Transcript Highlights:

• The first change is to repeal Government Code Section 13296 to reflect modern processes.
• The proposal eliminates the code section entirely.
• Finance proposes the repeal of Government Code Section 13296 because the code is no longer relevant.
• Of Government Code Section 13296 because the code is no longer relevant, as all of the completed Finance
• The proposed revisions to Government Code Sections 13400 through 13407 related to SLAA modernize the

Summary: The hearing focused on the expected health coverage losses tied to H.R. 1, the resulting pressure on California’s county indigent care systems, and what data and policy changes the Legislature may need before the next budget cycle. Chair Hart and Assemblymember Addis framed the issue as a major rollback in coverage that could leave more Californians uninsured and push more people into county safety-net programs. Members repeatedly emphasized the need for baseline, county-by-county data on eligibility, benefits, caseloads, and funding before making larger structural decisions. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained the history of county indigent care under Welfare and Institutions Code 17000, the shift in funding through 1991 realignment, and the later redirection of funds to CalWORKs. LAO said county programs vary widely in scope and eligibility, that current realignment funding does not automatically rise with demand, and that the Legislature faces tradeoffs if it changes the funding structure. Administration witnesses from Finance and DHCS projected large Medi-Cal and Covered California enrollment losses, with DHCS estimating more than 1 million Medi-Cal members could eventually lose coverage under work requirements and redeterminations, and noting that a new federal rule could make exemptions more restrictive. Officials also said there is no single statewide real-time data system for uninsured or indigent care populations, though some hospital and utilization data exists with significant lags. County representatives from Santa Barbara, San Diego, and Tulare described how their indigent care programs are being rebuilt or strained after years of low demand. They warned that many newly uninsured residents will need only basic, emergency-oriented care under county programs, not the preventive and continuous care available through Medi-Cal, and said that without new state support counties may have to divert funds from public health or reduce other services. Several counties asked for bridge funding, technical statutory changes, and flexibility to adjust realignment methodology. The California Health Care Foundation closed by arguing that the problem is statewide and needs a statewide solution rather than a patchwork county response.

Transcript Highlights:

• Hi, welcome to the General Government Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee.
• I've included a detailed section at the end of my presentation to try to address those questions and
• They're a structured cross- sectional body.
• We're actually having to spend fees from the Department of Transportation Turnpike Authority.
• General government transportation or recess for lunch.

Transcript Highlights:

• President Trump's executive order recently invoked the Guarantee Clause of Article 4, Section 4 of the
• I'm here in support of this bill, but I specifically want to speak to Section 4, Number 3, which states
• Got to have transportation to be able to go from location to location.
• Under Chapter 54 of the Government Code, 25 different counties have their own qualification standards
• McCord, some very necessary definitions are being added to the penal code.

