Transcript Highlights:

• I'm eager to hear from my colleagues and hear from the people of Texas as we move forward.
• No, that's the process.
• with the process.
• and the admissions process.
• I don't hear a complicated answer. I hear a way of getting around the answer.

Bills: HB 3

Keywords: emergency communication, public safety, interoperability, Texas Interoperability Council, grant program, emergency communications, public safety radio, first responders, radio system, dispatch, 911, emergency management, Texas Division of Emergency Management, public safety infrastructure, Project 25, P25, broadband emergency alerting, outdoor warning sirens, homeland security, disaster response

Transcript Highlights:

• traumainformed process that was working. traumainformed process that was working.
• They go try to start at the back of the court process now; they enter the fund relying on the process
• process?
• We're going to hear SB414, recess.
• An order is hearing. So you wait.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The pulp is a byproduct from the sugar manufacturing process.
• After the sugar process is done, you have this pulp.
• If this grant is processed. **Mr. Terstein**: Sure.
• I thank you for hearing this bill.
• Thank you for hearing this bill today.

Transcript Highlights:

• , post-entitlement process, and even the legal process.
• what we represent, we know there's nothing progressive about process for process' sake.
• Can we hear? Can we hear? Is this good? Okay. Thank you. Good morning, everyone. Thank you.
• That is seven months of time already in an 18-month process, so it has to be an iterative process.
• , a very tough hearing.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Housing and Community Development heard a long agenda focused mainly on housing production, higher education facilities, homelessness, and permitting reform. Early items included AB 6, which would direct HCD to convene a working group on allowing three- to ten-unit “missing middle” housing to be built under the Residential Code rather than the Building Code; AB 48, a higher education bond proposal that would fund campus repairs, modernization, disaster recovery, and student/employee housing; and AB 76, which would clarify a Chula Vista university innovation district exemption so the project can include academic buildings and housing without conflicting with surplus land rules. Supporters emphasized affordability, cost savings, student housing needs, and access to education, while members raised questions about implementation, affordability requirements, and project scope. The committee later took votes on these items, with AB 6, AB 48, and AB 76 all moving forward on unanimous or near-unanimous votes to Appropriations. Members also heard AB 595, which would create a state homeownership tax credit pilot to support affordable for-sale housing. The author and supporters argued that California’s homeownership rate is at historic lows and that the bill would help close racial wealth gaps by financing homes working families can buy. The committee approved AB 595 and sent it to Appropriations. The consent calendar, including several other housing-related bills, was also approved unanimously. A major portion of the hearing was devoted to AB 1165, the California Housing Justice Act of 2025, which would require ongoing state investment and a financing plan to address homelessness and housing affordability. The author and witnesses described the scale of homelessness, the limits of one-time funding, and the need for sustained, accountable funding streams. After testimony from housing advocates and people with lived experience, the committee passed AB 1165 on a 10-0 vote to Appropriations. Finally, the committee heard AB 609, a CEQA reform bill that would create a simplified exemption for qualifying infill housing projects in already developed areas. Supporters framed it as a targeted way to reduce delays and costs for housing near jobs and transit, while opponents from environmental justice, labor, and tribal groups warned it could reduce public participation, weaken protections for disadvantaged communities, and create consultation concerns for tribal cultural resources. The author said the bill would not change zoning or affordability tools and would continue to work with opponents on amendments. The bill was moved forward after extensive discussion, with members noting ongoing negotiations on tribal consultation and labor concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• the first time the at the first hearing the first time the at the first hearing for<00:23:07.240
• We had this hearing last week.
• court hearing than you or I.
• Do I hear a motion? Yes, I'd like to move ITL on that. Do I hear a second?
• Do I hear a motion for that?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting covered two main items. First, the solid waste subcommittee reviewed draft language for HB 707, focusing on landfill siting and permitting standards. Members and the Department of Environmental Services discussed replacing repeated references to “aquifer” with “drinking water well,” clarifying that aquifer is a broad term, and considering whether a statutory definition was needed. They also debated the bill’s setback and time-of-travel provisions, including the 10^-5 standard, a 1,500-foot distance, and whether the bill should rely more on performance-based criteria than prescriptive distances. Another major topic was permit denial language tied to applicants with significant histories of repeated serious violations or landfill-related litigation; the department said it already has related authority in current rules, but noted some wording was still too vague and could be tightened. No vote was taken, and the chair closed the hearing with plans to continue work later. The second item was a work session on HB 424, which would direct the Department of Agriculture, Markets and Food to create forms for businesses to request information about service animals and establish a study committee on fraudulent or untrained service animals. Several members said the problem raised by the bill was real but expressed concern that the legislature may be limited by the federal Americans with Disabilities Act. Others argued that a study committee would likely not produce a workable solution and might conflict with leadership’s direction to avoid unnecessary study committees. Members discussed whether the bill should be retained, amended, or instead replaced with a letter or resolution to the federal delegation. The committee appeared to lean toward ITL and possibly pursuing a letter to federal officials, but no final vote is reflected in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's really an easy process with them.
• We can move expeditiously at the Finance Authority through our process, our monthly board process.
• Process. Are you using CES?
• I like to hear that.
• Well, that's really great to hear.

