments that could have been severed in a way that they could have been voted on individually.
• But because it was sent down as a substitute, I don't think the amendments, it could have been treated
• as separately as amendments that could have been severed in a way that they could have been voted on
• It will allow them to verify the validity of that establishment's license or permit from the board.
• If you don't display that permit, you could be subject to a civil penalty of $10,000 for each day that

Keywords: Cannabis Retail Market, Joint Commission to Oversee the Transition of the Commonwealth into a, 976, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Reports of committees will be deemed read and amendments deemed adopted.
• Reports of committees will be deemed read and amendments deemed adopted. Deferred.
• Reports of committees will be deemed read and amendments deemed adopted.
• Resolve that Joint Rule 61A be suspended to permit... Okay, the clerk will read.
• Resolve that Joint Rule 61A be suspended to permit the Committee on Appropriations to meet, consider,

Summary: The Assembly convened after a quorum call, heard a prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, and approved the previous day’s journal. Procedural motions were adopted to allow certain members to speak on adjournment in memory and to host guests on the floor, and the chamber suspended Joint Rule 61 to allow the Appropriations Committee to meet and consider AB 1533. The majority leader also requested that SB 272 and HR 44 be removed from the consent calendar. The main floor action was the Assembly’s Pride Month observance, centered on HR 43, which recognizes June 2025 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Pride Month. Assembly Member Ward and members of several caucuses spoke in support, emphasizing LGBTQ+ history, civil rights, community contributions, and current political attacks on LGBTQ+ rights. Assembly Member DeMaio spoke in opposition, arguing the resolution was divisive and included controversial policy references. After debate, 49 coauthors were added and the resolution was adopted by voice vote. The chamber then held a Pride Month ceremony honoring 14 distinguished individuals for contributions to the LGBTQ+ community, followed by guest introductions recognizing APICA fellows, family members, educators, and community leaders. The Assembly later adopted the consent calendar, with SB 61, SB 66, SB 846, SB 229, and SCR 3 approved, and then heard adjournment-in-memory tributes for John E. Brison and former Assembly Member William T. Bagley. The House adjourned until Thursday, June 26, 2025, at 9 a.m.