Transcript Highlights:

• The rules for today's hearing include no talking or loud noises from the audience.
• Secondly, we'll invite Uber and Lyft to hear from the TNCs themselves.
• I look forward to hearing more from all these panelists.
• I know this is a very exciting hearing that was being watched by many people.
• We didn't hear a pun from Assembly Member Rogers, so I'm quite disappointed.

Summary: The hearing focused on transportation network companies in California, with the chair framing it as an informational hearing on the history, regulation, safety, climate, accessibility, and data issues surrounding Uber, Lyft, and smaller or autonomous TNC services. The CPUC described its decade-long regulatory role, including safety rules, background checks, insurance requirements, reporting obligations, and two major legislative programs from 2018: the Clean Miles Standard and the Access for All program. Members asked about complaint trends, data collection and disclosure, program implementation, and how the CPUC uses annual reports for policymaking, compliance, and program oversight. Uber and Lyft said the statewide framework has supported growth while providing safety and access benefits, but both companies emphasized that insurance is a major cost driver and argued that California’s UM/UIM requirement is unusually high compared with other vehicles. They said the Clean Miles Standard is pushing electrification but faces headwinds from EV affordability and charging infrastructure, while Access for All has expanded wheelchair-accessible service but still needs continued support. They also discussed transit partnerships, wildfire response, and the potential role of autonomous vehicles, with both companies saying human drivers will remain important and that future regulation should account for new technology. The final panel, including the San Francisco County Transportation Authority and UC Berkeley researchers, presented evidence that TNCs have increased congestion and reduced transit ridership, especially in dense urban areas. They described prior research showing TNCs contributed to congestion growth in San Francisco and noted that this work helped spur local taxes on ride-hailing trips to fund safety and transit improvements. The panel also discussed the CPUC’s evolving data-disclosure decisions, arguing that public access to TNC trip data is important for understanding transportation impacts and informing local policy.

Transcript Highlights:

• Can y'all hear me all right like that? All right.
• Did I hear you say that?
• We hear that.
• Chair yes, I would love to hear the DOJ report.
• We can share that data in a public hearing as well.

Committee: House Criminal Jurisprudence

Transcript Highlights:

• This hearing will come to order. Thank you all for coming.
• Today we'll hear from three experts.
• So far, I like what I'm hearing.
• Let me get to the point of the hearing. Thank you for holding this hearing.
• I was glad that our first official hearing beyond a confirmation hearing was on something where we should

Committee: Senate Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Personnel

Transcript Highlights:

• Call this hearing to order.
• We’re calling this hearing to order.
• Can you hear? We can. Can you see me? Not yet. I can hear you. Okay. Well, should I start?
• from later on in this hearing.
• We're hearing it constantly.

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:

• That bill is... hear the concerns.
• In fact, you very rarely hear of that sort of activity now.
• They get a human being, and they hear from me directly.
• They get a human being, and they hear from me directly.
• Today, we will hear in support of AB 2066 from Dr.

Committee: House Health

Transcript Highlights:

• So I thought it was only fitting that we do our first select committee hearing here.
• With that, we want to hear from you, Mr. Steele.
• When we hear the numbers around the cost of incarceration systems at the individual level, When we hear
• Can you hear me now? No? Can you hear me? Yes, sir. Oh, man, I was starting to worry.
• And with that, this closes the select committee hearing. Thank you all. Thank you.

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing none. Senator, tell us about your bill. Thank you, colleagues.
• The Senate is under the ceiling, so we'll hear her bill next.
• Chairman, thank you for hearing the bill.
• Chairman, thank you for hearing the bill.
• Hearing none, as he's making his way up.