Bills: SB476 , SB664 , SB745 , SB826 , SB989 , SB1080 , SB1171 , SB1320 , SB1437 , SB1727 , SB1809 , SB2289 , SB2320

Committee: Senate Criminal Justice

Summary: The committee heard and advanced several criminal justice bills, with most of the discussion focused on oilfield theft, DWI enforcement, juvenile justice, reentry licensing, jail transparency, and court/judicial standards. SB 1320 would create a DPS oilfield theft unit headquartered in the Permian Basin; supporters from industry, law enforcement, and a district attorney described increasingly sophisticated, organized theft tied to cartels and multi-jurisdictional criminal networks, while DPS said it currently has only two officers working the issue. The committee voted SB 1320 out unanimously and placed it on the local and uncontested calendar. SB 826, which would enhance DWI committed in a school zone to a state jail felony, also passed unanimously after brief explanation and no testimony. SB 1171, adding juvenile justice OIG peace officers to Schedule C salary, was reported favorably on a committee substitute, and SB 1080, which would allow incarcerated people to obtain occupational licenses effective upon release, also passed on a committee substitute after testimony from formerly incarcerated advocates and reentry supporters. The committee also considered several bills aimed at tougher DWI penalties. SB 476 would increase intoxication manslaughter penalties when the offender violates an ignition interlock restriction; the bill was supported by the author, victims’ family members, Galveston officials, and law enforcement, but opposed by the Texas Civil Rights Project, which argued treatment and prevention would be more effective. After discussion about possible amendments, the bill was left pending. SB 745 would create a new first-degree felony option for intoxication manslaughter involving multiple deaths, and it was reported favorably after testimony from a prosecutor supporting the need for a stronger sentencing option. SB 2320 would broadly increase penalties for DWI offenses, including first-time DWI, DWI with an open container, high-BAC DWI, and repeat offenses; it was supported by a grieving family member and a sheriff, and the committee voted it out favorably. On juvenile justice, SB 1727 would expand tools to address assaults on staff at Texas Juvenile Justice Department facilities by lowering the age for transfer to adult prison in some cases, allowing earlier transfer of determinate-sentence youth, and restricting release when a criminal case is pending. Juvenile probation officials supported the bill as a public safety and victim-rights measure, while the Texas Civil Rights Project opposed it, arguing it would send children to inappropriate adult facilities and conflict with juvenile justice principles; the bill was left pending. SB 1437 would expand the juvenile justice do-not-hire registry to include non-certified positions, and it passed unanimously after supporters said it would help close loopholes that allow predators to move between child-serving jobs. SB 2289, requiring counties that house inmates out of state to report that information and any deaths to the Texas Commission on Jail Standards, also passed unanimously. Finally, SB 989, requiring criminal background checks for court personnel who determine bail, and SB 664, establishing statewide qualifications and oversight for magistrates and associate judges, were explained and discussed as transparency and public-safety measures, with SB 989 reported favorably and SB 664 under committee consideration at the end of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate co-chair for this meeting, Brendan Crighton, who serves as chair of the Joint Committee on Transportation
• Each of those sections is allotted 30 minutes, and we will stick to that timetable, as we have another
• The coalition decided that there would be three codes that we looked at.
• We looked at just the sporting goods code.
• Subsection one, section one, subsection G, I think it says all of the provisions of this section shall

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition No. 25-15, H.5505, “An Act to Protect Water and Nature.” Committee co-chairs outlined the Article 48 initiative process and explained that the hearing was divided into expert, proponent, opponent, and public-comment sections. The first witness, Undersecretary Stephanie Cooper of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, described current state and federal funding sources for land conservation and outdoor recreation, said existing programs are oversubscribed, and noted that the proposal aligns with the Commonwealth’s 30% land conservation goal by 2030 and 40% by 2050. She also flagged possible governance clarifications in the petition, including board structure and administrative authority, while saying the administration has the expertise to manage such a fund. Proponents from Mass Audubon, the Trustees of Reservations, Mount Grace Land Trust, the Massachusetts Rivers Alliance, the Authentic Caribbean Foundation, and Bemis Associates argued that Massachusetts needs a dedicated, sustained revenue stream for conservation, clean water, climate resilience, and public access to nature. They said current funding is inconsistent and insufficient, cited estimates that the state may need roughly $300 million or more annually to meet conservation targets, and emphasized benefits to public health, mental health, biodiversity, flood protection, and the outdoor recreation economy. Several speakers said the measure would dedicate a portion of existing sales tax revenue tied to sporting goods, recreational vehicles, and golf courses, and that it would support both urban and rural communities, including underserved communities. Committee members pressed witnesses on the bill’s fiscal and constitutional implications, including how much sales tax revenue would be redirected, whether the measure is constitutional, how funds would be allocated among communities, and why the proposal includes certain revenue sources but not others such as ticket sales. Proponents said the measure would likely direct up to about $100 million annually when fully phased in, that it was designed as a “subject to appropriation” mechanism, and that legal review had found it constitutional. They also acknowledged that the proposal would reduce general fund flexibility but argued it would create a long-term investment in natural resources. The hearing concluded after public testimony, and the committee announced it would accept written testimony until March 27 at 5 p.m.; no vote was taken on the petition at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• That is actually part of our state plan and is located in Section 8.5.
• Is there a way to provide transportation?
• I want to thank everybody, the panelists, on this section. Great information.
• With my schedule, having safe and reliable transportation for my daughter is essential.
• So that's not including transportation. That's not including all of these other things.

