Transcript Highlights:

• So this bargaining process just continued.
• So then we'll look a little bit now at that funding process.
• So we've actually now gone through that process.
• Are there any questions before we hear from you, Dubb?
• Arbitrators can't hear about retirement benefits.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Employment Relations met on May 8, 2026, to receive updates on upcoming collective bargaining for the 2027–29 biennium. OFM’s Jenny Sheehan reviewed the state workforce, noting that most employees are represented, the workforce remains constrained by hiring limits and civil service rules, and bargaining goals include financially feasible agreements, maintaining labor relations, supporting an inclusive workplace, and addressing issues such as AI use, leave, and immigration-related workplace protections. She also outlined the bargaining calendar, the role of the June revenue forecast in determining what compensation proposals can be funded, and the need to reach tentative agreements by September 2026 for October 1 submission and legislative consideration. She described recent bargaining themes from unions, including limits on AI, expanded leave, access to union members in hybrid workplaces, and classification changes, and she summarized prior-cycle costs, including about $1.2 billion in general funds and $1.7 billion in total funds for 2025–27 awards, excluding the delayed WPEA agreements that were later funded after a return to bargaining. The committee then heard from Western Washington University and the University of Washington on higher education bargaining. Western described its locally bargained contracts, the importance of re-opener clauses tied to state budget decisions, and concerns about the instability of the state “fund split,” which shifts compensation costs between state funds and tuition revenue. Western also emphasized that student employees are increasingly central to retention and urged inclusion of student compensation in the wage base. UW similarly described its large and diverse workforce, the split between RCW 41.56 and 41.80 bargaining frameworks, and the reliance on state funding, tuition, and other revenue sources to cover compensation increases. UW highlighted the financial strain of the fund split, the lack of state funding for academic student employee compensation, and the impact of rising ASE costs on class sizes and the university’s teaching and research missions. OFM also presented on Washington Management Service bargaining, explaining that only certain WMS employees are covered, that bargaining began in 2024, and that current agreements include addenda for WMS-specific provisions. The presentation noted that WMS bargaining is still limited in scope, with only a few represented units, and that compensation bargaining generally covers band minimums and maximums rather than all salary levels. Finally, OFM reviewed interest arbitration rules for certain state employee groups, explaining that arbitration is available for some essential-service and statutorily covered employees, that arbitrators decide disputed contract language based on statutory criteria, and that awards still must be found financially feasible by OFM. Committee members asked about PFML treatment, the timing of arbitration, and the budget pressures facing bargaining, and the meeting adjourned without any votes or formal actions.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so I want to thank them for coming to hearing after hearing to go through that.
• We've had two years of hearings now, hearing some terrible stories about how some of the inmates have
• Glad to hear it.
• Glad to hear it.
• Sharon, I do hear you on that.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing none, so ordered.
• Hearing none, it is so ordered.
• What it does effectively is define the surrender process and create a clear process for surrenders.
• It's not necessarily a contested case subject to a hearing and appeal process, based on what you understand
• It's not necessarily a contested case subject to so hearing and appeal process based on what you understand

Bills: HB 106, HB144, HB145, HB252, HB1732, HB2221, HB2467, HB2468, HB2517, HB2518, HB2963, HB3016, HB3689, HB3960, HB4386, HB4490, HB4751, HB5247, HJR175, HB2213

Keywords: HB 106, oil and gas, Railroad Commission of Texas, overhead electrical lines, electrical distribution system, power line maintenance, administrative penalty, Natural Resources Code, oil and gas lease, well operator, energy safety, utility infrastructure, regulatory compliance, cleanup fund, oil and gas regulation and cleanup fund, production safety, leasehold operations, electric utility, distribution poles, inspection

