Transcript Highlights:

• Is there any discussion? Representative Davis? Thank you, Madam Chair, to speak on the bill.
• Thank you for that discussion. Representative Fountain Henderson.
• I know that this is a very sensitive topic with many people, not only in our state, but also in the country
• Any other discussion on HB 2153? Okay, seeing none, I move that House Bill 2153 be voted do pass.
• Any discussion? All right, Madam Clerk, please call the roll.

Summary: The Committee on Corrections and Public Institutions met with a quorum after some attendance bookkeeping and brief remarks thanking members and staff. The committee then took up House Bill 2153, which was described as a bill to stop or end the death penalty. Representative Davis said he would support moving the bill out of committee so the issue could be debated further, while Representative Hovis said he would vote no because he believes the death penalty is appropriate in certain rare cases. After discussion, a motion was made to do pass HB 2153. The roll call vote was tied 5-5, with several members voting yes and several voting no. Because the motion failed, the bill did not advance from committee. The meeting then concluded with a motion to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• Further discussion? Yes, there is further discussion. Senator Culker. Thank you.
• Further discussion on 1313. >> Thank you. Further discussion on 1313.
• Further discussion on SP 174. >> Thank you. Further discussion on SP 174.
• Further discussion to L7. >> All right. Further discussion to L7.
• Further discussion to SP 170. >> Thank you. Further discussion to SP 170.

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We never access sensitive information and we follow HIPAA.
• We never access sensitive information without consent.
• And we do believe we have a positive contribution to add to the discussion.
• But thanks for the discussion today. Assembly Member DiMaio?
• Lowenthal, we've, you know, our teams have discussed that.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there any discussion? Representative Davis? Thank you, Madam Chair, to speak on the bill.
• Madam Chair: Thank you for that discussion. Representative Fountain Henderson.
• I know that this is a very sensitive topic with many people, not only in our state, but also in the country
• Any other discussion on House Bill 2153?
• Any discussion? All right, Madam Clerk, please call the roll.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Corrections and Public Institutions met with a quorum after some attendance bookkeeping and opening remarks from the chair, who thanked members and staff for their work. Representative Collins then took over the meeting. The committee considered House Bill 2153, which was described as a bill to stop or change the death penalty. During discussion, Representative Davis said he would support moving the bill out of committee so the issue could be debated further, while Representative Hovis said he would vote no because he believes the death penalty is appropriate in certain rare cases. Representative Fountain Henderson asked for clarification that the bill would stop the death penalty. No other discussion followed. The committee then voted on a do pass motion for House Bill 2153. The roll call resulted in a 5-5 tie, so the motion failed and the bill did not advance from committee. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussion to the amendment?
• This bill ensures that individuals can express dissent, discuss sensitive topics, and engage in healthy
• </c><00:01:46.640><c> sensitive</c><00:01:47.280><c> topics</c><00:01:48.079><c> and</c> dissent discuss
• sensitive topics and dissent discuss sensitive topics and engage<00:01:48.600><c> in</c><00:01:48.840
• </c> on this bill and I'm happy to discuss on this bill and I'm happy to discuss your<00:10:44.959><c

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: House File 768, sponsored by Vice Chair Hudson, was heard with an author’s amendment (A4) adopted to remove a technical section and put the bill in the intended form. Hudson described the bill as a response to concerns about government monitoring of protected speech, saying it would bar the Minnesota Department of Human Rights from creating or maintaining a database of constitutionally protected speech while preserving the department’s ability to investigate actual discrimination, harassment, threats, or illegal conduct. He emphasized First Amendment protections and argued the state should not track speech simply because it is controversial or unpopular. The main testimony in support came from Ran Lee of Americans for Prosperity, who echoed the free-speech concerns and said databases of bias incidents can capture lawful speech and create a chilling effect. Representative Rest said she generally supported the free-speech goal but wanted to preserve the Department of Human Rights’ ability to produce biennial reports and analyze de-identified trend data on civil rights incidents, including emerging threats or hateful rhetoric, so lawmakers can respond to patterns without recording individuals’ protected speech. Representative Curran raised concerns that speech trends can relate to public safety and argued that attacks on human rights often begin as speech. Hudson responded that the Department of Human Rights is not a law enforcement agency and that the bill would not impede criminal investigations. He argued that trying to monitor “trends in thought” would be constitutionally problematic and produce unreliable data, and he distinguished protected speech from criminal conduct. Representative Feist said the department’s existing report already uses aggregate, non-investigative data and suggested there may be room to refine the bill’s language. The bill was laid over for further consideration, with Hudson indicating he was open to continued discussion and possible language changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussion?
• Any discussion?
• </c> office as well any discussion office as well any discussion &gt;&gt; the<00:27:05.279><c> date</
• Any discussion?
• Members, any discussion?