Transcript Highlights:

• Yesterday, we sat in a process.
• I'm sorry, I didn't hear what the thumb up was. Can I hear? This is a friendly amendment.
• Thank you for having me and hearing our voice.
• I hear there are concerns.
• I hear there are concerns.

Summary: The subcommittee first heard presentations on protecting minors from age-restricted products from the Department of Business and Professional Regulation and the Attorney General’s office. DBPR described its Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco division’s licensing and enforcement work on alcohol, tobacco, nicotine, and hemp sales, including inspections, undercover underage-purchase operations, arrests, and coordination with the Attorney General on hemp and nicotine enforcement. Members asked about trends in youth use, retailer training, use of underage decoys in investigations, and whether additional education or penalties could help reduce sales to minors. The Attorney General’s office then outlined the new nicotine dispensing device directory created under last year’s law, explaining the criteria for listing devices attractive to minors, the notice process for manufacturers and retailers, and enforcement consequences once listed devices become contraband. Members discussed online sales, product descriptions, notice to industry, and whether more outreach to parents, schools, and local partners could help. The committee then took up House Bill 105, which would decouple thoroughbred pari-mutuel permit holders from the requirement to conduct live racing in order to operate card rooms/slot gaming. The bill sponsor said the measure would align thoroughbred permits with other live-event permits and argued the industry is already declining and heavily subsidized, so the Legislature should not force a private business to keep an unprofitable line of business. An amendment by Rep. Yeager was adopted to remove live-racing requirements for thoroughbred permit holders who are card room licensees, broadening the bill’s effect to include Tampa Bay Downs as well as Gulfstream Park. Public testimony was sharply divided: supporters said decoupling would give tracks flexibility and not end racing, while opponents from the thoroughbred breeding and racing industry warned it would undermine live racing, breeding, jobs, farmland, and the broader equine economy. After debate, several members spoke in favor of the bill, emphasizing business flexibility, declining foal counts, and the view that the state should not require a private industry to maintain racing to keep gaming rights. Opponents argued the bill could damage a signature Florida industry and its economic impact. The committee then voted 10-6 to report HB 105 favorably, with several members voting no and some excused. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because you'll hear the Fair Plan is so expensive.
• So it was a very, like I said, a really smooth process.
• That disbursement process works exactly the same as the assessment process, right?
• That disbursement process works exactly the same as the assessment process, right?
• We do have, you know, you'll hear, I'm sure, because you guys hear the horror stories, right?

