Transcript Highlights:

• , or a special audit, program evaluation, or a special review.<00:02:03.160> So,<00:02:03.240>
• uh review and our program evaluation uh review and our program evaluation review.<00:02:46.080><
• And these tend to be more in our program evaluations.
• And we identify where evaluations.
• OLA's Program Evaluation Division. OLA's Program Evaluation Division.

Transcript Highlights:

• for a private neuropsych evaluation to get answers.
• That evaluation confirmed she had dyslexia. She's here with me today.
• pay for a private neurosych evaluation pay for a private neurosych evaluation to<00:06:46.560>
• <00:06:47.840> That<00:06:48.080> evaluation to get answers.
• That evaluation to get answers.

Bills: HF60, HF3067, HF3730, HF3638, HF3401

Keywords: interchange, bond issuance, transportation, infrastructure funding, Sherburne County, paraprofessional, paraprofessional qualifications, education support staff, teacher aide, teacher assistant, special education, Title I, federal personnel qualifications, Minnesota Department of Education, school district, charter school, cooperative unit, Read Act, reading instruction, math instruction

Transcript Highlights:

• It expands on a report card that our State Department of Education is putting out, but it's to evaluate
• All the tests that they take would be evaluated.
• There's a few other tests that they have to... that they'll evaluate and they'll do.
• It was much so I think for sort of self-evaluation as well from the individual teacher prep programs
• They should have got two toes. for sort of self-evaluation as well from for sort of self-evaluation as

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We believe that putting the new process in place with very strict evaluation forms... ...with very strict
• evaluation forms and prescription forms for physicians and PCP offices will significantly assist us
• They will then need to discuss with their PCP and have the PCP complete the evaluation referral.
• And that evaluation referral, it goes back...”
• “And that evaluation referral, it goes back to the provider like it does for the ADET, and then that

Summary: The committee approved the December 8 minutes and referred items C1 and C2 to the labor and environment subcommittees, adopting the chair’s recommendations. The main substantive item was a DHS rule package revising the State Plan Personal Care Manual and the Arkansas Independent Assessment (ARIA) Manual. DHS said the revisions would repeal and replace the current manuals with streamlined versions, remove overlapping language, implement Act 853 by shifting licensure/certification for personal care agencies to the Department of Health, lengthen personal care prior authorizations from six months to one year, and keep the 64-hour monthly cap. For ARIA, DHS said it would remove references to state plan personal care, clarify telehealth and in-person assessments, and add/update sections for PASS, AR Choices, Living Choices, and PACE. DHS argued the current independent assessment process is costly and not controlling utilization, citing a 95% approval rate, annual spending of more than $212 million on personal care for about 17,000 people, and an estimated $6.173 million in savings from eliminating the Optum assessment and reducing prior-authorization frequency. Agency witnesses said the new process would reinsert primary care practitioner involvement, use standardized evaluation and prescription forms, and rely on personal care provider nurses for the assessment step, with training already available through an AFMC contract. Several members questioned whether PCPs should be used as gatekeepers, whether the change would delay services, and whether the savings estimate accounted for training or provider burden. Some members also raised concerns about conflicts of interest, the workload on physicians, and whether the agency had adequately worked with the existing vendor to improve the current system. The discussion became contentious, with Senator Irvin and others strongly opposing the proposal as inconsistent with the earlier independent-assessment approach and urging DHS to slow down and work with legislators. Other members asked for clarification on how the new process would work for new applicants and whether it would affect waiver or PASS participants; DHS said the rule would not apply to PASS and should not delay services. At the end of the hearing, the chair offered DHS the option to pull the rule down and work off-record with legislators on a revised proposal, and DHS agreed. The meeting then adjourned without further business or a final vote on the rule.

Transcript Highlights:

• Blue is children who receive an oral evaluation.
• But nonetheless, this is where we're evaluated across other states.
• Think about pregnancy and oral evaluation outcomes?
• It's the pro fee or cleaning and the oral evaluation, periodic oral evaluation.
• And so we can evaluate that way.