Summary: The committee first handled pending business, including reconsidering a failed vote on SB 715 and then reporting several measures favorably. SB 1978 was reported from committee on a committee substitute, and a series of House bills — including HB 431, HB 1522, HB 1922, HB 3228, HB 3229, HB 3803, HB 3804, HB 3805, HB 3806, HB 4219, HB 4238, HB 434, HB 1584, and HB 4739 — were moved out of committee, most to the local and uncontested calendar. The votes on these items were overwhelmingly or unanimously in favor, with committee substitutes adopted where applicable. The committee then heard HB 2963, a right-to-repair bill for consumer electronics. The author said the bill would require manufacturers to provide parts, tools, and documentation on fair and reasonable terms while preserving trade secrets and excluding certain categories such as medical devices, motor vehicles covered by an MOU, critical infrastructure, and commercial-only transactions. Supporters from the Texas Public Policy Foundation and Environment Texas argued it would strengthen property rights, help small businesses, and reduce e-waste. Opponents, including representatives of SafeLight Auto Glass and LKQ, said they supported right-to-repair in principle but objected to the bill’s automotive MOU exemption and broader scope, warning it could create uncertainty and leave some manufacturers and repair shops outside the framework. The bill was left pending after testimony. Members also heard HB 2467 on salary parity for State Fire Marshal investigators, HB 252 on allowing some state agencies to pay certain employees twice monthly, HB 2468 on public improvement district notice and a buyer’s right to terminate, HB 4386 on annuity contract exchanges and surrender timelines, HB 4751 creating a Texas Quantum Initiative and related fund, and HJR 175 proposing a constitutional amendment protecting Texans’ ability to use mutually agreed-upon mediums of exchange, including cash, bullion, and digital currency. Testimony on HB 4751 was largely supportive but included questions about whether the state needs a new coordinating structure and funding mechanism for quantum research and commercialization. HJR 175 drew discussion about barter, taxes, and concerns over central bank digital currency. Each of these items was left pending after hearing testimony. The committee also heard HB 2221, which would update insurance anti-rebating laws to allow more wellness and value-added services in life and health insurance, with supporters saying it would encourage healthier behavior without requiring data monitoring. Finally, the committee took up a package of utility and wildfire-related bills from Chairman King’s portfolio: HB 106, requiring oil and gas operators to maintain certain overhead electrical lines; HB 144, requiring utilities to submit pole inspection and management plans to the PUC; and HB 145, requiring wildfire mitigation plans and allowing utilities to self-insure under certain conditions. Utility, co-op, and insurance representatives generally supported the safety and resiliency goals of HB 144, while asking for clarifications and less frequent reporting; HB 145 was introduced as a broader wildfire-risk and liability measure. These bills were also left pending after testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, we'll now hear from Ms.
• That's just a number that represents all of our applications and all stages of that processing process
• And all stages of that processing process. Thank you. May I have just one quickie? Yes, absolutely.
• Our licensure process is a competitive and comparative process, so these things are all bound up together
• It's a competitive, comparative process.

Summary: The Senate Health Policy Committee received updates from the Agency for Health Care Administration and the Department of Health on implementation of 2024 health care laws. AHCA reviewed progress on workforce and reimbursement measures in Senate Bill 7016 and related bills, including FRAME and TEACH funding, graduate medical education reporting, behavioral health teaching hospitals, acute hospital care at home, advanced birth centers, non-emergent care access plans, and rural emergency hospitals. Agency officials said several programs are already operational or have begun payments, while others are still in rulemaking, federal approval, or report-preparation stages. Senators asked about timing, funding reversion concerns, and whether appropriated dollars would be spent on schedule, especially for behavioral health teaching hospitals and the new birth center category. The Department of Health then reported on practitioner licensure and public health programs. MQA described implementation of the Interstate Medical Licensure Compact, the Mobile Act licensure pathway, massage therapy enforcement changes, background screening expansion, liposuction safety requirements, pharmacist HIV post-exposure prophylaxis authority, and chiropractic dry needling. Public health staff updated the committee on FRAME and dental loan repayment, the Sinati screening grant program, the cancer research and innovation changes, the health care innovation council and loan program, the pediatric rare disease grant program, telehealth maternity care expansion, newborn screening for congenital CMV, the sickle cell registry and grants, and the swimming lesson voucher program. Members focused questions on how practitioners were being recruited to underserved areas, the pace of licensure approvals, and whether new programs were on track to use appropriated funds. The committee also heard a lengthy update from the Office of Medical Marijuana Use. The director reported more than 900,000 qualified patients, real-time seed-to-sale tracking now integrated across most dispensaries and labs, and ongoing compliance work on product testing, advertising, diversion, and patient safety. Senators questioned the decline in qualified physicians, how THC potency is labeled and verified, and what the agency can do about diversion to non-patients. The director said the office relies on complaints, inspections, lab audits, and coordination with law enforcement, and that patients can be suspended if violations are confirmed.