Summary: The California State Assembly Select Committee on Child Care Costs held its second hearing focused first on disaster response, especially wildfires and flooding, and how they affect child care infrastructure. State agencies described their disaster preparedness and response work, including evacuation notifications, shelter coordination, emergency guidance, waivers, and support services. The Department of Education said wildfires have displaced tens of thousands of families and impacted thousands of preschool families, and recommended statutory changes to help rebuild programs, require early childhood programs to be included in local recovery plans, expand mental health supports, and review disaster, tax, and insurance policy gaps. Child care advocates and providers described major losses from the L.A. fires and San Diego flooding, including destroyed homes and businesses, lack of insurance, delayed permits, lost income, and the need for emergency grants, relocation help, and better disaster planning for child care programs. Several providers gave personal testimony about rebuilding after fires and floods, including one family child care provider from Pasadena/Altadena whose home and business were destroyed and who is still trying to reopen while paying rent, a mortgage, and permit costs. Another provider described flood damage, health impacts on children, and thousands of dollars in losses. Committee members emphasized that child care is often overlooked in disaster recovery and asked state officials what is being done to integrate child care into emergency planning and to improve coordination among state and local agencies. Officials said the statewide child care disaster plan exists and has been updated over time, but acknowledged more work is needed and that the hearing itself should inform future improvements. The second panel addressed immigration enforcement and its impact on the child care system. Advocates from the Children's Partnership, Every Child California, and CHIRLA said immigration raids and enforcement activity are causing families to keep children home, reducing attendance and enrollment, increasing fear and trauma, and destabilizing providers and the broader early learning workforce. They argued that child care settings are trusted spaces and that enforcement undermines continuity of care, child development, and program viability. They urged stronger privacy and safety protections, statewide training and technical assistance, trauma-informed guidance, legal support for families, transportation and subsidy protections, and emergency funding for providers. Speakers also highlighted recently enacted laws AB 49 and AB 495, but stressed that implementation will require funding and clear guidance. Committee members agreed that funding and implementation are critical and heard public testimony from providers describing fear, family separation, and the need to keep child care safe and stable for immigrant families.

Transcript Highlights:

• Codings Association in support of House Bill 2301.
• The new excise tax rates put forward in Section 105 and Section 107 represent an increase over what most
• Existing tools that we have, like code enforcement, are reactive.
• Existing tools that we have, like code enforcement, are reactive.
• House Bill 2640 addresses unauthorized Uniform Commercial Code filing.

