Transcript Highlights:

• So there are agreements between every jurisdiction and AAMVA.
• Proposed agreement.
• So you purchased fewer cars. Thank you.
• And then more cars purchased...
• And we hope we can get more cars purchased or whatever.

Summary: The committee first heard a DMV budget presentation on the state-to-state verification system required for Real ID compliance and the Digital Experience Platform (DXP) modernization project. DMV officials said the state-to-state system is a pointer-based exchange used when a person applies for a license in another state, with only limited identifying data shared initially and the full driver history sent only after a qualified request. Members raised concerns about privacy, possible misuse by other states or federal actors, notification to Californians, hacking, and whether California could detect or stop abusive access. DMV said it can monitor requests, see patterns of access, work with AAMVA and legal counsel, and seek to block or challenge misuse; LAO said California is in a difficult position and should consider guardrails rather than opt out. On DXP, DMV said the project is on its revised schedule and budget, occupational licensing is complete, vehicle registration is expected by the end of calendar year 2026, and the full system should be finished by fiscal year 2028-29, with phased rollout and reappropriated funding to keep costs controlled. The committee then heard from the California High-Speed Rail Office of Inspector General on a trailer bill and AB 1608. The Inspector General said current law does not clearly authorize public reports or establish a framework for retaining and disclosing work papers, and the proposed trailer bill would create that framework while also adding authority to hire needed classifications and purchase goods and services. He also said the office needs a clearer statutory definition of “proposed agreements” and notice when the High-Speed Rail Authority is reviewing them, so the office can review contracts and related agreements effectively. LAO raised no concerns with the trailer bill language, and Finance said any amendments would come in the May revision. Members debated the scope of confidentiality in the Inspector General proposal, especially whether reports could be held confidential when they identify weaknesses in fraud controls, security, or other vulnerabilities. The Inspector General said confidentiality would be temporary, tied to articulating the risk, reassessing it every 120 days, and releasing the report once the risk is no longer substantial; he also said the office had already published reports at its discretion and had found at least one procurement violation involving an amendment that added services not in the original contract. Several members pressed for stronger transparency and suggested time limits or broader disclosure, while others argued the bill would improve oversight and make the Inspector General’s authority clearer. No votes were taken during the discussion, and the item was left for further work on the trailer bill and AB 1608 language.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, players are in agreement with this.
• Uh those are bargaining agreement.
• </c><00:07:23.599><c> almost</c> collective bargaining agreement almost collective bargaining agreement
• Um one area where a agreement.
• ><c> may</c><00:07:33.520><c> not</c> collective bargaining agreement may not collective bargaining agreement

Committee: Senate Commerce

Transcript Highlights:

• So whether you own the aircraft or not is in the purchase agreement, and, um, you know, for the state
• So can it be the purchase of a contract, the purchase of a plane, whatever makes the most sense.
• If the purchase of a contract.
• Was it the purchase of a contract? Was it the purchase of a, uh, aircraft specifically?
• Purchase, we're prepared to purchase the aircraft.

Committee: House State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• So I just would... ...said sub-agreement or whatnot.
• , sub-agreement, or amendment.
• So I just would, said sub-agreement or whatnot.
• , sub-agreement or amendment.
• , including sub-agreements as required by this section.

Committee: House State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• Put simply, this is an agreement that a homeowner may be asked to sign after damage has already occurred

Bills: SB5223 , SB5286 , SB6002 , SB6178 , SB5892 , SB5177 , SB6039 , SB5874 , SB5863 , SB5972 , SB5941 , SB5203 , SB6014 , SB5993 , SB5831 , SB5928 , SB5912 , SB5825 , SB5223 , SB6178 , SB5892 , SB5177 , SB6039 , SB5941 , SB5993 , SB5831 , SB5928 , SB5912 , SB6183 , SB6071 , SB5995 , SB5966 , SB5841 , SB5840 , SB6061 , SB6058 , SB5931 , SB5944 , SB5520 , SB6011 , SB6087 , SB6076 , SB5916 , SB6016 , SB5936 , SB6137 , SB5185 , SB5956 , SB6025 , SB6009 , SB5833 , SB6161 , SB6188 , SB5890 , SB5917 , SB5820 , SB5973 , SJM8015 , SB5816 , SB6136 , SB6091 , SB6024

Keywords: criminal offense, fingerprinting, law enforcement, state regulations, public safety, policing costs, state hospitals, local funding, budget allocation, automated license plate reader, ALPR, license plate recognition, LPR, surveillance, driver privacy, vehicle tracking, location data, law enforcement technology, data retention, audit trail

Transcript Highlights:

• So this is not just for clarity, and this is in my mind I'm familiar with a purchase agreement.
• agreement.
• So, this is not uh purchase agreement.
• The opportunity to purchase law was a long-negotiated agreement in the legislative session between the
• We did have an agreement. on this. We did have an agreement.

