Transcript Highlights:

• and understanding what was good processing and what wasn't so much good processing.
• <00:01:03.400> and<00:01:04.040> and up with the the processing and and up with the
• > good<00:01:05.280> processing understanding what was good processing understanding what
• ><00:01:06.720> much<00:01:06.920> good<00:01:07.080> processing.
• and what wasn't so much good processing. and what wasn't so much good processing.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• So that process remains the same. They did. Two-year period, too, right? Rebecca: That is correct.
• And, Rebecca, we were really trying to just simplify this process, wasn't it?
• And Rebecca, we were really trying to just simplify this process, wasn't it?
• So those would be live use cases as we get additional ones that they would follow this process.
• So those would be live use cases as we get additional ones that they would follow this process.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The conference committee on HB 1248 met to review differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill, which concerns the PERS pilot program and insurance mandate process. Rebecca Frickie, executive director of PERS, explained that the Senate version removed the House provisions repealing the insurance mandate process, kept the two-year PERS pilot intact, and preserved the requirement for a report at the end of the pilot while removing language that would have required PERS to submit a bill to expand coverage to the commercial market. Members discussed the bill’s cost-benefit analysis requirements. Frickie said the current law triggers a cost-benefit analysis at the start of the pilot and again when a bill is introduced to roll coverage out commercially, but the Senate draft would change that to only one analysis at the end of the pilot if a rollout bill is introduced. Legislative Council indicated that if the committee wants that simplified approach, additional conforming changes are needed elsewhere in the code. Senators also asked about the purpose of the initial analysis and whether it is used beyond being attached to the bill packet; Frickie said PERS relies primarily on its own actuary and was not aware of broader use. The committee discussed whether the revised process would still require legislative sponsorship for any future rollout, and Frickie confirmed that a legislator or other sponsor would need to introduce such a bill. Examples mentioned included insulin caps and breast exams as possible future pilot items. The committee agreed to request Legislative Council draft the needed language changes and planned to reconvene after receiving the updated draft; no final vote was taken and the meeting was adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• growerowned sugarbeat processing growerowned sugarbeat processing facility<00:05:13.440> located
• piles are not only at our processing piles are not only at our processing facility.<00:08:24.000
• <00:24:48.240> today we're going to start the process today we're going to start the process
• happy that we're part of this process. happy that we're part of this process.
• c><00:47:03.760> depression process frequently leads to depression process frequently leads to

Bills: HF3553, HF3513, HF3576

Keywords: vehicle platooning, transportation, public safety, pilot project, Wilkin County, Grant County, autonomous vehicles, transportation regulations, driverless cars, safety standards, first responder interaction, school bus, third-party testing, driver certification, transportation regulation, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• . process. process.
• I respect the process, and I think the process matters.
• I respect the process, and I think the process matters.
• I respect the process, and I think the process matters.
• I respect the process, and I think the process matters.