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee first heard SB 2627, which would exempt Hawaii Tourism Authority contracts and agreements for sports projects, events, and related marketing from the state procurement code and other competitive bidding requirements. HTA, DBEDT, and the State Procurement Office testified in support or with comments, while one individual offered general support for sports tourism. Senators focused on narrowing the bill so the exemption would apply more specifically to sports-related projects and marketing, rather than broad marketing activities, and discussed whether the bill should require notice to the State Procurement Office or approval by the chief procurement officer. Procurement officials said a reporting requirement would be the most expeditious option, while still allowing post-event monitoring and public posting of exemptions. Members also discussed whether the exemption should be limited to situations involving sole-source sports entities, such as major leagues or international sports organizations, to better justify bypassing procurement rules. The committee did not take a final vote in the portion provided, but members and testifiers agreed to continue working on the language. The hearing then moved to SB 2074 relating to state facilities and naming rights for the Aloha Stadium and Hawaii Convention Center. The Stadium Authority, HTA, and DBEDT testified in support, while the Outdoor Circle and other organizations opposed the measure. Opponents argued the bill could create fiscal and legal risk, echoing concerns raised in prior legislation and by the attorney general, and warned it would mark a major shift by treating public facilities as commercial branding opportunities. Supporters said naming rights could generate significant revenue to help fund the stadium project and reduce the burden on the state and developers. Senators questioned how signage would be handled, especially whether it would be exterior-facing or limited to inward-facing signage, and the Stadium Authority said it was willing to work with the Outdoor Circle on language that would preserve community aesthetics while allowing revenue generation. A senator cited a prior study estimating naming rights could bring in about $1.5 million per year over 20 years, and asked what that revenue would buy for the public; the Stadium Authority responded that it would help advance the project toward a larger, improved stadium. No final action was taken in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for the opportunity to discuss derelict vessels in a row FWC place in their investigation.
• The impacts are sensitive ecosystems and many devi's are situated in sensitive areas like seagrass beds
• , corals marine estuaries and cultural heritage sites, remove all the bees and the bees in these sensitive
• Is there any discussion? Okay. Thank you so much again for your informative presentation.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there any discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed, nay.
• Some are more rate-sensitive than others, and a lot of other dynamics.
• These are the folks who shop in this range aren't as rate sensitive, plain and simple.
• They're not as rate sensitive, and that's okay. So we see million-plus deals.
• They're not as rate sensitive, and that's okay. So we see million-plus deals.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Further discussion, Representative McClintock.
• Is there discussion on final passage, Representative Richards?
• Further discussion, Representative McClintock.
• We have done discussion.
• We have done discussion.

