Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Abler votes aye. Senator Abler votes aye. Senator Dames votes aye. Senator Dames votes aye.
• <00:04:30.560> And votes I. Senator Dames votes I. And votes I. Senator Dames votes I.
• Mchuan votes no. Senator Mchuan votes Mchuan votes no. Senator Mchuan votes no.
• Senator Dames votes I. Senator Dames votes I. Senator Lang votes no. Senator Lang votes no.
• votes no. Senator Dames votes no. votes no. Senator Dames votes no.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• House voting I 40 members voting nay.
• <00:45:23.760> nay members voting I 35 members voting nay members voting I 35 members voting
• Roll call vote having been called for. Those in favor vote aye. Those opposed vote nay.
• <01:17:33.440> The voting I. 25 members voting nay. The voting I. 25 members voting nay.
• All members voted. There will be 77 members voting aye and 21 members voting nay.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The House convened with an invocation and Pledge of Allegiance, established a quorum, excused absent members, suspended rules to allow co-sponsorships and vote modifications, and approved the journal from February 26, 2026. The clerk then reported several bills on second reading, including measures on state personnel, domestic violence, fish and wildlife resources, open records, workforce investment, data centers, guardians ad litem and domestic relations, along with Senate Concurrent Resolution 9 on a Medicaid pilot feasibility study and Senate Joint Resolution 23 declaring Kentucky a “food is medicine” state. The main floor business was House Bill 2, the Medicaid reform and appropriation bill. The sponsor described it as a response to rising Medicaid costs and federal changes, saying it would improve transparency, oversight, fraud prevention, and program operations. He said the bill would apply mainly to the Medicaid expansion population and include community engagement, cost-sharing, eligibility safeguards, stronger managed care oversight, transportation and dental delivery changes, waiver program prioritization, greater legislative access to CHFS data, a transparency dashboard, periodic auditor review, and limits on certain weight-management drug coverage. A House committee substitute was adopted, and a floor amendment on phasing in a marginal medical loss ratio requirement over four years was offered as a friendly amendment and adopted. The House then debated House Floor Amendment 1, which would have removed state-mandated co-payments and limited cost sharing to the federal minimum, while also prohibiting reporting medical debt to credit agencies. Supporters argued the amendment would protect low-income Kentuckians from barriers to care and prevent medical debt from worsening poverty. Opponents said the bill’s co-pays were intended to encourage appropriate use of care, especially to reduce non-emergency emergency room visits, and noted that providers and MCOs could waive or work around some charges. After a roll call vote, the amendment failed 20-39. After the amendment vote, the House continued discussion of the bill, with the sponsor defending the co-payment structure as a way to promote personal responsibility and sustainability while preserving access to primary care. The transcript ends during further debate on House Bill 2, and no final passage vote is shown in the provided excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• this process. And you say it's 5%. this process.
• process and then we were asked to extend process and then we were asked to extend it<00:13:54.639>
• >> explain my vote, Mr. Chair. >> explain my vote, Mr. Chair.
• in favor vote I. All those opposed, no. in favor vote I. All those opposed, no.
• certainly can take two votes. certainly can take two votes.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first established a quorum, approved the minutes from the November 10 meeting, and then approved a large agenda of contracts and related items, with the total agenda amount stated as $359,638,393.88. Most items were approved without objection, but two contracts were pulled for discussion: attorney general panel counsel contingency fee contracts and a Kentucky Legislative Ethics Commission personal services contract. For the attorney general’s office, Chris Lewis explained that the contracts were panel counsel contingency fee agreements, with 14 qualified awards from 16 applicants. He said the contracts were contingency-based, so no money would be paid unless cases were successful, and that the fee structure worked out to roughly 5% under the statutory waterfall. Senators asked about the size of the contracts, whether the terms were uniform, why no Kentucky firms were among the awardees, and how the public should understand the large dollar figures. Lewis said one Kentucky firm applied but was disqualified for a late submission, other Kentucky firms had inquired but did not apply, and local firms could still work with national firms on cases. The committee then approved the contracts. The Kentucky Legislative Ethics Commission contract drew more extensive questioning. Commission representatives said they had previously had a contract disapproved because the proper process was not followed, so they used an RFI process posted on the state and commission websites for at least three weeks. They received one applicant, a Kentucky firm, and set the rate at $125 per hour. Members questioned whether the commission was acting beyond its ethics mission, whether staff were helping draft complaints against legislators, and whether the commission was taking on a prosecutorial or human-resources role. The commission said its role is limited to enforcing the legislative code of ethics, providing advisory guidance, and following the formal complaint process; it does not pursue matters outside that code. Members also raised concerns about the earlier procurement misstep and the commission’s credibility, and the commission apologized, said it had corrected the process, and pledged to comply going forward. The committee then approved the contract.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so the people who do vote currently on school committees are the people who were voted into office
• have the right to vote.
• And so the people who do vote currently on school committees are the people who were voted into office
• have the right to vote.
• They must get a vote.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education heard testimony on several bills centered on school accountability, receivership, graduation requirements, charter school access, community schools, school libraries, and student voting rights. Much of the discussion focused on the Thrive Act, S. 374, which would end state receivership and change the state’s accountability approach. Supporters, including educators, parents, advocacy groups, and students, argued that receivership has not improved outcomes in districts such as Lawrence, Holyoke, Southbridge, Boston, and the Dever, and that local communities should have more control, with greater emphasis on community schools, wraparound services, and broader measures of school quality. They also supported related bills on community schools and school library standards, and several witnesses backed a bill to expand student representative voting rights on school committees. Opponents of S. 374, especially charter school leaders, parents, students, and some education advocates, focused on Section 4 of the bill, which would change the charter school net school spending cap in the lowest-performing districts. They argued that the provision would reduce access to charter seats in communities where families are seeking more options, and that schools such as Roxbury Prep, Excel Academy, Brook, Veritas Prep, and Libertas Academy have produced strong results for students, including students of color, low-income students, and students with special needs. Several witnesses said the section would force schools to shrink or close and would remove opportunities for families in districts with long waitlists. Committee members questioned witnesses on both the effectiveness of receivership and the charter school cap language. Chair Lewis and Chair Gordon emphasized the need for a better accountability system and noted concerns about whether current measures, including MCAS-based designations, accurately reflect school quality. Some witnesses said they had discussed the possibility of removing Section 4 from the Thrive Act and suggested it might be addressed in separate charter reform legislation. No votes were taken during the hearing; testimony was received and the committee later closed testimony on S. 374 and several related bills before moving on to the student voting rights bill, S. 367.