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The Rules and Administration Committee met on March 19, 2026, to consider the referral path for Senate File 4139, the sports betting bill, rather than the substance of the proposal. Senator Franzen, the bill’s chief author, asked that the bill be referred first to the Commerce Committee, saying he had discussed the matter with the relevant committee chairs and that Commerce was the best place to address the bill’s consumer protection provisions. He emphasized that any final path to passage would still require the bill to go through State and Local Government as well. Senator Rasmusson objected and argued the bill should go first to State and Local Government, citing Senate jurisdiction rules, which he said assign gambling bills to that committee. He noted that prior sports betting bills had been referred there first and said a predictable referral process is important. Senator Maye Quade, Senator Dibble, Senator Bar, and Senator Jasinski also supported sending the bill to State and Local Government first, arguing that the committee has primary jurisdiction over gambling and that the bill’s consumer protection language does not change that basic referral. Senator Champion and Senator Miller supported the Commerce referral, saying authors may request an initial committee and that the bill’s consumer protection sections fit Commerce jurisdiction. Senator Marty moved to re-refer Senate File 4139 to the Committee on State and Local Government. Before the vote, members continued debating whether the bill’s structure and prior referral history justified Commerce or whether committee jurisdiction rules required State and Local Government first. The transcript ends with the motion pending and no final vote or disposition shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so if um an institution process.
• Um, so that's the process, and then there's also a review process at the end.
• Um, so that's the process, and then there's also a review process at the end.
• The process and then there's also a review process at the end.
• would be a consistent approval process. would be a consistent approval process.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 77, which would allow comprehensive universities to pursue doctoral programs under a new approval process and, in the original bill, would also change who may serve on the EPSB board for small colleges and universities. The sponsor and Council on Postsecondary Education representative explained that the committee substitute removed the current statutory prohibition on comprehensive universities offering certain doctoral degrees, but added eligibility guardrails: a 77% first-to-second-year retention rate, a 56% six-year graduation rate, and three months of unrestricted cash reserves. They said the thresholds were based on national data placing institutions in roughly the top quartile, and that CPE would still review proposals for mission fit, workforce need, fiscal impact, and, where applicable, programmatic accreditation and legislative appropriations. EKU President David McFaden supported creating a pathway for comprehensive universities, said Kentucky is unusual in having an explicit statutory prohibition, and urged the committee to keep the standards attainable and durable. The committee approved the bill and adopted a title amendment, with the motion passing unanimously. The committee then heard Senate Joint Resolution 55, which addresses antisemitism on postsecondary campuses. Senator Tichenor said the resolution responds to a rise in antisemitic incidents after October 7, 2023, and would require campuses to notify students each semester of Title VI rights, complaint procedures, existing harassment policies, and available Jewish student resources. It would also direct campuses to disband student organizations found to provide material support to known terrorist organizations, report such matters to law enforcement, and collect and report antisemitism data to CPE for posting on its website. A guest speaker from the Kentucky Jewish Council described a sharp increase in reported incidents, including harassment, threats, vandalism, and hostile campus activity, and argued that schools have often done too little to respond. He said the resolution was amended to protect free speech while ensuring Jewish students receive the same protections as other protected groups. The transcript ends while testimony on the resolution was still underway, before any committee vote on SJR 55.

Transcript Highlights:

• care agency licensing process, and current licensure processes in the home health care industry in Massachusetts
• of payroll processes that follow all state and federal labor and wage laws.
• The regulatory process is going to have to sort through.
• The aging process begins at conception.
• So as we all consider this licensure process, I'd like to offer a few thoughts.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Aging and Independence held a hearing on several bills, led by Chair Tom Stanley and Senate Chair Patricia Jehlen. The committee first heard testimony on H. 765/S. 487, an act relative to councils on aging, which would update outdated statutory language and allow directors of councils on aging to make staffing decisions when a council is structured as an advisory body. Representative Donahue and Betsy Connell of the Massachusetts Association of Councils on Aging said the change reflects how most councils now operate and would resolve conflicts like the one that arose in Sherborn. Members asked about whether the bill would affect town managers, volunteer roles, and whether the language should more clearly exempt informal volunteer help; supporters said the bill is aimed at municipal staffing structures, not unpaid volunteer assistance. The committee then took extensive testimony on H. 789/S. 470, an act to improve Massachusetts home care, which would create a statewide licensure system for non-medical home care agencies and entities. Julie Watt, Jay Krillovich, Betsy Krimmins, Lisa Gargoni, Tim Foley, and several providers and advocates supported the bill, arguing that licensure would establish baseline standards for background checks, training, service plans, insurance, complaint procedures, and labor-law compliance, while helping consumers identify legitimate providers and reducing fraud and abuse. Several witnesses described problems with unlicensed or poorly supervised providers, and family members and dementia advocates emphasized the need for dementia-specific training and better oversight for vulnerable clients. Tim Foley also raised concerns about private equity’s growing role in home care and said stronger regulation is needed to protect consumers and workers. Committee members focused on practical questions about the bill’s scope, including whether it would reach informal paid helpers, volunteers, or people doing occasional household tasks, and what agency would enforce the rules. Supporters said the bill is intended to cover entities advertising home care services, not unpaid volunteer help, though they acknowledged regulators would need to work out details. John Sneeth of Tribute Home Care offered a more cautious view, saying licensure should not unduly burden smaller providers or reduce competition, and that enforcement would be key. The hearing also included testimony from the Alzheimer’s Association and family caregivers, who strongly supported the bill’s dementia-training provisions and described how trained caregivers improved safety and quality of life for people living with Alzheimer’s and dementia. At the end of the hearing, the committee also heard support for H. 778/S. 473, regarding the Commission on LGBTQ Aging, with Lisa Krinsky urging funding for a full-time director and continued support for the commission’s strategic plan. After public testimony concluded, the committee adjourned the hearing by motion and voice vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's going to be a delicate process. Absolutely.
• So I believe the process we have is very broad.
• Again, BLM was our co-trustee in that case, but I think our process...
• But I think our process incorporates all ideas.
• So we do look forward to engaging in that process.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They also change companies in the middle of this process.
• So these folks are all still in process, right?
• March, you're recognized in the process. Thank you.
• Then that process to issue those Mas is outlined in statute.
• I think because we have that same process apply.