Summary: The Assembly Insurance Committee held an oversight hearing on the California Fair Plan, focused on the plan’s rapid growth, its financial stability after the January Southern California wildfires, and its role as the insurer of last resort. Fair Plan officials explained that the plan was created in 1968, is a not-for-profit involuntary association of licensed property insurers, and is intended to be a temporary safety net until policyholders can return to the admitted market. They emphasized that the plan is not a state agency or taxpayer-funded, but is regulated by the Department of Insurance and supported by member-company assessments if claims exceed available funds. Victoria Roach and Armand Feliciano said the Fair Plan has grown sharply since 2018 and especially after market pullbacks by major insurers, reaching about 575,000 policies and roughly $600 billion in exposure by spring 2025. They noted that growth is increasingly occurring in lower wildfire-risk areas, where the plan can sometimes be cheaper than the voluntary market, and said this undermines depopulation back into the private market. They also discussed recent policy expansions, including coverage for farms, higher residential and commercial limits, and pending or proposed changes such as AB 290, SB 525, and AB 226, which would add tools like a line of credit and bond access. A major portion of the hearing addressed the January wildfire losses and the plan’s financial response. Fair Plan officials said they assessed member insurers for $1 billion after determining claims and cash flow would exceed available resources, and that the process was approved quickly and paid smoothly, with more than 80% of the assessment collected within 10 days. They also described the reinsurance tower, the plan’s limited surplus, and the need for actuarially sound rates to reduce future reliance on assessments. On claims handling, they said the plan has received over 5,500 claims from the fires, has paid more than $2.9 billion so far, expects total payments near $4 billion, and has focused on advancing payments quickly for total losses and other urgent needs. Members questioned the plan’s solvency, the growth in non-wildfire areas, claim denials, smoke-loss coverage, and how depopulation works. Roach said most closed claims without payment were duplicates rather than denials, and that smoke claims require direct physical loss under the policy, with coverage determined case by case. Public commenters from the California Building Industry Association and the Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of California said the Fair Plan’s growth reflects a weak voluntary market, inadequate rates, and insurer fear of future assessments, and urged support for rate increases and AB 226. The hearing concluded with no vote, but with a commitment from Fair Plan officials to follow up on unanswered questions and continue providing more transparency through public data and website disclosures.

Transcript Highlights:

• Good to hear. Thank you so much.
• We have seen, you know, in our hearing from our providers, We have seen, you know, in our hearing from
• So through this process, or in the TBL, excuse me, we'll talk about the process in a minute, we define
• in a runway and a planning process.
• a runway and a planning process.

Summary: The subcommittee heard presentations from the Department of State Hospitals (DSH), the Commission for Behavioral Health, and the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) on budget proposals and implementation updates. DSH outlined its proposed 2026-27 budget, including funding for patient operating expenses, IST solutions savings, conditional release program costs, LPS bed allocation changes, electrical infrastructure projects at Napa and Patton, SB 380 transitional housing feasibility work, and expanded dental services at Metropolitan and Patton. DSH also reported that it has met court-ordered IST treatment benchmarks in the Stiavedi v. Clinton case, with average time to initiate treatment down to about five days and pending placements reduced to roughly 250, while noting that Proposition 36 could increase referrals and SB 1323 may divert some individuals earlier into community-based treatment. Members asked about rising outside hospitalization costs, Medicare enrollment, the timing and structure of capital projects, and whether IST solution funds are being fully used; DSH said the savings reflect slower-than-expected ramp-up of community programs and that the Central California FACT replacement program is still on track for January 2027 activation. The Commission for Behavioral Health described its role under the Behavioral Health Services Act (BHSA), including data, evaluation, grantmaking, technical assistance, and transparency work. It highlighted the new statewide Innovation Partnership Fund, a five-year, $20 million-per-year program with small and large grant categories; the first RFA drew strong interest, with more than 400 questions and over 1,000 bidders’ conference participants. The Commission also discussed a proposed extension to spend down about $4.1 million remaining for the Alcove Youth Drop-in Center grants so sites can finish implementation and Stanford can complete the final evaluation. Members asked about grant duration, whether projects can be renewed, what qualifies as innovation, and whether the fund could support service delivery rather than awareness campaigns or training; the Commission said awards are expected to be three-year contracts and that proposals must be new or meaningfully expanded approaches that support BHSA priority populations. DHCS reviewed major behavioral health changes under CalAIM and BH Connect, including peer support, mobile crisis, contingency management, traditional health care practices for tribal members, updated specialty mental health access criteria, and new substance use treatment standards based on ASAM’s fourth edition. DHCS reported strong contingency management results, with more than 13,000 members served and 95% testing negative for stimulant use during treatment, and said 21 Indian health care providers have been approved to offer traditional health care practices. It also described BH Connect initiatives such as the $1.9 billion access reform and outcomes incentive program, workforce investments, evidence-based practice expansion, IMD participation by four counties, and transitional rent services. On BHSA implementation, DHCS said it is not tracking individual county contract cuts but is monitoring county plans and statewide outcomes, while stakeholders raised concerns about local prevention and service gaps. DHCS also outlined its H.R. 1 implementation strategy, including outreach, streamlined renewals, exemptions for disabled, substance use, and medically frail individuals, and proposed clinic navigator and outreach funding; it said it has not yet produced a focused estimate of H.R. 1 impacts on behavioral health populations. The discussion ended with DHCS noting that B-CHIP bond funding has supported 437 infrastructure projects, creating 546 new or expanded facilities and more than 9,500 residential beds across the state.