Transcript Highlights:

• The hearing room is open for attendance at this hearing, and it can be watched via live stream on the
• In order to facilitate the goal of the hearing, we will hear as much from the public as possible within
• With that, we will begin our hearing.
• So it was the same process.
• Yeah, so I hear you. Thanks very much for hearing me out.

Summary: The committee first took up SB 712, which would expand California’s smog-check exemption for classic vehicles by adding model years 1976 through 1986 in phases, with a sunset in 2032. The author and supporters, including lowrider advocates and the Specialty Equipment Market Association, argued the bill would preserve car culture, support a small class of rarely driven collector vehicles, and reduce burdens on owners who struggle to find equipment for older smog tests. Opponents, including air district officials, the American Lung Association, and other environmental groups, warned the bill would weaken an important emissions-control program and increase pollution. After discussion, the committee adopted the motion to do pass as amended to Appropriations on a roll call vote of 10-0, with the roll held open for additional votes. The committee then heard SB 800, which requires Caltrans, working with local governments, to assess mitigation measures for suicide prevention on locally owned overpasses crossing state highways. The bill was presented as a response to recent tragedies in Rancho Cucamonga and was supported by local officials, health organizations, and suicide-prevention advocates, who said the measure would help identify high-risk locations and lead to life-saving interventions. There was no registered opposition. The committee members expressed support, and SB 800 was passed to Appropriations on a unanimous roll call vote, with the roll held open. Next, the committee considered SB 30, which would prohibit California public entities from selling, donating, or transferring decommissioned diesel locomotives and railroad equipment with Tier 1 or older engines unless the engine is removed, while allowing Tier 2 and newer transfers under certain conditions. The author and supporters framed the bill as a climate and public-health measure to prevent older, dirtier locomotives from continuing to pollute elsewhere, while transit agencies opposed it, arguing it could limit useful transfers of equipment that still supports passenger service and could be better handled through case-by-case air-quality review. After debate, the committee voted 6-4 to pass SB 30 as amended to Appropriations, with the roll held open for later additions. The committee also heard SB 791, which replaces the flat dealer document processing charge cap with a 1% fee capped at $350, along with new disclosure requirements. Dealers and industry groups supported the bill as a way to recover costs and improve transparency, while consumer advocates opposed it as an unjustified increase that would burden buyers. The committee approved SB 791 on a 8-? roll call vote and held the roll open. The meeting then moved on to SB 34, a port-air-quality bill presented by Senator Richardson, but the transcript ends during testimony and debate on that measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• processes.
• on uh this going into those processes. on uh this going into those processes.
• processing. Okay, good to hear. Yeah. processing. Okay, good to hear. Yeah.
• I what I hear what I think I hear order.
• We looked at the process.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This would put the full election process in a 150-day process, but with all the same notices and requirements
• as the normal election process.
• It's nice to be back in this hearing room.
• So, and it deals with the housing element process.
• Relapse is a normal part of the recovery process.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee heard a series of housing-related bills, with testimony largely focused on streamlining housing production, preserving affordable housing, and improving homelessness responses. AB 1892 clarified HOA repair and election notice rules; AB 1708 sought to give smaller cities a more meaningful role in allocating Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention (HAP) funds; AB 2058 aimed to reduce duplicative local inspection and permitting barriers for factory-built housing; AB 2576 clarified that historic resources protected under SB 79 include local, state, and national designations; and AB 1751 would expand ministerial approval for qualifying townhome projects to support missing-middle homeownership. Later bills included AB 1924, creating a statewide homelessness prevention strategy; AB 2626, allowing HCD to waive certain monitoring fees for at-risk affordable housing developments; and AB 2089, modernizing welfare exemption recertification and tax filing procedures for affordable housing providers. Supporters across the bills included city officials, housing nonprofits, builders, and advocacy groups, who generally argued the measures would reduce costs, speed approvals, preserve existing housing, or better target homelessness resources. Opposition or concerns were more limited and usually focused on administrative burden, local control, or the need for clearer definitions and safeguards, especially for factory-built housing, townhome approvals, and historic preservation. Several committee members emphasized the need for accountability, data, and balance between housing production and local infrastructure or preservation concerns. The committee took action on multiple measures. AB 1751 passed the committee on an 8-0 vote and was sent to Appropriations. AB 1924 passed on a 7-0 vote to Appropriations. AB 2626 also passed on a 7-0 vote to Appropriations. AB 2089 passed on a 6-0 vote to the Assembly Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Other bills were discussed with committee amendments or were held pending quorum or later action, and several authors were invited to continue working with committee members and stakeholders on remaining concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• So today's meeting is the public comment hearing.
• This way, people who are watching online can hear you, and I can hear you because I don't hear too well
• I'm with JKJ Processing.
• processes.
• Changing from an administrative law judge to a hearing examiner raises concerns about due process for