Keywords: 962, all

Summary: The Care Management Meeting opened with a DSS update on the PCMH program. Staff reported the program remained steady at 124 practices, 553 sites, and 2,548 providers, with some month-to-month fluctuation driven by practice consolidation, retirements, and a few practices leaving the program because NCQA requirements were burdensome. Members asked about declining provider and site counts, member attribution trends, and whether PCMH practices overlap with behavioral health homes; DSS said attribution changes are largely due to members becoming ineligible, moving, or getting other insurance, and that PCMH and behavioral health homes are separate programs that coordinate informally. The committee also discussed why some smaller practices leave the program and whether the requirements could be made easier to support retention. The committee then resumed a detailed presentation on the Husky Dental program. The presenter described the dental benefit’s history, the importance of preventive oral health, workforce and consolidation pressures in dentistry, and the lack of interoperability between dental and medical records. Network data showed year-over-year declines in enrolled dental practitioners and service locations, with access gaps concentrated in rural and eastern parts of the state. Appointment availability surveys showed average waits of 38 days for adults and 23 days for children, but much longer waits at FQHCs than private fee-for-service practices. The presenter said Connecticut remains above the national median on CMS pediatric dental quality measures, though sealant rates remain a concern, and noted that preventive care is associated with lower per-member costs. Members raised concerns about provider participation, large practices dropping Medicaid, mobile dental care, and whether the public directory accurately reflects which dentists are actually accepting new patients. The presenter said the plan uses secret-shopper calls, tracks appointment availability, and has begun using place-of-service coding to better identify school-based dental care. She also noted a new MOU with 20 Head Start programs to share data and provide oral health literacy and navigation support. The final major topic was implementation planning for HR1. DSS said CMS guidance was expected in early June and proposed using upcoming meetings to cover medical frailty, communication strategy, and data integration/ex parte verification. Committee members urged the department to create a dashboard to track disenrollments and other impacts of HR1, to build a process for complaints and problem resolution, and to think through cost-sharing, caregiver verification, exemptions, and notices. Members also asked about using existing eligibility structures such as the working-disabled program as a model. The committee agreed to move the next meeting to June 10 by Zoom, with the agenda to be circulated in advance and any PCMH Plus quality data shared if available.

Transcript Highlights:

• counseling let's first do an evaluation counseling let's first do an evaluation to<04:11:02.439>
• It’s not about evaluations at all.
• :13:27.880> an<04:13:28.080> evaluation<04:13:29.000> just courts mandating an evaluation
• being evaluated it's not about<04:14:09.080> evaluations<04:14:09.680> at<04:14:09.800
• Would an evaluation detect coercion?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The House Children and Family Law Committee opened its February 4, 2025 hearing with a business item on House Bill 553, appointing a subcommittee chaired by Representative Greg and including several named members. The committee then took up House Bill 486, which would revise New Hampshire’s grandparents’ visitation law. The prime sponsor said the bill is intended to address gaps in current law, especially in situations involving divorce, separation, kinship care, and parental substance use, so that children can maintain important relationships with grandparents or other kin caregivers. He emphasized that the proposal was meant to supplement existing law rather than replace it, and said the language was modeled on statutes from other states. Several witnesses testified in support of HB 486, describing painful family separations and arguing that current law can be interpreted too narrowly. One grandmother said the existing statute had been used to dismiss her visitation case because she was restricted while the parents were separated, and she asked for language changes so courts could still order visitation in similar circumstances. Another witness, testifying online, urged passage of the bill as being in the best interest of children. A third witness described a family living arrangement in which grandparents had been a consistent presence in their grandchildren’s lives but were later cut off during a contentious separation, and said the bill would help repair those relationships. Committee members asked about the six-month timeframe in the bill, whether the proposed language would affect cases where a grandparent does not live with the child but is still a regular caregiver, and whether the sponsor had written amendment language; the sponsor said the six-month language was taken from other states’ statutes and that the new language would not change existing visitation rights but would add to them. After hearing the testimony, the chair said the committee would hold HB 486 aside for a week or two while awaiting additional information before voting. The hearing then moved to House Bill 320, an act relative to enforcement of marital property settlements. The sponsor explained that the bill would require courts to enforce final property decrees and would clarify the difference between enforcement and contempt, arguing that courts should have clear authority to fashion remedies and that litigants, especially self-represented parties, need clearer statutory guidance. Committee members questioned the legal distinctions the sponsor drew, including whether the bill was aimed at enforcement rather than contempt and how the proposed language would operate in practice. The transcript cuts off before any vote or further action on HB 320.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:12:20.560> 902<00:12:21.160> 8070 once per evaluation year. 902 8070 once per evaluation
• provisions to establish a evaluation provisions to establish a limiting<00:12:45.600> date<00
• :12:45.920> for<00:12:46.040> the<00:12:46.160> current<00:12:46.520> evaluation
• limiting date for the current evaluation limiting date for the current evaluation process,<00:12
• and delete evaluation procedures and delete material<00:13:13.560> incorporated<00:13:14.240>