Transcript Highlights:

• You'll hear more about that coming.
• drags out or the bid process drags out.
• What you're hearing is absolutely right.
• So the process...
• And so that's really the process.

Summary: The Higher Education Budget Subcommittee met to review funding models for the Florida College System and district workforce education programs, with an emphasis on how new dollars are allocated in the program fund and how performance and targeted funding are incorporated. Chancellor Hebda explained the Florida College System model, including base program funding, student success and pipeline funds, performance incentives for industry certifications, and the 2022 president-developed formula that weights enrollment, workforce enrollment, completions, small-college factors, and regional cost differences, plus a targeted funding floor for colleges below a minimum per-FTE level. Vice Chancellor Goodman then outlined the district workforce model, which uses lagged enrollment, program cost weights, local revenue offsets, small-district adjustments, and unmet-need calculations to distribute lump-sum appropriations to school districts offering workforce education. The department also provided updates on several grant programs and funding delays. Goodman said the Workforce Development Incentive Grant, Pathways to Career Opportunities Grant, Graduation Alternative to Traditional Education Startup Grant, and teacher apprenticeship/mentor bonus programs all involve multi-year awards and often require reversions and reappropriations because projects are delayed, extended, or not fully obligated by year-end. She said the department is moving toward an electronic grants system and had already adjusted internal deadlines to speed awards, while acknowledging some reimbursement delays and explaining that mentor bonuses for teacher apprentices will not be paid until the first cohort reaches the statutory timing requirement. Members asked about tracking whether CTE students work in their trained fields, how Xello is used to inform students about career pathways, how FTE is calculated, whether the funding formulas could encourage growth over quality, and how students with disabilities are counted in workforce funding. Questions also focused on tuition, enrollment trends, and the gap between college and university funding. The committee heard that tuition has remained flat for more than a decade, enrollment has rebounded from COVID and is projected to exceed pre-pandemic levels, and the college system’s funding per FTE varies widely. Valencia College President Kathleen Plinsky testified in support of the proposed formula and an additional $200 million for the Florida College System, saying Valencia is the second-largest college in the state but ranks last in per-FTE funding, which has made it difficult to recruit and retain faculty and admit qualified students in high-demand programs like nursing. The committee took no vote and adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um I hear your concerns, bill a hearing.
• <01:20:51.760> processes plant's nutritional process processes plant's nutritional process
• and to give him the hearing.
• and to give him the hearing.
• hearing. Um any closing comments? hearing. Um any closing comments?

Bills: HF3898, HF3957, HF4372, HF4350, HF3692, HF4085

Keywords: pesticides, wild rice, environmental protection, agriculture, water quality, pollinators, training, management plan, fertilizer research, education grants, Minnesota Agricultural Council, technology transfer, agricultural productivity, HF4372, Minnesota agriculture, meat processing, meat processing training, retention incentive grants, grant extension, project deadline extension

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing no objections, it would be adopted.
• The reality and the flip side of what that is will be the number of due process hearings that could potentially
• and expulsion hearings.
• and expulsion hearings.
• Hearing none, the minutes are adopted.

