Transcript Highlights:

• committee hearing. committee hearing.
• Supreme Court case Citizens United v.
• glad to hear from you. glad to hear from you.
• So the case was Rana's case began in 2004.
• filing a case in state or federal court. filing a case in state or federal court.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 1552, which would make the attorney general the interim chief election officer if that office becomes vacant until the Elections Commission appoints a replacement. The Department of the Attorney General opposed the bill, saying it could create a conflict of interest if the attorney general were both the state’s lawyer and the chief elections officer in any related litigation. The League of Women Voters supported having some interim backup for the office, but said it was not necessarily advocating that the attorney general fill the role. Several other testifiers, including the Hawaiian Islands Republican Women, opposed the bill, arguing the current law already provides for a prompt commission appointment and warning about partisan bias and concentration of power. Supporters, including Indivisible Hawaii, said an interim mechanism is needed to ensure election certification in a crisis. The chair also asked whether any statutory acting capacity already exists, and the attorney general said none was known. The committee then took up House Bill 2125, which would bar corporations operating under state law from engaging in election activity. The attorney general opposed the bill, citing Citizens United and arguing that corporations have First Amendment-protected political speech rights and that the bill would likely be unconstitutional. Indivisible Hawaii supported the measure, saying it would keep elections focused on the will of the people rather than corporate influence. Libertarian Party testimony was mixed: one witness supported the goal of reducing corruption but warned the bill could suppress organized dissent and sweep too broadly by treating many associations as corporations. The bill’s introducer asked whether the legislature could still enact it as a policy matter, but the attorney general maintained federal constitutional law would control. No vote was taken on either bill during the portion of the hearing provided. The committee also heard House Bill 2493 on wrongful imprisonment, which would set procedures and compensation for people whose convictions are reversed or vacated on grounds consistent with innocence and whose charges are dismissed. The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation supported the bill’s intent but objected to language assigning it responsibility for helping released individuals secure housing, identification, health coverage, and other reentry needs, saying it no longer has jurisdiction after release and suggesting the courts or a community-based contractor handle that role. The Office of the Public Defender strongly supported the bill, emphasizing the harm of wrongful conviction and the need for compensation, case management, and medical coverage after release. No action or vote was reported on this measure in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• a true 60-day period to consider the merits of each case.
• to...” “...the Appeals Board, every case, every party on both sides of the case knows that there’s a
• The arts field is continuing to show up hearing after hearing because we believe this legislature understands
• The arts field is continuing to show up hearing after hearing because we believe this legislature understands
• Thank you for your patience in today's hearing.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee 5 on State Administration held a May Revise hearing focused on state administration proposals, with the chair noting no actions would be taken and all items would remain open. The committee heard presentations on a range of budget proposals, including technical adjustments for the Governor’s Office of Service and Community Engagement and the California Workforce Development Board, security and election-related funding for the Secretary of State, modernization and loan-backfill requests for the Department of Consumer Affairs, and multiple Employment Development Department updates covering EDD Next, UI and DI/PFL benefit estimates, workforce funding, and an EMT training reappropriation. Several items drew discussion from the LAO and committee members. The LAO generally supported technical or modernization items such as PERB’s implementation requests, GoServe’s College Corps adjustment, the Secretary of State’s security and HAVA grant items, and the Board of Pharmacy modernization proposal, but raised concerns about the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education’s proposed $10 million General Fund backfill and interest-free loan language. For EDD, the LAO flagged the size of the DI/PFL benefit adjustment and the unusual structure of the document management system proposal within EDD Next, while EDD said the changes reflected higher participation and benefit levels after SB 951 and ongoing modernization needs. The Department of Industrial Relations drew the most extensive questioning. It proposed funding for legal unit reclassifications, EAMS and Cal/OSHA data modernization, a new Cal/OSHA emerging technologies unit, a COYA reappropriation, and trailer bill changes requiring electronic payment of employer assessments and adjusting the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board timeline. Members pressed DIR on high vacancy rates, long wage theft and workers’ compensation backlogs, low collection rates for fines, and the need for clearer workload and outcome measures. DIR said the requests were intended to improve efficiency, support audits and corrective action plans, and better address emerging workplace risks, while the LAO said the workload drivers behind delays remain unclear. The hearing also included support for CalHR’s employee assistance program consolidation and CDT’s proposal to expand “Poppy,” a statewide generative AI assistant for state employees.

