Transcript Highlights:

• none hearing, let's try that again. none hearing, let's try that again.
• hearings and some discussions on that. hearings and some discussions on that.
• that's documented loss in those cases that's documented loss in those cases that<00:19:57.120>
• The 2025 FCFS case overview talks about 2,889 cases.
• Even though there's times we get into cases, which happens in all cases across the BCA, where we just

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• courts are free to decide cases courts are free to decide cases independently<00:05:04.680> using
• various things in in deciding cases. various things in in deciding cases.
• was was I correct in hearing you there? was was I correct in hearing you there?
• . hearing. hearing.
• taking a moment to hear our testimony. taking a moment to hear our testimony.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• often pressure to recant in these cases often pressure to recant in these cases so<01:20:45.120>
• One is settling one court case will solve both cases.
• is settling one court case will solve both both both cases<01:26:12.920> if<01:26:13.080>
• <01:32:46.119> on versa and lawyers take these cases on versa and lawyers take these cases
• I hear it. I have it.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The House Judiciary Committee opened a hearing on HB 584, which would bar New Hampshire and its political subdivisions from enforcing mandates, orders, or similar directives from the World Health Organization, United Nations, or World Economic Forum. Prime sponsor Representative Green described the bill as a sovereignty measure and offered an amendment to clarify language, including replacing a reference to entities that “create and enforce policies” with language covering enforcement of policies, mandates, orders, requirements, edicts, or directives. Supporters argued the bill was a preemptive safeguard against outside influence and cited concerns about pandemic-era public health measures and international organizations. Opponents, including the American Heart Association, warned it could chill local policymaking and limit the ability of communities to use outside research or guidance. The chair closed the hearing on HB 584 after testimony concluded. The committee then moved to HB 580-FN, relative to retaliatory defamation in domestic violence and sexual violence cases. Representative Anita Burroughs, the prime sponsor, said the bill is intended to protect people who report sexual assault, sexual harassment, abuse, or domestic violence from retaliatory defamation suits, so long as statements are made in good faith and without malice. She also said the bill preserves the ability of accused persons to defend their names. Burroughs explained that the proposal was prompted by a survivor’s experience and was meant to address the chilling effect of expensive litigation on reporting misconduct. Testimony on HB 580 was generally supportive. Witnesses said the bill would help survivors speak out without fear of meritless lawsuits and described retaliatory defamation as a tool used to silence or intimidate accusers. Burroughs noted the bill was informed by anti-SLAPP principles and referenced high-profile defamation cases as examples of the cost and pressure of litigation. No vote was taken in the portion of the transcript provided; the hearing on HB 580 was opened and testimony began.

Transcript Highlights:

• They told her to dismiss the case. She did not dismiss the case in the magistrate court.
• That judge was suspended from hearing cases, and the state police, everybody in our community, we have
• The cases are so extreme from people.
• , that they can prosecute those cases.
• The big issue for me is, is when employees and they're hearing cases and some of them are consulting

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you hear me? Yes, we can.
• Can you hear me now? Yes. Great. Can you hear me now? Yes. Oh, awesome. Okay, hello.
• It's a little dry; that webinar is given by a lawyer, but it goes through case after case.
• But each case is specific, and each case is specifically outlining the particular harms that they feel
• Each specific case is different. In front of them. Each specific case is different.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So if any of y'all are here to hear those bills, we're not going to hear them today. Mr.
• Hearing none, the motion carries. Thank you.
• I think the challenge, Representative Jackson, is that it's a case-by-case issue, depending on what the
• Yeah, I don't disagree that it may be a case by case, but there are bills that move through here that
• are case by case all the time.