Summary: The committee first heard Substitute House Bill 1128, which would create a Child Care Workforce Standards Board within the Department of Labor and Industries to study child care workforce conditions and make recommendations on employment standards. Staff explained that the proposed second substitute narrows the board’s role from setting enforceable standards to making recommendations, with estimated ongoing costs for L&I staffing and smaller costs for board member stipends and possible DCYF support. Supporters, including child care providers, SEIU 925, and labor representatives, said the bill would help address understaffing, low wages, and retention problems; opponents, including child care industry groups and private schools, argued it duplicates existing work, adds bureaucracy, and creates unfunded costs. No vote was taken in the hearing. The committee then heard Second Substitute House Bill 1634, which would direct OSPI and ESDs to develop a technical assistance and training framework to help schools coordinate student behavioral health supports. Staff said the bill aligns with the Washington Thriving Strategic Plan and could largely be implemented with existing work and limited additional costs, though DOH would need some support. Testifiers from behavioral health and school counseling fields described severe youth mental health needs and urged passage, and OSPI said the work is doable with current resources. The committee also heard Substitute House Bill 2636, which would create a public education review advisory council to recommend K-12 policies and funding provisions for JLARC review; staff described JLARC, OSPI, and State Board costs, and no public testimony was offered. The committee next heard House Bill 1316, which would expand the Supporting Students Experiencing Homelessness program so additional university campuses can access funding. The sponsor said the program has strong retention outcomes, and student advocates testified that campuses such as UW Bothell need access to already appropriated funds for emergency aid, food pantries, and case management. Staff then briefed Substitute House Bill 2474, which would allow the Student Achievement Council Tuition Recovery Trust Fund to be used for refunds tied to broader consumer protection violations, with no expected fiscal impact; there was no testimony. The committee also heard Substitute House Bill 2365 on digital equity, which would expand the Broadband Office’s role, revise the digital equity forum, and rename the grant program; supporters emphasized rural access, affordability, and the loss of federal digital equity funding, while staff estimated significant Commerce staffing costs and some additional agency impacts. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 2401, creating a Washington State Boys and Men Commission contingent on non-state funding, with staff outlining OFM startup and fundraising costs and an estimated operating budget if fully funded. Supporters said boys and men face mental health, education, and mentorship gaps and that the commission would improve coordination; the bill drew testimony from rural school leaders, nonprofit advocates, and community members. The committee then heard Substitute House Bill 2475 on language access, which would require the Office of Equity to develop uniform language-access guidelines and a report on interpreter and translator shortages; staff said the office could absorb the work but other agency and local government impacts were uncertain. Substitute House Bill 2517, on permitting for high-capacity transit, would let regional transit authorities apply for permits earlier and streamline land-use processes; Sound Transit and the sponsor said it would speed delivery of major projects, while staff estimated Commerce technical-assistance costs and possible local government impacts. The last bill heard was Substitute House Bill 2145 on the 340B drug pricing program, which would bar manufacturers from restricting contract-pharmacy access and require reporting to DOH; supporters said it protects safety-net providers and patient services, while opponents warned of higher costs for employers, state health plans, and litigation burdens. No final committee action or votes were recorded in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• As you know, transportation funding in Arizona does not meet the needs of our transportation infrastructure
• Ten miles section, yes.
• for various transportation projects.
• for various transportation projects.
• What's how many miles in what section again?

Summary: The committee heard a lengthy Arizona Department of Transportation presentation on major corridor projects, beginning with Interstate 11. ADOT Director Jennifer Toth said the entire 280-mile I-11 corridor from Nogales to the Nevada line is covered by a federal lawsuit, which has paused Tier 2 work pending a Tier 1 reevaluation and public comment period expected later this year and into early 2027. Members asked whether the northern segment could move forward separately; ADOT said the lawsuit covers the full corridor and that segmentation would likely add time and cost. The committee also heard updates on SR 347 and the I-10 Wild Horse Pass corridor, including widening, interchange reconstructions, grade separations, and traffic-management improvements, with members raising concerns about congestion, signal timing, construction hours, signage, and safety. ADOT also presented the West Kingman I-40/US 93 project, a $106.5 million free-flow ramp project that is about 60% complete and expected to finish in early 2027; members discussed temporary traffic controls near Beale Street and the need for better access and safety in the area. The committee then moved to a mass hearing on the Regional Transportation Advocacy Council (RTAC) bill, House Bill 2304, which appropriates about $473 million for a list of rural and small-metro highway projects. Testimony came from regional planning organizations, county officials, mayors, and city staff supporting projects in Apache Junction, Show Low, Chino Valley, Sedona, Eloy, Coolidge, Casa Grande, Lake Havasu City, Clarkdale, San Luis, and Yavapai County. Speakers described projects such as road widenings, bypasses, bridge and interchange improvements, flood and evacuation routes, freight access, and safety upgrades, often emphasizing local matching funds, shovel-ready status, and economic development benefits. Committee members frequently asked about traffic flow, emergency access, and project design details, while the chair reminded witnesses that support in the budget would still depend on members advocating for the projects during budget negotiations. No final vote on the RTAC bill or the individual project bills was taken in the portion provided, but the chair announced a mass-motion approach: members and witnesses would be allowed to speak briefly on each project, after which the committee would vote on the package together. The meeting also included brief staff explanations of several individual appropriation bills, including funding for Apache Junction, the Wolford Road extension in Show Low, Ray Lane in Graham County, SR 89 widening in Chino Valley, and Sedona roadway and roundabout-related improvements.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's not just a requirement, but following code.
• A few things: I would say first off the code, as I mentioned before, and we could raise the code statewide
• . to code.
• Yeah, and I don't have all the code sections memorized, so. technical issue that I have to go back and
• I think we do have some sections of the government code that would allow for an executive to take up