Transcript Highlights:

• It involves the 5th and 14th Amendments, which include the due process and procedural due process rights
• You had mentioned there's a three-step enforcement process. Can you walk us through that process?
• Okay, sounds like an extensive process.
• As far as changing a rule, there absolutely is a process for that.
• We will take it, and we will run it through our process.

Bills: SB1361, SB2105, SB2690, SB2713, SCR38, SB2637, SB2881

Keywords: SB 1361, Texas disaster recovery loan, small business loan, micro-business loan, community development financial institution, CDFI, economic disaster assistance, post-disaster financing, business recovery fund, Texas Economic Development Bank, zero-interest loan, working capital, payroll support, health benefits, job retention, declared disaster, small business relief, microenterprise, franchise exclusion, private equity-backed business

Transcript Highlights:

• We have taken this year to review the process.
• These are procurement processes, as I certainly learned, that they're not months.
• Some of these are stretched into a year and a half, two-year processes.
• And so that very long procurement process that goes through a number of different review and audit processes
• We're very early in that process.

Summary: The committee met to review agency program funding as it prepared to build the budget, hearing brief presentations from six agencies and then taking member questions. Florida Division of Emergency Management highlighted its role in response, preparedness, recovery, and mitigation, describing a largely federal pass-through budget, major technology investments, and large disaster and preparedness grant activity. The Department of Commerce, Department of State, Florida Housing Finance Corporation, Department of Transportation, Department of Military Affairs, Florida State Guard, and Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles also summarized their budgets, staffing, and major programs, including workforce and economic development, elections and arts funding, housing assistance, transportation work programs, military readiness, state guard expansion, and highway safety and motorist services. Members focused questions on several issues: arts and library grant funding and whether award criteria had changed; Commerce’s rural infrastructure and job growth grants and why funds were not being disbursed faster; Florida Housing’s use of SAIL, Live Local, Hometown Heroes, and SHIP funds and how smaller agencies learn about and access funding; and DOT’s work program gap between agency and governor proposals. The most extensive questioning was directed to Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles about long DMV lines, vacancies, overtime, staffing shortages, and the ability to shift funds between divisions. The department said staffing and pay constraints, especially in South Florida, were driving service delays and vacancy rates, and that overtime was being used because troopers were leaving for better-paying jobs. The Florida State Guard was also questioned about its spending and procurement pace, including aircraft purchases and facilities. Its director said long procurement timelines explained the low initial spending and that obligations had risen sharply as contracts matured. Members also asked about the department’s public opposition to Amendment 3 and whether agency resources were used in that effort; the director said no contracts or purchases were made to influence the vote and said the colonel’s comments were made off the clock. The meeting ended with the chair asking agencies to respond promptly to unanswered questions, and the committee adjourned without any recorded votes or formal actions beyond receiving the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• That process is a big lift for a team. teacher, but the other process is really just about the teacher's
• If they cut muster with our evaluation process, processes, then we make a recommendation to the state
• It's a very rigorous application process.
• Once you are approved, state law sets up an expedited approval process. discretionary approval process
• and basically a closure process.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So constituents consistently reach out to our office to report extensive delays in processing claims,
• were changes made and are being made within the Department of Unemployment Assistance and their processes
• A thorough look into these processes to improve basic and vital government functions, helping many of
• So many families across the Commonwealth rely on it, and when it's not being processed in a timely manner