Bills: HR217, HB66, HB204, HB208, HB326, HB472, HB483, HB484, HB793, HB1051, HB1080, HB1087, HB1111, HB1215, SB78, SB148

Keywords: rent stabilization, affordable housing, cost burdened, Louisiana housing, housing policy, emergency rental protections, Alexandria, municipal ordinances, administrative adjudication, code enforcement, housing violations, building codes, zoning, nuisance ordinances, vegetation ordinances, sewerage, drainage, licensing, permits, local government

Summary: The committee met on April 29 and heard a series of local bills affecting municipal and parish governance, blight enforcement, planning boards, and other local issues. Early actions included adopting a three-minute rule due to the late hour and deferring several bills that were not to be heard that day. House Bill 483 was voluntarily deferred, while House Bill 484 on the New Orleans Regional Business Park was amended and reported favorably. House Bill 78 on the Shreveport Downtown Development Authority was amended to correct a district reference and then reported favorably. House Bill 66, expanding Alexandria’s administrative adjudication authority for ordinance violations, was supported by the city and reported favorably. House Bill 326, requiring the Tickfaw police chief to reside in the village, was also reported favorably. The committee then took up several Shreveport blight-related bills. House Bill 1051, dealing with demolition of dilapidated residential property, was amended to allow the city to rely on reports from code enforcement, fire, police, or other public safety officials, and was reported favorably. House Bill 1080, a similar measure for condemned commercial property, was also reported favorably, with the sponsor noting he would consult the city attorney before floor debate. Senate Bill 148, allowing Lake Charles to pay a modest per diem to planning commission members by local ordinance, was reported favorably. House Bill 208, which would let St. Helena Parish voters decide whether to impose term limits on parish governing authority members, drew opposition from the police jury and failed on a recorded vote, 3-10. The committee also considered House Bill 1215 on the disposition of historical statues and monuments, adopting an amendment to prevent transferred monuments from being placed back in the parish where they were removed, and then reporting the bill favorably as amended. House Bill 793, a contested bill addressing subdivision plats filed without parish approval and the running of prescription, generated extensive testimony from the author, parish officials, the McCormicks, and a former appellate judge; the committee ultimately reported it favorably, with the author saying he would keep working on the language and send it to the Law Institute. Finally, House Bill 472, authorizing local rent stabilization measures during declared emergencies, was amended to limit any local ordinance to the duration of a governor-declared emergency, tie increases to CPI, and cap the measure at 365 days; the bill remained under discussion with questions about its relationship to existing price-gouging laws and whether the committee should wait for a broader study.

Transcript Highlights:

• One is, you said there is, did I hear right, there were 37 total cases that were waived and 32 of them
• You only had one county with a few cases from Fargo or West Fargo, one of the two. ...with a few cases
• And so what you're kind of saying is you're... so it went from a few cases to 37 cases.
• You know, those are individual judicial decisions regarding whether the judge hearing the case wants
• But I think it's incumbent upon this committee, I feel, after what we hear and we'll hear more testimony

Summary: The Judiciary Interim Committee met to begin its study of charitable gaming and the ownership of alcoholic beverage establishments by licensed charitable gaming organizations, a study directed by Senate Bill 2334. Legislative Council gave an overview of the constitutional and statutory framework for charitable gaming, site authorizations, rent limits, proceeds, and recent legislative changes. The Attorney General’s Gaming Division then clarified the financial flow of gaming, explaining that in fiscal year 2025 North Dakota had about $2.5 billion in gross gaming proceeds, with roughly 88-90% paid back in prizes and about $256 million available to organizations after taxes; most of that activity came from electronic pull tabs. Members asked for more detail on winnings, replays, rent, and the breakdown of manufacturer/distributor revenues, and the AG’s office agreed to provide supplemental information. The committee also heard from the League of Cities and the Association of Counties about local site authorization. Cities said they have a limited role in approving gaming sites, can adopt policies after public hearing, may charge up to $100, and can set certain conditions, including local nexus requirements, but cannot require donations or force a specific charity or site. The League said it had worked with stakeholders on a model policy to provide more consistency, though members raised concerns that local requirements could become too restrictive for charities serving broader areas. Counties said the issue is mostly a city matter, with little county involvement beyond minimal site fees and general site approval. The North Dakota Gaming Alliance testified in support of the study and provided IRS-related material suggesting charities may use asset diversification, while emphasizing it had not taken a position on whether charities should own bars. Members questioned whether bar ownership is being used for site stability or to channel charitable gaming dollars, and whether city policies might disadvantage charities with broader missions. The committee also discussed the relationship between gaming organizations, manufacturers, and distributors, including restrictions on incentives and interference, and asked for more information on those entities and their ownership. Later in the meeting, the Racing Commission gave its regular update on live racing, pari-mutuel wagering, ADW providers, purse and promotion funds, a new TRPB contract, and concerns about cease-and-desist actions from other states. Finally, the State Hospital superintendent briefly reported on the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s support services, including the SORT team, training, and security assistance for the hospital campus.