Bills: SB1041 , SB1363 , SB1418 , SB1419 , SB1445 , SB1447 , SB1488 , SB1519 , SB1523 , SB1560 , SB1580

Committees: Senate Natural Resources , Senate Senate Natural Resources Committee of Reference

Keywords: electronic monitoring, nursing care, assisted living, resident rights, privacy, consent, surveillance, marijuana, rural opportunity, dispensary, economic development, licensing, social equity, unserved communities, Arizona, small modular reactors, energy regulation, environmental compatibility, utility construction, agricultural use

Transcript Highlights:

• So we'll hear from the commissioner.
• And Antonio, yes, have a seat, and we'll hear from you after Jill.
• We just hear for questions and nothing else. I am.
• And we also close public hearing on Senate Bill 6041.
• And we also close public hearing on Senate Bill 6041.

Bills: SB6239 , SB6074 , SB5886 , SB6041 , SB6190

Committee: Senate Law & Justice

Keywords: tort claims, state liability, Washington law, government accountability, legal process, parole, criminal justice reform, felony, recidivism, rehabilitation, public safety, personality rights, right of publicity, publicity rights, name image likeness, NIL, deepfake, AI-generated content, digital impersonation, forged digital likeness

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to hear all about this.
• We'll now hear from James Pine, Dr.
• We'll now hear from James Pine, Dr.
• So we’ll hear from Katie.
• I hear other communities doing that.

Summary: The Community Safety Committee held an interim work session on crisis response, with members and witnesses discussing how Washington can better integrate 911, 988, mobile crisis, co-response, and alternative response models for behavioral health crises in public spaces. Travis Parker opened with an overview of the Sequential Intercept Model and the crisis care continuum, emphasizing early intervention, 988 access, regional coordination, navigators and peer support, and the need for sustainable braided funding. Several Washington witnesses then described current programs and system gaps, including the growth of co-response teams, the importance of integrating 911 and 988 rather than treating them as competing systems, and the need to reduce unnecessary emergency room use and improve first responder wellness and training. City, fire, and crisis-system representatives described local challenges and reforms. Kim Hendrickson of Poulsbo said most crisis calls still come through 911 and urged better coordination among field-based teams, more behavioral health training for fire/EMS, and more alternatives to ER transport. Laura Pippen, a designated crisis responder, described a strained involuntary treatment system, fewer DCRs statewide, difficulty getting law enforcement support for transports, and limited facility capacity, especially for substance use disorder. Jennifer Stuber and South County Fire’s Keith Sharp highlighted workforce training, a crisis responder certificate program, and first responder wellness efforts. Research witnesses Evan Lauder and James Pine said the evidence is still developing but generally supports on-scene resolution, reduced ED transport and detention in some models, and the importance of clear dispatch protocols, coordination, and ongoing evaluation. Dispatch and program operators then gave examples of how systems are working in practice. Katie Myers of Washington APCO/NENA said 911 remains essential, but needs evidence-based triage protocols, liability protections, and additional funding if it is expected to take on more crisis-response responsibilities. Whatcom County described embedding a “community connector” in the 911 center to coordinate alternative response, while ValleyCom reported that its 988 diversion pilot transferred 2,165 calls with 98% resolved through 988/211 without returning to 911. National examples included Denver’s STAR program, Albuquerque’s Community Safety Department, and Atlanta’s PAD initiative, each showing different ways to route low-acuity or behavioral-health-related calls away from police and toward clinicians, peers, or civilian responders. The session ended with Washington examples continuing, including Whatcom County’s alternative response team, underscoring the committee’s interest in refining and expanding integrated crisis response systems in the next session.

Transcript Highlights:

• c> at the committee hearing.
• I did not hear at the committee hearing.
• </c> can hear you? There we go. can hear you?
• </c><00:12:05.200><c> report</c> going to pull up the uh hearing report going to pull up the uh hearing
• </c><00:14:43.920><c> It</c> reading over the hearing report. It reading over the hearing report.