• The increase in the backlogs led to significant delays in decisions and processing claims.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Labor and Workforce Development held a hearing on House 5188, a late-filed bill to establish a special commission to study access to unemployment insurance in Massachusetts. Representatives Hadley Luddy and Joshua Tarski, the bill’s sponsors, said they filed it after seeing many constituent cases involving delays, unresolved claims, and difficulty navigating the unemployment system, especially for seasonal workers and others facing financial instability. They argued the commission should review claim data, gather stakeholder input, and identify gaps in the process so the system is more efficient, equitable, and transparent. Greater Boston Legal Services testified in support, describing numerous client cases in which claimants waited months for determinations or were stuck in limbo after the launch of a new online benefits system. Attorneys said DUA’s backlogs and timeliness metrics had worsened, citing large increases in non-monetary, separation, and hearings backlogs, and they urged the committee to consider systemic fixes, including better notice about paid family and medical leave and possibly more funding or staff for DUA. Committee members generally praised the bill and the sponsors’ collaboration, and one suggested the commission’s reporting deadline might need to be extended. No vote was taken during the hearing. After testimony and brief discussion, the chair closed the hearing and concluded the committee meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• And now we have to talk about the building standards process.
• What is so detrimental I think about the co-development process is very few people understand it.
• First, there's a big difference between the triennial process, which is a very methodical, thorough process
• It is going through the policy process. I know that you are going to continue to meet with.
• and creating consistency across the process.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In terms of setting up the criteria, it is a competitive process, but the competitive process is not
• It is a competitive process, but the competitive process is not to exclude small towns, suburban areas
• So the panel process is a key step, but prior to getting to that panel process, it went through the agency
• And Member Hurtado, if I could add around our panel process.
• So we have a race and equity manager here, Around our panel process.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the budget process.
• ... ...hearing process.
• , that I feel included as a new member of this process.
• I lived that process, right?
• So thank you to everybody who has been part of this process.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee heard opening remarks on the 2025 Budget Act, which will be amended into AB 101 and SB 101 for floor consideration. Committee leaders described the budget as a difficult compromise shaped by a $12 billion deficit, federal funding uncertainty, wildfire impacts, and rising out-year costs, while emphasizing a balance between compassion and fiscal responsibility. Each budget subcommittee chair then summarized major actions in their areas, including health care, human services, education, climate and transportation, housing and state administration, public safety, and oversight/transparency. Key policy items included delaying or narrowing some of the Governor’s proposed cuts, especially in Medi-Cal and other safety-net programs; preserving funding for dental care, women’s health, family planning, hospice, long-term care, IHSS, and services for undocumented Californians; and maintaining or expanding child care, foster care, food banks, and CalWORKs-related supports. Education actions included additional Proposition 98 settle-up, reduced deferrals, support for TK-12, teacher recruitment, literacy, mental health, preschool slots, and restored funding for UC and CSU. Other major items included housing and homelessness investments, wildfire and disaster response funding, transit loans and greenhouse gas reduction fund support, Proposition 36 and VOCA-related public safety funding, and oversight measures on federal impacts and state efficiency. Department of Finance and Legislative Analyst staff said the package makes some of the same savings moves as the May Revision but relies more on internal borrowing and fewer reductions, leaving a smaller reserve than the administration’s plan but still maintaining roughly $11 billion in the rainy day fund. Members from both parties largely supported the package while raising concerns about long-term sustainability, Medi-Cal costs, reserve use, and the need for future revenue and program review. The committee adopted the subcommittee actions by roll call, 18-6, with the roll held open for absent members and additional comments continuing after the vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• The A17 is in regards to the changes to the 62J process that is within this bill.
• The A17 is in regards to the changes to the 62J process that is within this bill.
• The A17 is in regards to the changes to the 62J process that is within this bill.
• And we also have Commerce's uh process.
• <00:26:47.039> strong would would keep the 62J process strong would would keep the 62J process