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the prior meeting’s minutes, and then reviewed a series of administrative regulations from multiple agencies. Most of the regulations were presented as technical updates or policy clarifications, and in each case the committee approved staff-suggested amendments without objection. The Department of Revenue regulation would delete a section on tax credits for trusts and estates to align with statute. The Kentucky Public Pensions Authority package updated definitions, sick leave credit rules, hazardous/non-hazardous employment participation, refund procedures, contribution limits, mortality table references, and incorporated federal tax references. The Board of Medical Licensure regulations addressed renewal and activation of inactive physician-assistant licenses and renewal/reinstatement timelines for athletic trainer licenses. The Fish and Wildlife regulations revised rules for Otter Creek and Peabody areas by deleting definitions and creating shooting-range permit exemptions. The committee also heard emergency vocational rehabilitation regulations that would clarify definitions, due process rights, federal compliance, service fees, in-state service preferences, and service-specific requirements; a workforce insurance regulation updating contribution/reporting rules for professional employer organizations; and a horse racing regulation adding license categories for allied animal health professionals, animal chiropractors, and equine dental providers, while updating fees, application timing, and special events licensing. Members asked questions about the horse racing licensure changes, and the agency explained they were responding to prior session changes and adding guardrails, including veterinarian sign-off for equine therapist licensure on the back side of a racetrack. The Department for Public Health package made several personnel and salary-related changes for local health departments, including salary ranges for new hires, probation and evaluation rules, salary increases after probation, and limits on certain leave payouts for employees who separate without proper notice or are dismissed for cause. The Office of Inspector General regulation added electronic prescription references and removed authority to create a new prescription number for partial dispensing of Schedule II prescriptions. The Department for Medicaid Services regulations updated provider group definitions, removed some service limits, required prior authorization for all genetic testing for non-MCO recipients, changed physician fee schedule updates from quarterly to annually, and added reimbursement for department-approved vaccines. Members asked detailed questions about genetic testing prior authorization and sleep disorder coverage; the agency said prior authorization is intended to take two to five days and that sleep disorder services generally involve sleep apnea-related treatments such as CPAP machines and sleep studies. The committee then adjourned and announced its next meeting for Tuesday, May 12 at 1:00 p.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• SREB HAS PRODUCED CHECK LISTS AND GUIDANCE TO HELP DISTRICTS EVALUATE THESE RISKS SYSTEMICALLY.
• SECUREMENT MUST ALSO EVALUATE PRIVACY AND SECURITY PROTECTIONS THROUGH DETAILED DUE DILIGENCE.
• IN THEIR EVALUATIONS? >> Chair: MR.
• THROUGH THE PROCESS EVALUATION. NOWADAYS EVERYONE CLAIMS EVERYTHING THEY DO AS AI IS BAD.
• THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER AVENUE WHEN WE ARE EVALUATING THE ROI IS RETENTION.

Transcript Highlights:

• But for example on the complaint data, we do do an evaluation of trends.
• And can we expect that the CPUC will publish an analysis or report to evaluate the program, and will
• There's a couple of key components in the program that will provide an analysis and evaluation.
• Of the firm escapes me, but they will be an evaluator of this driver's assistance program and will be
• The CPUC is administering the process to evaluate how or when the TRIP data could be released.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The federal VA has a process that they can evaluate the history of an individual to determine if they
• But the first step for our recommendation is to pre-file for burial so that the NCA can evaluate the
• eligibility of individuals. has a process that they can evaluate the has a process that they can evaluate
• We are then in a position to evaluate those documents and make a determination on eligibility, either
• evaluate those in a position to evaluate those documents<00:14:25.120> and<00:14:25.760> uh