Committee: Senate Commerce

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you all hear me okay in the back? Great, thank you.
• So, I'd love to hear feedback about that.
• The third thing that I'd like to hear is which treatments—I'd like to hear more specificity, and we won't
• You’ll hear more about those in a future agenda.
• Thanks for the nice long hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• hear I couldn't<00:05:32.880><c> hear</c><00:05:33.039><c> the</c><00:05:33.199><c> comment</c><00:05
• The fact that we're even having this hearing and other hearings on these bills, I do have a question:
• The fact that we're even having this hearing and other hearings on these bills, I do have a question:
• </c><00:36:52.119><c> now</c> fact that we're having this hearing now fact that we're having this hearing
• </c> doesn't help to have committee hearings doesn't help to have committee hearings like<00:37:05.040

Committee: House Public Safety Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing none, it is so ordered. Yes.
• Hearing none, the substitute is adopted.
• Hearing none, it is so ordered.
• Hearing none, it is so ordered.
• Hearing none, it is so ordered.

Bills: HB40 , HB40 , HB1916 , HB1973 , HB2524 , HB2530 , HB3180 , HB3421 , HB3783 , HB4170 , HB4213

Committee: Senate Jurisprudence

Summary: The committee considered several House bills dealing with family law and civil procedure. House Bill 1916, concerning a court’s jurisdiction in suits to divide property not divided on dissolution of marriage, was reported favorably on a 4-0 vote and recommended for the local and uncontested calendar. House Bill 1973, addressing proof of the identity of a child’s parents in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship, was also adopted with a committee substitute, reported favorably 4-0, and sent to the local and uncontested calendar. House Bill 2524, on recovery of fees, court costs, and expenses in family law proceedings, and House Bill 2530, on special appointments in suits affecting the parent-child relationship, each received favorable 4-0 votes and were likewise recommended for the local and uncontested calendar. The committee then took up House Bill 3180, which was reported favorably 4-0 and recommended for the local and uncontested calendar. The most detailed discussion centered on House Bill 40, relating to updates to business courts. Senator Hughes explained a committee amendment that made conforming changes requested by the Finance Committee and removed language creating two new judgeships, replacing it with a different judge allocation. The amendment was adopted, the amended committee substitute was adopted, and the bill was reported favorably on a 4-0 vote and sent to the local and uncontested calendar. At the end of the meeting, members briefly clarified procedural details about the House Bill 40 amendment and then closed out the agenda. The committee also noted a correction to an earlier reference to Bartleby the Scrivener, and the Chair recessed the Committee on Jurisprudence subject to the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• notice of hearing, method of notice.
• Is that what I'm hearing? Kind of, sort of.
• and hear it out.
• Hearing no objections, the amendment is adopted.
• Hearing no objection, the amendment is adopted.