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• process for that.
• That is the process now.
• So right now, if the town objects, there's a hearings process for the license to go through within that
• If the town votes against approval, if the town votes for it, that means that hearing process doesn't
• hearing process doesn't occur means that hearing process doesn't occur because<01:23:36.560> the

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee first took up an amendment to a bill dealing with digital assets, zoning, utilities, and noise. Members discussed removing the “private key” language, clarifying that the bill would prohibit state or local governments from treating digital asset mining differently from other industrial uses, and narrowing several provisions based on feedback from the Municipal Association. There was also discussion about electricity use, rate schedules, and whether the bill would allow payment of electric bills in Bitcoin; members clarified that bills would still be paid in dollars and that discriminatory rates were not allowed. The amendment was approved on a straw vote, and the committee then voted 7-1 to adopt the amended bill. The committee then considered a separate bill related to a paint stewardship program. The sponsor explained that the amendment would remove references to a fee structure that had troubled him in public hearing, while still preserving the plan and oversight by the Department of Environmental Services. Members discussed whether the bill’s liability and disclosure language affected antitrust concerns, and a representative from the American Coatings Association testified that the program’s environmental management practices and liability provisions were intended to ensure responsible handling and cleanup. The committee ultimately voted 7-1 to adopt the amended bill. Later, the subcommittee moved to liquor-related business. It first voted unanimously, 7-0, to retain a cannabis-related item. It then discussed a tavern license bill that would create a 21-plus tavern category, with the Liquor Enforcement Division explaining that the restriction was tied to alcohol-only venues and the potential for late-night entertainment and nightclub-style operations. Members raised concerns about local control and public safety, and the discussion referenced existing cocktail lounge rules and the possibility of towns opting into such a license. The transcript cuts off before a final vote on that item is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're getting more politics involved in the impeachment process. We got an impeachment process.
• And we can't just, we can't punish the second part of the process when the first part of the process
• They have a similar process, and many of those states also have an impeachment process and a legislative
• address process, kind of like this.
• But there needs to be a process. Without a process, the people are without a voice.