Transcript Highlights:

• bills toward the end of today's hearing.
• In certain cases, that's a fraction of a percentage.
• We'll now hear from members of the public.
• Reminder, we do not have a hearing next week. Our next hearing will be on the 25th at 8:30 a.m.
• Reminder, we do not have a hearing next week. Our next hearing will be on the 25th at 8:30 a.m.

Summary: The committee heard several public safety-related bills. AB 383 by Assembly Member Davies would expand and clarify firearm restrictions tied to juvenile adjudications, allow certain minor firearm possession for hunting or training with guardian approval, and authorize warrants in some domestic violence-related firearm surrender situations. Supporters, including a district attorney representative, argued it would close gaps in existing law and improve public safety; opponents said it would over-criminalize youth and disproportionately affect marginalized communities. The bill passed as amended to Appropriations. AB 400 by Assembly Member Pacheco would require law enforcement K-9 units to meet statewide POST standards covering training, use of force, and handler skills. Supporters said the bill would create consistency, accountability, and safer deployments; opponents argued the standards were inadequate and would legitimize harmful canine practices. After debate over whether the bill expanded canine use or simply standardized it, the committee approved AB 400 and sent it to Appropriations. AB 380 by Assembly Member Gonzalez would extend price-gouging protections during emergencies, including for hotels, food, essential goods and services, and commercial property, and would remove the 12-month lease limit loophole for rent gouging. Supporters said the bill responds to wildfire-related exploitation and provides clarity for disaster victims; business and landlord groups warned it could amount to commercial rent control and create uncertainty for future emergencies. The author said he would continue working on amendments, and the bill passed as amended to Appropriations. AB 358 by Assembly Member Alvarez would create a narrow exception to Cal-ECPA so law enforcement could inspect tracking or surveillance devices found in a person’s home, vehicle, or property with the finder’s consent. Supporters said the change would help stalking and domestic violence victims preserve evidence quickly; privacy advocates argued warrants and existing emergency exceptions already cover these situations. The chair proposed narrowing the language to “tracking or surveillance device,” and the bill was held on call after an initial roll with only three votes in favor. The transcript also began AB 247, which would raise pay for incarcerated hand crew firefighters, with testimony from formerly incarcerated firefighters in support, but the discussion was not completed in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• In many cases, it is lifelong.
• I don't remember the name of the case, but it's a current case.
• Anyway, I'd love to hear that.
• Those cases have gone to court.
• So in that case, it ended up being a federal case because of the state line piece.