Bills: HB2 , HB1 , HB18 , HB19 , HB20 , HB1 , HB2 , HB18 , HB19 , HB20

Committee: House Disaster Preparedness & Flooding, Select

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman, on what we are recommending for the Department of Transportation.
• We are recommending some additional funding for the Department of Transportation.
• You've also done pretty significant tax code changes.
• There is no set aside for recurring tax code changes in the LFC.
• I have questions on two sections. Well, just really overall compensation.

Committees: Senate Senate Finance , Senate House Appropriations & Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 1357(g), or 8 CFR Section 287.7.
• Section 1357(g), or 8 CFR Section 287.7, shall, upon the effective date of the Immigrant Safety Act,.
• And then we are going to renumber the sections accordingly. All right, so that's the amendment.
• In Section 4, this new part of the bill will be structured similar to Section 3, and it prohibits public
• warrant, and you're saying transport.

Bills: SB100

Committee: House House Judiciary

Keywords: burglary, aggravated burglary, dwelling, criminal law, property rights

Transcript Highlights:

• The purpose of House Bill 4543 is to clarify the existing statutory exemption found in section 87 of
• Unfortunately, an inability availability of appointments, transportation issues, and finances.
• Hobgood said, this can be transportation, this can be dogs that are aggressive or fearful, cats that
• Or say you yourself cannot drive, and you rely on public transportation, you rely on a ride, and if you're
• . ...and the rights and responsibilities that come with it do not depend on your ZIP code.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills, with the longest discussion focused on House Bill 426 and Senate Bill 263, which would prohibit the sale in Massachusetts of cosmetics known to rely on vertebrate animal testing. Supporters from Animal Defenders International, Humane World for Animals, and the Animal Rescue League said animal testing is cruel, outdated, and unreliable, and pointed to non-animal alternatives and similar laws in other states and countries. No opposition was heard on that bill during the excerpt, and witnesses urged the committee to report it favorably. The committee also took testimony on House Bill 4543, which would clarify an existing pipe-fitting exemption for certain work performed on property owned by industrial plants, utilities, colleges, and similar institutions. A representative for Construction Industries of Massachusetts supported the bill, saying it would preserve longstanding practice for outside contractors doing yard piping work. Pipefitters Local 537 opposed it, arguing the work is properly licensed pipefitting and that the bill would weaken licensing standards and undermine state inspectors. Another major topic was Senate Bill 237 on regulating self-checkouts in grocery establishments. The Mass AFL-CIO and UFCW Local 1445 supported the bill, saying self-checkout has reduced staffing, increased worker stress and customer conflict, and contributed to theft and safety problems. Workers described being responsible for multiple machines at once, verbal abuse, and even assaults, and said the bill’s staffing and machine limits would improve safety and customer service. The committee also heard extensive testimony on House Bill 355, which would allow veterinarians to establish a client-patient relationship via telehealth; ASPCA, MSPCA, and several veterinarians supported it as a way to expand access to care, while the Massachusetts Veterinary Medical Association and several veterinarians opposed it, arguing that an in-person exam is essential for proper diagnosis and that telemedicine should only follow an in-person VCPR. Finally, the committee heard testimony on House Bill 330, Senate Bill 221, and House Bill 371, which would preempt local boards of health from adopting tobacco-related age or sales restrictions beyond the statewide standard. Public health advocates opposed the bills, arguing they would block local innovation and undermine nicotine-free generation policies adopted by municipalities, while retailers and tobacco trade groups supported them as necessary to preserve a uniform statewide age-21 standard and avoid confusion for consumers and businesses. No votes or final actions were taken during the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman, I did find that section. >> Mr. Chairman, I did find that section.
• two. >> Uh, leave section two. >> So section one also delete 19102.
• </c> &gt;&gt; And then leave section two. &gt;&gt; And then leave section two.
• </c> &gt;&gt; Uh leave section two. &gt;&gt; Uh leave section two.
• </c> &gt;&gt; So section one also delete 19102. &gt;&gt; So section one also delete 19102.