Summary: The House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee met on February 4, with public hearing and executive action on several bills. The main public hearing was on House Bill 2668, as proposed substitute, which would direct the Department of Fish and Wildlife to identify and pursue relocation of the Bob Oak Game Farm and to plan remediation of the current site. Testimony from the bill sponsor, Centralia city officials, Lewis County public health staff, a tribal member, and residents strongly supported relocation, citing nitrate contamination in a sole-source aquifer, risks to drinking water for Centralia and nearby households, and the need for long-term public health protection. The committee also heard that interim mitigation measures such as point-of-use filters and water/sewer extensions were underway, but witnesses said relocation was the only durable solution. The bill was added to the day’s executive session as an unusual late addition, then later passed out of committee on a voice vote with a due pass recommendation. During executive session, the committee also acted on House Bill 2598, creating a Salmon Advisory Commission; House Bill 2619, creating a legislative task force to reduce regulatory stress in agriculture; House Bill 2199, dealing with derelict vessels and disposal timelines; House Bill 2463, which revises agricultural donation and farm-to-food pantry programs; and House Bill 1735, which prohibits force-feeding birds and related foie gras sales. Amendments were considered on several bills, including a DNR amendment to the vessel bill and a narrowing amendment to the force-feeding bill, which failed. The committee approved House Bill 2598 by a 6-5 vote, and House Bill 2619, House Bill 2199, House Bill 2463, House Bill 1735, and House Bill 2668 all received due pass recommendations, with some on voice votes and others by recorded roll call. The chair noted that moving House Bill 2668 in executive session the same day as public hearing was highly unusual and done because of the bill’s urgency and bipartisan support.

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to discuss a couple housekeeping items before we begin.
• We did discuss the issue with the Office of the Attorney General.
• And when we hear that word redaction, the industry is extremely sensitive to that.
• I will tell you, in my office, ...like many big offices, we do have sensitive positions.
• Thank you all for allowing me to be here and discuss. And I, again, my name is Ethel Strother.

Bills: HB240, HB2097, HB2731, HB3087, HB3234, HB3319, HB3394, HB3687, HB4105, HB4205, HB4350, HB4462, HB4642, HB4801, HB5403

Keywords: quorum, tax levy, county governance, local government, population regulations, quorum requirement, Texas counties, population threshold, deputy sheriff, civil service, law enforcement, appeals process, sheriff's department, HB 2731, roadside vendors, solicitors, county regulation, border counties, Mexico border, Transportation Code

Summary: The subcommittee on county and regional government heard a long agenda of county-related bills, with most measures left pending after testimony. HB 2097, by Rep. Martinez, would let counties that opt in use an independent hearing examiner instead of a civil service commission for certain deputy sheriff discipline appeals; the bill drew support from CLEET’s Robert Leonard, who said it would be fairer and faster, and it was left pending. HB 4642, by Rep. Gonzalez, would require counties that contract with out-of-state jail facilities to include Texas jail-standard protections and oversight; Gonzalez, detainee Jess Hampton, his wife, Texas Jail Project’s Krish Kundu, and TCJS director Brandon Wood all discussed deaths and poor conditions in Louisiana facilities, staffing shortages, and the need for guardrails and data collection. The bill was left pending. The committee also heard HB 4350, by Rep. Capriglione, allowing peace officers to request redaction of personal information from online real property records. Supporters said officers face targeted threats and should have protections similar to judges; a title industry witness warned about preserving the integrity of land records. The bill was left pending. HB 3687, by Rep. Harless, would require county fire marshals in counties over 100,000 to meet training and certification standards within set timeframes; Harris County Fire Marshal Laurie Christensen supported professionalization, and the bill was left pending. HB 4105 would let very large counties give a local-bid preference for construction and infrastructure contracts, and HB 4205 would require pay parity for similar law enforcement ranks within large counties; both were supported by Harris County officials and constables and left pending. Later, the committee heard HB 5403, which would repeal a special rule limiting Dallas and Tarrant county sheriffs’ control over commissary funds; the author said it would remove an outdated population bracket, and the bill was left pending. HB 4462 would require large counties to allow elected officials named in civil suits to seek outside counsel and have a role in settlement decisions; supporters argued county attorneys and commissioners court can have conflicts of interest, while questions focused on who qualifies and whether the bill could complicate settlements. The bill was left pending. Finally, HB 240, by Rep. Swanson, would restore a five-member quorum requirement for Harris County tax levies, effectively preventing tax action without all commissioners present and defaulting to the no-new-revenue rate if quorum is not met; urban counties opposed it as a potential budget obstruction, while supporters said it protects taxpayers and representation. That bill was also left pending. The transcript ends as the committee begins HB 3319, which would create a civil service system for constable department employees in large counties, but the discussion is cut off before testimony or action.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so, with that, if there's no further discussion, is there a motion on this bill? Move the bill.
• Currently, California state law does not provide adequate protections for their sensitive data.
• As noted in the analysis and discussed by the author, we've seen a startling increase in threats and
• Sorry, I came in late, so I don't know what has been discussed.
• What we passed in 2022, so maybe it's just something that needs to be discussed more.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So that time sensitivity is the reason for the request. I'll stop there if there's any questions.
• So I'll stop there if time sensitivity.
• Is there any further discussion? >> Yes, Representative Mooney. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
• </c><00:30:43.760><c> All</c><00:30:43.919><c> in</c> &gt;&gt; There's no further discussion.
• All in &gt;&gt; There's no further discussion.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Fiscal Committee met with replacement members noted at the start and took up one emergency item from the Department of Health and Human Services: approval to accept and expend $2 million to support SNAP recipients during the federal shutdown. Commissioner Lori Weaver and CFO Nathan White explained that USDA/FNS had notified the state it would not receive November SNAP funds, affecting about 74,000 recipients. The department said it activated a contingency plan to contract with the New Hampshire Food Bank to expand mobile food pantries, targeting SNAP households and prioritizing locations based on need, with evening and daytime access and outreach through mail, text, email, social media, partner organizations, and a shutdown webpage. Committee members asked about timing, locations, reimbursement, and whether the state would be repaid by the federal government. Department staff said the food bank would likely need about a week to mobilize once the contract was approved, and that the contract would be cost-reimbursement based, with faster turnaround than usual but not advance payment. White explained the money would come from excess Medicaid Enhancement Tax revenue from state fiscal year 2025, which can be used only for Medicaid purposes under state law and SB 249, allowing general funds to be shifted to the food bank contract. Members also asked about other affected programs; the department said WIC had funding through November 10, energy assistance was expected to continue through December, and school breakfast/free and reduced lunch were not impacted. Members discussed broader public outreach, including a possible PSA and use of the New Hampshire Food Bank’s network of 417 partners, and one member suggested religious leaders or the governor might be better positioned to make donation appeals. The committee then voted unanimously to adopt the item (motion by Senator Gray, second by Senator Waters). The meeting ended with notice of the next meeting on November 21 at 11:00 and a motion to adjourn, which was approved.