Summary: The committee first approved the December 16 minutes and then heard a presentation from Dr. Ramona Danielson on adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and their economic and public-system impacts. She explained that ACEs are population-level risk indicators, not individual diagnostic tools, and said higher ACE exposure is associated with more chronic illness, mental health challenges, child welfare and justice involvement, and lower workforce participation. She cautioned that precise dollar estimates are difficult because of the many interacting factors across the life course, but said the direction of the impact is clear and that evidence-based interventions and protective factors can reduce harm. Members asked about definitions of a “healthy family,” same-sex couples, divorce, substance abuse, trends in ACEs, and home visiting; she emphasized supportive relationships, protective factors, and the importance of positive childhood experiences. The committee then heard from Allison Mahoney and Missy Barranco, along with a recorded family story from Abby, about evidence-based home visiting programs in North Dakota. Abby described how Healthy Families North Dakota supported her family after a premature birth and NICU stay by providing weekly in-home coaching, developmental screenings, postpartum mental health check-ins, referrals, and parenting support. The presenters explained that home visiting is voluntary, relationship-based, and usually begins prenatally or shortly after birth, with referrals coming from hospitals, WIC, pregnancy navigators, human service zones, self-referrals, and other community partners. They said North Dakota currently has four main evidence-based models operating through 12 organizations, with Healthy Families available in all 53 counties, though only a fraction of eligible families are served. Funding was described as a patchwork of federal MIECHV/Title IV-E, Medicaid, state and tribal funds, philanthropy, charitable gaming, and other grants; members discussed whether the Legislature or agencies should expand support and how to improve outreach and sustainability. Finally, the committee received a memorandum on artificial intelligence and sexual exploitation, focusing on AI-generated child sexual abuse material, deepfakes, sextortion, and chatbot-related risks. The report summarized federal and state law, including North Dakota’s existing computer-generated image provisions, the federal PROTECT Act, the Take It Down Act, and recent federal executive orders on AI policy. Members discussed the need for child-safety protections, the limits of executive orders, and broader concerns about AI’s effect on critical thinking and misinformation. The committee then heard from BCI Special Agent Cassidy Halsef, who said AI is already driving a sharp rise in child exploitation cases in North Dakota, including AI-generated explicit images of real minors and school-based incidents involving mass-shared manipulated images. She said investigators are seeing more cyber tips, more difficult forensic work, and lasting harm to victims and families, and urged stronger legal penalties, specialized training, victim services, and prevention education in schools and communities.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:09:56.880> of<00:09:57.440> sexual case it was a main um case of sexual case it
• there I you know I'm surprised to hear there I you know I'm surprised to hear some<00:37:35.079>
• Confidential in that case, you know.
• Confidential in that case, you know.
• Confidential in that case, you know.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• If it's based in case law and we don't apply a standard, it's subject to case law.
• If it's based in case law and we don't apply a standard, it's subject to case law.
• This is all case law that comes from Supreme Court cases.
• Like, I hear you that this isn't an avenue for all, whatever the case may be, but surely there's a reason
• Directly after this, we will have a hearing of Crime and Public Safety in Hearing Room 6.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Summary: The House convened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, approved the House Journal for the previous day by a vote of 123-1, and then recognized a series of special guests, including a physician, several sheriffs, school groups, interns, and other visitors. The chamber then moved into third reading and perfection of bills, with some measures sent to the informal calendar before debate began on House Bill 1758, which would make daylight saving time permanent in Missouri. Supporters argued it would end the twice-yearly clock change and could improve productivity and convenience, while opponents raised concerns about dark winter commutes, safety, and health effects. The bill passed third reading by a vote of 107-31 with two present. The House next took up House Bill 3329, which repeals expired or unused tax credits to clean up the statutes and reduce Department of Revenue reporting work. Members from both parties generally supported the bill as a government-efficiency and accountability measure, though one member questioned whether removing credits from statute could make them harder to revive later. The bill was perfected and printed without opposition. The chamber then considered House Bill 3405, which clarifies that the state and local tax (SALT) pass-through entity provision is a deduction rather than a tax credit, with sponsors saying the change would streamline Department of Revenue processing and improve the accuracy of tax credit reporting. That bill was also perfected and printed after discussion about tax administration and fiscal note implications. Finally, the House debated House Bill 2426, a parental rights bill covering education, medical, privacy, and related decisions for children, and applying a strict-scrutiny standard to government actions affecting those rights. Debate focused heavily on whether the bill merely codified existing protections or expanded parental authority in ways that could affect school records, recordings, evaluations, truancy, medical consent, and district transparency requirements. The House adopted House Amendment 1 by a vote of 98-25 with six present, an amendment addressing IEP procedures and requiring parental consent for certain major changes unless due process requirements are met. Further debate continued on the underlying bill, with supporters emphasizing parental involvement and opponents warning about unintended consequences for schools, child welfare, and existing legal standards.