Keywords: 974, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, and I hear you and I've heard you through this process.
• who I serve and that's what I'm hearing. who I serve and that's what I'm hearing.
• So I'm just processing through those pieces.
• Um just processing through those pieces.
• been resolved, we are not going to hear been resolved, we are not going to hear this. this. this

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The Seclusion Working Group met for its final meeting on January 28 and first approved the prior meeting minutes after correcting two roll-call vote errors involving Miss Woodward. The chair then gave an extended recap of the history of seclusion policy, including the pre-2023 emergency-only framework, the 2023 ban on seclusion for children birth through grade 3, the 2025 introduction of SF 1830 to restore prior law, and the compromise amendment that allowed limited seclusion in grades 1 through 3 with added safeguards. The chair also reviewed the working group’s timeline, noting it had met from August 2025 through January 2026 and was required to submit findings by January 30, 2026. The main substantive discussion focused on the chair’s proposed timeline for eliminating seclusion and an alternative proposal from Mace. Several members criticized a Minnesota Department of Education letter that opposed parts of the working group’s recommendations, arguing it mischaracterized district practices, questioned informed consent and mental health professional provisions, and did not reflect the realities faced by schools. Members supporting the current use of seclusion said districts already use MTSS, PBIS, Ukeru, and other interventions, but still need seclusion in limited emergency situations. They also said the department’s comments felt inflammatory or unsupportive. On the timeline issue, Mace proposed allowing limited seclusion for students in grades 1 through 12 receiving certain special education services until July 1, 2036, with data collection on outcomes and related interventions. Some members supported a “runway” toward elimination, saying it would allow time to build alternatives and avoid an abrupt ban, while others said they could not support including grades 1 through 3 in any extended timeline and preferred elimination sooner. Members also questioned whether MDE currently collects enough data on law enforcement interventions and related outcomes. The meeting ended with continued discussion of the timeline proposal, but no final vote or report approval was recorded in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then the process uh of the trash.
• if we hadn't had this hearing.
• if we hadn't had this hearing.
• forward if we hadn't had this hearing. forward if we hadn't had this hearing.
• <01:37:07.440> So, um for this hearing. So, um for this hearing.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you hear me? Yes, we do hear you. Thank you. Great.
• Can you hear me? Yes, we do hear you. Can you hear me? Yes, we do hear you.
• declaratory order process, or the ruling process, process, process, right?
• It will appear to run concurrent with the current processes of court or hearing officer.
• current processes of court or hearing current processes of court or hearing officer. officer. officer

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills, with most measures drawing either support or comments rather than opposition. HB 2395, relating to taking marine deposits for research, education, management, or propagation, received support from the University of Hawaii and DLNR. HB 2585, relating to agricultural tourism, drew broad support for its intent to keep agritourism secondary to farming, but agencies and farm groups raised concerns about enforcement, county authority, and the rebuttable presumption language. Testifiers included OPSD, the Agribusiness Development Corporation, Hawaii Farm Bureau, a small farm operator, and others, with some urging clearer definitions, simpler registration, and protections for bona fide farms and hosted farm stays. HB 1728, on rainwater catchment systems, was supported in principle by DLNR, which cited drought conditions and said it deferred to counties and the Department of Health on safety and regulation. HB 1881, which would prohibit passenger ropeways on mountain lands, drew strong support from community testifiers who said it would help prevent development disguised as agritourism and protect forests and country lands. HB 1990, establishing penalties and possible foreclosure for unresolved zoning violations, received comments from the Attorney General recommending removal of AG references and more county-centered enforcement, while the Hawaii Association of Realtors warned the 30-day timeline could create problems for absent or unaware homeowners. The committee also heard HB 1712, which would expand and make permanent certain seats on the State Building Code Council. The Plumbers and Fitters union supported the bill, but BIA Hawaii requested amendments to add “licensed contractor” language, and architects and other professionals opposed the measure, arguing that increasing the council from 12 to 15 voting members would make it less efficient and harder to reach quorum. Finally, HB 2151, relating to hempcrete, was supported by a Kauai workforce development advocate and the Hawaii Farm Bureau, who said hempcrete could support agriculture, manufacturing, and affordable housing while reducing carbon and reliance on imported materials. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• All right, we are going to get this hearing started.
• Great to be back in this hearing room with you all.
• We love to hear that.
• I want to hear more about that.
• We're at the beginning of the process. The door is open.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm sorry to hear that, Representative Roach.
• Hear all of us do our work.
• We did hear, as Representative Kresha had a hearing on school safety.
• We did hear, as Representative Kresha had a hearing on school safety.
• Hearing no objections, the motions prevail.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House took up Senate File 3432, a public safety bill requiring identifying equipment and insignia to be removed from emergency vehicles sold to the public. The chamber first adopted a House language amendment, then debated a broader security package that would fund judicial and courthouse security, Capitol security measures, short-term protection for legislators facing credible threats, State Patrol deficiency funding, and additional BCA analysts and investigators to assess threats statewide. Supporters framed the bill as necessary to protect public safety, democracy, and First Amendment activity at the Capitol and courthouses; they also said the package was pared down from larger requests and based on security reviews. The House adopted an A-1 amendment clarifying that BCA staff could investigate threats statewide, and later rejected a Schultz A-3 amendment that would have eliminated all appropriations in the bill. The A-3 was defeated on a 37-94 vote after the House upheld the Speaker’s ruling that a proposed school-safety secondary amendment was not germane, with that appeal decided 69-62. A major theme of debate was whether the Legislature should prioritize security for members and the Capitol before passing school safety funding. Several members argued they could not support spending tens of millions on Capitol and legislative security without first funding school safety for all students, including public, charter, private, and tribal schools. Others defended the bill as necessary because of recent threats and violence, including the June 14 tragedy, and said the Capitol security changes were based on professional recommendations. Some members also criticized the new security setup as overly restrictive or “security theater,” while supporters said the measures were needed to keep the public, staff, and lawmakers safe. After the A-3 was defeated, the bill was read for third time and members continued floor debate. The discussion remained split between those emphasizing immediate Capitol and legislative security needs and those insisting school safety should come first. Representative Agbaje then moved to table the bill, and the clerk began a roll call on that motion.

