Transcript Highlights:

• Part of our ask was to try to show the Upper Basin that you have risks.
• And that's been part of the discussion.
• That's part of the bargain. Why doesn't anyone grab onto that?
• I'm still, I just, I agree with the mandated part.
• They’re not part of jet exhaust.

Summary: The committee began by announcing that House Bill 2094 would be held and not heard that day, then received a lengthy update from Arizona Department of Water Resources Director Tom Buschatzky on Colorado River negotiations and post-2026 operating rules. He described Arizona’s legal position, the basin’s water allocations, current shortages, conservation efforts, and the state’s view that the Upper Basin should share more of the reductions and move more water from reservoirs above Lake Powell to Lake Mead. Members asked about tourism, recreation, tribal water rights, public outreach, and the role of the state’s delegation and the federal government. Buschatzky said Arizona has already made major conservation cuts and that further reductions are likely, whether by agreement or federal action, and emphasized ongoing negotiations and public meetings. The committee then heard House Bill 2758, which would expand McMullen Valley groundwater transfer rules to allow eligible entities, including private water companies, to withdraw and transport groundwater under specified conditions, with ADWR oversight and reporting requirements. Supporters argued the bill would provide a lawful, regulated way to move water for urban growth and housing needs, while opponents from La Paz County and rural advocacy groups said it would accelerate aquifer depletion, harm private wells, and benefit a New York hedge fund at the expense of local residents. After debate over guardrails, stakeholder outreach, and the impact on rural communities, the committee adopted the Griffin amendment and passed HB 2758 as amended on a 6-4 due-pass vote. Finally, the committee took up House Bill 2098, which revises bonding authority and public hearing notification requirements for county water augmentation authorities and allows such authorities to enter into local repayment agreements with WIFA. Pinal County officials and related stakeholders testified in support, saying the changes would help the Pinal County Water Augmentation Authority finance future water and infrastructure projects, including possible augmentation efforts tied to Bartlett Dam, and would clean up statutory language to match the authority’s needs. The transcript ends during testimony on HB 2098, before any committee vote on that bill is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, that's part of the budget, part of the money that's coming in."
• </c><00:43:19.359><c> of</c> are situations I I have been part of are situations I I have been part of
• </c> recommendation and concurred in part recommendation and concurred in part with<00:50:24.800><c>
• </c><00:50:27.520><c> with</c> Justice, which concurred in part with Justice, which concurred in part
• Just curious on the financial disclosure part.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Fiscal Committee met on December 19, with Senators Long and Lang serving as replacements. The committee approved the November 21 minutes and adopted the consent calendar after removing two Department of Health and Human Services items for separate discussion. It then took up an HHS request involving nursing facility rates, where Nathan White explained that $2.2 million would be transferred from a long-term care Medicaid eligibility contract to the nursing facilities budget. He said the funds would offset an otherwise projected 3.9% average rate decrease and bring the overall average change to zero for the next six months, with rates reset again in July under state law. Members asked about the budget adjustment factor, bed counts, and whether additional funds could raise rates further; White said the factor is statutory, capped at 28.76%, and that more money would lower the factor and increase rates. The committee also corrected a date in the request from February 1, 2025 to February 1, 2026, and approved the item. The committee next approved another HHS item related to rural health transformation grants. Members confirmed the request covered the full amount applied for this biennium, and asked about the technology component. HHS said the grant is not solely about AI, but about broader technology improvements such as electronic medical records, back-end systems, and tools to improve access and sustainability in underserved areas. The committee approved that item as well. The Judicial Council then requested funds for contract attorneys providing indigent defense on a fixed-fee basis. The council said current funds had already been exhausted and that the new appropriation would be used immediately. Members questioned the size of the request and the number of people awaiting counsel; the council reported about 150 incarcerated people and about 300 non-incarcerated people waiting for counsel, more than in recent years. It attributed the increase to competition for attorneys, public defender offices closing intake in some locations because of caseload limits, and broader case and court-system changes. One member raised constitutional concerns about delays in counsel for incarcerated defendants. The committee ultimately amended the request downward to $1 million, approved it, and then approved a motion to place several annual financial reports on file and release them to the public when available. The committee also discussed dashboard reporting from HHS, asking for more detail on community mental health center caseloads and budget-reduction information, and HHS agreed to provide more useful monthly detail.