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have a lot of bureaucratic process that we as a legislature have to address.
• We're at the beginning of the process. The door is open.
• Just want to provide some clarity about the process that exists.
• So, to be clear, there is a timeline on the application process.
• really sets off the next 180-day process that we have for the organization.

Summary: The Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee heard a long agenda of housing-related bills, beginning with AB 518 on low-impact camping areas. The author and supporters said the bill would streamline permitting for small rural camping operations on private land, expand outdoor access, and support rural economies, while opponents from campground associations and counties warned it could undermine existing regulation, create enforcement problems, and allow advertising of unpermitted sites. Members raised concerns about fire safety and local control, but the bill was ultimately passed as amended on an 8-0 vote. The committee then approved AB 635, which would require HCD to refer up to 25 of the most serious mobile home residency law complaints to the Attorney General. Supporters said mobile home residents need stronger enforcement against egregious park-owner violations, while opponents argued the existing program is underused, costly, and should remain subject to a sunset. After discussion of the program’s surplus and enforcement role, the bill passed 9-1. AB 893, which expands ministerial approval for mixed-income housing near college campuses and broadens eligibility for affordable units to students, faculty, and staff, also drew strong support from student advocates and housing groups and respectful opposition from the League of California Cities over local control and height limits; it passed 10-0. AB 925, the Mobile Home Emergency Safety Act, would require stronger emergency preparedness measures in mobile home parks, including accessible exits, working fire hydrants, and gas shutoff access, with a fee increase to fund enforcement. Supporters framed it as a life-safety measure in disaster-prone areas, while opponents argued the bill duplicates existing requirements and imposes an unnecessary fee increase. The committee voted 6-1 to send it to Appropriations, with the bill left on call. The consent calendar, including several other housing and local government bills, was approved 8-0. The committee also heard AB 712, which would increase penalties and attorney-fee protections for applicants enforcing state housing laws against public agencies; supporters said it would improve compliance, while special districts opposed the bill as overly broad and unclear. Members discussed indemnification and timing issues, and the bill was advanced with amendments to Judiciary.

Transcript Highlights:

• This process is on behalf of our public schools.
• We'll make a determination later in the process.
• You're damn right I would, but there is a process here, and the process is that I can't go off and create
• Process, madam. I really do.
• to that process, to Business and Commerce.