Bills: HR244 , HR245 , HR246 , HR247 , HR248 , HR249 , HR250 , HR251 , HCR101 , HCR102 , HR223 , HR224 , HR225 , HR226 , HR227 , HR229 , HR230 , HR231 , HR232 , HR234 , HR235 , HR236 , HR237 , HR238 , HR239 , HR240 , HR241 , HR242 , HR243 , HCR94 , HCR95 , HCR96 , HCR97 , HCR98 , HCR99 , HCR100 , SCR31 , SCR33 , SCR35 , SCR37 , SCR56 , SCR57 , SB171 , SB251 , SB252 , SB353 , SB367 , SB433 , SB461 , HR170 , HR191 , HR206 , HR207 , HR208 , HR217 , HCR11 , HCR53 , HCR60 , HCR66 , HCR68 , HB66 , HB153 , HB165 , HB326 , HB387 , HB454 , HB455 , HB484 , HB513 , HB603 , HB660 , HB719 , HB762 , HB766 , HB793 , HB802 , HB816 , HB833 , HB940 , HB947 , HB950 , HB975 , HB1028 , HB1039 , HB1051 , HB1053 , HB1080 , HB1201 , HB1215 , HB1228 , HB1251 , HB1252 , SCR2 , SB26 , SB28 , SB29 , SB30 , SB41 , SB44 , SB64 , SB84 , SB87 , SB93 , SB98 , SB107 , SB118 , SB142 , SB192 , SB195 , SB199 , SB219 , SB222 , SB234 , SB241 , SB255 , SB275 , SB277 , SB292 , SB294 , SB306 , SB314 , SB482 , SB233 , SB326 , HR171 , HCR49 , HCR65 , HCR72 , HR37 , HCR64 , SCR19 , SCR3 , SCR6 , SCR18 , SCR11 , SCR22 , HB64 , HB68 , HB92 , HB130 , HB258 , HB633 , HB801 , HB89 , HB341 , HB451 , HB456 , HB579 , HB595 , HB621 , HB818 , HB841 , HB1064 , HB1101 , HB1191 , SB47 , SB82 , SB106 , SB206 , SB210 , SB248 , SB305 , SB376 , SB397 , SB441 , SB2 , SB19 , SB24 , SB50 , SB70 , SB96 , SB101 , SB103 , SB104 , SB114 , SB122 , SB159 , SB160 , SB173 , SB180 , SB182 , SB260 , SB412 , SB418 , SB424 , SB442 , SB460 , SB476 , SB1 , SB23 , SB32 , SB42 , SB43 , SB46 , SB51 , SB110 , SB113 , SB150 , SB154 , SB161 , SB218 , SB220 , SB221 , SB253 , SB289 , SB310 , SB351 , SB399 , SB404 , SB502 , HCR32 , HB955 , HB284 , HB617 , HB730 , HB926 , HB1125 , HB1194 , HB1203 , HB798 , HB998 , HB1084 , HB1223 , HB646 , HB824 , HB901 , HB79 , HR20 , HR74 , HB59 , HB306 , HB366 , HB393 , HB458 , HB577 , HB582 , HB605 , HB614 , HB682 , HB733 , HB752 , HB773 , HB911 , HB996 , HB1035 , HB1069 , HB1113 , HB1140 , HB1180 , HB1234 , HB1240 , SB89 , SB68 , SB149

Transcript Highlights:

• The hearing room is open for the attendance of this hearing.
• The hearing room is open for the attendance of this hearing, and it can be watched from a live stream
• I'm open to hear should the bill get out. I'm open to hear additional conversations.
• And I know that sounds like a lot, but hear me out. This bill also... But hear me out.
• We hear this all over. I'm sure we all hear this.

Summary: The committee heard several transportation and public safety bills, largely focused on traffic violence, e-bike regulation, and DUI enforcement. AB 1588 on sideshows and street takeovers drew support from the author, San Francisco officials, law enforcement, and the League of California Cities, who said the bill would close loopholes, add motorcycles and dirt bikes to the sideshow framework, and align penalties with speed contests. ACLU California Action opposed it, but members generally supported the bill, noting the need for stronger tools against dangerous takeovers. The committee also heard AB 1654 on commercial driver’s licenses and federal verification rules, with the author arguing California must comply with federal law to avoid losing CDL authority; the chair and others objected that the bill could wrongly affect U.S. citizens and codify changing federal rules. The bill was discussed but not advanced in the portion provided. AB 1976 sought to speed delivery of bicycle and pedestrian safety projects by limiting some public meetings, restricting cancellation of contracts without findings, lowering petition thresholds for traffic calming, and updating the Pedestrian Mall Act. Supporters said current procedures delay life-saving projects and give too much power to opponents, while counties and cities opposed the limits on local public input and budget authority. After discussion, the committee voted to send AB 1976 to Local Government, with several members expressing support but also concerns about preserving community participation. The committee also heard AB 2015, which would direct Caltrans to study the effects of navigation apps on local roads and safety. Supporters said apps can divert traffic onto residential streets and undermine local traffic calming, while members suggested the bill should also consider built-in vehicle navigation systems. AB 2168, on the Active Transportation Program, would update the definition of safe routes to transit, prioritize transit-rich and underserved areas, and add stronger spending accountability; it drew support from bicycle and transit advocates and some local agencies, with a few technical concerns left to resolve. Finally, AB 1942 on e-bike registration and license plates for Class 2 and 3 e-bikes drew strong support from law enforcement and medical witnesses citing rising injuries, but broad opposition from bicycle groups, micromobility advocates, and some local governments who said it would burden lawful riders, create DMV problems, and not address illegal e-motos. The committee also heard AB 1685 and AB 1687, both DUI-related bills from the same author: AB 1685 would increase DMV points for gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, and AB 1687 would extend license revocation for a third DUI conviction to eight years with an interlock option after four years. Both bills received strong support from law enforcement and victims’ advocates, with ACLU California Action opposing them as duplicative or overly punitive; both bills were advanced by committee vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• The hearing room is open for the attendance of this hearing.
• The hearing room is open for the attendance of this hearing, and it can be watched from a live stream
• I'm open to hear should the bill get out. I'm open to hear additional conversations.
• We hear this all over. I'm sure we all hear this.
• We hear this all over. I'm sure we all hear this. So long-winded answer.