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• It's an evaluation.
• <00:48:35.359> legal evaluation, and an evaluation in legal evaluation, and an evaluation
• It's an evaluation. treatment record. It's an evaluation.
• But the evaluation, not treatment.
• <00:49:43.359> and an independent medical evaluation and an independent medical evaluation

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Kentucky Legislative Ethics Commission met on November 18, 2025, approved the October 14 minutes, and then took up five motions in ethics matters 24LEC3 and 24LEC6. Those motions included a renewed motion to dismiss and motion to quash by Representative Daniel Gberg, a renewed motion to compel/sanctions and continuance request by Mr. Jenkins, and competing motions in limine concerning evidence and redaction of deposition transcripts. Vice Chair Mike Schaw was appointed hearing officer for the motion practice, and the commission agreed to hear the motions one at a time in open session. Representative Chris Lily joined later by Zoom. Counsel for Representative Gberg argued the remaining allegations were minor, that the commission lacked key exculpatory materials such as an alleged LRC report, policies, procedures, and training materials, and that the record did not support the ethics charges. She also argued the case had been broadened by extraneous allegations and that the respondent had been unfairly prejudiced. Enforcement counsel responded that he had produced all materials in his possession, that any LRC materials were not in the commission’s custody, and that the commission’s probable-cause findings were based on sworn testimony and affidavits already in the record. He argued the motions to dismiss and for summary judgment should be denied because genuine issues of material fact remained and the commission had already found probable cause on three ethics violations. Commission members questioned both sides about the alleged LRC report and whether it was part of the commission’s record. The chair stated the commission had not relied on any LRC report and had not withheld anything, while another member emphasized that the proceeding concerned alleged violations of the ethics code, not LRC sexual-harassment policy. A commissioner also noted the unusual structure of the proceeding and questioned whether the complaints, taken as true, stated a basis for dismissal. The transcript ends during continued discussion of the standard for dismissal and summary judgment, with no final ruling on the motions captured in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've had this program evaluated by WestEd over a number of years.
• The first CSAC evaluation is The first CSAC evaluation is in December of this year, so additional funding
• What are the assessment or evaluation requirements for the program?
• For finance, there's currently not any assessment or evaluation for this at this time.
• What would the LAO recommend in terms of an evaluation for a program like this?

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance heard an extended discussion on state efforts to recruit, prepare, and retain teachers, with a focus on whether current programs are sustainable and well targeted. Testimony from the Learning Policy Institute, the Commission on Teacher Credentialing, the Department of Education, and the Legislative Analyst’s Office described persistent shortages, especially in special education, math, science, bilingual education, and high-need schools. Speakers emphasized that residency programs, Golden State Teacher Grants, National Board incentives, classified employee pathways, and undergraduate teacher pipelines have helped increase preparation and retention, but many of these efforts rely on one-time funding and lack long-term certainty. Committee members repeatedly raised concerns about the “leaky pipeline,” working conditions, the burden of student debt, and whether the state should simplify and institutionalize support for aspiring teachers rather than rely on a patchwork of grants. The agencies presented data showing continuing shortages and uneven distribution of fully credentialed teachers. CTC reported projected hiring needs of roughly 20,000 to 25,000 teachers annually, with the highest needs in self-contained classrooms, special education, and certain regions of the state. It also noted that emergency permits, waivers, and intern credentials remain high, and that teachers entering through those routes have higher turnover. LPI cited research showing residency-prepared teachers are more effective and more likely to stay, and argued that Golden State Teacher Grants attract candidates who might not otherwise enter teaching and help them complete preparation. CDE stressed that most new demand comes from attrition and urged support for multiple entry points, tuition assistance, and campus-based coursework. Several members also discussed the role of community college pathways, dual credentialing, and support for school leaders as part of retention. The LAO recommended rejecting the educator pipeline proposals under discussion, citing limited evidence of effectiveness and suggesting that any new spending should be more narrowly targeted to the highest-need schools and long-standing shortage subjects. The LAO also said that if the Legislature funds new programs this year, Proposition 98 would be preferable given the state’s fiscal condition. Committee members pushed back on the idea that declining enrollment or layoffs would solve shortages, noting that shortages and layoffs can coexist in different subject areas and regions. The discussion ended with agreement that staff would continue working with agencies on how to make teacher pipeline investments more consistent, coherent, and easier for candidates to navigate. The committee then turned to the Golden State Teacher Grant Program. Finance proposed $50 million in one-time General Fund support to extend the program for one additional year, while the LAO recommended rejecting the proposal because the first CSAC evaluation is not due until later in the year and because the funding would be non-Proposition 98. CSAC supported the extension, saying demand has been strong, over 20,000 aspiring educators have been served since 2021, and the agency had to pause applications after receiving more than 9,200 this year; it also said more than 2,500 candidates had already expressed interest for next year. Members asked how many students the new funding would serve, and CSAC estimated just under 5,000 awards at $10,000 each. The discussion also covered whether the grant could be moved into Proposition 98 and how the one-time nature of the funding affects confidence among prospective teachers.