Bills: SF0045 , SF0058 , SF0067

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• And then on page two, section two.
• So if you would go to the sections and start with Section number five, okay, the first two sections are
• But start with Section five. So Section five identifies $3,512,670 in one-time funding for SIFT.
• And if you look at the sections, it's talked about in section four.
• Section 5 is the motor carrier electronic permit fund transfer authorization. Section 6 is...

Committee: House Appropriations

Summary: The committee began with roll call and a brief update on remaining work, then took up Senate Bill 2213, the “science of math” bill. Members clarified that the appropriation for the program was not included in the DPI budget and would remain attached to the policy bill for now. The committee adopted the amendment and then gave the bill a do pass recommendation, 21-2. The committee next considered Senate Bills 2036 and 2037, both juvenile justice/Human Services bills involving mental health and criminal responsibility evaluations for minors. Testimony explained that the bills create new processes and require DHS to contract with specialized providers, with appropriations of $500,000 in 2036 and $300,000 in 2037. Members debated whether the funding should come from existing DHS resources or remain as separate appropriations, and whether the programs were one-time or ongoing. The committee adopted amendments on both bills and then recommended both do pass, with 2036 passing 14-6 and 2037 passing 17-4. The committee then heard Senate Bill 2021, the Information Technology Department budget. Representative Bosch outlined major themes in the budget, including migration from PeopleSoft and the mainframe, onboarding/off-boarding automation, double-counting of IT spending, and the transition of education technology from PowerSchool to Infinite Campus. Members also discussed a study amendment related to a statewide enterprise resource planning system, and added language on grant management and compliance management. The committee adopted the amendments and gave the budget a do pass recommendation, 20-0-3. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 2011, the Highway Patrol budget. Representative Pyle explained the House changes, including shifting some one-time costs to the motor carrier electronic permit fund, funding for body armor, breath tests, road course resurfacing, fleet costs, handgun replacement, and carryover authority for federal technology funds. The committee adopted the amendment and then passed the budget 21-0-2. The committee then began Senate Bill 2399, a Human Services bill on Medicaid reimbursement for psychiatric residential treatment facilities, but deferred action after testimony from a facility representative and committee discussion about therapeutic leave days, reimbursement rates, and whether a cap on reimbursable days should be set in statute or rule. The chair said the committee would seek more information from DHS and take the bill up the next day.

Transcript Highlights:

• after July 1, 2024. municipality stricture codes enabled municipality stricture codes enabled before
• takes</c> building code.
• The code already takes building code.
• </c><01:40:46.480><c> had</c><01:40:46.719><c> towns</c> code requirements, but we've had towns code
• If I know that passing this will make sure that the state building code is a state building code, and

Transcript Highlights:

• The hearing will be divided into four sections.
• So that court concluded that both Article 2, Section 17 of the Washington Constitution and the constitutional
• And you can see the language in Article 2, Section 17.
• Because it was coded under C23, which, in my understanding, ...
• Because it was coded under C23, which, in my understanding, is contract employees.