Transcript Highlights:

• That part frustrates me.
• Just because one part of the body gets to write the bills doesn't mean the other part of the body shouldn't
• I can't remember that part of the bill, and I know it may not be part of the new bill, but I'd really
• The county, parts of the county can be, but not parts of the city. Federal U.S.
• That's the part I'm talking about.

Transcript Highlights:

• Part one is just in order for the department really to be able to comply with part two; they'd have to
• do part one, but the part one wouldn't be available because it has personally identifiable information
• </c> information that part this part two is information that part this part two is what<01:41:15.080>
• </c><01:41:21.080><c> one</c> with part two they'd have to do part one with part two they'd have to do
• part one but<01:41:21.679><c> the</c><01:41:21.840><c> part</c><01:41:22.040><c> one</c><01:41:22.239

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Travel insurance is an unusual kind of insurance in that it's part insurance, part other services like
• Travel insurance is an unusual kind of insurance in that it's part insurance, part other services like
• Travel insurance is an unusual kind of insurance in that it's part insurance, part other services like
• </c><00:35:14.800><c> of</c> but they are not changing any part of but they are not changing any part
• > the</c> statute and it's not a part of the statute and it's not a part of the contracts<00:40:51.040

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The committee met to walk through nonpartisan side-by-side comparisons of House File 4188, focusing on differences between House and Senate language across consumer protection, insurance, financial services, health, and technical provisions. Staff highlighted numerous Senate-only items, including rules for financial providers communicating through trusted contacts, virtual currency requirements for banks and credit unions, a prohibition on virtual currency kiosks beginning in 2026, mortgage servicing and student loan servicing changes, the Rental Home Marketplace Guarantees Act, insurance and travel-related provisions, scrap metal licensing changes, protections related to minors accessing chatbots and AI companions, and several technical or conforming repealers. Staff also noted that some provisions were identical or substantially similar between the chambers, including mortgage originator standards, student loan borrower protections, securities-related changes, unclaimed property provisions, and technical updates in the bill’s miscellaneous articles. The Senate-only health-related articles were also summarized, including repeal of the prescription drug affordability advisory council, technical changes to the reinsurance program, and a series of health insurance provisions on enrollment-growth notices, limits on officer and director salary increases under certain capital conditions, guaranteed issue rights for certain Medicare supplement enrollees, data-sharing between Commerce and Health, restrictions on using artificial intelligence alone to deny claims, reimbursement for clinical trainees, home care nursing coverage, and PBM transparency. The Senate’s telecommunications article was described as largely technical and conforming, with repeals of obsolete statutes. Staff also noted that some standalone bills had already passed and would be removed from the comparison report. Public testimony followed. Thomas Elness of AARP Minnesota supported inclusion of the cryptocurrency kiosk bill, expressed support for guaranteed issue protections for a narrow group of consumers affected by discontinued plans, and urged adoption of changes to the consumer protection restitution account, including raising the cap to $10 million per fiscal year. Representative Lee testified that the restitution account proposal should be treated as policy rather than finance because it has a zero fiscal note, and said the House would accept the Senate’s $10 million cap. Robin Rowan, representing the Minnesota Insurance and Financial Services Council and the U.S. Travel Insurance Association, urged adoption of Senate travel insurance language, requested a House-style change to lead-generation recordkeeping language, and supported a Senate provision allowing employers and insurers to coordinate notice to employees when group policies are cancelled. The Department of Commerce then responded to questions, explaining that the prescription drug affordability council would be sunset because the board already has other avenues for public input, that the reinsurance changes were technical and did not alter the prior agreement, and that the abandoned cryptocurrency provisions rely on statutory definitions of inactivity and known examples such as keys stored in safes or deposit boxes.