Transcript Highlights:

• I would be shocked if that were the case.
• I'm particularly interested in hearing the testimony from the industry and the stakeholders to hear their
• “I think for Delaware consumers to assess their own case, and if it is not a case that is appropriate
• Only hearing some of the questions that have popped up, and again, you know—” “Hearing some of the questions
• So if people are in Delaware, then in that case they could bring a private right of—” Then in that case

Summary: The committee heard several bills, but much of the meeting focused on House Bill 306, which would require disclosure when a consumer is interacting with a chatbot rather than a human. Sponsor Senator Townsend described it as a consumer protection measure and said the bill is meant to keep pace with rapidly changing AI technology. Committee members and witnesses raised concerns about the bill’s enforcement structure, especially private rights of action and penalties that could apply even without actual consumer harm. The Department of Justice said the bill would apply where the conduct has a Delaware nexus, and that the disclosure requirement is the key consumer protection. Industry witnesses and chambers of commerce opposed the bill as drafted, arguing it would create broad compliance burdens and expose businesses to excessive litigation risk without a harm requirement or clearer safe harbor language. Earlier in the meeting, the committee discussed House Bill 429, which would update Delaware’s step therapy exception process to include biosimilars and interchangeable biologics. Senator Poore and supporters from Highmark and the Department of Insurance said the bill would modernize insurance law, improve access to effective treatments, and reduce costs; they cited national savings from biosimilars and said the bill has agency support. Members asked about Delaware-specific savings, patient switching, and how the process would work, but no vote was taken during the discussion. The committee also heard House Bill 310, which would exclude large data centers from Blue Collar Jobs Act tax credits; the sponsor said the bill is intended to ensure large energy users contribute more to state and local revenues, while supporters and opponents debated competitiveness and community impacts. House Bill 406, on allowing insureds to choose their auto repair shop, and Senate Bill 347, a cleanup bill related to medical debt collection and personal property levies, were also presented without opposition in the hearing. House Bill 253, concerning who may receive letters testamentary or of administration, was described as a cleanup to align statute with existing practice. The committee approved the meeting minutes, but the transcript does not show final votes on the bills discussed.

Transcript Highlights:

• We hear about 10,000 new workers' compensation cases that are filed each year and about 700 new administrative
• And what this means is that referring agencies, instead of hearing cases within their agency themselves
• So referring agencies who refer a case to the Office of Administrative Hearings pay an hourly billable
• And what this means is that referring agencies, instead of hearing cases within their agency themselves
• So referring agencies who refer a case to the Office of Administrative Hearings pay an hourly billable

Bills: HF1151, HF1239, HF1240, HF2020, HF2514, HF2515, HF2451

Keywords: Compensation Council, salaries, state officials, judicial compensation, legislative process, public funds, misuse, law enforcement, accountability, state government, legislative auditor, compliance, transparency, retirement benefits, health insurance, dependents, state employees, Medicare, legislative studies, government oversight

Transcript Highlights:

• I do appreciate the suggestion that this is like a Red Bull case, but that wasn't a New Mexico case and
• And I appreciate the suggestion that this is like the foot-long case, and that was not a New Mexico case
• Hearing no objection, Senator Adama. Mr.
• Hearing no objection, Senator Woods to explain.
• Hearing no objection, the reader to read. Mr.

Transcript Highlights:

• And in many cases, many, many cases, the wonderful people of the state of Texas have agreed to do so
• We hear a lot about... So, okay, that’s great. We hear a lot about PUC.
• The other is a case management system.
• And I know I will when looking at these cases.
• Typically, all the parties to the case in the first phase of a rate case are just trying to get that

