Transcript Highlights:

• I think we all have them.
• I think we all have them.
• I think there's a disconnect there in terms of what judges think is available.
• I think that's awesome.
• And I think it's all in the way it's communicated to them. And I think I...

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Commission on Correctional Consolidation and Collaboration met on June 15 with co-chairs Senator Will Brownsberger and Representative Dan Hunt. After deciding not to approve prior meeting summary notes at this session, the commission heard testimony from the Massachusetts Parole Officers Association (Brian Lucier and Shauna Hawksley). They described parole officers’ work in both institutions and the community, including housing, mental health, substance use, employment, education, and benefits referrals, and argued that parole officers often know local service providers best. They also said the former reentry navigator positions were lost in 2025 and that regional reentry centers used in the past helped reduce duplication and improve information sharing; they urged more funding, staffing, and training, and said parole should be better integrated with MPTC/POST training and with community-based reentry resources. Commission members asked about the relationship between parole and Community Justice Support Centers, training and arrest authority, revocation practices, and coordination with sheriffs and the Department of Correction. The witnesses said CJSC access is limited by location, transportation, and scheduling, while parole’s older reentry centers were referral-based and did not require regular attendance. They also said parole officers are special state police officers with arrest authority, receive a parole-specific academy plus firearms/defensive tactics/first responder training, and would benefit from more formal reentry training. On revocations, they said they lacked data but believed parole now returns fewer people for mental health or first-time substance use issues and focuses more on public safety threats. They also said collaboration with sheriffs and DOC reentry staff is generally good but still suffers from duplicative referrals and last-minute changes that can undo work done inside facilities. After testimony, the commission discussed next steps, including extending its reporting deadline from September 30 to November 30 through the pending budget, finishing remaining DOC facility visits in the fall, and holding additional meetings on mental health and other unresolved issues. Members also discussed whether to seek more input from the judiciary and district attorneys, with agreement to continue outreach and document responses. The meeting ended with a motion to adjourn, and the commission indicated it would reconvene in the fall.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think I knew that.
• I think you guys have been, Mr. Chairman, I think you've been transparent now.
• So I think the 103, I think we need to start moving— Can't find somebody.
• Well, and I think St.
• So I think... Okay. So I think now we've gone through all the long sheets.

Bills: SB2015

Keywords: corrections, rehabilitation, prison budget, department of corrections, adult services, youth services, correctional facilities, Heart River correctional center, Missouri River correctional center, James River correctional center, minimum security facility, county jails, regional jails, deferred maintenance, capital construction, strategic investment and improvements fund, Bank of North Dakota, line of credit, tasers, body cameras

Summary: The committee met to review revised long sheets and section-by-section language for a human services/health budget bill, with much of the discussion focused on how to present block grant funding and full-time equivalent (FTE) positions for behavioral health clinics and CCBHCs. Members debated whether to keep FTE counts in the budget at all, ultimately leaning toward removing or zeroing out the FTE references while keeping the dollar authority, and reducing the salaries-and-wages block grant by about $4.75 million. They also discussed public health federal authority, agreeing to remove about $60 million in unused federal spending authority tied to COVID-era funds, and clarified that if federal money later becomes available it could be requested through the Emergency Commission. A major topic was the provider inflation increase. The House version had 2% and 2%, while members debated alternatives and appeared to settle, at least for further work, on 2% in the first year and 1.5% in the second year, with staff asked to recalculate the fiscal impact. The committee also reviewed FMAP changes, noting a revised 2027 FMAP estimate and its effect on general fund and other funds, and discussed whether to adjust public health and other line items accordingly. Several members emphasized that many of these numbers are still tentative and will be refined before final action. The committee also touched on several policy items and capital-related provisions, including behavioral health services, Medicaid expansion, the moratorium on new ICF beds, and a proposed amendment for a medical homes/fourplex-related item that would show a $400,000 legislative investment with repayment from a developer. There was extended discussion of the All True hospital/facility proposal, with some members favoring leaving it in with a smaller initial commitment and others preferring to remove it and revisit later in conference committee. The meeting ended with staff asked to continue updating the bill language and members instructed to review remaining sections before the next meeting; no final votes were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• But I think there's explanations.
• But I think this is...
• I don't think so. Okay.
• I think.
• I think.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Some cynics, I think, think if you give school districts lots of money and don't give them guidance on
• So I don't think it's clear.
• So I don't think it's down in the 60, 70. I think it's Los Angeles looking down.
• I think I think in some ways I think of it as a longer-term question than a COVID recovery question and
• So I think I would think of it that way, specific to the pandemic, I think the lasting things are mental

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• and as we think about how... ...as we think about network and as we think about outcomes.
• So this is a contemplation of when we think about rates and we think about quality.
• That's for HR 1, I think. The next topic. That's for HR 1, I think, the next topic. Okay.
• So I think we are thinking, Karen, and for the rest of the committee, is that we're...
• I'll take that back because I think, I think...