Transcript Highlights:

• We recognize that this process is a very political process.
• is a very that this um this process is a very political<00:16:36.240> process.
• And the enrolling process does process.
• moving through even as a non- voting moving through even as a non- voting member?
• We got a vote to get Motion for consent. We got a vote to get the<02:04:51.199> bill.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, I will be voting no on it.
• process here in rulle making process process here in Minnesota<01:25:26.480> these<01:25:26.760
• Chair Hinman voted yes. Vice Chair Burkel voted yes. Representative Fischer voted no.
• Representative Gillman voted yes. Representative Hansen voted no. Representative Jacob voted yes.
• Representative Jordan voted no. Representative Nelson voted yes. Representative Pursell voted no.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Paroleies and probationers whose voting Paroleies and probationers whose voting rights<00:11:31.519
• whose right to vote has been restored. whose right to vote has been restored. Okay. Okay.
• voting rights. voting rights.
• And HB 535 would allow that process to streamline a process, but also would help him get his background
• <00:22:53.280> but<00:22:53.520> also process to streamline a process but also process

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• THAT IS HOW THE PROCESS WORKS AND KISSIMMEE.
• BUT IF I HAD TO VOTE I WILL VOTE UP WITH YOU TODAY BUT I HOPE THIS BILL DOES NOT GO MUCH FURTHER OR DOES
• SHE IS BEEN IN THE PROCESS FOR THAT LONG. .
• AND GOD BLESS THE PROCESS WE HAVE IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA THAT WE HAVE A PROCESS THAT GOES THROUGH AND
• WELCOME TO THE PROCESS.

