Transcript Highlights:

• A remote assistant does not do any of the driving tasks, so they're not performing any of the driving
• A remote assistant does not do any of the driving tasks, so they're not performing any of the driving
• don't drive the vehicle remotely.
• Remote driving is where you would have driving happening.
• I see lots of distracted driving happening.

Summary: The Assembly Transportation Committee heard an informational hearing on California’s newly finalized autonomous vehicle regulations, with DMV and CHP officials describing the updated framework and committee members pressing them on safety, enforcement, and first-responder impacts. DMV said the rules, effective April 28, 2026, expand reporting, create a phased permitting system from testing to deployment, add requirements for safety cases, remote operations, and first-responder coordination, and open a path for heavy-duty AV testing and deployment while still prohibiting oversized loads and hazardous materials. CHP said it worked with DMV on enforcement tools, first-responder interaction plans, and training local agencies on the new notice of noncompliance process. Members asked about crash data, immobilizations, freeway and construction-zone safety, weigh-station enforcement, and whether foreign licenses can qualify for remote assistants or drivers; DMV and CHP said the rules are intended to keep AVs accountable and that heavy-duty AVs will be held to the same roadway standards as human-driven commercial vehicles. A second panel focused on data collection and enforcement. Consumer attorneys argued the prior rules were too limited because DMV stopped collecting meaningful data once AVs moved from testing to deployment, making it difficult for the public and litigants to understand incidents; they supported the new regulations but urged that the collected information be made public. The industry association said California now has the nation’s most robust AV oversight, with monthly or quarterly reporting of collisions, system failures, immobilizations, harsh braking, vehicle miles traveled, and notices of noncompliance, plus broad DMV authority to restrict or suspend operations. In response to questions, the industry said it generally supports the new framework, believes the regulations are clear, and does not favor full federal preemption of state AV rules, though it wants federal standards for design, construction, and performance. A third panel addressed first-responder interaction and remote operations. The San Francisco Fire Department described repeated AV interference with emergency scenes and said AVs have generated hundreds of “sleeper calls,” where passengers fall asleep and trigger 911 responses; the department said these incidents consume significant staff time and it wants better protocols to reduce unnecessary dispatches. Waymo said it has trained thousands of public-safety personnel, maintains a 24/7 emergency line, uses geofencing/avoid-the-area messages, and can allow first responders to manually override or move vehicles when needed. Committee members asked about sleeper-call prevention, remote assistant licensing and drug testing, communication redundancies during outages, and how manual overrides work for vehicles without traditional controls; Waymo said it is collaborating with responders and that its vehicles are designed to reach a safe stop if connectivity is lost. The final panel began with testimony on heavy-duty autonomous vehicles. A transportation researcher said freight is essential to California’s economy and that heavy-duty AVs pose distinct safety risks because of their weight, stopping distance, and the potentially severe consequences of crashes or immobilizations on highways. He said the new regulations are important because they create a regulated pathway for heavy-duty AV deployment, require a safety case, set mileage thresholds, and add reporting categories that can serve as leading safety indicators. The hearing was still in progress when the transcript ended, with additional testimony expected from labor and industry witnesses on heavy-duty AV deployment.

Transcript Highlights:

• So members, I hope that we all agree that R&D is very important for driving economic growth in our state
• So members, I hope that we all agree that R&D is very important for driving economic growth in our state
• So members, I hope that we all agree that R&D is very important for driving economic growth in our state
• So if we want to drive growth in Minnesota, we need to drive research and development here.
• So if we want to drive growth in Minnesota, we need to drive research and development here.

Transcript Highlights:

• And even our rural students who are familiar with driving because they've been driving on the farm are
• And we know that those folks may not have the best driving habits themselves.” ...to drive.
• , but I had been driving a tractor for a lot of years when I was ready to drive a car.
• Aggressive driving, distracted driving, speeding, and things like that. Right.
• I've driven and still do drive 18-wheelers, big loads, heavy loads. I drive a normal truck, car.