Transcript Highlights:

• They submit that as part of their application.
• That was part of the modeling, or has to be.
• That's in part why they asked us to do it.
• Van Zandt County is part of this, and that's part of my district.
• Hopkins County has part of this aquifer.

Summary: The committee held a hearing on high-capacity groundwater wells proposed in Anderson, Henderson, and Houston counties, with members framing the issue as one of local water supply, fairness, and the need to modernize groundwater law while protecting private property rights. Opening remarks focused on the scale of the proposed Redtown Ranch and Pine Bliss projects, the potential export of tens of thousands of acre-feet of groundwater annually, and concerns that the applications lacked sufficient technical detail and could harm nearby landowners, cities, agriculture, and manufacturing. Members also noted the broader context of the recent flooding tragedy in central Texas and the Legislature’s intent to address water-related loss of life in the upcoming special session. Witnesses from the Texas Alliance of Groundwater Districts and the Texas Water Development Board explained the current groundwater management framework. They described groundwater conservation districts as the state’s preferred management method, the role of groundwater management areas and desired future conditions, and how the Water Development Board uses those conditions to calculate modeled available groundwater. They emphasized that districts rely on local data, monitoring wells, and planning processes, but that information is often more limited in areas without a district, where the rule of capture applies. Members pressed witnesses on recharge rates, export permits, subsidence, the effect of pumping on nearby wells, the age and real-time availability of model data, and whether the proposed project would exceed modeled available groundwater in some counties. TCEQ explained its limited oversight role over groundwater conservation districts, including inquiries, compliance actions, and, in extreme cases, dissolution authority. Water Development Board staff also outlined funding programs, saying the New Water Supply for Texas Fund is limited to projects such as brackish desalination, reuse, ASR, and other new-supply projects, and does not fund fresh groundwater exports alone. They said the project at issue had not applied for board funding. A water lawyer then testified on the rule of capture, ownership in place, and district regulation, arguing that districts must use permitting and other tools to manage production within modeled available groundwater and that the Legislature could consider additional authority over groundwater exports under current law.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that's part of the affordability crisis on our part, is we're finding something, fires are going
• And that’s the other part of that.”
• Yeah, you know, not part of the initial barriers.
• Everyone has to pay a part. And I think I shared that yesterday. Everyone has to pay a part.
• the state, even the urban parts of the state.

Summary: The joint Senate hearing focused on California wildfire resilience funding, the SB 254 report on natural catastrophe resilience, and how the state should better prioritize community hardening, recovery, and financing. Senators emphasized that catastrophic wildfires have driven major property losses, insurance cancellations, and affordability problems, and several members argued that prevention and home/community hardening should receive far more attention than they have to date. Members also raised concerns about CEQA and other permitting delays, the need for ongoing rather than one-time funding, and whether the state should rely more on the General Fund, utilities, or other sources such as polluter-pays approaches. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the state has appropriated about $4.7 billion for wildfire resilience since 2018-19, with most funding going to forest health, fuels reduction, and related landscape work, while only about $65 million has been specifically targeted to community hardening. LAO also noted that future one-time funding is likely to decline, that GGRF revenues may be limited under the new cap-and-invest structure, and that maintenance costs for treated areas could be substantial over time. Senators pressed LAO on why wildfire resilience is not more often funded through the General Fund and on whether current spending matches the scale of the risk. Cal Fire’s State Fire Marshal described the state’s community wildfire preparedness strategy, centered on home hardening, defensible space, and neighborhood-scale mitigation, and said the SB 254 report aligns with Cal Fire’s direction. He said California has roughly 4 million homes in the wildland-urban interface, most built before modern wildfire-resistant standards, and highlighted recent streamlining that approved 383 fuels-reduction projects in under 30 days during an emergency proclamation. Cal OES described the AB 38 pilot and FEMA hazard mitigation work, saying federal approval delays have been a major barrier and that the state has hardened 155 properties so far through the pilot, with many more in process. The Wildfire and Forest Resilience Task Force said the state has coordinated more than $6 billion in state and federal investments, treated over 700,000 acres annually, and is shifting toward more regional, data-driven planning and block grants. Task force staff and Cal Fire both said they are moving beyond simple acreage metrics toward models that estimate avoided loss and community risk reduction, but acknowledged major data gaps on parcel-level home hardening and defensible space. No formal votes were taken; the hearing was informational, with members discussing possible future legislation and budget changes, including home inspection reforms and continued CEQA streamlining.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is part of a coherent ecosystem of education.
• Or sorry, could you repeat that part?
• “Oh, that'll be part of mid-... So we won't know by that May revise.”
• Anyone else on part one of today's hearing? Thank you. Anyone else on part one of today's hearing?
• So do you think that will be part of the conversation?