Bills: SCR8, SCR25, SB1, SB14, SB24, SB213, SB251, SB315, SB371, SB378, SB379, SB406, SB413, SB472, SB487, SB502, SB502, SB509, SB513, SB513, SB565, SB565, SB583, SB608, SB621, SB650, SB686, SB686, SB707, SB710, SB710, SB761, SB761, SB810, SB815, SB840, SB856, SB875, SB875, SB896, SB896, SB916, SB925, SB958, SB958, SB961, SB965, SB965, SB973, SB973, SB987, SB990, SB995, SB1018, SB1019, SB1146, SB1146, SB1198, SB1252, SB1252, SB1253, SB1253, SB1330, SB1343, SB1362, SB1499, SB1499, SB1532, SB1532, SB1547, SB1547, SB1555, SB1596, SB1596, SJR36, SJR12, SJR57, SCR25, SCR22, SCR12, SCR8, SB565, SB765, SB62, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB847, SB1248, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB925, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB815, SB1379, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB241, SB304, SB621, SB1023, SB1024, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB609, SB670, SB502, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1555, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB985, SB965, SB1119, SB1505, SB24, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB213, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB378, SB1343, SB608, SB487, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB990, SB1019, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB958, SB761, SB1, SB541, SB315, SB379, SB1018, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB1527, SB125, SB599, SB1330, SB53, SB916, SB896, SB1352, SB973, SB785, SB710, SB472, SB1450, SB1502, SB1566, SB414, SB1062, SB1547, SB961, SB1038, SB513, SB578, SB711, SB746, SB942, SB1404, SB1448, SB1738, SB108, SB8, SB318, SB507, SB533, SB689, SB1026, SB1349, SB1355, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596, SB1403, SB1198, SB1146, SB763, SB667, SB1059, SB617, SB1567, SB503, SB1, SB1555, SR233, SR307, SR310, SR318, SR319, SCR25, SJR72, SJR73, SJR75, SJR77, SJR79, SJR80, SJR81, SJR82, SB2198, SB2201, SB2202, SB2203, SB2204, SB2205, SB2206, SB2207, SB2208, SB2209, SB2210, SB2211, SB2213, SB2214, SB2215, SB2216, SB2217, SB2218, SB2219, SB2220, SB2221, SB2222, SB2223, SB2224, SB2225, SB2226, SB2227, SB2228, SB2229, SB2231, SB2232, SB2233, SB2234, SB2235, SB2236, SB2237, SB2238, SB2239, SB2240, SB2241, SB2242, SB2243, SB2244, SB2245, SB2246, SB2247, SB2248, SB2249, SB2250, SB2251, SB2252, SB2253, SB2254, SB2255, SB2256, SB2257, SB2258, SB2259, SB2260, SB2261, SB2262, SB2263, SB2264, SB2265, SB2266, SB2267, SB2268, SB2269, SB2270, SB2271, SB2272, SB2273, SB2274, SB2275, SB2276, SB2277, SB2278, SB2279, SB2280, SB2281, SB2282, SB2283, SB2284, SB2285, SB2286, SB2287, SB2288, SB2289, SB2290, SB2291, SB2292, SB2293, SB2294, SB2295, SB2296, SB2297, SB2298, SB2299, SB2300, SB2301, SB2302, SB2303, SB2304, SB2305, SB2306, SB2307, SB2308, SB2309, SB2310, SB2311, SB2313, SB2314, SB2315, SB2316, SB2317, SB2318, SB2319, SB2320, SB2321, SB2322, SB2323, SB2324, SB2325, SB2326, SB2327, SB2328, SB2329, SB2330, SB2331, SB2333, SB2334, SB2335