Committee: House Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing none, the minutes are adopted. Okay, members, now we will hear HB 574.
• Hearing none, are there any objections? Hearing none, the amendment is adopted.
• Hearing none, any opposition? Hearing none, the amendment is adopted.
• I didn't hear from her.
• Hearing none, any opposition? Hearing none, the technical amendments are adopted.

Bills: HB62 , HB124 , HB182 , HB193 , HB198 , HB203 , HB223 , HB237 , HB469 , HB486 , HB574 , HB779 , HB796 , HB919 , SCR2 , SB4 , SB36 , SB38 , SB109 , SB152 , SB168 , SB195 , SB216 , SB221 , SB236 , SB404

Committee: House Health and Welfare

Transcript Highlights:

• I mean, this session, last session that I did hear some information.
• I mean, this session, last session that I did hear some information.
• I worked with did hear some information.
• </c><00:46:12.160><c> the</c> mountain of Judea Samaria and hear the mountain of Judea Samaria and hear
• This is just wanted to hear won't vote. This is just wanted to hear this.<00:48:48.480><c> Okay.

Bills: SB8 , SB22 , SB137 , HB295 , HB2 , HB343 , HB220 , HB303 , HB81 , SB8 , SB22 , SB137 , HB295 , HB2 , HB343 , HB220 , HB303 , HB81

Committee: House State Government

Keywords: emergency management, public funds, educational materials, state legislation, disaster response, uniformity, state laws, legislative commission, appointments, government structure, resilience, natural disasters, risk management, Alabama Resilience Council, Chief Resilience Officer, state planning, environmental protection, community preparedness, Alabama Office of Civic Engagement, Alabama Office of Minority Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• I mean, this is the message I'm hearing.
• Moving on, we're going to hear H.C.M. 2002.
• And I hear your concerns.
• I wanted everyone to hear voices heard.
• I think there's still quite a bit of concern that we're hearing, and that I'm hearing from community