Summary: The Senate Committee on Nominations held its final nomination hearing of the session and considered three nominees: J.B. Goodwin for the Texas Real Estate Commission, Courtney Yaltman for the Public Utility Commission of Texas, and Thomas Gleason as PUC chairman. Goodwin described his long career in real estate and charitable work, and senators questioned him extensively about the Real Estate Commission’s self-directed, semi-independent status, housing affordability, institutional homebuyers, property insurance costs, disclosure issues, and the Burnett v. National Association of Realtors case. Yaltman and Gleason were questioned about PUC oversight of ERCOT, post-Winter Storm Uri reforms, utility resilience and vegetation management after Hurricane Beryl, water and telecommunications oversight, staffing and transparency, and rising infrastructure and utility costs. Much of the discussion focused on housing and utility affordability, with several senators urging the nominees to keep consumer protection and public trust at the forefront. Goodwin said housing affordability and large-scale investment purchases were not within the Real Estate Commission’s direct purview, though he supported further study. Yaltman and Gleason said the PUC had increased oversight of ERCOT, improved communication and accountability with utilities, and was working on resiliency plans, rate-setting issues, and infrastructure planning while trying to avoid overburdening ratepayers. The committee first voted to favorably report nominees left pending from the May 5 agenda by a 6-0 roll call vote. After public testimony was opened and closed, the committee then voted on the nominees heard that day and favorably recommended all three to the full Senate for confirmation by a 7-0 vote. The committee then recessed subject to the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• case she has a seizure.
• Hello, can you hear me all right? Yeah, we can hear you. Great.
• Hello, can you hear me all right? Yeah, we can hear you. Great.
• Can you hear me? Excellent.
• Can you hear me? Excellent. So, Senators Lewis, the... Can you hear me? Excellent.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education held a public hearing on a large slate of bills, with the chairs emphasizing time limits, written testimony, and grouping similar measures together. Early testimony focused on opioid use disorder education in schools (S.382), with Senator Keenan arguing that students should be taught about the risks of substance use disorder and naloxone use as part of health curricula. Representative DeCost also briefly introduced H.551, a narrow bill concerning parent rights for children in third grade and younger. Several bills were then closed without testimony, including measures on type 1 diabetes informational materials and other diabetes-related proposals. A major portion of the hearing centered on school health and emergency response bills. Supporters of H.652/S.342 on diabetes management in schools described inconsistent district practices and urged clearer standards so students can receive care in classrooms rather than being sent out of instruction. Bills on epinephrine access and seizure disorders drew extensive testimony: advocates for stock epinephrine in schools argued that unassigned epinephrine can save lives and should be funded in a cost-neutral way, while a pediatrician opposed one version as an unfunded mandate. For seizure-safe schools (S.422/H.635), students, parents, educators, and advocates described missed or delayed responses to seizures, stigma, and the need for staff training, seizure action plans, and emergency medication protocols. A separate bill, H.645, allowing anti-seizure medication on school buses, was supported by a parent and student who said current law forces costly and restrictive transportation arrangements. The committee also heard testimony on youth skin health bills (S.334/H.600/H.619), which would let students carry and apply sunscreen at school and camp without a physician’s note. Supporters from melanoma prevention, dermatology, and industry groups said the bills would remove unnecessary barriers and promote sun-safe habits, while one witness cautioned about drafting details and unintended consequences. The hearing then moved to CPR/AED education for graduation (S.456), where Senator Tarr, a student advocate, and the Red Cross all supported requiring hands-on CPR certification for high school students. Finally, the committee took testimony on healthy school lunches (H.539/S.401): supporters from the Healthy School Lunch Coalition and school food directors backed stronger nutrition standards and a standing advisory council, while Consumer Brands Association witnesses opposed the bill as too vague and potentially disruptive. A nutrition scientist also warned about unintended restrictions on medically necessary or innovative foods. The chairs closed the hearing on the healthy lunch bills and then opened testimony on universal school meals for virtual schools (H.700), with Superintendent Patrick Latuka supporting access for students in Commonwealth virtual schools who currently receive no meal support.

Transcript Highlights:

• and to this day she still deals with um severe hearing loss and and only has about 20% of her hearing
• The chair hears none and the bill is left pending.
• Does any member need to hear? Oh. Let me back up.
• , um, since October 1 case out of.
• The chair hears none in the bill is left pending.