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:

• We think it's a good bill.
• So I think that we can think bigger. I think this is a great bill.
• So I think that we can think bigger. I think this is a great bill.
• I think it's less than probable. I think it's like clear and convincing.
• I think it's less than probable. I think it's like clear and convincing.

Summary: The committee heard several bills, with the most detailed discussion focused on AB 316, AB 251, AB 474, AB 1201, AB 464, and AB 614. AB 316 would prevent AI developers or deployers from arguing in civil cases that an AI system’s alleged autonomy absolves them of responsibility. Supporters framed it as a narrow guardrail to protect families, especially children, from harms like dangerous chatbots and deepfakes; opponents, including TechNet and the Chamber of Progress, raised concerns about possible strict-liability implications. The bill was moved out of committee to Privacy and Consumer Protection. AB 251 would let judges lower the burden of proof in elder abuse cases when a skilled nursing facility or RCFE intentionally destroys evidence. Supporters said the measure is needed because elder abuse victims are often unable to testify and records are vulnerable to spoliation, while opponents argued existing sanctions are sufficient and warned of more litigation. The bill passed, with committee members emphasizing the vulnerability of elder abuse victims. AB 474 sought to expand nonprofit home-sharing programs, including tax incentives for low-income homeowners and changes to housing law and lodger rules. Supporters said it would help older adults and low-income Californians avoid homelessness, but several members and the California Apartment Association raised concerns about removing lodger-law protections for homeowners; the author committed to keep working on the issue. The bill passed to Human Services. AB 1201 would give courts discretion to provide family reunification services to parents with certain violent felony convictions, rather than applying an automatic bypass. Supporters from Starting Over Inc. described personal experiences with permanent family separation and argued the bill would give parents a fair chance when the conviction is unrelated to child safety. Some members supported the measure but questioned whether domestic violence histories should be treated differently; the author said the bill still allows courts to deny services when reunification would endanger a child. The bill passed to Human Services. AB 464 addressed sexual abuse and retaliation in state prisons by extending reporting time after release, adding 90-day monitoring after reports, barring rehiring of confirmed abusers, and strengthening reporting and anti-retaliation rules. Survivors testified about abuse, retaliation, and failures in CDCR’s response; the bill passed to Appropriations. AB 614 would standardize the Government Claims Act filing deadline at one year for all claims. The author and supporters argued the current six-month deadline for injury and wrongful death claims is too short for victims to learn the process, find counsel, and gather evidence, while businesses often get a full year. A civil rights attorney and a family member of a deceased jail detainee testified in support, describing how the current deadline can block meritorious claims. The bill was presented for committee consideration as the hearing continued.

Transcript Highlights:

• that's important because I think that, as I read through this bill, and I think as is reflected in the
• <00:08:58.760> overall think overall think overall uh<00:09:00.279> are<00:09:00.600>
• that I think is worth exploring.
• that I think is worth exploring.
• that I think is worth exploring.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I think that is needed and I think they need to be accountable for that money.
• And I think that's important.
• I think that's important.
• So I think that's important.
• But again, I think it's fair for industry. I think it's fair for locals.

Keywords: 965, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, but I think that's kind of what I'm thinking right now. I see the chair Champion nodding.
• I think I heard someone say Mr. Okay. I think I heard someone say Mr.
• now that I think about it, it's 2027. now that I think about it, it's 2027.
• And I don't think it hurts waiting two years, personally. And I think it's just good.
• thinks, but I think we should kind of put a little bit of guide rails on it.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But I think there's explanations.
• But I think this is..."
• And I think that's some of the resistance to thinking of going back to fixed funding.
• I don't think so. Okay.
• I think.