Transcript Highlights:

• Seeing none, hearing none, public testimony is closed. Thank you.
• It will remain, and shortly we'll be hearing testimony, but we want to.
• In a minute, you're going to be able to hear from my son Ashton.
• Because of this, justice has not been served in a lot of cases.
• We want to hear from you; everybody gets to tell their story. That's important.

Bills: HB34, HB128, HB621, HB748, HB2259, HB2960, HB3113, HB4749, SB835, HB128

Keywords: HB 128, sister city, sister-city agreement, international exchange, municipal diplomacy, local government, state agency, political subdivision, foreign adversary, China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Taiwan, major non-NATO ally, cultural exchange, educational exchange, tourism, bilateral cooperation, foreign relations

Transcript Highlights:

• Another case, I was very happy to participate. to participate in two recent cases of exonerating two
• But, you can't even get that review if there is currently a CPS case or a criminal case pending and you
• Additional use cases, and in those cases we're operating to support the ERCOT grid.
• So when I hear Grant.
• The chair hears none. Is there objection? The chair hears none, and the bill is left pending.

Bills: HB741, HB 1199, HB2070, HB2402, HB2542, HB2665, HB2789, HB3096, HB3396, HB3595, HB3747, HB4116, HB4127

Keywords: child welfare, relative caregiver, monetary assistance, Department of Family and Protective Services, child custody, family law, emergency power, nursing facilities, assisted living, generator requirements, health and safety, emergency generators, power outage, emergency generator, assisted living facilities, power source, child abuse, neglect registry, court findings, Medicaid

Transcript Highlights:

• Hanapi case and several other cases which define culture in the bill if it were to pass.
• Hanapi case and several other cases which define culture in the bill if it were to pass.
• Can you hear me now? Yes, we can hear you. Please proceed. You have a minute.
• Can you hear me now? Yes, we can hear you. Please proceed. You have a minute.
• Can you hear me now? Yes, we can hear you. Please proceed. You have a minute.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint committees heard testimony on three fireworks-related bills. On SB 1226, which would create a shipping container inspection program and require Department of Law Enforcement reporting, the Department of Law Enforcement supported the measure, while the Attorney General recommended deleting references to explosives to avoid a single-subject constitutional issue and noted possible federal limits on military involvement. Harbor users raised concerns about logistics, delays, and cost, and HPD supported the bill; members also discussed how inspections would work and whether DLE would coordinate with county and federal partners. No vote was taken during the testimony portion. On SB 32, which would sharply restrict consumer fireworks by requiring permits for cultural use, repealing the general holiday exceptions, and imposing a $25 permit fee, the State Fire Council supported the bill as a public safety measure but said it was willing to work on problematic language. The Office of the Public Defender opposed it, arguing the bill’s use of “culture” could create constitutional and discrimination problems because permit decisions would effectively define culture. Fireworks retailers and other opponents said the bill would push consumers toward illegal fireworks and hurt lawful sales, while supporters said it would reduce injuries, fires, and respiratory harm. Members questioned whether the permit fee was new, whether the bill would affect commercial display companies, and whether permit caps should be added. On SB 1324, which expands fireworks offenses, increases penalties for injuries or death, creates new criminal offenses and an infraction adjudication system, and appropriates funds, the Attorney General strongly supported the bill and said it would give law enforcement and prosecutors better tools, while DLE said the current weight-based definitions make prosecutions difficult and labor-intensive. DLE also said disposal of seized fireworks is expensive and hazardous, and suggested violators should bear more of that cost. HPD and the Maui County prosecutor supported the bill, but some opponents argued it would overcriminalize conduct and create constitutional issues; a commercial pyrotechnics company asked for amendments to preserve lawful display work. Members asked about the appropriation, enforcement challenges, and whether existing exceptions would still allow commercial shows. The hearing ended with no final decision reported in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think we hear that loud and clear.
• Are you saying that's not the case?
• Or in cases where you're extending the school day, obviously, the school day is longer. or in cases where
• And is that also the case for middle school? No.
• “I hope that will be the case.