Bills: HB 2510, HB 3589, HB 4611, HB 4655, HB 4665, HB 4666, HB 4670, HB 4700, HB 4730, HB 4798, HB 4838, HB 5136, HB 5243, HB 5302, HB 5539

Keywords: assisted living, healthcare, licensing, criminal offense, personal assistance, group home, regulation, health and safety, inspections, resident care, criminal background checks, adoption, parental rights, registry, vital statistics, disclosure, counseling, foster care, independent living, financial literacy

Transcript Highlights:

• document it, and we did in this case." document it, and we did in this case."
• And for whatever reason, those cases And for whatever reason, those cases have,<00:02:51.720>
• I believe there in ICE-related cases.
• <00:06:19.240> on is uh whenever we have these hearings on is uh whenever we have these hearings
• > cases<00:21:38.200> that<00:21:38.320> are charged versus cases that are charged

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• of cases, you'll remember my friend Mr. of cases, you'll remember my friend Mr.
• Those are being dealt with on a case-by-case basis.
• They were notified case by case basis.
• >> Hearing<00:17:54.880> none. >> Hearing none. >> Hearing none.
• we want to hear. we want to hear. >> Thank<00:18:45.840> you,<00:18:46.000> Mr.

Bills: SJ0001

Keywords: mineral leasing, federal lands, Wyoming, energy policy, local control, federalism, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Seeing none, that'll end the hearing.
• Seeing none other hearing. Oops. on 480? Seeing none other hearing. Oops. So<00:23:17.039> moved.
• And there's the possibility that a public hearing in that case just exposes that person more, where it
• , licensed individuals, in this case, licensed individuals, in this case, teachers,<00:48:02.319>
• An attorney for the those cases.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, hear none. Any witnesses in opposition?
• I think what you're hearing, unfortunately, is an attempt to relitigate the Bronco wine case.
• First of all, we are not trying to relitigate the Napa Ridge case, the Bronco case.
• case.
• I just, I hear the...

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The committee heard several bills, with testimony largely split between supporters and opponents on policy and implementation. Assembly Member Wynn presented AB 2507 to strengthen state consultation with federally recognized tribal governments by requiring clearer tribal liaison roles, a tribal advisory committee, and more consistent early consultation across agencies. Supporters from Wilton Rancheria and the California Tribal Business Alliance said the bill would improve respect, coordination, and program outcomes; no opposition was heard. Wynn also presented AB 2024, a cleanup bill intended to reduce delays in outdoor advertising permit processing by requiring agencies to act on submitted applications. Supporters said it would clarify existing law and reduce uncertainty, and members expressed interest in the measure as a final fix to longstanding interpretation problems. Both bills were later approved and sent to Appropriations. Assembly Member Connolly presented AB 1585, which would require wine labeled “American” to be made from 100% American-grown grapes, aligning the federal “American” designation with California’s 100% sourcing rule for California-labeled wine. Supporters, including growers, farm bureaus, consumer advocates, and family wineries, argued the bill would improve truth in labeling, protect consumers, and help an industry facing bankruptcies, vineyard removals, and job losses. Opponents from major wineries and Wine Institute argued the bill could confuse consumers, create costly label changes, and disrupt blends and cross-regional products that are currently legal under federal law. After extended debate, the committee passed the bill to Appropriations. Assembly Member Ransom presented AB 1605, a DUI safety bill that would allow judges to place a no-alcohol-sales notice on the licenses of repeat or serious DUI offenders, limiting their ability to purchase alcohol. Supporters from law enforcement and roadway safety groups said the measure would address recidivism and help prevent alcohol-related crashes and deaths, while retailers and restaurant groups raised concerns about implementation and ID-checking burdens. The committee discussed committee amendments and the bill passed to Appropriations. Assembly Member Hoover’s AB 2211, allowing craft distillers to operate a second tasting room, also advanced with support from the distilling industry and no opposition. The committee also took up AB 1578, which would require local and state elected officials to take anti-hate speech training; supporters said it responds to rising hate crimes, while opponents raised First Amendment concerns and objected to the lack of a clear definition of hate speech. After a lengthy exchange, the bill passed on a party-line-leaning vote to Appropriations. Finally, AB 2717, extending a sunset for off-site advertising displays at large sports venues, was introduced as a venue-revenue and fan-experience measure tied to major upcoming events, and the transcript indicates it was being considered with committee amendments.