Committee: House Elementary and Secondary Education

Summary: The committee met in executive session first and took up House Bill 3239, adopting a Hurlbert amendment that capped the program at $4 million and then adopting the House Committee Substitute. The substitute bill passed 11-7. The committee then combined House Bill 2913 and House Bill 3228 into one substitute; members discussed that it would not cover student teachers and was intended to start with the current scope and broaden later. The combined substitute passed unanimously, 19-0. In open session, the committee heard House Bill 2195, which would create a Missouri Integrated Safe Driving Program to let DESE vet and distribute safe-driving lesson materials for voluntary use in existing courses starting in 2027-2028. Sponsor Representative Reedy said the bill is intended to improve teen driver safety without a fiscal note. Supporters included AAA Missouri, traffic-safety and motorcycle groups, MoDOT, and the Missouri Insurance Coalition, who cited teen crash and fatality data, the benefits of formal driver education, and the need to address distracted driving, traffic stops, and motorcycle awareness. No one testified in opposition. The committee also heard House Bill 2502, which would clarify how records from closed nonpublic schools and charter schools are transferred and stored so students can later obtain transcripts and graduation records. The sponsor said the bill responds to missing records from closed schools and would direct records to the appropriate public district; a technical correction was noted to avoid including homeschool records. Missouri NEA supported the bill and suggested charter-school performance contracts include compliance expectations. The committee then heard House Bill 2396, which would allow retired teachers to return to PSRS-covered teaching jobs without a time limit, similar to existing critical-shortage provisions. The sponsor argued it would help districts, especially smaller ones, and could benefit teachers and students without harming the retirement system. PSRS/PEERS testified that the bill could raise contribution rates by an estimated 1.44% to 2.45% and raised concerns about behavior changes and IRS qualification issues; Missouri NEA and the Missouri State Teachers Association opposed the bill, saying it would not solve recruitment and retention problems and could damage the retirement system. The Missouri Retired Teachers Association testified for informational purposes, warning that the bill could prompt many eligible teachers to retire sooner.

Transcript Highlights:

• vehicle and driving knowing that they probably should not be driving.
• And probably you're not okay to drive.
• I've seen the carnage that impaired driving leaves behind.
• It is proven to reduce impaired driving and save lives.
• Well, that's why we don't have drive-ins anymore, because I know what used to go on at the drive-in when

Committee: House Crime and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• The Waymo driver, our automated driving system, drives over 1 million miles on a weekly basis.
• The job of a driver is not just to drive. The work of a driver is not just to drive.
• And then I'm driving, keep driving Uber.
• and Memorial Drive.
• and Memorial Drive.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Transportation

Summary: The Joint Committee on Transportation held a hybrid hearing on 46 bills covering bicycle and pedestrian safety, autonomous and specialty vehicles, street design, and related transportation issues. Chair Jim Arciero and Senate co-chair Brendan Crighton opened the hearing, noted that Senate Bill 2347 was postponed at the sponsor’s request, and explained the hearing procedures. No votes were taken during the hearing. A major portion of testimony focused on autonomous vehicles. Labor representatives from the AFL-CIO, Teamsters, Machinists, and app-based driver organizations opposed bills that would authorize fully autonomous vehicles, arguing they could displace workers, weaken bargaining power, increase congestion, and create safety and data-privacy risks. Waymo and Chamber of Progress supported legislation creating a framework for autonomous vehicles, saying the technology has strong safety results and could improve mobility and economic opportunity, but they opposed provisions requiring a human operator in the vehicle. Transportation and environmental advocates urged stronger oversight, local control, crash-data reporting, and privacy protections before deployment. Several bills on pedestrian and bicycle safety drew support from advocates and affected residents. Testimony backed measures to improve crosswalk timing for slower pedestrians, raise penalties for crosswalk violations, expand truck sideguard and safety-device requirements, and improve roadway marking reflectivity. AARP, MassBike, and other advocates emphasized the need to protect older adults, cyclists, and other vulnerable road users, while some speakers opposed bills expanding e-bike access to sidewalks and natural-surface trails, citing safety concerns. The committee also heard strong support for the Blue Envelope program for drivers with autism and developmental disabilities, with testimony from the Arc of Massachusetts, the Developmental Disabilities Council, families, and individuals describing how the program can reduce misunderstandings during traffic stops and crashes.