Bills: H5004

Committee: Joint Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-14, H 5-004, “an act to improve access to public records.” Chairs Cindy Friedman and Alice Peisch outlined the Article 48 process and explained that the committee was hearing expert testimony, then proponents, then opponents, before any public testimony. The first expert, Will Clark of the National Conference of State Legislatures, gave a general overview of public records laws across the states, emphasizing that all states have some form of open-records law but that exemptions, timelines, fees, and coverage of legislatures vary widely. He discussed legislative exemptions, legislative privilege, and court cases showing that outcomes often turn on the exact language of state constitutions, statutes, and chamber rules. Rebecca Murray, General Counsel for the Secretary of the Commonwealth, testified about Massachusetts public records administration, saying requests and appeals have risen sharply since the 2017 law update, with state agency requests increasing from 22,572 in 2017 to 47,776 in 2025 and appeals reaching a record 4,051 cases in 2025. She said the initiative would extend the law to the General Court and the Governor’s office and add exemptions for those branches, while warning that the volume and complexity of requests could require more resources. The proponents, led by Jesse Littlewood of the Coalition for Healthy Democracy, Scotia Hila of Act on Mass, and Auditor Diana DiZoglio, argued that Massachusetts is an outlier for exempting the legislature and governor from public records law and that the proposal would create needed accountability without exposing personal constituent communications or internal deliberations. They said the measure would make records such as committee votes, final bill drafts, amendments, expenditures, attendance records, minutes, and public testimony available, while preserving exemptions for constituent services, draft legislation, internal staff communications, and policy development discussions. DiZoglio emphasized that the initiative is aimed at basic administrative and financial records, citing her own difficulty obtaining receipts, contracts, and procurement documents, and said the public should be able to see how taxpayer dollars are spent. Committee members questioned the witnesses extensively about the scope of exemptions, constituent privacy, legislative privilege, and whether the measure could reach communications with nonprofits or lobbying-type interactions; proponents responded that privacy and constituent-service exemptions were intended to remain in place, though some members pressed for clearer statutory language. The hearing also included a contentious exchange over whether the initiative could affect legislative communications and whether the Senate had already taken a position against the measure. Some members raised concerns about separation of powers, legislative privilege, and the possibility of exposing constituent communications or internal deliberations, while proponents argued that the initiative was narrowly tailored and that any legal disputes could be resolved in court. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing. The committee concluded the testimony portion after hearing from the proponents and their questions, with the matter left pending for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• Rule 8.2 reported in the journal Section Rule 8.2 reported in the journal for<00:28:37.600><c> April
• And then one that is a removes a section of the bill.
• Senate File 3295 as follows: Page 147, delete Section 1 and insert. This is the A-17 amendment.
• :46.920><c> the</c> Transportation, working with the Transportation, working with the Department<03:15
• </c><03:16:24.680><c> and</c> by the Department of Transportation and by the Department of Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• These include heavy-duty transportation, ports, maritime shipping, aviation, fuels, and other industrial
• To support these uses, hydrogen must be transported safely and efficiently from where it is produced
• I think it's in section 6A2. 6-8-2. To assess one of the potential solutions.
• We just don't want that code. Upfront funding, not the ongoing basis.
• So even the smallest code-compliant process. definitions or parameters around the size.

Committee: House Utilities and Energy

Transcript Highlights:

• Now, you said that your C-section prediction tool the C-section prediction.
• Now, you said that your C-section prediction tool can predict with 90% accuracy whether a C-section will
• because the tool outputted a C-section prediction.
• And having had incredible care, I was on the verge of a C-section with my first.
• They rely on public transportation.