Summary: The House and Governmental Affairs Committee met on Senate Bill 123, a proposed constitutional amendment to create a legislative process for removing judges for cause. Senator Morris said the bill was needed because of uncertainty in the current Constitution about whether impeachment applies to judges, given the Judiciary Commission’s role in judicial discipline. He argued the measure would provide a clearer, higher-threshold accountability mechanism, and the committee adopted a technical amendment renumbering provisions and later clarified that the bill uses a majority vote in the House and two-thirds in the Senate, consistent with impeachment-style thresholds. Much of the hearing centered on testimony from Anna Carter and her family, who supported the bill after the murder of Jacob Carter in New Orleans. They described his death and other cases they said showed judges releasing dangerous offenders despite repeated violations, missed electronic-monitoring check-ins, and other warning signs. They argued the bill would create a last-resort accountability tool when judicial decisions or supervision failures lead to preventable harm. Several committee members expressed sympathy and said the testimony highlighted serious problems in the justice system, though some also suggested the bill should address district attorneys, electronic-monitoring oversight, or broader systemic issues. Opposition came from members who warned the proposal was overly broad, could become a political tool, and might conflict with existing constitutional provisions governing impeachment and judicial discipline. They argued the Judiciary Commission and Supreme Court already provide a disciplinary framework and that the bill could chill judicial independence or create due-process concerns. The ACLU’s Sarah Whittington also opposed the bill, noting technical inconsistencies in the draft, questioning why impeachment had not been tried first, and arguing the measure singled out judicial discretion while leaving other elected officials’ discretion untouched. The committee took no final vote on the bill during the hearing, but did adopt the technical amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'd like to call this hearing of the Assembly Education Committee to order.
• We are scheduled to hear...
• And when they hear that their child's being placed in an...
• The hearing is adjourned. Thank you. And that’s a wrap. The hearing is adjourned. Oh. Oh, or Nilo?
• Hearing is adjourned. Um, I mean, uh, what’s on the floor?

Summary: The Assembly Education Committee met without a quorum for much of the hearing and heard several bills out of order. SB 249 by Senator Umberg would move county board of education elections from the primary to the statewide general election. Supporters, including the League of Women Voters and many educators, argued the change would increase turnout and make the electorate more representative. The Orange County Board of Education opposed the bill, saying it would increase costs, reduce local control, and bury education races on crowded general-election ballots. The chair and members discussed turnout, cost, and representation, but the bill was held pending a quorum. Senator Grove presented SB 373, which adds safeguards for California students placed in out-of-state non-public schools through IEPs. The bill would require more robust LEA and CDE oversight, including annual site visits, student interviews, quarterly contact, stronger certification standards, and restrictions on prone, supine, and mechanical restraints. Testimony from a survivor of an out-of-state placement and from advocates emphasized abuse, neglect, and the need for stronger monitoring. There was broad support and no opposition testimony, but the measure was also held pending a quorum. Senator Ashby presented SB 568, the epinephrine in schools modernization act, to clarify and expand requirements for stocked epinephrine so they clearly apply to all public schools, including preschool programs. School nurses and medical experts said the bill would close gaps created by universal preschool and ensure life-saving treatment is available for anaphylaxis. The committee discussed dosing and implementation, and the bill was supported without opposition testimony. The committee also heard SB 414, the Charter School Accountability Act, which would strengthen fiscal oversight, audit standards, and transparency for charter schools and authorizers. Supporters said it responds to fraud and audit findings while preserving charter flexibility; opponents, including school employees and teachers, said it did not go far enough on authorizer accountability and small-district oversight. After discussion, the committee voted 7-0 to pass SB 414 as amended to Appropriations. The committee also briefly heard SB 743 by Senator Cortese, which would create an equalization reserve account to provide additional funding to underfunded school districts and reduce funding inequities tied to ZIP code. The author said the bill would support student achievement and teacher retention over time. The transcript cuts off before testimony or action on SB 743 was completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• You can exit the hearing room once you're done testifying or return to your seat.
• Secondly, we will invite up Uber and Lyft to hear from the TMCs themselves.
• If you can just walk us through that process. So the...
• So yes, we are still in active engagement on those processes.
• as we have, you know, informational hearing.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• When you hear from one of the witnesses, you will hear of an actual case that I think strongly makes
• Can you hear me okay? Yes? Great.
• attempting to navigate the process.
• And it sounds like he's in the process. Let's let the process work its way out.
• This bill is not that process.