Transcript Highlights:

• each of those evaluations.
• The two other programs that my husband and I evaluated—one was 35% higher.
• And then, again, that $1,000 per evaluation will add some more.
• So, and then there is a timeline associated with the evaluation.
• So, and then there is a timeline associated with the evaluation.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• As a note, in our analysis, we did not evaluate which of these high- and moderate-high-risk sites are
• As a note, in our analysis, we did not evaluate which of these high- and moderate-high-risk sites are
• My name is Carolyn Cato, and next we will cover the results of the site evaluations we conducted.
• We found the agency lacked a systematic process to evaluate Community engagement process.
• Only two of the six sites evaluated had conducted evaluations of the community engagement activities.

Summary: The I-900 Subcommittee held a public hearing on the State Auditor’s performance audit, Community Engagement During Contaminated Site Cleanups. Auditors said Ecology directly conducts or supervises cleanup at only about 8% of active contaminated sites, while most sites are handled by third parties or have no cleanup plan yet. The audit found that Ecology generally met legal requirements at the sites it oversees, but community engagement varied, was not consistently tailored to local needs, and lacked a systematic “lessons learned” process. Auditors also found inconsistent coordination between Ecology and the Department of Health, and limited guidance for staff on when to collaborate. Tribal feedback was mixed: some tribes said engagement met their needs, while others wanted earlier and more tailored outreach. Committee members pressed the auditors on why many third-party-managed sites appeared to have little or no public involvement, and whether Ecology has broader authority to require public engagement and oversight. The auditors responded that their review focused on community engagement requirements, not the full cleanup permitting process, and said the gap they identified was the lack of required oversight for third-party engagement. Members also asked about tribal engagement, exposure scenarios, and the meaning of “active” and “planless” sites. Ecology officials said they agreed with many of the findings, were already taking steps to improve community research, lessons-learned reviews, tribal guidance, and coordination with Health, and had recently launched a public email notification system for site status changes. They also said some recommendations would require additional funding or staff resources. Public testimony supported stronger community engagement and more resources for Ecology. Washington Conservation Action said contaminated sites disproportionately affect communities of color and low-income communities, praised the audit for highlighting the need for better site-specific engagement, and urged full funding for MTCA-related work. The hearing ended with the chair inviting written comments and adjourning the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• whole sense of reality comes into question if we don't have the information we need to be able to evaluate
• the information we need to be<00:04:19.880> able<00:04:20.040> to<00:04:20.280> evaluate
• <00:04:20.840> what<00:04:20.959> we're<00:04:21.360> seeing be able to evaluate
• what we're seeing be able to evaluate what we're seeing you<00:04:22.520> mentioned<00:04:23.000
• <00:09:20.000> that can understand the evaluation that can understand the evaluation that

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We also help with evaluation plans collecting and analyzing evaluation data as I tell programs along
• They also provide funding for the evaluation as you've heard.
• I was I said the word on the guardianship assistance evaluation.
• We wanted to program evaluation.
• And I think that the evaluation will speak to that.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So for instance, always evaluating.
• So there may participants are evaluated.
• <00:32:01.039> and they do get the uh evaluations and they do get the uh evaluations and assessments
• We're evaluating others. It's a little touchy.
• We're evaluating others. It's a little touchy.

Keywords: 924, joint, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We do have an evaluator with our program that evaluates all of our programs.
• Those reports are analyzed and sent to our evaluator. We also conduct annual site visits.
• We do have an evaluator with our program that evaluates all of our programs.
• Those reports are analyzed and sent to our evaluator. We also conduct annual site visits.
• It amends an existing contract for evaluation support for the statewide stroke program.