Transcript Highlights:

• The chair hears none.
• The chair hears none. The substitute is adopted.
• Our organization hears from over 500 women.
• I've handled every type of criminal case and I've seen the real positive effects of designated a case
• And by leaving this case out of the codification of cases that 42A.02 0.54 applies to, that is exactly

Transcript Highlights:

• Westminster case. Her father— Gonzalo Mendez. They fought for equity.
• Westminster was a landmark case right here in our state.
• I had a chance to hear from the Mendez family.
• Seeing and hearing no further debate, the clerk will open the roll.
• But I don't hear it. I don't hear a lot of recognition of that here this morning.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Joining us later on in the hearing as well.
• In this case, that's what we do. We find multiple cases of workers being exploited in our state.
• One of my own cases One of my own cases involved a baseless $5,000 claim.
• Chairman, can you hear? Yeah, we can hear you. Thank you. Thank you.
• Eduardo, I'm not sure if you can hear us, but if you can, we cannot hear you or see you.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused on several labor-related bills, especially proposals to give legislative employees the right to organize and collectively bargain, close a prevailing wage loophole for off-site prefabrication work, and strengthen enforcement against wage theft. Committee chairs opened the hearing by explaining the hybrid format and asking witnesses to keep testimony brief. Multiple legislators testified in support of the legislative staff union bill, saying staff deserve the same bargaining rights as other public employees and that unionization would improve pay, benefits, retention, and workplace dignity. Witnesses also discussed how the bill would likely be structured, with separate House and Senate bargaining arrangements or locals, and emphasized that it would only create the option to unionize, not require it. A second major topic was the prevailing wage bill addressing off-site fabrication and prefabrication in construction. Union leaders, contractors, and workers described how more work is being shifted from job sites into shops, especially in sheet metal, HVAC, electrical, and pipefitting work, and argued that the law should treat that work the same as on-site construction when it is part of a public project. They said the current loophole lets some contractors underbid by paying lower wages off-site, while responsible contractors already pay prevailing wages in their shops. Supporters argued the bill would protect workers, preserve apprenticeship and training standards, improve safety and quality, and make enforcement easier through certified payroll and clearer definitions. The committee also heard testimony on wage theft legislation. Representative Dan Donahue, the Attorney General’s Fair Labor Division, AFL-CIO representatives, and carpenters’ union witnesses described wage theft, misclassification, labor brokers, and tax fraud as widespread problems that hurt workers, honest contractors, and public revenues. They supported giving the Attorney General stronger enforcement tools, adding contractor accountability up the subcontracting chain, and protecting workers from retaliation and from delays that can cause claims to expire. A separate witness supported a bill to extend the statute of limitations for Wage Act cases while AG investigations are pending, and another supported changes to help hospital workers enforce timely payment rights. No votes were taken during the hearing; witnesses repeatedly asked for favorable reports on the bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• During the public hearing, when asked if there had been any cases of the New Hampshire reproductive care
• There have been many cases.
• There have been many cases.
• does not file charges in the case. does not file charges in the case.
• possibility of an evidentiary hearing. possibility of an evidentiary hearing.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• >> Well, if I mean it's just we in case >> Well, if I mean it's just we in case that<00:02
• And I think in that case, we're it.
• So, this that's not always the case.
• <01:02:49.839> They hear if they have a statement. They hear if they have a statement.
• <01:08:24.400> be make the profit is 17 in this case be make the profit is 17 in this case

Bills: SB170, SB177, SB207, SB208, SB215, HB27, SB219, SB247, SB232, SB81

Keywords: 923, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• applications than we have time to hear applications than we have time to hear within<00:15:11.120
• cases often they wetering type of cases cases often they wetering type of cases that<01:04:44.839
• We got a lot of cases, I'm hearing people come in and talk about cases that are getting lost, and it's
• <01:54:55.079> I'm<01:54:55.199> hearing yet we got a lot of cases I'm hearing yet
• we got a lot of cases I'm hearing people<01:54:55.719> come<01:54:55.840> in<01:54:56.000

Bills: HF2432

Keywords: HF2432, judiciary finance bill, public safety finance bill, corrections policy, crime victims, victim services, Minnesota victims of crime account, court fees, marriage license fee, financial crimes, fraud investigations, insurance fraud, Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, BCA, Commerce Fraud Bureau, wage theft, automobile theft prevention, nonprofit security grants, 911 funding, POST Board

Transcript Highlights:

• So we're not going to hear to argue disparate impact.
• Is it statutory or case law?
• I come to find out it's a cobbling of case law into some statutory stuff.
• It's statutory or case law?
• That's not the case. What we need to do is have a really good law.