Summary: The Higher Ed Funding Committee met to review how North Dakota might identify and address low-producing academic programs and to discuss draft funding formulas for the university system. Lisa Johnson of the NDUS explained that the State Board of Higher Education is already developing a system-wide policy, using models from other states such as Texas, Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado, Kentucky, Ohio, and Connecticut. She described how low-producing programs are typically flagged by multi-year enrollment or completion thresholds, then reviewed for workforce demand, mission fit, cost, accreditation, and regional need before any action is taken. Committee members asked about what counts as a program, how costs are analyzed, whether certificates are included, how exemptions work for mission-critical or high-demand fields, and whether the board or legislature should set the rules. Johnson said the board is the appropriate body to lead the process, but legislators could use funding leverage if they wanted to encourage action; the chair asked the board to bring a detailed proposal to the June meeting. The committee then heard a Legislative Council presentation on a draft formula for UND and NDSU. The proposal uses fall census FTE enrollment, with a placeholder undergraduate rate of $7,000 per FTE and a graduate/professional rate of $10,500, plus incentives for completions in in-demand fields and research productivity. Alex from Legislative Council walked through the projected funding effects, noting that the model would increase funding for NDSU and reduce it for UND in the current biennium, with different results in the next biennium as enrollment changes are recognized. Members questioned the use of the placeholder rates, the definition of in-demand programs, the treatment of research funding, and the exclusion of state-appropriated dollars from the external grants calculation. The chair emphasized that the numbers were illustrative and that appropriators would set the actual dollar amounts later. A second draft formula for the other nine institutions was also reviewed. That model uses fall census FTE without a weighted economic factor, applies a higher undergraduate rate, and adds completion incentives for in-demand credentials and all other completions. Members noted that the formula would benefit some institutions, such as Bismarck State College, while reducing funding for others, such as Mayville State, and discussed whether the nine institutions should be treated more uniformly or split into smaller groups because of their different missions and sizes. Committee members and staff repeatedly stressed that the formulas are still being refined and that some institutions would likely need hold-harmless adjustments or other transition measures. The meeting ended with the chair directing the committee to continue the discussion later and to expect further work on both the low-producing program policy and the funding formulas.

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't think it's probably tight enough for, but I do think it's an important thing, and I do think
• I think that's true.
• I think, Someone had asked about the penalties, I think it was Mr. Burton.
• I think folks need to go in front of the judge. I think it's part of the process.
• , I think.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think that we should do that. I think that this should just be funded.
• I think I'm lying.
• that they're graduation requirements and I think that they're I think we're an example so I think an
• I think we have to really think about that lease option as well, and I agree, I think if you're bringing
• I think for today... I think for today it will get out of committee.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And I do think, as Mr.
• um yes I I think that's I don't<00:20:52.720> think<00:20:52.840> they're<00:20:53.000
• <00:21:52.760> this<00:21:52.919> may think biggest thing I think this may think biggest
• I think this is a small addition to that, and I think the ombudsman is not going to be a super person
• I just think it's very important that if this ombudsman moves forward, that we handle what I think is

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative, I think one thing to also think about is treatment.
• And so I think thinking about those buckets also is important. That's a really good point, Doctor.
• Well, people are thinking about that. I just wanted to. Well, people are thinking about that.
• So I think that was sort of what I was thinking about.
• , but I do think it would be beneficial if we think about, you know, treatment or outreach.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Working Group on Outreach and Treatment of the Special Commission on Xylazine held its first meeting, chaired by Gabe Adams-Cain in Senator John Villis’s absence. Members introduced themselves and described priorities such as improving education about xylazine, expanding first responder and clinical training, and ensuring patients and providers know how to respond to xylazine-related wounds and complications. Several participants emphasized that outreach should reach both people who have not been exposed and those already affected, and that stigma is a major barrier for patients and families. Discussion focused on the main challenges to treatment and outreach, including limited awareness, inconsistent wound care access, gaps in geographic coverage, cost of supplies, and the need for better training in both outpatient and inpatient settings. Dr. Kimmel noted that harm reduction and outreach programs are already providing much of the care, but often lack specialized staff, sufficient supplies, and standardized protocols. He also said xylazine can complicate withdrawal and make it harder for people to engage in substance use treatment. Members discussed the value of non-stigmatizing, consensus messaging, family support organizations, and existing resources such as PARI, StreetCheck, and state-funded syringe service and naloxone networks. The group also reviewed the commission timeline and next steps. Staff said materials for the December 11 full commission meeting should be submitted by December 2, with draft presentation materials to be shared by December 4 and reviewed by December 9. Members agreed to do additional follow-up research on topics including the cost-effectiveness and contents of self-care wound kits, outreach to family and recovery organizations, incarcerated populations, and geographic access gaps. The meeting ended with agreement to use a PowerPoint-style presentation and to continue compiling research through a shared folder, followed by adjournment at 9:55 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think one of the...
• Well, the only thing I can say is that we think, I think...
• Well, the only thing I can say is that we think, I think, that it's a good model.
• I think I think I would... Thank you. Well, whatever. Doesn't matter.
• And I think that it is...