Summary: The committee heard a series of appropriation requests and contract reviews across multiple sections. In Section B, members approved temporary appropriations for the Court of Appeals, Commerce/Aeronautics, and Insurance-related payments and refunds. Section C ARPA requests from DHS were approved to return unused federal funds. Section D infrastructure-related appropriations, including wildfire preparedness, broadband BEAD funding, forestry support, recycling, and oil and gas sample preservation, were approved after questions about broadband audit controls and performance safeguards. Section E DHS reallocations were approved, including large transfers within Medical Services from hospital medical to private and public nursing home lines, along with smaller transfers for children and family services, developmental disabilities, and youth services; members asked about the source and purpose of the medical services transfer. Sections F and G were reviewed, covering cash fund requests, federal grants, and miscellaneous grants, including community college storm repairs, corrections commissary and maintenance, 911 enhancements, maternal health, disability determinations, state police equipment, digital newspaper archiving, and CDL data improvements. In Section H, the committee reviewed pay plan appropriations and performance fund transfers tied to the new Class and Comp pay plan. Section I reviewed three methods of finance for UA Little Rock, UAMS, and the University of Arkansas system. In Section J, the committee reviewed discretionary grants, including a $1.4 million HIV services grant and nine tobacco prevention subgrants through UAPB. Members questioned the effectiveness, metrics, and addresses of some tobacco-cessation arts-based grantees, especially Arts Absolutely Inc.; after discussion, Representative Kavanaugh moved to expunge the vote on J2 and refer it back for review at a later ALC meeting, and that motion passed. J3, a Department of Energy and Environment grant for propane safety training and e-waste recycling services, was then reviewed. The committee also reviewed contracts in Section K. K-1 ratified emergency management nuclear planning work performed during a transition between agencies. K-2 construction contracts included architectural and engineering services for corrections, National Park College signage, a Razorback Road parking facility, and UAMS cyclotron installation. K-3 intergovernmental contracts covered health, education, autism waiver, stroke, newborn screening, Medicaid evidence review, and radiation testing services. K-4 out-of-state contracts included staffing, IT, tobacco prevention, audit, marketing, planetarium, recruitment, and janitorial services; Senator Irvin noted one contract appeared to belong in the out-of-state list rather than intergovernmental. K-5 in-state contracts covered staffing, cleaning, re-entry and treatment services, foster care and disability services, hearing officers, asbestos abatement, campus IT support, and janitorial work. The meeting ended after a brief personal update from Senator Irvin about tornado damage in Stone County and thanks to members for their concern, followed by adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that's the evaluation and the funding period to use that.
• just want to make sure that that are, as is impressed upon here is that each year is going to be evaluated
• States proposed evaluate each state will is proposing their own evaluation metrics based upon the initiatives
• So have there been any discussions for you to re-evaluate or talk to them about reevaluating?
• We're evaluate by the Cicero Institute and that that hygienist by the Oral Health Workforce Research

Transcript Highlights:

• STR20 requesting the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to comprehensively re-evaluate its
• testimony in support of STR20, which urges the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to re-evaluate
• <00:03:20.400> its<00:03:20.720> policies comprehensively re-evaluate its policies
• comprehensively re-evaluate its policies regarding<00:03:21.920> in-person<00:03:22.640> contact
• <00:05:11.440> its Rehabilitation to re-evaluate its Rehabilitation to re-evaluate its policies

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Public Safety met on April 17, 2025, to hear STR20, which urges the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to re-evaluate policies on in-person contact visitation at correctional facilities statewide so incarcerated people can stay connected with loved ones who support rehabilitation. Director Tommy Johnson testified that the department supports the intent of the measure and would review its policies and procedures to see whether contact visits could be restarted at all facilities, noting that some facilities already allow them. The committee also acknowledged 11 written testimonies in support, and one Zoom testifier, Panda Valdono, spoke in favor, arguing that in-person visitation supports rehabilitation, mental health, family connection, and successful reentry, and that visitation is not a major source of contraband. After testimony, the committee initially lacked quorum and recessed until 3:40 p.m. When the meeting reopened with six members present, the chair recommended passing STR20 as is. The committee voted to adopt the chair’s recommendation, with members Morikawa, Puo, Witson, and Shimizu voting aye and several members excused. The measure was approved and the meeting adjourned.