Transcript Highlights:

• People are getting tickets and things as they drive through.
• And things as they drive through.
• Basically, the issue is that it deals with limited driving privileges.
• Basically, the issue is that it deals with limited driving privileges.
• intoxicated aren't driving on the highways, you need to rethink that.

Committees: House Judiciary , House Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence

Transcript Highlights:

• A remote assistant does not do any of the driving tasks, so they're not performing any of the driving
• A remote assistant does not do any of the driving tasks, so they're not performing any of the driving
• don't drive the vehicle remotely.
• Remote driving is where you would have driving happening.
• I remember the day they started driving.

Committee: House Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• Henry messed up and I couldn't drive.
• </c><00:17:04.160><c> at</c> that uh results in their driving at that uh results in their driving at
• </c> license suspended very often will drive license suspended very often will drive anyway<00:26:35.679
• . drive. drive.
• ,</c> um so if you're telling me they drive, um so if you're telling me they drive, that's<00:36:48.320

Transcript Highlights:

• And it's not even from driving under the influence.
• And they did it on impaired driving and the laws on impaired driving.
• Driving while impaired is not an accident. It is a decision.
• He admitted that two people offered to drive him home because they felt he was too intoxicated to drive
• And it looked like he was impaired when he was driving that vehicle.

Committees: House Judiciary , House Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair Collins and this bill is about hands free driving moving from a ban on texting while driving to
• driving.
• driving law.
• we need to treat distracted driving like drunk driving because it is the same selfish behaviour with
• It was because it wasn't a bright line because driving is not driving is a privilege.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> driving backwards and folks see that. driving backwards and folks see that.
• . driving. driving.
• Um, and they drive responsibly. I calls. Um, and they drive responsibly.
• drive.
• drive.

Committee: Senate Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• , Careless driving will be established as a 4th degree felony.
• Over the last couple of years, reckless driving has now passed that.
• attention to driving and engaging in dangerous driving behavior.
• habits or impaired driving.
• With reckless driving, we have to prove that they had a lack of intentional driving behavior.

Transcript Highlights:

• the influence, driving automation.
• , driving automation.
• It is driving-centric.
• reckless driving and driving over 100 miles an hour.
• reckless driving and driving over 100 miles an hour.

Committee: House Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• the influence, driving automation.
• , driving automation.
• Sitting in jail, you cannot drive.
• It's their second and third time driving while under the influence or reckless driving, where they're
• It is driving-centric.