Transcript Highlights:

• Voting Rights Act of 8 1965. Voting Rights Act of 8 1965.
• The first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote.
• Members will record their vote by electronic device. This is a 15-minute vote.
• Members will record their vote by electronic device. This is a five-minute vote.
• Members will record their vote by electronic device. This is a five-minute vote.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Wednesday, June 10, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• vote yes.
• We urge the committee to vote no. Thank you. We urge the committee to vote now. Thank you.
• Vote yesterday.
• I would have voted.
• Please vote now.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The vote is two zero. The bill. The vote is two zero. The vote is two zero.
• Current vote is 2-0. Chair voting aye. Senators Ashby and Becker, aye. The vote is 4-0.
• Current vote is 3-1. Chair voting aye. Vice Chair voting no. Senator Ashby, aye.
• Current vote is 3 to 1. Chair voting aye. Vice Chair voting no. Senator Ashby. Aye.
• Current vote is 3-1. Chair voting aye. Vice Chair voting no. Senator Ashby, aye. The vote is 4-1.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard several revenue and taxation bills, beginning with SB 1124, which would require the California Department of Public Health to create and post signage at tobacco retail locations about lung cancer screening eligibility. Senator Archuleta and Dr. Alex Zhu testified that lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death and that awareness is low, while retail groups raised implementation concerns about sign size, notice, and penalties. Members discussed screening access and cost, and the author indicated willingness to reduce penalties. The bill passed 4-0 to the Senate Health Committee. The committee then heard wildfire-related tax relief measures. SB 1352 would clarify that disaster victims rebuilding homes may increase the size of a reconstructed home by up to 10% without triggering reassessment, and SB 1343 would provide a $4,000 income tax credit for sales tax paid on furniture and appliances purchased to furnish a rebuilt primary residence after a disaster. Both measures were supported by local officials and taxpayer groups, with some concern about administration and whether the benefits would skew toward higher-income households. Each bill passed unanimously, with SB 1352 sent to Appropriations and SB 1343 also sent to Appropriations. SB 1172 would place limits and transparency requirements on consultant compensation in local tax-sharing agreements, prompted by concerns that revenues in places like Shafter and Dinuba were being diverted away from local communities. The bill drew support from the League of California Cities and the California Retailers Association, while some members worried about local control. It passed 4-0 to Appropriations. SB 1408 would authorize the Contra Costa Transportation Authority to place a countywide sales tax measure of up to 1% on the ballot to continue transportation funding; supporters said it would let voters decide on continued investment in roads, transit, and congestion relief, while taxpayer groups opposed it. The bill passed 4-1 to Appropriations. The committee also considered SB 1404, which would restore a fire prevention fee in state responsibility areas and use it to help fund Cal Fire wildfire prevention and suppression, with the author arguing the fee would help address rising wildfire costs and reduce reliance on other funding sources. Rural county and taxpayer groups opposed it, citing affordability, double-charging, and constitutional concerns; some members also questioned the fee’s administration and burden on fixed-income residents. The bill passed 4-1 to Appropriations. Finally, SB 1102 would create a $2,000 tax credit for frontline nurses working in rural hospitals to improve retention and access to care; it drew support from a rural clinic and no opposition beyond a CTA tax-credit concern, and it passed 5-0 to Appropriations. The consent calendar, including SB 1072, SB 1165, and committee bills SB 1435-SB 1437, was also adopted.