Transcript Highlights:

• Next, they invited the Department of Education to returns that we can continue our discussion on workforce
• data environments and respects all of the rules of HIPAA and FERPA, allowing us to do some pretty sensitive
• Protocols are regulated for students and faculty who are working on like sensitive data and things like
• But what kind of guardrails are in place to make sure that no sensitive information and sensitive know
• But I mean, the sensitivity such a project specifically the that's the fight of semi classified, one

Transcript Highlights:

• Our second panel will discuss some of the research on various wastewater contaminant issues and their
• And we look forward to this wonderful confluence, this discussion, confluence of health and climate tech
• in the past to be more sensitive to wastewater discharges, we are continually responding to tightening
• in the past to be more sensitive to wastewater discharges, we are continually responding to tightening
• This is, I'm really setting the stage for discussion about PFAS, or forever chemicals, here.

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Biotechnology and Medical Technology held an informational hearing on the role of biotechnology industries in wastewater treatment, hosted at Bakar Labs on the UC Berkeley campus. Opening remarks emphasized California’s water scarcity, the rising cost of wastewater infrastructure, and the need to reuse and clean contaminated water. Committee members framed the hearing as a look at both current treatment challenges and emerging technologies that could improve water quality, affordability, and resilience over time. The first panel focused on statewide wastewater challenges. BACWA Executive Director Laurie Fono described wastewater plants as part of a broader circular economy, noting their roles in recycled water, environmental enhancement, biosolids management, carbon sequestration, and renewable energy generation. She highlighted major challenges including aging 1970s-era infrastructure, nutrient reduction mandates, sea level rise, evolving regulations, and PFAS source control. She said Bay Area agencies face about $11 billion in nutrient reduction costs, with rate increases, state revolving funds, WIFIA loans, and bonds as the main financing tools. Members asked about regional differences, energy revenue opportunities, smaller decentralized plants, and agricultural collaboration. The second panel featured researchers and lab experts discussing biotechnology solutions. Lawrence Berkeley National Lab’s Dr. Romine Chakarvati described using microbial communities and machine learning to help break down PFAS and treat produced water. CEL Analytical’s Dr. Yigi Dearborn explained pathogen testing for direct potable reuse, wastewater monitoring, and the need for larger sample volumes and more funding to validate methods for viruses and protozoa. Stanford’s Dr. Chunhung-Shin presented an anaerobic membrane system that turns domestic wastewater into clean water and energy with less biosolids and lower operating costs. Committee members asked about AI, assay development, scaling technologies, and funding priorities. Public comment from the California Association of Sanitation Agencies stressed the need to balance scalability, reliability, and affordability, and the hearing adjourned without any formal vote or action.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:21:38.400><c> in</c><01:21:38.640><c> my</c> uh panel panel discussion in my uh panel panel discussion
• I think there are um discussed.
• Um, and we're taking data sensitivity really serious.
• Um, and we're taking data sensitivity really serious.
• </c><02:39:02.960><c> it,</c> be doing, you know, and discussing it, be doing, you know, and discussing