Summary: The joint informational hearing by the Assembly Health and Privacy Committees focused on generative AI in health care, with opening remarks emphasizing both the promise of improved care and the risks around privacy, bias, workforce impacts, reimbursement, and liability. Members and witnesses repeatedly stressed that AI should augment clinicians rather than replace them, and that California has a role in shaping responsible adoption. The first panel featured health systems and developers describing current uses such as ambient scribes for physicians and nurses, imaging triage, maternal-fetal risk prediction, and administrative automation. Speakers from Cedars-Sinai, Kaiser Permanente, Penguin AI, and Google highlighted efficiency gains, reduced clinician burnout, faster treatment, and some reported patient-safety benefits, while also noting the need for human review, governance, and ongoing monitoring. Committee members pressed the panel on bias, especially for multilingual patients, women of color, and Medi-Cal populations, and on whether predictive tools could worsen disparities or drive unnecessary interventions such as C-sections. Witnesses said tools must be tested in real-world settings, with humans in the loop and outcomes tracked by demographic group. They also discussed the legal landscape, with concerns that liability may fall more on hospitals and physicians than on developers, and that clearer rules may be needed for clinical, clinical-adjacent, and administrative uses. Several speakers argued that administrative uses like prior authorization and coding are lower-risk and ripe for automation, while clinical applications require much stronger safeguards. The second panel shifted to broader policy and equity issues. The California Health Care Foundation described early AI adoption in the safety net, including a Los Angeles County homelessness-risk model and AI tools supporting community health workers, and said safety-net providers want guidance on privacy, liability, safety, bias, and workforce impacts. Dr. Ziad Obermeyer described research showing racial bias in widely used risk algorithms and argued for accountability, access to data under strong protections, public-sector leadership, and partnerships to steer AI toward better outcomes. Dr. Michelle Mello said most organizations lack strong governance, that monitoring is difficult and costly, and that states could require AI governance structures as a condition of licensure. The discussion closed with calls for clearer standards, better data access for evaluation, and policy approaches that protect patients while allowing beneficial AI to spread beyond large health systems.

Transcript Highlights:

• But we're very careful at DPMO because price gouging is a Penal Code section that has to do with prices
• But we're very careful at DPMO because price gouging is a Penal Code section that has to do with prices
• It's part of the transition plan and the transportation fuels assessment... ...the transportation fuels
• fuels assessment or in the transportation fuels transition plan.
• For our transportation needs and at the same time having more reliability.

Committee: House Utilities and Energy

Transcript Highlights:

• In lieu of time, I will only highlight parts of this section.
• Finally, the last section discusses economic opportunities stemming from AI.
• I also have a definition here very similar from California government code.
• And then eventually it goes to a code enforcer or someone hears about it.
• code a little bit too.

Committee: Joint Artificial Intelligence and Data Center Committee

Summary: The committee held its first meeting on artificial intelligence and data centers, establishing its purpose as a study and policy-development body rather than one aimed at producing many bills. Majority Leader Hogue urged members to move quickly, focus on federal and other states’ AI laws, consider possible federal preemption, child protections, and the siting and economic impacts of data centers. Committee leadership echoed that the goal is practical, balanced governance that protects North Dakota while allowing innovation to continue. Legislative Council staff provided a background memo and NCSL presented a detailed overview of AI concepts and the current state legislative landscape. The presentations distinguished narrow AI, generative AI, agentic AI, and theoretical AGI/ASI, and summarized major state policy themes: comprehensive AI laws in states such as Utah, Colorado, Texas, California, and Illinois; targeted laws on deepfakes, chatbots, health, education, notifications, and digital likeness; and growing use of appropriations and agency inventories. Members asked about Colorado’s repeal and reenactment, Texas’s sandbox and training provisions, oversight structures, and whether AI regulation is bipartisan; presenters said most issues cut across party lines, with broad agreement on child safety and deepfakes but more division on broader regulatory approaches. The federal update focused on executive orders, preemption, and congressional activity. NCSL described a White House framework favoring a single federal standard, a DOJ litigation task force, Commerce Department review of state laws, and possible funding conditions tied to state AI policy, though no formal state-law challenge had yet occurred. The presentation also covered a recent executive order creating a voluntary federal vetting process for advanced frontier models after safety concerns, and congressional proposals including a failed 10-year state moratorium, Senator Blackburn’s child-safety bills, the Kids Online Safety Act, a House-passed children’s digital safety package, a Senate data center moratorium proposal, and a House ratepayer/data-center bill. The committee took no formal action beyond receiving testimony and asking questions.