Committee: House House Federalism, Military Affairs & Elections Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee convened with roll call, member and staff introductions, and a review of amendment deadlines and decorum rules. Members also suspended the committee rule on late-distributed amendments to allow consideration of a Kolodin amendment. The chair then moved to the agenda bills, beginning with HCM 2001, a memorial urging Congress and the President to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organization and asking Arizona agencies to monitor related organizations. Testimony on HCM 2001 was sharply divided, with supporters arguing the Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR are linked to terrorism and Sharia law, and opponents calling the memorial discriminatory, unsupported by evidence, and an attack on Muslim civil rights organizations and free speech. The committee voted 4-3 to pass HCM 2001 out of committee. The committee then heard HCM 2002, which urges a federal review of CAIR for possible foreign terrorist organization designation and supports related congressional action. Testimony again split along similar lines: opponents, including CAIR representatives, a veteran, and community members, said the measure was scapegoating, lacked legal basis, and would stigmatize Muslim communities; supporters cited the Holy Land Foundation case, FBI concerns, and alleged ties between CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Hamas. After debate, the committee voted 4-3 to pass HCM 2002 out of committee. Following a brief recess, the committee took up HB 2009, which would prohibit committees primarily organized to influence constitutional amendments from accepting foreign national contributions and require disclosure of out-of-state funding. The sponsor said the bill was intended to improve transparency and keep constitutional initiatives focused on Arizona voters; members discussed whether the measure should apply to all ballot initiatives and how donor verification would work. HB 2009 was also approved 4-3. The committee then began HCR 2001, a proposed constitutional amendment on election procedures, including citizenship requirements for voting, limits on foreign contributions to candidate and ballot measure campaigns, government-issued ID requirements, and changes to early voting and mail ballot rules. The committee adopted a late amendment after procedural discussion, and the sponsor described the resolution as a broad election-security reform modeled on Florida. Members raised concerns that the proposal could reduce access, increase lines, and create confusion for mail voters, while the sponsor argued it would improve security and voter confidence. The transcript cuts off during this bill’s discussion, before final action is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Before we begin our official hearing, we do have two members.
• We've provided informational hearings to this body.
• And we are going to be hearing from our veterans, please.
• Happy to hear the support for that.
• You can hear from different vendors, get different price quotes, hear about their capabilities, and a

Summary: The subcommittee first heard an informational presentation on the May Revision’s proposed reorganization of the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency into separate housing-focused and consumer/business-focused entities. Administration officials said the split would improve oversight, streamline decision-making, and create a dedicated California Housing and Homelessness Agency with a new housing development and finance committee. The Department of Finance said funding was needed in 2025-26 to begin implementation, while the LAO recommended rejecting the proposal without prejudice because the Little Hoover Commission review was still pending and the plan would require ongoing General Fund costs. Members raised concerns about the timing, the lack of alignment with the budget process, and whether the reorganization would improve accountability for homelessness spending; several public witnesses supported the concept but stressed it could not substitute for new housing and homelessness dollars. The committee then took up the Department of Veterans Affairs. CalVet requested funding for phase three of its electronic health care record project and a trailer bill to preserve authority for federal background checks, but the May Revision withdrew requests for deferred maintenance and additional administrative support. The LAO noted deferred maintenance can prevent larger future costs, and the chair criticized the withdrawal of less than $1 million for veterans’ homes as short-sighted given existing repair needs. No vote was taken. Next, the Department of Housing and Community Development presented its budget. HCD said the May Revision provides no new affordable housing or homelessness funding, but does retain existing rounds of funding and proposes a $31.7 million reversion from undersubscribed housing programs. Members from both parties expressed concern about zeroing out ongoing housing and homelessness investments, especially for LIHTC, the Multifamily Housing Program, and HAP. HCD also defended its homelessness accountability and compliance work, saying the unit includes about 30 program staff and six attorneys, with three additional attorneys requested mainly to handle public records and litigation workload. Public commenters largely opposed the lack of new funding and urged continued support for housing and homelessness programs, while some supported the reorganization and accountability efforts. Finally, the committee heard Go-Biz proposals. The administration requested authority to increase funding for a federal trade program match if needed, plus reappropriations for administrative funds tied to the Containerized Ports Interoperability Grant Program, zero-emission vehicle operations, and the Women’s Business Center Enhancement Program. It also proposed withdrawing the Cal Competes grant request and reverting remaining funds from the Performing Arts Equitable Payroll Fund. The LAO said Cal Competes is generally effective but could be cut as a budget solution, while warning that the performing arts fund was close to awards and should be considered carefully. Members objected to pulling back committed funds for performing arts organizations and questioned why the state would withdraw support after applications had already been submitted.