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• .extends existing buffer zone protections to include hospitals, bringing them in line with other sensitive
• Chairman, in closing, as I discussed with you and the Lieutenant Governor in private session, this is
• We've already recognized... ...and sensitive land uses.
• What we're doing here is just adding another sensitive land use.
• terms and conditions... conditions of the standard permit would establish requirements to protect sensitive

Bills: SB2082, SB2203, SB2351, SB2550, SCR48

Keywords: concrete crushing, hospital proximity, environmental regulation, public health, zoning laws, SB 2203, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, TCEQ, State Office of Administrative Hearings, SOAH, contested case, administrative law judge, ALJ, discovery, scope of discovery, certification, administrative procedure, permit dispute, agency rules, Government Code

Transcript Highlights:

• Potentially, but we view it as part of the overall discussion that we'll be having with the legislature
• We're going to have more discussion on that.
• We intend to discuss those as part of our comprehensive Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund.
• There's been a lot of discussion about the zeroing out of investments from GGRF.
• We welcome the discussion on community air pollution.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , A lot of public agencies that express concerns, some discussion about SCADA systems.
• I appreciate the discussion we've had and the comments.
• The data itself is not sensitive; the only thing that is sensitive is the abuse of it by folks that are
• They've exchanged thousands of messages discussing using those kids for sex. Three-year-olds.
• Yeah, thank you for the robust discussion. I appreciate the debate.

Summary: The committee began as a subcommittee due to the lack of a quorum and heard several privacy- and technology-related measures. The first item was H.R. 117, a resolution urging Congress to reform Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. The author and supporters argued the law is outdated and shields platforms from accountability for harms such as harassment, exploitation, scams, and other online abuse. Witnesses, including a survivor parent and a gender justice advocate, described harms to children, women, and LGBTQ people and urged a two-year sunset to force federal reform. Some members supported the resolution as a call for federal action, while one member said he could not support it because the resolution was too general and lacked specificity about the reforms being sought. No vote was taken because the committee lacked a quorum. The committee then heard SB 898, which would require manufacturers of connected consumer products to disclose how long they will support the software and to notify consumers when products approach end of life. The author said consumers deserve transparency about security updates and continued functionality, and supporters from Consumer Reports and PIRG emphasized cybersecurity risks, consumer confusion, and electronic waste from unsupported devices. Opponents, including business and industry groups, raised concerns about enforcement through the unfair competition law, notice burdens, labeling issues, and compliance challenges, especially for products with long support windows or third-party dependencies. One member expressed support, noting the cybersecurity risks of end-of-life devices, but again no vote was taken because there was no quorum. The committee also heard SB 435, which would narrow the CCPA definition of publicly available information to limit how businesses classify data as public. The author and supporters said the bill would close a loophole that allows data brokers and others to monetize personal information without meaningful consent and could help prevent surveillance and misuse of data, including by government agencies. Opponents argued the bill would upset the balance between privacy and the free flow of information, create compliance uncertainty, and retroactively reclassify information that businesses reasonably believed was public. Some members said they supported the goal of stronger privacy protections, while others said the bill was too broad. The committee again could not vote due to the lack of a quorum. Later, the committee heard SB 923, which would expand Californians’ right to delete personal information to cover data obtained from third parties and require online businesses to offer a web form or similar method for deletion requests. Supporters, including the California Privacy Protection Agency and consumer advocates, said the bill would make deletion rights meaningful and better address data broker practices. Opponents sought an opt-out-of-processing alternative and raised operational and legal concerns, but supporters said deletion is not the same as retention or processing limits. Members largely spoke in favor of the bill’s privacy goals, but no action was taken. The committee also heard SB 947, the “No Robo Bosses Act,” which would require human review for certain automated employment decisions and limit predictive analysis in workplace discipline and termination. Labor groups supported the bill as a safeguard against biased or erroneous AI-driven decisions, while business, public employer, and local government groups opposed it as overbroad and burdensome. Members voiced support for human oversight in employment decisions, but the item was not voted on because the committee still lacked a quorum. Finally, the committee began hearing SB 1114, the SOGI Data Privacy Act, which would restrict disclosure of sexual orientation, gender identity, and intersex data to federal agencies absent a court order or legal requirement; the author and witness framed it as a response to federal efforts to obtain sensitive LGBTQ-related data.