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The meeting began with roll call, approval of the May 5 minutes, and opening remarks thanking commissioners and the public for their attendance. The commission then heard testimony from former Ambassador Alan Solomont, who argued that antisemitism is rising in multiple forms, including white nationalist antisemitism and antisemitism tied to anti-Israel rhetoric after October 7. He said campus antisemitism should be addressed with nuance, distinguishing protected political speech from conduct that targets Jewish students, and warned against weaponizing antisemitism to attack higher education, civil liberties, or federal research funding. He urged the commission to use multiple definitions and frameworks, including IHRA, Nexus, and the Jerusalem Declaration, and to focus on campus-specific solutions, civic education, and civil discourse. Commissioners asked him about Tufts’ antisemitism training, the role of the federal government, the use of the IHRA definition, and how to improve civic education; he emphasized local campus responses, broader civics instruction, and protecting democracy and due process. The second major witness was Professor David Weber of Boston University, who testified on the BDS movement and anti-BDS laws. He described BDS as a campaign targeting Israeli businesses, universities, and institutions, and argued it functions as a propagandistic and discriminatory effort that fuels antisemitism and chills dialogue on campuses and in public life. He cited examples such as SodaStream, Ben & Jerry’s, and Brown University, and said anti-BDS laws in 37 states have been effective and constitutional because they regulate government economic activity rather than suppress speech. Weber urged Massachusetts to adopt an anti-BDS statute or executive order, saying the state’s large Jewish population and economic ties to Israel make the issue especially important. Commissioners questioned him about which states have such laws, the impact on dialogue and campus culture, possible legal frameworks, and whether BDS is really aimed at the Israeli government or at individuals and institutions; he maintained that BDS targets people and entities connected to Israel and that anti-BDS measures can help draw a line against illiberal conduct.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think that's important. I think for me, because they just laid it all out.
• I think that's important.
• They do not think about that. They do not think about that at all, right?
• When I looked at the inventions, I don't think the inventions, I don't think the invention.
• I think it's a great idea.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The DEIA subcommittee of the Special Commission on the 250th Anniversary of the American Revolution met with a quorum and discussed planning for the upcoming Patriots Day period, grant opportunities, and ways to make 250th programming more inclusive. Dr. Trent reported on a Virginia 250 conference and shared examples such as the Made by Us youth engagement toolkit and a Smithsonian-related traveling exhibition. Brian also updated the group on Mass Humanities’ grant programs, including Museum on Main Street, Reading Project Douglas Together, and the Promises of Revolution grants, noting that the latter has $600,000 available and is expected to fund roughly 30 to 40 projects through letters of intent due in June. The committee also noted that state tourism 250th grants are open with an April 11 deadline. A major discussion focused on ensuring respect for Indigenous sovereignty and improving representation in marketing. Members raised concerns that Indigenous leaders were not being treated with sufficient respect in state-level engagement, and they discussed whether the full commission should hear from tribal leaders and whether the subcommittee should recommend a broader conversation at the next commission meeting. On marketing, members criticized recent promotional materials as too formulaic and insufficiently reflective of Massachusetts’ diversity, especially in their limited inclusion of Indigenous people, Black patriots, women, and other communities. The group agreed that the commission should push for more inclusive visuals and narratives, and that there is still time to influence digital and future materials. The subcommittee also discussed possibly inviting the marketing and education committees, or commission staff and the outside marketing agency, to explain the rollout and scope of possible changes. The committee then considered a Utah 250 idea for a July 5, 2026 “America’s potluck” style community event and agreed it could be adapted for Massachusetts as a foodways-focused, culturally diverse statewide activity. A motion was made, seconded, and approved to recommend that the full commission and MOTT promote the potluck concept. The meeting ended with agreement to continue developing recommendations on representation, Indigenous engagement, and public outreach, and then adjourned by unanimous vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• But I do think it's going to pass, and I think we're looking at dire circumstances.
• Tell me if I'm thinking.
• I think it's interesting.
• I think some of that information is publicly available, but I can check. I would just think, Mr.
• But yes, I think you're right.

Transcript Highlights:

• I I think that there this time.
• So, I think this bill does that.
• So, I think this bill does that.
• I don't think they held it, but I think they might have retained it.
• And I don't think that one should go on. And I don't think that one should go on.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think it's a good question too.
• I think it's a good question too. Chair. I think it's a good question too.
• I think I think you got the snowplow through part of the drift. Senator Gustoson.
• I think I think you got the snowplow through part of the drift. Senator Gustoson. Certainly.
• I think I think you with a lot of those.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So that is an issue that I think is one that we all have to think about.
• Chairman, I think so.
• I think you'd have...
• And I think Ms.
• should think.

Bills: SB40, SB104, SB136, SB164

Keywords: SB40, Driver Privacy and Safety Act, automated license plate reader, ALPR, license plate reader, vehicle surveillance, privacy, data sharing, law enforcement data, immigration enforcement, reproductive health care, gender-affirming care, civil liberties, surveillance, public records, Inspection of Public Records Act, New Mexico State Police, Department of Public Safety, data sovereignty, vehicle tracking