Summary: The committee heard several bills, with most drawing support after amendments or ongoing stakeholder negotiations. SB 29, by Senator Laird, would extend a sunset on the law allowing pain-and-suffering claims to survive a plaintiff’s death; supporters, including a family member describing a medical negligence case, labor groups, consumer advocates, and disability and elder organizations, argued it prevents defendants from running out the clock, while hospitals, medical groups, and business organizations warned of higher costs and added liability. After extensive debate about data collection, settlement reporting, and the impact on health care access, the bill passed to Appropriations on a divided vote. SB 294, by Senator Reyes and presented by Senator Laird, would require employers to notify a worker’s emergency contact if the worker is arrested or detained and would create a template to inform employees of state and federal labor rights. Labor and worker advocates said the bill would help workers understand and enforce their rights amid weakened federal enforcement; there was no opposition on file, and the bill passed unanimously to Appropriations. SB 697 would modernize water-rights adjudication by allowing the State Water Board to use technology instead of requiring in-person field investigations; with no opposition, it also passed unanimously. The committee also advanced SB 37 on attorney advertising, SB 645 on peremptory challenges in civil cases, SB 303 on bias-mitigation trainings in public workplaces, and SB 464 on expanding pay-data reporting for specified state workers. SB 37 drew support from consumer and legal groups but concerns from Walker Advertising about joint advertising; members said negotiations were ongoing, and the bill passed. SB 645 would extend anti-bias jury-selection rules to certain civil rights cases; criminal-defense and defense groups said they were close to agreement, and the bill passed. SB 303 and SB 464 were both amended to narrow scope and moved forward after several opponents shifted to neutral or removed opposition. The committee also approved a consent calendar of additional bills, all sent to Appropriations.

Transcript Highlights:

• can you hear me now? can you hear me now?
• >> Yep, we can hear you. >> Yep, we can hear you.
• hear it a lot this this session. hear it a lot this this session.
• the process too?
• We hear that very often. We do clients? We hear that very often.

Bills: HB1991, HB1776, HB1897, HB1900

Keywords: liquor tax, alcohol, inflation adjustment, small craft breweries, public health, tenant rights, housing stability, landlord-tenant code, eviction prevention, multilingual resources, condominium, dispute resolution, mediation, arbitration, attorneys' fees, common expenses, construction defects, building code, statute of repose, statute of limitations

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 1991, which would change Hawaii’s liquor excise tax structure to an ABV-based system. The Department of Taxation and the Tax Foundation of Hawaii took no position and stood on written comments. Supporters, including the Hawaii Public Health Institute and an individual testifier who described surviving a drunk-driving crash, argued that higher alcohol taxes reduce alcohol-related harms, save lives, and generate additional state revenue. The public health witness cited alcohol-related harms as a major preventable cause of death and said the tax increase would have only a small annual cost for most consumers. Most industry testimony was in opposition. Representatives of Lanikai Brewing Company, Maui Brewing Company, the Wine Institute, and the Hawaii Food Industry Association said the bill would sharply raise taxes on beer and wine, squeeze already thin margins, and threaten local jobs and businesses. They argued Hawaii producers already face high costs for labor, energy, shipping, and compliance, and said an ABV-based tax would be difficult to administer, would require additional testing and labeling work, and could reduce consumer choice. Several industry witnesses urged lawmakers to instead adopt a small-producer or class 18 carveout, with one suggesting a cap tied to 60,000 barrels. Committee members questioned the brewers about alcohol content testing, labeling, and whether smaller producers already measure ABV. Witnesses said many local producers do not certify ABV for in-state sales, that yeast and fermentation can vary by batch, and that an ABV-based system could require more testing than current practice. No vote or final action on the bill was taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill does away with those processes.
• So the city will go through a process, usually starting with a planning process where we engage a bunch
• So are there, I mean, in that process, uh, you know, due process is being given, hearings are being And
• Citizens cannot start the process if they don't own the process.
• So it would take away the process to go to the board of adjustment, which is a public process.