Committee: Senate Housing and Homelessness Prevention

Transcript Highlights:

• so that once the purchase agreement is signed, it can't be terminated.
• </c> 10 days to terminate a purchase 10 days to terminate a purchase agreement<00:55:43.440><c> from<
• </c><00:55:49.920><c> agreement</c><00:55:50.240><c> is</c> buyer before a purchase agreement is buyer
• provide</c> purchase agreement be signed, provide purchase agreement be signed, provide these<00:55:
• agreement if they terminate the purchase agreement if they don't<00:56:04.400><c> like</c><00:56:04.640

Bills: HF4075 , HF3826 , HF3825 , HF3827 , HF3459 , HF3711 , HF4200 , HF3908 , HF3712

Committee: House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law

Transcript Highlights:

• The sales tax generally is on the total purchase price. Labor, delivery, etc.
• The sales tax generally is on the total purchase price.
• That gets you your total of 9.8% sales tax paid on the purchase.
• The purchaser? Yes, the purchaser. Thank you. That's a better term.
• And then now at that point in time, the onus flips onto the purchaser, right?

Committee: House Finance

Summary: The Finance Committee work session began with a presentation from Dr. Reich on the Economic and Revenue Forecast Council (ERFC), explaining how the state’s revenue forecasts are built from economic models and how they are used to support the budget process. He described the main revenue sources for state operating funds, the ERFC’s membership and quarterly public process, and the factors affecting the latest forecast, including slow employment growth, weak taxable sales, higher inflation pressures, tariffs, federal spending uncertainty, and the federal shutdown. He said the September forecast was reduced, mainly because of lower sales tax and real estate excise tax collections, with smaller changes to capital gains and other funds, though revenues were still roughly on track and the base case remained slow growth rather than recession. Committee members asked about whether Washington’s economy can lag national downturns, and Dr. Reich said the timing and severity of impacts can differ by recession and sector. Representative Chase asked what happens if revenues fall short of expenses, and Dr. Reich said that is a budgeting question for elected officials rather than the forecast council. Members also noted the importance of the forecast for policy decisions, especially given slowing employment and manufacturing. The committee then heard from the Department of Revenue on implementation of Senate Bill 5814, which expands retail sales tax to certain services effective October 1, 2025. Steve Ewing explained the existing sales and use tax framework, sourcing rules, reseller permits, and the multiple points of use exemption, then walked through the new taxable categories, including live presentations, temporary staffing, investigations and security services, IT services, custom website development, advertising services, and custom software changes. He described DOR’s implementation efforts, including listening sessions, a public landing page, notices to taxpayers, and interim guidance, and noted a six-month grace period for certain pre-existing contracts but no general penalty or interest relief. Committee members raised concerns about taxpayer confusion, the burden on new taxpayers, sourcing and allocation issues, and the difficulty of determining liability in cases like speakers, nonprofits, and advertising services. DOR said it would continue outreach, answer ruling requests, and likely seek technical cleanup legislation in the 2026 session. The committee took no formal votes and adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is obviously on the purchase of the property where the REET would be exempted.
• Is this, this is obviously on the purchase of the property where the reet would be exempted.
• The other major issue is the significant restriction on operating agreements or good neighbor agreements
• The other major issue is the significant restriction on operating agreements or good neighbor agreements
• The draft in front of you basically says only reporting in on Good neighbor agreements.