, SB2336, SB2337, SB2338, SB2339, SB2340, SB2341, SB2342, SB2343, SB2344, SB2346, SB2347, SB2348, SB2349, SB2350, SB2351, SB2352, SB2353, SB2354, SB2355, SB2356, SB2357, SB2358, SB2359, SB2360, SB2361, SB2362, SB2363, SB2364, SB2365, SB2366, SB2367, SB2368, SB2369, SB2370, SB2371, SB2372, SB2373, SB2374, SB2375, SB2376, SB2377, SB2378, SB2379, SB2380, SB2381, SB2382, SB2383, SB2384, SB2385, SB2386, SB2387, SB2388, SB2389, SB2390, SB2391, SB2393, SB2394, SB2395, SB2396, SB2397, SB2398, SB2399, SB2400, SB2401, SB2402, SB2403, SB2404, SB2405, SB2406, SB2410, SB2411, SB2412, SB2413, SB2414, SB2415, SB2416, SB2417, SB2418, SB2419, SB2420, SB2421, SB2422, SB2423, SB2424, SB2426, SB2427, SB2428, SB2429, SB2430, SB2431, SB2432, SB2433, SB2434, SB2435, SB2436, SB2437, SB2438, SB2439, SB2440, SB2441, SB2442, SB2443, SB2444, SB2445, SB2446, SB2447, SB2448, SB2449, SB2450, SB2451, SB2452, SB2453, SB2454, SB2455, SB2456, SB2457, SB2458, SB2459, SB2460, SJR72, SJR73, SJR75, SJR77, SJR79, SJR80, SJR81, SJR82, SB2198, SB2201, SB2202, SB2203, SB2204, SB2205, SB2206, SB2207, SB2208, SB2209, SB2210, SB2211, SB2213, SB2214, SB2215, SB2216, SB2217, SB2218, SB2219, SB2220, SB2221, SB2222, SB2223, SB2224, SB2225, SB2226, SB2227, SB2228, SB2229, SB2231, SB2232, SB2233, SB2234, SB2235, SB2236, SB2237, SB2238, SB2239, SB2240, SB2241, SB2242, SB2243, SB2244, SB2245, SB2246, SB2247, SB2248, SB2249, SB2250, SB2251, SB2252, SB2253, SB2254, SB2255, SB2256, SB2257, SB2258, SB2259, SB2260, SB2261, SB2262, SB2263, SB2264, SB2265, SB2266, SB2267, SB2268, SB2269, SB2270, SB2271, SB2272, SB2273, SB2274, SB2275, SB2276, SB2277, SB2278, SB2279, SB2280, SB2281, SB2282, SB2283, SB2284, SB2285, SB2286, SB2287, SB2288, SB2289, SB2290, SB2291, SB2292, SB2293, SB2294, SB2295, SB2296, SB2297, SB2298, SB2299, SB2300, SB2301, SB2302, SB2303, SB2304, SB2305, SB2306, SB2307, SB2308, SB2309, SB2310, SB2311, SB2313, SB2314, SB2315, SB2316, SB2317, SB2318, SB2319, SB2320, SB2321, SB2322, SB2323, SB2324, SB2325, SB2326, SB2327, SB2328, SB2329, SB2330, SB2331, SB2333, SB2334, SB2335, SB2336, SB2337, SB2338, SB2339, SB2340, SB2341, SB2342, SB2343, SB2344, SB2346, SB2347, SB2348, SB2349, SB2350, SB2351, SB2352, SB2353, SB2354, SB2355, SB2356, SB2357, SB2358, SB2359, SB2360, SB2361, SB2362, SB2363, SB2364, SB2365, SB2366, SB2367, SB2368, SB2369, SB2370, SB2371, SB2372, SB2373, SB2374, SB2375, SB2376, SB2377, SB2378, SB2379, SB2380, SB2381, SB2382, SB2383, SB2384, SB2385, SB2386, SB2387, SB2388, SB2389, SB2390, SB2391, SB2393, SB2394, SB2395, SB2396, SB2397, SB2398, SB2399, SB2400, SB2401, SB2402, SB2403, SB2404, SB2405, SB2406, SB2410, SB2411, SB2412, SB2413, SB2414, SB2415, SB2416, SB2417, SB2418, SB2419, SB2420, SB2421, SB2422, SB2423, SB2424, SB2426, SB2427, SB2428, SB2429, SB2430, SB2431, SB2432, SB2433, SB2434, SB2435, SB2436, SB2437, SB2438, SB2439, SB2440, SB2441, SB2442, SB2443, SB2444, SB2445, SB2446, SB2447, SB2448, SB2449, SB2450, SB2451, SB2452, SB2453, SB2454, SB2455, SB2456, SB2457, SB2458, SB2459, SB2460