Summary: The Assembly Public Safety Committee heard a long agenda of bills, with several authors presenting measures focused on probation, prison conditions, public safety, diversion, and infrastructure theft. Early in the hearing, AB 1816 by Assembly Member Davies proposed allowing courts to extend probation for up to one additional year for people convicted of registrable sex offenses who have not completed required treatment. Supporters, including the Chief Probation Officers of California, argued the bill would improve rehabilitation and public safety by allowing treatment to be completed; opponents, including public defenders and civil liberties groups, said existing revocation tools already address noncompliance and warned the bill was vague and would prolong supervision. The bill was later moved on call with an aye recommendation. The committee also heard AB 2593, which would prohibit non-medical staff from interfering with prescribed care for incarcerated patients; it drew broad support from medical, disability, public defender, and justice reform groups and passed to Appropriations. The consent calendar, including AB 1927 and AB 2502, was adopted without controversy. The committee then considered AB 1538 by Assembly Member Krell, which would bar elected or appointed officials from using political power for retaliation. Support came from a student activist and the California News Publishers Association, with additional support from education, law enforcement, and civil liberties groups; no opposition testimony was offered, and the bill passed to Appropriations. AB 2584 by Assembly Member Flora, as amended, would narrow civil liability for lawful defensive force; supporters framed it as protecting self-defense, while one opposition witness objected on behalf of labor and justice groups. The chair noted concerns about eliminating civil liability but still recommended aye, and the bill passed to Judiciary. AB 2217 by Assembly Member Zbur would rename and expand the LEAD diversion program as “Alternatives to Arrest,” broaden eligible offenses, and continue grant funding for local diversion efforts. Supporters emphasized reduced recidivism and service connections, and the bill was moved on call to Appropriations. Later, the committee took up AB 1941 by Assembly Member Mark Gonzalez, which would create an organized metal theft offense and a statewide data-sharing system to address copper theft and damage to public infrastructure. Supporters from utilities, cities, transit, telecom, and law enforcement described widespread outages, costly repairs, and public safety risks; opponents argued the bill would deepen criminalization and racial disparities and that non-carceral solutions were preferable. The author and supporters responded that the bill was needed to address repeated thefts that leave communities without lights, power, or 911 service, and the measure passed to Appropriations. Finally, AB 2499 by Assembly Member Gibson sought stronger protections for incarcerated people and workers from extreme heat and inadequate ventilation in state prisons. The bill was backed by incarcerated workers, family members of a woman who died from heat-related causes, and a wide coalition of public defender, civil rights, and prisoner advocacy groups. Members spoke emotionally about prison conditions and the need for humane treatment, and the bill passed to Labor and Employment with strong support.

Transcript Highlights:

• I drive 70 miles an hour.
• driving 75 miles an hour in the passing lane.
• Like, I'm teaching my daughter how to drive, and she's...
• People say, well, people drive it anyway.
• So all those things that have been mentioned, distracted driving, drunk driving, you can just go down

Committees: House Transportation , House Joint Committee on Transportation Oversight

Transcript Highlights:

• I drive 70 miles an hour.
• driving 75 miles an hour in the passing lane.
• You hear people say, well, people drive it anyway.
• You hear people say, well, people drive it anyway.
• So all those things that have been mentioned—distracted driving, drunk driving—you can just go down the

Committee: House Joint Committee on Transportation Oversight

Summary: The House Committee on Transportation met on Senate Bill 1408, which would allow Missouri to raise the maximum speed limit on rural interstates from 70 to 75 miles per hour. Senator Berger, the bill sponsor, argued the change would better match neighboring states, improve traffic flow, and reflect modern vehicle safety technology. Several members supported the idea as a practical adjustment, while others questioned whether the time savings were worth the safety tradeoff, raised concerns about driver behavior, truck speed governors, road design, fuel use, and the possibility that higher posted limits would lead to even faster driving. Testimony was sharply divided. Supporters, including a motorist advocate and some committee members, said 75 mph is common in surrounding states and worldwide, that most crashes are caused by inattention rather than speed alone, and that MoDOT should be able to set limits based on engineering and traffic conditions. Opponents included a Hazelwood police lieutenant, AAA, the Missouri Insurance Coalition, and MoDOT Director Ed Hassinger. They argued that higher speeds increase crash severity and fatalities, that Missouri’s roads and traffic volumes differ from flatter neighboring states, and that the bill could disproportionately affect young and older drivers as well as roadside workers. MoDOT said its data shows speed is a major factor in fatal crashes and cited fatality increases in Arkansas and Kansas after those states raised rural interstate limits. Committee members also debated whether the bill actually mandates 75 mph or merely authorizes MoDOT to set it where appropriate. MoDOT and AAA said any increase should be tied to engineering studies and roadway-specific analysis, while supporters argued the department already has that discretion and that the bill simply removes an outdated cap. No vote was taken in the excerpt. After closing the hearing on SB 1408, the committee moved on to House Bill 3447, a towing and recovery bill that would require more insurance for large commercial vehicles, improve notice and dispute procedures, and address abandoned vehicles; testimony on that bill began with the sponsor and representatives from the towing and trucking industries.