Transcript Highlights:

• We filed our case in June, and we'll be through in the hearing process this summer.
• So for now, I will be present with my option to change my vote.
• So I vote aye. I have. If we have to go back years later and amend this, we do.
• So I vote aye. Vice Chair Taylor? Aye. Chair Wilmeth, thank you, ma'am.
• I appreciate the discussion for both sides, and I vote aye.

Bills: HB2133, HB2592

Keywords: sexual material, consent, synthetic depiction, privacy, internet regulation, rights protection, artificial intelligence, government regulation, innovation, procurement, administrative burdens, 1182, all

Summary: The House AI and Innovation Committee first heard an informational presentation from Arizona Public Service (APS) on the rapid growth of data centers and AI-related electricity demand in Arizona. APS said Phoenix now ranks near the top in North America for data center development and projected its peak load could rise from 8.7 gigawatts to 12 gigawatts by 2035, with about 19 gigawatts of potential data center demand in its queue. APS emphasized three principles for serving this growth: maintaining reliability for existing customers, preventing data center costs from being shifted to residential and small business customers, and preserving capacity for other growth. APS described its proposed approach as a combination of a pending Corporation Commission rate case and bilateral contracts, including minimum bill requirements, queue management, long-term financial commitments, and direct cost assignment to data center customers. Committee members asked about rate impacts, self-generation, behind-the-meter power, seasonal load, and possible future nuclear or other generation options; APS said it is pursuing an all-of-the-above resource strategy and that the proposed data center rate increase is 45 percent, though not yet approved. The committee then considered House Bill 2133, which would require commercial entities that knowingly distribute or publish sexual material online to obtain reasonable consent and age verification, including for synthetic or AI-generated altered images, and would impose civil penalties for violations. A five-page amendment narrowed the bill by excluding internet service providers, affiliates, search engines, and cloud providers from liability for content they do not create or directly host. The sponsor said the bill is intended to protect people in adult content from exploitation and non-consensual use, including revenge porn and trafficking-related material, and to extend protections to synthetic media. Members discussed the penalty structure, with the sponsor explaining it was modeled on similar penalties in related laws and set at $10,000 per day of violation. After no public opposition was presented, the committee adopted the amendment and voted 5-0, with 2 members present, to return HB 2133 as amended with a due pass recommendation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, if not, Acting Vice Chair Fukunaga for the vote. Chair votes I. Thank you.
• <00:04:31.440> you for the vote chair votes I thank you for the vote chair votes I thank you
• I encourage you to vote no.
• Okay, if not, Vice Chair, for the vote. Chair votes aye. Senator Fukunaga, aye.
• <00:32:59.799> Yes for the vote chair elante I I vote Yes for the vote chair elante I I vote