Summary: The committee heard testimony on three education budget items: the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), differentiated assistance/statewide system of support, and universal school meals plus kitchen infrastructure grants. For ELOP, the Department of Finance described the Governor’s proposal to provide $4.7 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding and $62.4 million to set a minimum Tier 2 rate of $1,800 per pupil. The LAO recommended instead fixing the Tier 2 rate at $1,579, and committee members questioned how the rate was determined, how much funding is actually spent, and whether overlapping funding from ELOP, ACEs, and 21st Century programs is being tracked. CDE said ELOP is showing positive attendance and math outcomes, but some requested data will not be available until mid-2027; members also raised concerns about double-funding, transparency, and whether middle and high school students are being equitably served. On differentiated assistance, CCEE outlined the statewide system of support and the various tiers of universal, targeted, supplemental, and intensive assistance. Finance explained the Governor’s proposal to replace the current DA structure with a more stable universal and targeted assistance model, funded at $131.9 million ongoing, with a three-year support cycle aligned to LCAP and ESSA timelines and broader State Board authority to revise eligibility criteria. The LAO objected to considering the proposal before the State Board finalizes the new performance criteria, and committee members expressed concern that moving to a three-year cycle could delay support for LEAs that newly fall into need mid-cycle. There was also discussion about whether the proposal would weaken subgroup-based equity guardrails or give the State Board too much discretion over who qualifies for support. For school meals and kitchen infrastructure, Finance proposed $1.8 billion ongoing for universal meals and an additional $100 million ongoing plus $100 million one-time for a fourth round of kitchen infrastructure and training grants. The LAO recommended rejecting the new kitchen grant round because prior rounds are still being spent and the unmet need is not yet clear. CDE said prior investments have improved meal participation, efficiency, and menu variety, but many schools still lack the facilities for scratch cooking and face construction, electrical, and procurement barriers. Members asked for more data on how prior grants were used, which schools are benefiting, and whether funds could also support lower-cost food access strategies such as pantries, while noting federal restrictions on some meal-service innovations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative, actually, Florida and Texas, there are two parts here.
• That's a very interesting part of history.
• That's a very interesting part of history.
• What was the second part of the question?
• So I do like that part of it.

Bills: HB113, HB342, HB632, HB690, HB1003, HB1078, HB1132, HB1146

Keywords: grading scale, education reform, students, public schools, academic policy, special education, due process, local education agency, burden of proof, IEP, education law, data sharing, student information, privacy, education, LA FIRST, foreign adversaries, terrorism, contracting, school funding

Transcript Highlights:

• We're simply just trying to help our farmers that this is part of our ag industry.
• And I think that's part of our picture moving forward in education.
• Because homeschoolers are still part of the community.
• The question of the Henry came up, sure enough, the Henry did play a special part.
• And that's part of the information you have before you, but you don't have this page.