Summary: The Senate Land Use Committee met in hybrid format but did not have a quorum, so it did not approve minutes or take formal votes. The committee first heard House Bill 457, which would raise the appraisal threshold for certain DELDOT real property dispositions from $10,000 to $25,000 to match federal highway standards and reduce the time and cost of selling small surplus properties. There was little discussion and no public comment on that bill, and the chair indicated it would be circulated. The committee then took up House Bill 451, which would codify a disparate impact framework under Delaware’s Fair Housing Act. The bill was described as clarifying that housing policies or practices can violate the law even without discriminatory intent if they have an unjustified discriminatory effect on a protected class, using a burden-shifting test similar to federal law. The sponsor and DHSA said the measure was intended to preserve fair housing protections amid uncertainty at the federal level, and an additional amendment was discussed that would delay implementation for 180 days and require DHSR, with DSA and stakeholders, to conduct outreach, education, and training. Public testimony was divided. Supporters, including Housing Alliance Delaware, YWCA Delaware, and the Delaware Human and Civil Rights Commission, said the bill would protect against discriminatory outcomes, align state law with longstanding fair housing principles, and preserve recourse if federal enforcement changes. Opponents and housing-provider groups, including the Delaware Association of Realtors, Greater Wilmington Housing Providers, and the Delaware Apartment Association, argued the bill could create liability for neutral policies, rely on statistical outcomes landlords cannot easily measure, and increase litigation and costs; several asked for more time, a right-to-cure process, or further amendments. The committee adjourned without taking a formal vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• And typically, follow-up hearings are not held.
• And typically, follow-up hearings are not held.
• hear, but we know it's the hardest ones to give in testimony.
• And it is oftentimes really devastating to hear their stories as well and to hear how that's leading
• We are now adjourning this committee hearing. Thank you.

Summary: The committee heard SB 1067, which would require annual math screening for kindergarten through second grade students beginning in 2028-29 to identify early numeracy difficulties and connect students to evidence-based supports. Senator Weber and supporters, including EdVoice, UC Davis researcher Charles Wilkes, and several education and community advocates, argued that California’s math performance is too low and that early screening would help close gaps before they widen. Opponents, including the California Mathematics Council, county superintendents, and the CTA, said the bill could narrow instruction, overemphasize deficit-based measures, and should instead be paired with stronger investments in teacher training and implementation of the California Mathematics Framework. Committee members generally expressed support for the bill’s goals while discussing how the screener would work and what kinds of follow-up supports would be needed. The committee also heard SB 1110 on child care subsidy administration, which would restructure funding for alternative payment programs and core contracts as the state moves to enrollment-based funding. Supporters said the bill would stabilize child care providers, improve payment timelines, and better reflect the administrative work of enrolling families and managing services; there was no opposition testimony. SB 1374, supported by the CSU and UC systems, would allow public higher education institutions to seek temporary restraining orders when credible threats are directed at a campus rather than a specific person. Supporters described recent campus threats that created safety concerns but did not fit current restraining-order law; there was no opposition. Senator Nilo presented SB 1321, which would direct the State Auditor to review remedial course use and student preparedness at selected UC and CSU campuses after a UC San Diego report showed a sharp decline in incoming students’ math readiness. Supporters argued the audit would help identify gaps in college readiness and the effects of K-12 changes, while some members raised concerns about bypassing the usual legislative audit process; the bill was held on call. The committee then took up SB 1086 on microschools, which would define microschools and direct model ordinances for local land-use regulation. Supporters said it would create a clearer path for small, individualized learning communities, but several members questioned whether the concept was sufficiently defined and whether the state had enough information to draft model ordinances; the bill was also placed on call after a quorum was established. Finally, SB 1181 was presented as a limited pilot program in Central Valley counties to connect schools with regional threat assessment centers when credible safety concerns arise. The author and supporters, including the mother of a student killed in a shooting and several students, said it would improve early intervention and communication; committee members raised privacy and federal-sharing concerns but indicated support, and the bill was moved forward on a vote once quorum was present.