Bills: HB24

Keywords: groundwater, conservation, water permits, sustainability, resource management

Transcript Highlights:

• But yeah, no, I hear.
• But yeah, no, I hear.
• But yeah, no, I hear.
• But yeah, no, I hear.
• But yeah, no, I hear.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 313 and, on motion by Representative Perez, voted to retain the bill because members felt it needed further work and was not ready for final action. The motion passed 18-0, and no further action was taken on the bill. House Bill 391, an anti-SLAPP measure, was then discussed; supporters said it addressed a real problem and should move forward, while opponents raised concerns that it was too broad, could affect criminal cases, and might create procedural complications. The committee voted 18-0 to retain HB 391 as well, and it was placed on consent. The committee next considered House Bill 462, establishing a cause of action for unwarranted video imaging of residential properties. Representative McFarland moved OTP, saying the bill raised First Amendment and property-rights concerns. The motion passed 18-0, and the bill was also placed on consent. The committee then turned to House Bill 509, which would require reporting on forfeitures. Supporters argued the information was useful for future legislation, while opponents said the reporting would be costly, duplicative, and potentially split data across fiscal years. The committee voted 11-7 to recommend OTP, with a minority of members opposed. House Bill 520, authorizing Department of Education hearing officers to issue subpoenas, drew the most extended debate. Supporters argued DOE needed the same tools other agencies have, while opponents said DOE already had access to needed information, the Attorney General could handle subpoenas, and the bill would create an unbalanced process and raise due process and student-record concerns. Representative Tur offered Amendment 0842H to shift subpoena power from DOE hearing officers to the Attorney General; after debate, the amendment failed 10-8. The transcript cuts off as the committee begins the roll call on the underlying bill after rejecting the amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• process.
• A number of bills today we'll be hearing.
• and they have to go to the court process time when they're trying to resolve it before the court process
• Can you hear me? Yep.
• Mike, can you hear us now? Do you want to speak? Yes. Can you hear me? We can hear you now, Mike.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Housing held a hybrid hearing on a broad slate of housing and homelessness bills. Chairs Rich Haggerty and Julian Cyr opened by noting the committee’s focus on EOHLC programs such as RAFT, MRVP, and HomeBASE, and several members and advocates emphasized the urgency of the state’s homelessness crisis, including rising family homelessness and the need for earlier intervention, more stable subsidies, and stronger long-term housing tools. A major theme was homelessness prevention and rehousing. Multiple witnesses supported bills to codify and strengthen RAFT and HomeBASE, arguing that assistance should be available earlier in a crisis rather than only after a notice to quit or imminent loss of housing. Testimony from legal services, homelessness coalitions, social workers, municipal housing staff, and tenant advocates said the programs help families avoid eviction and shelter, but need more flexibility, higher benefit caps, and permanent statutory protection. Several speakers also urged support for codifying the Massachusetts Rental Voucher Program (MRVP), describing it as a critical long-term subsidy for low-income households and older adults, and warning that codification would protect the program from future budget or policy changes. The committee also heard testimony on housing stability for older adults, affordable homes for people with disabilities, supportive housing, housing cooperatives, home sharing, local preference, and reentry housing for returning citizens. Advocates for older adults described a Somerville bridge subsidy pilot that helped stabilize seniors while they waited for permanent housing, and urged statewide expansion. Supporters of supportive housing called for an interagency board to streamline funding and development, while cooperative housing proponents backed creation of a Massachusetts Center for Housing Cooperatives and a dedicated funding reserve. A bill to secure housing for returning citizens drew support from reentry providers and Senator Adam Gomez, who said stable housing is essential to successful reintegration. No votes were taken during the hearing; witnesses generally asked the committee to report the bills favorably, and some members asked follow-up questions on data and program details.

Transcript Highlights:

• I also hear you on preservation of agricultural land.
• The Texas Water Development Board's process is successful.
• So, a public hearing? Public hearing, yes.
• There can be other sub-processes and information sharing in there, but that's the basic process in the
• , a more intensive filtration treatment process.