Transcript Highlights:

• , A lot of public agencies that express concerns, some discussion about SCADA systems.
• I appreciate the discussion we've had and the comments.
• The data itself is not sensitive; the only thing that is sensitive is the abuse of it by folks that are
• They exchanged thousands of messages discussing using those kids for sex. Three-year-olds.
• Yeah, thank you for the robust discussion. I appreciate the debate.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I have also personally had many impactful discussions with opposition.
• We're just trying to protect the sensitive information. We use now.
• And I think, but a very sensitive.
• Thank you, Madam Chair and members, and thank you for the discussion.
• Was there some other discussion about a perimeter that you ever contemplated?

Summary: The committee heard a lengthy insurance-focused agenda, including special-order bills on wildfire mitigation, Fair Plan accountability, aerial imagery, genetic testing, and wildfire moratoriums. AB 1888 would require California Safe Homes Grant Program work to be performed by a skilled and trained workforce at prevailing wage; it drew support from the author, Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, and labor representatives, with no opposition heard. AB 1680, the “Make-It-Fair Act,” would impose accountability and consumer-protection reforms on the California FAIR Plan in response to Department of Insurance examination findings; it passed out on a do-pass motion to Appropriations, though the FAIR Plan Association remained opposed unless amended. AB 1559 would require notice and access rights when insurers use aerial images of homes and allow in-person inspection requests; it passed on a do-pass motion to Privacy and Consumer Protection, with broad support and one “concern” witness. The committee also took up AB 1798, which would bar life and disability insurers from using non-diagnostic genetic information, including direct-to-consumer genetic testing, for underwriting below a $1.5 million coverage threshold. Supporters, including the author, the Insurance Commissioner, the ALS Association, and several consumer and biotech groups, argued the bill would reduce fear of genetic discrimination and encourage testing and research. Opponents from life insurance and financial advisor groups argued the bill could impair risk-based underwriting and raise premiums, especially in the middle market. After extensive back-and-forth on the distinction between predictive genetic data and doctor-assessed medical risk, the bill passed as amended to Privacy and Consumer Protection on a do-pass vote, with several members voting no. AB 2038 would extend wildfire-related nonrenewal moratoriums from two to three years for total-loss homes and from one to two years for homes in and around fire zones. Supporters said the change better matches the real rebuilding timeline after major fires and protects displaced homeowners from losing coverage while rebuilding. Insurers and trade groups opposed the measure, warning that longer moratoriums could force carriers to reduce exposure elsewhere and worsen the broader availability crisis. The bill passed to Appropriations on a do-pass vote. The committee also approved AB 1800, which adds eyewear to portable electronics insurance coverage, and moved a consent calendar of additional bills, including AB 1554, AB 1683, AB 1781, and AB 2471. Later, AB 2198 was introduced to clarify title-rate filing responsibilities between title insurers and underwritten title companies and to require rate schedules to be posted publicly.