Summary: The Senate Housing Committee heard several housing-related bills and gubernatorial appointments. SB 6201 would create property tax and REET exemptions for property used as affordable housing by social housing agencies, with testimony from the sponsor and supporters from Seattle Social Housing and House Our Neighbors emphasizing lower development costs and deeper affordability. Senator Gildon questioned how the 50% occupancy requirement would work at purchase, and staff explained the covenant and compliance requirements. The committee also heard SB 6205, which would add conflict-of-interest restrictions and reporting requirements for the Community Reinvestment Account, Affordable Housing Program, and Covenant Homeownership Program; Senator Braun said the bill responds to reports of misuse and is intended to improve transparency and trust. The committee heard gubernatorial appointments Pedro Espinoza and Diana H. Perez to the Housing Finance Commission, both of whom described their construction, local government, and housing experience and were supported by committee members. In executive session, the committee adopted a substitute and passed SB 6001 on scissors stairs, SB 6026 on allowing residential uses in commercial and mixed-use zones, and SB 6054 on fire-hardened building materials. SB 6026 drew the most debate, with amendments added and others rejected; supporters said it would expand housing supply, while opponents and local governments raised concerns about historic districts, main street areas, and limits on local planning authority. SB 6054 was amended to remove the 10% cap on fire-hardened materials, with members saying it would help homeowners protect against wildfire risk. The committee then moved to public hearings on SB 6069, which would require cities and counties to allow emergency shelters, transitional housing, indoor emergency housing, and permanent supportive housing in more zones and limit local restrictions to objective standards and administrative review. Supporters, including housing providers, the Attorney General’s Office, King County, and Disability Rights Washington, said local barriers are delaying needed housing, while cities and the Association of Washington Cities argued the bill is too broad and would limit operational agreements and local flexibility. The committee also heard SB 6167, which would bar homebuyers from receiving multiple state-funded down payment assistance loans or grants. The sponsor said the bill is meant to maximize limited assistance dollars for more households, but opponents from housing nonprofits, advocates, and a homeless veteran said it would reduce access to homeownership, especially for Black households and families needing layered assistance in high-cost markets. Finally, the committee returned to SB 6205 testimony, where supporters said the bill would prevent self-dealing and misuse of grant funds, while one testifier urged more investigation and oversight resources. No final action was taken on the public hearing bills during the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:03:36.239><c> and</c> management and agreements and management and agreements and appointments
• </c> Republicans and Democrats so Agreements Republicans and Democrats so Agreements are<00:04:02.920
• cards—people using a purchasing card for things they can't be purchasing in that role.
• </c> government has been with purchasing government has been with purchasing cards<00:25:29.399><c> people
• c> card</c><00:25:30.600><c> for</c> cards people using a purchasing card for cards people using a purchasing

Transcript Highlights:

• in there is to ensure that their proper usage is applied throughout the purchasing process.
• I think the way that we do purchasing in this state is important.
• I think the way that we do purchasing in this state is important.
• This is specifically for any purchases that happen through the division.
• Current statute directs the... ...agreements to the controller's office.

Committee: House State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• c> bill</c> power purchase agreements uh this bill power purchase agreements uh this bill is<00:49:05.559
• New</c> purchase power agreements in New purchase power agreements in New Hampshire<00:49:11.960><c>
• Power purchase agreements distort and weaken energy markets.
• Power purchase agreements distort and weaken energy markets.
• Power purchase agreements distort and weaken energy markets.

Committee: Senate Energy and Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• We can still make the purchase.
• We can still make the purchase.
• They're all under master agreements.
• And it says master agreements must not...
• Per master agreement. Permit... ...exceed $1 million. Per firm. Per master agreement.

Committee: House Special Committee on Intergovernmental Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• There's not like we can just go out and randomly purchase something.
• to make those purchases.
• But each time, they work out an agreement, a home agreement, in which they have.
• They work out an agreement, a home agreement, in which they have to be able to show that they have electric
• But each time, they work out an agreement, a home agreement, in which they have. they work out an agreement

Committee: House Corrections and Public Institutions

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:48:57.599><c> Um,</c> agreements remain in effect. Um, agreements remain in effect.
• agreements agreements or written agreements educated<00:49:06.880><c> with</c><00:49:07.520><c> executed
• mutually agree to terminate agreement mutually agree to terminate the<00:49:21.520><c> agreement.
• We'll authorize HHFDC to secure a line of credit, standby bond purchase agreement, or other credit enhancement
• </c> purchase agreement or other credit purchase agreement or other credit enhancement<01:22:00.480><