Bills: HB1523, HB2109, HB2694, HB3525, HB3898, HB4646, HB5188, HB5219, HB5320, HB5651, HB5655, HB5659, HB5662, HB5672

Keywords: aquifer conservation, Class V injection well, environmental regulation, groundwater protection, municipal water supply, temporary prohibition, water management, reservoir construction, state water plan, Texas Water Code, environmental impact, Brazoria Drainage District, commissioners, elections, vacancies, resignation, HB 3525, North Texas Groundwater Conservation District, groundwater permit, permit amendment

Summary: The Committee on Natural Resources heard House Bill 2109, which would remove certain long-proposed reservoir projects from the state water plan after 50 years without progress. Chairman Van Deaver and many landowners, local officials, timber interests, and conservation advocates testified in support, arguing that the Marvin Nichols Reservoir has burdened Northeast Texas landowners for decades with the threat of eminent domain, depressed property values, and uncertainty over homes, farms, ranches, schools, churches, and cemeteries. Supporters also said the project would flood tens of thousands of acres, require extensive mitigation, harm timber and agriculture, and that Texas now has better alternatives such as conservation, reuse, aquifer storage and recovery, and desalination. Several members expressed sympathy for the affected families and questioned whether a project could remain in the plan indefinitely without progress. Opposition came from North Texas water interests, including the North Texas Commission, Tarrant Regional Water District, and the Texas Water Association, who argued that the bill would interfere with the state’s long-term water planning process and remove needed future supply options for a fast-growing region. They said Region C faces major projected shortages by 2070, that conservation and reuse have already delayed the need for new supplies, and that reservoirs remain one tool in the state’s water-planning toolbox. TWDB staff explained the existing inter-regional conflict process and noted that the substitute would affect several unique reservoir sites, not just Marvin Nichols. After testimony, Chairman Van Deaver closed by urging passage of the bill, but the committee withdrew the substitute and left HB 2109 pending. The committee then took up House Bill 5188, a brackish groundwater bill. The author said the bill would reduce permitting burdens for wells in designated brackish groundwater production zones, and the committee substitute added requirements on monitoring, groundwater-rights ownership, and allocation of pumpage limits while removing some exclusions and export-fee provisions. Texas Wildlife Association testified against the bill, warning that the exemptions could weaken groundwater conservation districts’ ability to protect freshwater resources and surface-owner rights. San Antonio Water System testified in favor, saying brackish groundwater is a key future supply and that the substitute would help speed development of desalination and brackish projects. The Texas Alliance of Groundwater Districts testified neutrally but raised concerns about reduced district oversight, especially around injection-well exclusions and the loss of export fees, and said discussions on the bill were ongoing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then Kelly made changes to this process, which we'll talk about.
• Bowers, so we would love to hear from you. Sure. Thank you very much.
• Bauer, so we would love to hear from you. Sure. Thank you very much.
• What are we hearing from the outreach that we're doing?
• We've drafted a process for receiving requests, displaying requests, and processing requests.

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We work within what they are agreeing to, or we need to pursue a due process hearing if the district
• Did you hear this is great? Hey, did you guys hear this is great?
• Did you hear this is great? Hey, did you guys hear this is great?
• Did you hear this is this is great. Did you hear this is great?
• I'm hearing >> I'm hearing my Okay, great. I'm hearing an<01:36:58.080> echo.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Seclusion Working Group approved the minutes from its previous meeting by motion and vote. Members then began discussing a set of proposed recommendations submitted by Woodward, Havman, and Hull aimed at addressing concerns about the use of seclusion in special education settings. The recommendations focused on several areas: requiring a mental health professional on the IEP team before seclusion is added to a student’s plan; replacing passive parental consent with explicit written consent in the parent’s native language; limiting seclusion to students receiving setting 3 or setting 4 services; requiring annual review of seclusion frequency and duration data by the IEP team; and creating stronger monitoring and accountability through a reporting system modeled on Minnesota’s existing disproportionality process. The group also proposed mandatory annual staff training, more preventive crisis-intervention supports such as CPI and Ukeru, direct funding and technical assistance for districts, and incorporating restraint/seclusion data into disproportionality calculations. Members discussed how the proposed accountability system might work in practice, including whether a third party or parent reporting mechanism should be added. Woodward explained Minnesota’s current disproportionality framework, including year 1, year 2, and year 3 notifications and the possibility of required coordinated early intervening services if problems persist. Participants also raised concerns about whether schools should track law-enforcement involvement as an alternative or related response to student behavior; some noted that such data is already collected in certain district reporting systems and could be useful to monitor alongside seclusion data. The discussion remained ongoing, with no final action taken on the recommendations during this portion of the meeting.