Summary: The committee heard presentations on the Governor’s education budget proposals for the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), Learning Recovery Block Grant, and Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), followed by testimony from State Board of Education President Linda Darling-Hammond. On LCFF, Finance outlined the proposed 2.43% COLA, repayment of prior deferrals, and a trailer bill penalty for LEAs that fail to adopt Local Control Accountability Plans on time. The LAO said its COLA estimate was slightly lower and raised concerns that the Governor’s proposed TK staffing ratio increase may be more costly than estimated. Members also discussed whether the current COLA formula should better reflect California-specific or district staffing costs, and whether TK should be more clearly separated from the K-3 grade span adjustment to avoid larger K-3 class sizes. The chair asked staff to work with the LAO on both the TK/K-3 issue and alternative COLA calculations. For the Learning Recovery Block Grant, Finance proposed restoring the first of three delayed payments, $378.6 million one-time Proposition 98 General Fund, while the LAO recommended adopting the proposal but extending the expenditure deadline by at least a year. The LAO reported that districts had spent $1.6 billion of the $6.8 billion received through 2023-24 and said most districts were only now shifting from federal COVID relief to block grant spending. Members questioned whether the large state and federal investments were improving outcomes, citing declining reading and math trends, while Finance and the State Board president pointed to some signs of improvement, especially in math, attendance, and gains for some student groups. Darling-Hammond emphasized that student needs have grown, that recovery spending has gone to devices, ventilation, staffing, tutoring, summer school, and community schools, and that targeted interventions appear to be helping some districts recover faster than others. On ELOP, Finance proposed adding $435 million to expand universal access by lowering the Tier 1 threshold from 75% to 55% unduplicated pupils, bringing ongoing funding to $4.4 billion. The LAO said the estimate was reasonable but recommended delaying implementation for a year, aligning ELOP with ASES to reduce overlap, moving toward funding based on participation rather than enrollment, and considering a fixed Tier 2 rate. Members and witnesses discussed staffing challenges, the use of funds for students with disabilities, and uncertainty in Tier 2 funding caused by unspent dollars and opt-outs. Darling-Hammond supported ELOP as part of California’s broader after-school and summer learning strategy, said most districts are now offering full-day TK and expanded learning, and urged the state to reduce fragmentation across categorical programs and build more unified systems for funding, reporting, and support.

Transcript Highlights:

• And in every one of those cases, the agency in question ...of exceeding rulemaking authority.
• And in every one of those cases, the agency in question, ...number.
• And in no case was the agency exercising the kind of restraint that you see in a sunset provision.
• coming up with the administrative hearing.
• coming up with the administrative hearing.