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Public Safety and Military Affairs met on its 3:15 p.m. reconsideration and hearing agenda. The committee first reconsidered SB 1379 on emergency preparedness and voted to pass it with amendments. The amendments would require HEMA to submit a report to the Legislature on a community readiness centers plan, including public and private sites, funding sources, partnerships, stakeholder coordination, and projected annual funding, due 20 days before the 2026 Legislature convenes. The committee also made technical and fiscal-related changes, including blanking out certain amounts in the bill and committee report while retaining recommended amounts there, and changing the effective date language. The committee then voted unanimously to adopt the amended recommendation. The committee heard SB 1364, which makes emergency appropriations for law enforcement personnel costs. The Department of Budget and Finance supported the bill but said the figures in oral testimony would be slightly higher than those in written testimony and that updated numbers would be emailed later in the week. Because the exact figures were not yet available, the chair deferred decision-making to February 7, 2025. The committee also heard SB 1451 on critical infrastructure, SB 1452 on the Uniform Controlled Substances Act, SB 1149 on hate crimes reporting, SB 1321 on the Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission, and SB 1341 on energy industry information reporting. For SB 1451, testimony was split, with support from state law enforcement and opposition from the Public First Law Center, which argued the information was already protected under existing law; the committee later adopted a motion to pass the bill with amendments, including a narrower definition of critical infrastructure information and a revised effective date. SB 1452 received support from law enforcement and prosecutors, with a requested cleanup amendment to correct a federal drug-name spelling issue; decision-making was postponed to allow the department to provide language. SB 1149 drew substantial testimony both for and against; supporters emphasized better hate-crime data collection and transparency, while opponents raised concerns about definitions and free speech. The committee adopted amendments and passed the bill, with the chair summarizing the move from the older UCR system to NIBRS and noting a public dashboard expected by September 30, 2025. SB 1321 was passed with amendments shortening the oversight coordinator term from four years to three years, though one senator voted with reservations in favor of a longer term. SB 1341 was passed as is after brief support testimony, and the committee adjourned after completing the agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• is um the labor and delivery process is um the labor and delivery process<00:41:34.800> as<00
• :41:35.000> well<00:41:35.440> as process as well as process as well as um<00:41:37.640
• things to vote on in March?
• So mid-year, you would have like another vote, a townwide vote?
• That's adopted by a vote as well.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 662, which would require public schools to include discussion of abortion procedures and show specified videos in health education classes. The prime sponsor argued the bill would ensure students receive medically accurate, age-appropriate, and nonpolitical information about abortion, saying the topic is important for informed decision-making and should be taught consistently statewide. He said the videos were intended for grades 9-12, that parents could opt out, and that the requirement was meant to supplement, not sway, students’ views. He also acknowledged the bill could be seen as limiting local control over curriculum and said the intent was to prevent the topic from being missed due to scheduling disruptions. Committee members questioned the sponsor about local control, the need for a video mandate, the source of his statistics, whether the bill could be biased or inflammatory, and whether the requirement should apply every year in high school. The sponsor said the videos were only a starting point, could be replaced by others, and were meant to be informational. He also said the bill was not intended to influence students’ decisions about abortion. Several supporters testified in favor, including representatives of New Hampshire Right to Life and others who said students should be told the “truth” about abortion and its consequences. They emphasized graphic or emotionally difficult aspects of abortion and argued that young people need this information to make informed choices. Opponents and skeptical witnesses raised concerns about prescribing curriculum, eroding local control, and the appropriateness of the material for younger high school students. The New Hampshire School Administrators Association said the bill was overly prescriptive, that health education standards are already set by the State Board of Education, and that the topics in the bill are not part of the current standards. That witness recommended the committee consider retaining the bill for further work or making it less prescriptive. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:04:05.519> the again, a green vote or a yes vote on the again, a green vote or a yes vote
• A green vote vote yes by co-chair her.
• And process, not the end of the process.
• Hussein votes votes votes I.<00:33:02.000> McDonald. I. McDonald. I. McDonald.
• McDonald votes I. Paris McDonald. I. McDonald votes I.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We will be adopting Article 14 and 5 recommendations in one vote, and its contents are not subject to
• As we've discussed, this is just the first step in the process.
• Look, frankly, we don't decide points of order at this part of the process.
• It was a very fair process, a process where there was a lot of deliberation.
• Uh, it was a very fair process, uh, a process where there was a lot of deliberation.