Summary: The joint House committees on Housing and Education heard HB 1713, HD1, which would repeal school impact fees and transfer remaining balances in the school impact fee and certain fair share accounts to the school facilities special fund. The Department of Education testified in opposition, while the Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation, the Attorney General’s office (with comments and suggested constitutional amendments), the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, the School Facilities Authority, Grassroot Institute of Hawaii, NAP Hawaii, Avalon Development Company, Mark Development, Maui Chamber of Commerce, Housing Hawaii’s Future, Landis Research Foundation, BIA Hawaii, and others testified in support. The Tax Foundation of Hawaii offered comments. The DOE said the bill would weaken a key tool for matching school facilities to residential growth, while supporters said the current program leaves funds unused or restricted in ways that limit their effectiveness. A lengthy discussion followed about the difference between the older school impact fee program and the separate fair share agreements tied to land use entitlements and change-of-zone approvals. DOE Deputy Superintendent Jesse Suki explained that fair share funds are tied to the district where they were collected, may be too small to build a full school on their own, and are held until needed for projects such as Core Ridge, Central and West Maui, and other planned schools. Committee members pressed DOE on why funds had remained unspent for years, how much money was in the accounts, and whether the department had reviewed audit findings about the program. Members also questioned whether homeowners ultimately bear these costs through developers passing them along. The committee did not take a vote during the portion of the meeting provided. The discussion ended with members and DOE debating whether the current statute should remain in place, whether past entitlements should be affected, and whether the bill should be amended to better address remaining construction-related obligations and the use of collected funds.

Transcript Highlights:

• But they won't be able to purchase any more, correct?
• So they actually would need to purchase another plot of land.
• Coming, so they actually would need to purchase another plot of land.
• districts to be able to purchase land removes...
• We can't wait until the need to purchase land to do our planning to build for schools.

Summary: The committee first took up PCS for HB 123, which would change the process for converting a public school to a charter school by requiring approval from a majority of parents at the school, allow municipalities to apply to convert certain schools under limited circumstances, and address surplus school property in districts with declining enrollment. The sponsor said the bill is meant to give parents the primary say and to prevent districts from holding unused property. Opponents, including the Florida PTA, several members, and public speakers, argued the bill excludes teachers, school boards, and other stakeholders, could disenfranchise parents who do not live in the municipality, and could create enrollment, transportation, and equity problems. After debate, the bill passed 13-5 and was reported favorably. The committee then heard HB 597 on diabetes management in schools. The bill would allow school districts and charter schools to procure and store glucagon pens for emergency treatment of severe hypoglycemia, permit trained personnel to administer them, require 911 to be called after use, and add limited liability protections. The sponsor said the medication is inexpensive and could save lives for the roughly 7,000 diabetic K-12 students in Florida. An amendment clarified that public and charter schools are both covered. The bill drew support from the American Diabetes Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Florida PTA, and members from both parties praised the measure. It passed unanimously and was reported favorably. Finally, the committee heard HB 85 on hazardous walking conditions, which would add walking along freeways, expressways, and their ramps as a hazardous condition requiring bus service for elementary students within two miles of school. The sponsor described personal examples of children walking near dangerous roads and said the bill is intended to prevent injuries and deaths. An amendment narrowed the language by deleting “state highway.” Public testimony included a parent who described her child being hit by a car and urged broader coverage, while members raised concerns about bus shortages and fiscal impact. Most members spoke in support, emphasizing student safety, and the bill was reported favorably after debate.

Transcript Highlights:

• The sales tax generally is on the total purchase price.
• That gets you your total of 9.8% sales tax paid on the purchase.
• I go to the store, I purchase the shirt.
• That purchase is subject to sales tax.
• The purchaser? Yes, the purchaser. Thank you. That's a better term.