Transcript Highlights:

• And even our rural students who are familiar with driving because they’ve been driving on the farm are
• , but I had been driving a tractor for a lot of years when I was ready to drive a car.
• Compare driving, distracted driving. Things that go into it. We have programs for that already.
• Compare driving, distracted driving, speeding, and things like that. Right.
• I've driven, and still do drive, 18-wheelers, big loads, heavy loads. I drive a normal truck, car.

Committee: House Elementary and Secondary Education

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> otherwise blameless while they drive otherwise blameless while they drive down<00:30:57.240><c>
• How come Dad doesn't drive?
• They understand how to drive.
• How come Dad doesn't drive?
• They understand how to drive.

Summary: The Transportation Committee met in executive session on several House bills. HB 212, allowing a 180-day operation waiver when a vehicle fails an emissions test, was retained at the sponsor’s request for possible modifications. HB 249, which would have let bicyclists treat stop signs as yields and stop lights as stop signs, was recommended inexpedient to legislate (ITL) by a 9-7 vote, with a minority report expected. The committee then retained HB 298, creating an exception for removing VIN tags from pre-1981 vehicles when needed for repair or restoration, by a 15-1 vote. HB 411-FN, making handheld device use while driving a secondary offense, was recommended ITL by consent after members argued the current primary-offense law is more effective for enforcement and safety. On HB 414, which would have barred DMV license suspensions based on debts owed to private towing or storage companies, the committee rejected ITL and instead retained the bill 16-0 after members split over whether the current law unfairly ties driving privileges to private debt collection. HB 441, addressing visible diesel emissions and “rolling coal,” was recommended ITL 16-0 because members said the conduct is already illegal under existing state and federal law. The committee then took up HB 461, concerning Department of Safety and DMV training and testing materials, where members debated whether driver testing should be limited to English and whether multilingual materials are a safety necessity or discriminatory; the transcript cuts off before a final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Some judges, when I was a judge, like I would not let people drive.
• Each year, thousands of families are impacted by drunk driving.
• Everyone knows the dangers of intoxicated driving.
• No more families should have their worlds destroyed by drunk driving.
• But this is what can happen when someone chooses to drink and drive.

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:

• <00:03:43.640><c> on</c><00:03:43.799><c> a</c><00:03:44.000><c> suspended</c> drive on a suspended drive
• and that's folks that already have a DWI and are caught driving.
• </c><00:09:09.680><c> events</c> to stop tragic impaired driving events to stop tragic impaired driving
• </c><00:13:34.040><c> privileges</c> violated their their driving privileges violated their their driving
• </c><00:13:43.920><c> Under</c><00:13:44.120><c> the</c> DWI and driving Under the DWI and driving Under

Summary: House File 2130, sponsored by Representative Craft, was heard and amended before being re-referred to the Committee on Public Safety Finance and Policy. The bill responds to serious impaired-driving tragedies in St. Louis Park, including the Park Tavern crash, and aims to strengthen Minnesota’s ignition interlock requirements for repeat DWI offenders. Craft described the bill as based on data showing repeat-offender risk, arguing that current law’s look-back and interlock timelines are too limited and that the statute was also reorganized for clarity. The A1 amendment was adopted without objection. Craft explained that the amendment clarifies when the $680 license reinstatement fee must be paid: not before entering interlock, but before exiting the program, to reduce barriers to participation. He also said the bill would extend interlock requirements more aggressively for repeat offenders, expand the look-back period for prior offenses, and in some cases require treatment. He emphasized that interlock is intended to improve public safety and can support sobriety, while also acknowledging broader root-cause issues such as mental health and addiction. Testimony in support came from St. Louis Park Mayor Nadia Mohamad, Police Chief Brian Cruy, and Methodist Hospital President Jennifer Meister. They said the bill would help address gaps in current law, better account for prior offenses, and potentially prevent future tragedies. Some members raised concerns about whether the bill was a reaction to tragedy and about addressing underlying causes of impaired driving, while others supported the measure and noted the need for broader transportation and treatment options. After discussion, the committee voted to re-refer HF 2130 to Public Safety Finance and Policy, and the motion prevailed.