Summary: The Joint Administrative Procedures Committee met on February 3, 2025, with a quorum present and took up three main items. First, the committee considered a large set of recommended objections to Agency for Health Care Administration rules, all centered on sunset provisions stating the rules would expire after five years. AHCA asked for another deferral while it reviewed the rules, arguing the sunset language was a form of self-restraint rather than an invalid exercise of rulemaking authority. Committee leadership disagreed that further delay would resolve the issue and moved to a single vote covering all objections. The motion passed by roll call, and the committee informed AHCA that an objection would be filed unless the agency amended the rules within 30 days. The committee then heard an informational briefing from the Department of Environmental Protection on its Outstanding Florida Springs rule and stormwater rule. DEP explained that it did not prepare a statement of estimated regulatory cost for the springs rule because the proposed standards largely mirror existing water management district rules and the Central Florida Water Initiative framework, so DEP said there was no new regulatory burden. Members asked about permit authority, costs, and whether the rules were functionally different from prior rules. DEP maintained the rules set minimum standards and did not add costs beyond what regulated parties were already doing. DEP also described implementation of the stormwater rule adopted under the 2020 Clean Waterways Act and later ratified by the Legislature in 2024. DEP said the rule was the product of years of workshops and technical advisory committee meetings, and that the final version included lower-cost alternatives, grandfathering, and phased implementation. DEP estimated the rule’s cost at about $2,600 per acre in the revised CERC, while industry witnesses said the real cost could be much higher, especially if land costs are included. A home builders representative argued the estimate understated impacts, while a stormwater engineer said the rule gives more flexible, performance-based tools and could become more cost-effective over time. Finally, Senator Graal presented proposed Chapter 120 changes in SB 108, aimed at tightening and modernizing rulemaking. The proposal would require five-year rule reviews, annual agency reporting, faster notice of proposed rulemaking after authorizing legislation, electronic filing, public access to incorporated materials, clearer tracking of technical changes, and limits on how long rules can remain pending ratification. Members discussed whether the Legislature should be more specific in statutes about rulemaking deadlines and whether agencies should be more accountable when rules stall. No formal action was taken on the Chapter 120 proposals, and the committee adjourned after discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• . ...or dispel some of the false narrative that you will hear after this hearing on Facebook.
• So it's just a case-by-case basis.
• case, or as a prosecutor, you can dismiss the case.
• So this is what case management is for. Then we have specialized case management.
• Yeah, I hear you say 42%, back to...? You said 44%? Did I hear you say 42%? Back to...

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The Governor has made his case. And Mr.
• We hear because of two people.
• case in your district.
• I took over pro bono as an attorney in a case, a pretty complicated case in your district.
• That is his theory of the case.

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D, later substituted with House Bill 1D, both establishing Florida’s congressional districts. The sponsor, Senator Gates, explained that the Governor had transmitted a proposed redistricting plan on short notice and argued that mid-decade congressional redistricting is legally permissible, citing population growth and the Governor’s view that race-based provisions in the Fair Districts Amendment are unconstitutional. He repeatedly said the Legislature was not being asked to prove the Governor’s legal theory, only to consider the proposal, and noted that no amendments were offered. A lengthy question-and-answer period followed, with senators raising concerns about the rushed process, lack of statewide public hearings, and the map’s effects on minority communities, compactness, communities of interest, and partisan fairness. Senators questioned whether the map cracked Latino and Black communities, whether partisan data was used, whether the Governor’s office had outside consultants, and whether the plan complied with the Florida Constitution, the Fair Districts Amendment, and the Voting Rights Act. Gates generally deferred on legal conclusions, said the Governor’s representatives had testified the map was race-neutral and used political data only as one factor, and emphasized that any constitutional challenge would be for the courts. After a motion to temporarily postpone failed by a recorded vote of 12 yeas to 23 nays, the Senate continued debate. Senators Rouson, Bernard, and others spoke in opposition, arguing the proposal was rushed, partisan, and harmful to communities of interest and minority voting power. Gates maintained that the Governor had a constitutional prerogative to propose the map and that the Legislature could accept, reject, or amend it. The House companion bill was then substituted for the Senate bill, read a third time, and the chamber moved into final debate on the congressional redistricting plan.

Transcript Highlights:

• Committee on Housing hearing. I'd like to call the meeting to order.
• A number of bills today we'll be hearing.
• Hi, yes, can you hear me? We can. Great, thank you so much.
• Can you hear me? Yep.
• Mike, can you hear us now? Do you want to speak? Yes. Can you hear me? We can hear you now, Mike.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Housing held a hybrid hearing on a broad slate of housing and homelessness bills. Chairs Rich Haggerty and Julian Cyr opened by noting the committee’s focus on EOHLC programs such as RAFT, MRVP, and HomeBASE, and several members and advocates emphasized the urgency of the state’s homelessness crisis, including rising family homelessness and the need for earlier intervention, more stable subsidies, and stronger long-term housing tools. A major theme was homelessness prevention and rehousing. Multiple witnesses supported bills to codify and strengthen RAFT and HomeBASE, arguing that assistance should be available earlier in a crisis rather than only after a notice to quit or imminent loss of housing. Testimony from legal services, homelessness coalitions, social workers, municipal housing staff, and tenant advocates said the programs help families avoid eviction and shelter, but need more flexibility, higher benefit caps, and permanent statutory protection. Several speakers also urged support for codifying the Massachusetts Rental Voucher Program (MRVP), describing it as a critical long-term subsidy for low-income households and older adults, and warning that codification would protect the program from future budget or policy changes. The committee also heard testimony on housing stability for older adults, affordable homes for people with disabilities, supportive housing, housing cooperatives, home sharing, local preference, and reentry housing for returning citizens. Advocates for older adults described a Somerville bridge subsidy pilot that helped stabilize seniors while they waited for permanent housing, and urged statewide expansion. Supporters of supportive housing called for an interagency board to streamline funding and development, while cooperative housing proponents backed creation of a Massachusetts Center for Housing Cooperatives and a dedicated funding reserve. A bill to secure housing for returning citizens drew support from reentry providers and Senator Adam Gomez, who said stable housing is essential to successful reintegration. No votes were taken during the hearing; witnesses generally asked the committee to report the bills favorably, and some members asked follow-up questions on data and program details.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is literally life and death in far too many of these cases.
• And even then, these cases are incredibly fact-specific and individualized.
• And if anything, these cases show that this bill is unnecessary.
• Sorry, I'm trying to hear, like, which microphone.
• Hear you loud and clear, Mr.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard several bills focused on privacy, AI, consumer protection, and public safety. AB 1979 would require a licensed health care professional to retain final clinical judgment when using AI tools in health care and would limit chatbot access to medical records; supporters, including nurses and TechEquity, said it preserves human decision-making, while hospitals and industry groups opposed it unless amended, citing burdens and training concerns. The bill passed 6-1 and was placed on call. AB 2624 would expand the Safe at Home confidentiality program to immigrant service providers and workers facing harassment and doxing; supporters described threats against advocates and their families, while one senator raised concerns about a private right of action and penalties. The bill passed 4-1 and was placed on call for further committees. AB 2103 would make Engaged California a permanent statewide public engagement program; supporters said it broadens civic participation and transparency, while concerns were raised about partisan balance in topic selection. It passed 6-0 and was placed on call to Appropriations. The committee also considered AB 2, which would set statutory damages and other financial accountability measures for large social media platforms when negligence causing harm to children is proven in court. The author and supporters, including a parent who lost her daughter and child-safety advocates, argued that stronger remedies are needed because social media design features are harming children and existing enforcement has been insufficient. Opponents, including TechNet, CCIA, CalChamber, and others, argued the bill blurs content and conduct, could increase litigation, and is unnecessary given existing lawsuits and verdicts. Several senators said the bill was a consumer-protection measure and supported it; it passed 5-0 and was placed on call. AB 883, as amended, would use California’s Delete Act/DROP system to help elected officials and judges remove personal information from data brokers, while also shortening the deletion timeline for all Californians from 45 to 30 days. Supporters said the bill responds to rising threats against public servants and improves privacy tools broadly; some opponents removed or softened opposition after amendments, though CalChamber and CCIA remained opposed unless amended, largely over the private right of action. The bill passed 4-0 and was placed on call. The committee then recessed briefly before taking up AB 2023, a chatbot safety bill for children that would require age verification, safety audits, default protections, parental controls, crisis-response measures, and limits on targeted ads and data sharing. Supporters said it builds on prior AI and child-safety legislation and is needed to prevent harms like self-harm and manipulation; opponents raised concerns about vague harm standards, audit requirements, and liability. The hearing continued with testimony and committee discussion, but no final vote on AB 2023 was shown in the transcript.