Keywords: central bank digital currency, CBDC, Federal Reserve, digital dollar, digital currency, cashless payments, financial privacy, cybersecurity, government surveillance, financial surveillance, money laundering, terrorism financing, illicit finance, banking policy, monetary policy, payments system, commercial banks, Texas Legislature, concurrent resolution, federal reserve digital currency

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you talk to us more about the federal process that carriers have to go through to be granted COLR
• "And with that, we're going to continue to panel two and update on the CPUC rulemaking and process.
• So we went out to see if anyone wanted to be a COLR, as sort of part of the process.
• That process is a shared benefit both by the company and the public at the same time.
• We envision that that process is not only going to sustain... Thank you.

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on Carrier of Last Resort (COLR) to examine its history, current operation, and possible future changes in California. Chair Tasha Berner said the hearing was prompted in part by AT&T’s 2023 request for relief from COLR obligations and by broader concerns about public safety, affordability, universal service, and access to modern broadband and telecommunications. The first panel featured a telecommunications expert who traced COLR back to universal service principles and explained how states have handled COLR differently, including full deregulation, limited rural obligations, or transition pathways tied to competition and customer protections. Members asked about affordability, federal and state processes for service withdrawal, and whether COLR remains necessary given modern competition. CPUC staff then described California’s COLR framework, explaining that universal service rests on access, reliability/quality, and affordability, and that COLR requires carriers to provide basic service, including voice-grade calling, 911 access, relay services, and Lifeline. Staff said AT&T’s application sought relief in nearly all of its territory, but no replacement COLR came forward during the proceeding, and public participation hearings drew thousands of comments and strong concern from rural and vulnerable customers. The CPUC outlined its ongoing rulemaking to reconsider whether the 1996 COLR rules and 2012 basic-service definition still fit current conditions, with workshops and public hearings scheduled and a proposed decision expected later in the year or into 2026. Members pressed staff on geographic outreach, wireless coverage, whether broadband can be part of basic service, public safety during wildfires, and what reporting and complaint processes currently exist. In the final panel, industry and public-interest witnesses sharply disagreed. A U.S. Telecom representative argued COLR is outdated, costly, and copper-focused, and said reform should allow technology-neutral alternatives such as wireless, fiber, and satellite while preserving reliable voice and emergency access. The CPUC Public Advocates Office countered that COLR remains a necessary public safeguard, especially for rural and low-income customers, and argued that any transition should maintain or improve service, with public benefits such as broadband investment and continued protections for 911, disability access, and affordability. Committee members focused on the difference between an obligation to serve everyone and a mere option to serve, and on whether the Legislature should provide clearer guidance as the CPUC’s rulemaking moves forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's just another potential alternative dispute resolution process.
• the mental well-being of the people that are engaged in this process.
• Yeah, so that process is one party, the petitioner, The process is one party, the petitioner, files a
• As far as filing online, there is a process to do that now.
• So the order to show cause process would be immediate or very fast.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Child Custody Review Task Force met with a quorum, approved the prior meeting minutes, and reviewed a memorandum compiling member suggestions for possible legislation. The memo grouped ideas into topics including creation of a family court, expanded education for parents, attorneys, and judges, expedited hearings for parenting-time violations, limiting law enforcement involvement in custody disputes, creating parenting time expediters, and adopting more uniform court procedures. Members also discussed whether to form subcommittees, but the task force decided to continue working as a full committee rather than create subcommittees at this time. The committee then heard testimony from Dr. John Perez, a mental health professional, who described his personal custody experience and his professional work with families he believes have been affected by parental alienation. He argued for stronger education, faster court response times, and better tools to address intentional interference with parenting time. Members questioned him about his case history, the concept of parental alienation, and whether specialized family courts or judges with family-law training could help. Dr. Perez said a dedicated family court and faster hearings would likely have helped his situation. The task force spent substantial time discussing the possible creation of a family court. Judge Hovey supported the idea of a specialized family court or at least a study of one, saying family cases are distinct from ordinary adversarial litigation and that judges with family-law experience could better handle them. Several members agreed that a family court could improve consistency, expertise, and speed, but others cautioned that the task force’s current directive is focused on enforcement of existing orders rather than broader custody policy, and noted that voters had previously rejected equal shared parenting proposals. The group also discussed expedited procedures for parenting-time disputes, with Judge Hovey suggesting a 30-day hearing timeline may be workable. On education, members generally supported requiring parents to complete a parenting education course and adding educational materials explaining court process, child support, and what judges can and cannot do. Mr. McLean suggested a short instructional video for litigants and more family-law education for judges and attorneys, while Ms. Moldenhauer said education could be incorporated into scheduling orders or mediation orders. Members also discussed the Parents Forever course, including whether it should be mandatory in all counties and whether cost is a barrier; no vote was taken on any of these proposals.