Summary: The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Articles 14 and 5 met first and adopted its report on budget recommendations by a 4-0 vote, with three members absent. The chair said the report finalized prior decisions and could not be changed at that stage. Notable additions discussed included increased appropriations for the Office of the Attorney General, DPS driver’s license offices in Hays and Montgomery County, TJJD facilities and programs, Texas Facilities Commission funding for SCIF projects in Lubbock and San Antonio, THC funding for the Juneteenth Museum, an alcohol tourism study, and a TDCJ statewide reentry services pilot program. Members thanked staff and the meeting adjourned after the vote. The Article 3 subcommittee then presented its report for the committee substitute for Senate Bill 1, describing it as a procedural step that incorporated prior discussions, member writers, and changes made with Chairman Bonin. The chair noted that most items had been moved to Article 11 and that rejected riders were duplicates or conflicted with general law. The report was adopted unanimously, 6-0, and the subcommittee adjourned. The Articles 6, 7, and 8 subcommittee followed with its report for Senate Bill 1. During consideration, a member raised a point of order arguing the subcommittee had violated House rules requiring audio and video recording of formal meetings and public availability online. The chair rejected the point of order and proceeded to a roll call vote. After extended debate over the recording issue and the chair’s handling of the point of order, the report was adopted, with the transcript reflecting 6 ayes, 1 nay, and 1 absent. The subcommittee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• vote. On the A2? Yes. vote. On the A2? Yes.
• request for roll call vote. request for roll call vote.
• Wolgamott votes no. Chair Wolgamott. Wolgamott votes no.
• Board of Regents selection process. Board of Regents selection process.
• appointment process going forward. It is appointment process going forward.

Bills: HF1323, HF4266, HF4413, HF3101, HF4572, HF4698, HF3650, HF2634

Keywords: undocumented, financial aid, state policy, higher education, noncitizen eligibility, state grants, college affordability, Office of Higher Education, Minnesota State Grant, need analysis, expected family contribution, student aid, grant formula, living and miscellaneous expense allowance, dependent student, independent student, parental contribution, student contribution, surplus appropriation, biennium

Transcript Highlights:

• don't have to vote on the font. don't have to vote on the font.
• roll call vote. roll call vote.
• Chair<00:47:27.760> votes<00:47:28.079> I. Chair votes I. Chair votes I.
• we will take a vote. we will take a vote.
• and the chair votes I. and the chair votes I.

Bills: HF3661, HF2380, HF3468, HF3483

Keywords: facial recognition, privacy, government surveillance, public safety, data protection, civil liberties, disability rights, discrimination, accommodations, employment, housing, public services, education, civil action, failure to render aid, damages, Minnesota Statutes, legal liability, trespass, civil immigration enforcement

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from February 24 and February 26. It then took up House File 3661, a bill originally authored by Representative Gomez and presented by Representative Feist, which would ban government use of facial recognition technology and be re-referred to the Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee. The committee adopted the A1 amendment, described as a technical amendment based on House Research recommendations, before hearing testimony on the bill. Representative Feist said the bill is aimed at preventing serious privacy and civil-liberties harms, including secretive surveillance, racial and gender bias, and the lack of statewide rules governing government use of facial recognition. Supportive testimony came from Chad Marlo of the ACLU, who argued the issue is bipartisan, the technology has accuracy problems, and government use is expanding against vulnerable groups. Chris Wayland of Restore the Fourth Minnesota also supported a ban, emphasizing the inability to opt out of facial recognition and the lack of standards, disclosure, and community input. Rich Newmeister urged stronger transparency measures, including agency policies and public notice in buildings using the technology. Major Spencer Baky of the Hennepin County Sheriff's Office opposed an outright ban, saying facial recognition is used only as an investigative lead, not for positive identification or real-time surveillance, and that results are corroborated before use. He said the office has used the tool in hundreds of investigations and supports a statutory framework with safeguards instead of a ban. In member discussion, Representative Hudson argued a blanket ban was too broad and suggested a more targeted evidentiary approach, while Representative Moller and Representative Kurr expressed concern about misuse and the federal government's use of the technology. Representative Durant asked whether there was a current Minnesota problem and whether stakeholders and law enforcement had been involved in drafting the bill. No final vote on the bill was taken in the portion provided, beyond adoption of the amendment and the committee’s continued consideration of HF 3661.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any negative votes? Any votes to advance the bill without recommendation? The bill is reported.
• Any negative votes? Any votes to advance the bill without recommendation? The bill is reported.
• Any negative votes? Thank you. Any negative votes?
• Any negative votes?
• Any negative votes?