Summary: The committee first received a presentation from Dr. Reich on the Economic and Revenue Forecast Council (ERFC), including how the council’s joint executive-legislative forecasting process works, the main state revenue sources, and recent economic conditions. He said Washington’s economy is slowing, with weak employment growth, softer taxable sales, and uncertainty from tariffs, federal spending, and the federal shutdown. He also noted that the September forecast was reduced, mainly because of lower sales tax and real estate excise tax collections, and that the state still expects modest growth rather than a recession. Members asked about whether Washington tends to lag national downturns and how forecast information should affect budgeting; Dr. Reich said the forecast is a revenue tool, not a budgeting decision, and that spending choices remain with elected officials. The Department of Revenue then presented on Washington’s sales and use tax structure and the implementation of Senate Bill 5814, which expands retail sales tax to several services effective October 1, 2025. Steve Ewing explained how sales and use tax are sourced, how reseller permits and the multiple points of use exemption work, and how the new law applies to live presentations, temporary staffing, investigations and security services, IT services, custom website development, advertising services, and custom software. He said DOR held listening sessions, issued interim guidance, and set up a centralized landing page and outreach efforts to help taxpayers understand the changes. He also described a six-month grace period for certain pre-existing contracts through March 31, 2026, but said penalties and interest still apply under the statute. Committee members raised concerns about how businesses and individuals will know when a service is taxable, who is responsible for collecting and remitting tax, and how sourcing will work for services delivered across multiple locations or online. DOR staff walked through examples involving accounting services, live lectures, virtual events, advertising campaigns, and search engine marketing, including the use of reasonable allocation and pool codes when exact sourcing data is unavailable. Members also questioned the administrative burden on small businesses and professionals newly subject to tax, and whether additional legislative fixes or relief from penalties and interest may be needed. No votes or formal actions were taken in the work session.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, they don't have a purchase agreement in hand.
• And in a purchase agreement in hand.
• </c><00:46:12.560><c> we</c><00:46:12.800><c> can</c> purchase agreement in hand, so we can purchase
• agreement and and didn't have a purchase agreement and then<01:18:27.760><c> as</c><01:18:28.000><c>
• agreement, but one of the for a purchase agreement, but one of the things<01:21:32.480><c> I'm</c><01

Bills: HF3508 , HF3548 , HF3549

Committee: House Agriculture Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• So the idea of a power purchase agreement, you know, became attractive to folks.
• So the idea of a power purchase agreement, you know, became attractive to folks.
• </c> them to enter into those power purchase them to enter into those power purchase agreements<01:17
• </c> full expansion of power purchase full expansion of power purchase agreements<01:30:34.960><c> um
• </c><01:30:50.040><c> agreements</c> talked about power purchase agreements talked about power purchase

Committee: House Science, Technology and Energy

Transcript Highlights:

• I've purchased three used vehicles in Texas since 2020 with my son.
• During one purchase, a $1,000 fee for outside financing was listed.
• And again, the price of a vehicle—your first purchase of a vehicle and the purchase of a vehicle today—there's
• We have to sign a confidential agreement with the executive agency.
• There have been instances where these agreements, confidential agreements, the agency wants to go outside

Bills: HB12 , HB149 , HB 12 , HB149 , SB229 , SB1361 , SB1749 , SB1897 , SB2113 , SB2566 , SB2677 , SB1652 , SB2327 , SB2344 , SB2696

Committee: Senate Business & Commerce

Summary: The Senate Committee on Business and Commerce heard testimony on HB 149, the Artificial Intelligence Governance Act. Senator Schwertner described the bill as an outcomes-based AI framework that would require disclosure when people interact with AI, prohibit manipulative or social-scoring systems, address biometric capture, discrimination, and deepfake child exploitation, and give the Attorney General enforcement authority. It would also create an AI Sandbox and AI Council. Witnesses from the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a Houston attorney, TechNet, and the Texas Association of Business strongly supported the bill, praising its stakeholder process and pro-innovation approach, while Texas Appleseed suggested regulators should have more examination authority over sandbox participants. The bill was left pending. The committee then heard SB 229, which would prohibit motor vehicle dealers from conditioning a sale on dealer-offered financing or charging more because a buyer uses outside financing or cash. Senator West said the bill is meant to stop forced financing and bait-and-switch pricing, and he noted the bill passed the committee and Senate in the prior session. The Texas Automobile Dealers Association opposed the bill, arguing it would force dealers to accept any third-party lender or cash transaction on terms they cannot control. The Texas Credit Union Association supported the bill, saying consumers should be able to choose outside financing without hidden fees or pressure. After questions about cash purchases and dealer practices, the bill was left pending. The committee also took up SB 2566, which would clarify legislators’ access to information from executive agencies, including confidential information, by setting response deadlines, limiting confidentiality agreements to statutory terms, requiring a standard AG form, and creating a complaint and penalty process for noncompliance. No witnesses testified, and the bill was left pending. Finally, SB 1749, as substituted, would let certain court-related employees and judicial conduct commission personnel keep personal information such as home addresses and phone numbers confidential, with work addresses used in place of home addresses for certain purposes. District clerk and judicial conduct commission witnesses described threats and harassment as the reason for the bill, and a court administration witness answered questions about how the address protections would work with voter registration and precinct records. That bill was also left pending, and the committee recessed without further business.