Transcript Highlights:

• We can hear you pretty good. Mr.
• We can hear you pretty good. Mr.
• advises the commissioner on this process advises the commissioner on this process as<00:16:06.240
• in front of you uh that that process in front of you uh that that process starts<00:21:18.440>
• uh came around to is that that process uh came around to is that that process would<00:21:38.600

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The hearing room is open for in-person attendance, and all are encouraged to watch the hearing from its
• Senators, if you can hear us, join us. for in-person attendance of this hearing and all are encouraged
• to watch the hearing from its live stream on the assembly's website.
• Senators, if you can hear us, join us. Senators, if you can hear us, join us.
• But I hear you on the breathing room.

Summary: The Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee heard several housing-related bills. SB 996 by Senator Padilla would let manufactured homeowners opt to title their homes as real property, with supporters saying this would improve access to conventional mortgages, consumer protections, and lower-cost financing. SB 866 by Senator Blakespear would require cities and counties to include homelessness-related information in their annual housing element reports, with supporters saying the bill would improve transparency, regional coordination, and accountability around homelessness funding and services. The committee also heard SB 1090 by Senator Perez, which would impose a temporary moratorium in Altadena on certain state housing density laws after the Eaton Fire. Supporters, including Supervisor Catherine Barger and many Altadena residents, argued the bill would protect fire survivors from speculative investors and give families time to rebuild and return home. Opponents argued the bill could limit tools that homeowners need to finance rebuilding and could reduce future housing production. After extensive testimony, the committee passed SB 1090 to the Assembly Local Government Committee on a 10-0 vote. SB 1388 by Senator Durazo would create an Affordable Housing Risk Reduction Program to help affordable housing providers reduce insurance costs through technical assistance and risk-mitigation support. Supporters said rising insurance premiums are threatening the viability of affordable housing developments and existing units. The committee also reconsidered and then voted on SB 1092, which was taken up only for reconsideration and final vote; after a split vote, the bill ultimately passed the committee. Final recorded votes showed SB 866 and SB 996 passing unanimously, SB 1388 passing with one no vote and one not voting, and SB 1092 passing 7-5 after reconsideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• We also are heartened to hear that the author is taking our due process request seriously.
• Let's hold ourselves to account through the budget process, through the confirmation process for State
• Let's hold ourselves to account through the budget process, through the confirmation process for State
• And I hear what my colleague is saying.
• We'll now hear. Thank you for your presentation. We'll now hear from those in support.

Keywords: 987, senate, all