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The New York State Senate Committee on Housing, Construction, and Community Development met on May 4 under Chair Brian Kavanagh and considered an eight-bill agenda, much of it consisting of measures previously sponsored by former Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal and now carried by other senators. Kavanagh noted the committee was in the first full week of May, with 32 days left in session and ongoing budget negotiations that include housing issues. The committee moved through the agenda without substantive debate on most bills. The committee reported several bills to the floor, including S.6263 (requiring certain out-of-state affordable housing owners to maintain escrow accounts for New York affordable units), S.8956 (transferring the Potsdam Housing Authority to the Canton Housing Authority), S.9571 (allowing multiple transfers of low-income housing tax credits), S.9677 (the City of Buffalo Historic Preservation Receivership Act), S.9716 (expanding the definition of family members in public housing law), S.9907 (marshals’ filing requirements for eviction notices), S.9908 (calculating rent reductions from the date services were actually diminished), and S.9914 (requiring replacement units to retain the same protected status after demolition or major renovation). Several of these bills had previously passed the Senate in earlier sessions. Most measures were advanced by motion and second, with some recorded negative votes or votes to advance without recommendation from minority members, but no bill was defeated. The transcript includes some repetition of bill readings, but the final action on each listed bill was reporting it out of committee, generally to the floor and, for S.9914, to Cities 1.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Cortese: [vote not clearly captured]. Senator Gonzalez: [vote not clearly captured].
• Senator Choi: [vote not clearly captured]. Senator Cortese: [vote not clearly captured].
• Current vote is four ayes, no noes, with the chair and vice chair voting aye. Senator Choi: Aye.
• Current vote is four ayes, no noes, with the chair and vice chair voting. Senator Choi: Aye.
• Current vote is three ayes, no noes, with the chair voting aye.

Summary: The committee heard SB 1067, which would require annual math screening for kindergarten through second grade students beginning in 2028-29 to identify early numeracy difficulties and connect students to evidence-based supports. Senator Weber and supporters, including EdVoice, UC Davis researcher Charles Wilkes, and several education and community advocates, argued that California’s math performance is too low and that early screening would help close gaps before they widen. Opponents, including the California Mathematics Council, county superintendents, and the CTA, said the bill could narrow instruction, overemphasize deficit-based measures, and should instead be paired with stronger investments in teacher training and implementation of the California Mathematics Framework. Committee members generally expressed support for the bill’s goals while discussing how the screener would work and what kinds of follow-up supports would be needed. The committee also heard SB 1110 on child care subsidy administration, which would restructure funding for alternative payment programs and core contracts as the state moves to enrollment-based funding. Supporters said the bill would stabilize child care providers, improve payment timelines, and better reflect the administrative work of enrolling families and managing services; there was no opposition testimony. SB 1374, supported by the CSU and UC systems, would allow public higher education institutions to seek temporary restraining orders when credible threats are directed at a campus rather than a specific person. Supporters described recent campus threats that created safety concerns but did not fit current restraining-order law; there was no opposition. Senator Nilo presented SB 1321, which would direct the State Auditor to review remedial course use and student preparedness at selected UC and CSU campuses after a UC San Diego report showed a sharp decline in incoming students’ math readiness. Supporters argued the audit would help identify gaps in college readiness and the effects of K-12 changes, while some members raised concerns about bypassing the usual legislative audit process; the bill was held on call. The committee then took up SB 1086 on microschools, which would define microschools and direct model ordinances for local land-use regulation. Supporters said it would create a clearer path for small, individualized learning communities, but several members questioned whether the concept was sufficiently defined and whether the state had enough information to draft model ordinances; the bill was also placed on call after a quorum was established. Finally, SB 1181 was presented as a limited pilot program in Central Valley counties to connect schools with regional threat assessment centers when credible safety concerns arise. The author and supporters, including the mother of a student killed in a shooting and several students, said it would improve early intervention and communication; committee members raised privacy and federal-sharing concerns but indicated support, and the bill was moved forward on a vote once quorum was present.