Keywords: 989, all

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, approved the prior day’s journal, and received committee reports and House messages. Among the reported actions, several bills were advanced or enrolled, Senate Bill 1441 was sent to the 14th order for possible amendment, and House Bill 1449 on election petition circulation was introduced and referred. The chamber then moved into third reading and final consideration of multiple measures. Several bills were debated and passed, including House Bill 772 on industrial hemp negligence standards, House Bill 879 clarifying hemp product regulation, House Bill 926 expanding community infrastructure district authority to certain county areas, House Bill 894 protecting the public’s right to record open meetings, and House Bill 932 placing an advisory question on the ballot to select an official state gun. Supporters generally described these as technical clarifications, transparency measures, or tools to support agriculture, infrastructure, and public participation; opponents raised concerns about property taxes, rural development, and the symbolism of the state gun measure. House Bill 1436 on cooperative purchasing also passed after debate over procurement flexibility and a pending court case. Other measures failed or were sent back. Senate Bill 1424, which would have expanded protections for licensed motor vehicle dealers and restricted direct manufacturer sales, failed on a 11-24 vote after opponents called it protectionist and argued for consumer choice. House Bill 888 on information technology procurement drew criticism over vague “reasonable fee” language and lack of competitive bidding, and the Senate unanimously returned it to committee. House Bill 934, making technical changes to the parental school choice tax credit, passed after extensive debate over whether students participating in public school extracurriculars should remain eligible; supporters said it clarified original intent, while opponents argued it allowed “double dipping.”

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, we don't currently do that now as part of our deployment.
• part of what this proposal does.
• And that's part of these preventative measures we're taking.
• It's part of the concern that everyone has.
• It's part of the concern that everyone has.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And so that's another complicating factor in part of this.
• Part of it is also our revenue estimates. A complicating factor in part of this.
• Part of it is also our revenue estimates. And it shows the COLA.
• ..for the most part, those are common across.
• For the most part, those are common across.

Summary: The committee heard opening public comment and then took up several K-12 budget items in the Governor’s January proposal. On LCFF and necessary small schools, the Department of Finance described a 2.41% COLA, a roughly $2.2 billion increase for districts and charters, and a $30.7 million ongoing augmentation to raise necessary small schools funding by 20%. The LAO supported funding the COLA and said the small schools proposal had merit, but questioned the 20% figure and warned about a sharp funding cliff around the enrollment thresholds. Members and witnesses repeatedly raised declining enrollment, attendance, and the need to align funding with outcomes and local cost pressures. The chair and several members also asked whether consolidation, shared administration, or alternative formulas could better address small district costs, and the issue was left open for further discussion. The panel then discussed special education equalization. Finance proposed $509 million ongoing Proposition 98 funding to raise the statewide special education base rate to $999 per ADA, which would fully equalize SELPA base rates; the LAO said the same target could likely be reached with less money under current assumptions. CDE strongly supported equalization as an equity issue and said about 15% of students are identified with disabilities, with identification rising by roughly 20,000 to 25,000 students per year. Members raised concerns about staffing shortages, high caseloads, and the need to use any additional funds for inclusive practices, alternative diploma pathways, and the extraordinary cost pool. The committee also discussed whether the budget language should reflect the $509 million amount or the $999 rate, and the item was held open. For the Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant, Finance proposed restoring $757.3 million one-time to complete the program, while the LAO recommended approval because learning loss remains unresolved and districts have generally used the funds for tutoring, supplemental instruction, and other academic supports. CDE explained that LEAs must revisit their needs assessments and that many districts are using the funds alongside other support systems, but members pressed for clearer accountability and better data on how much money actually goes to tutoring or other direct services. The committee then reviewed the Student Support and Professional Development Discretionary Block Grant, with Finance proposing $2.8 billion one-time and the LAO saying discretionary funding can help districts address local priorities but should be paired with fiscal oversight and possibly more targeted priorities. Members split between supporting flexibility for local needs and worrying that the grant could be used to cover ongoing structural deficits without clear evidence of student-outcome gains; the issue was also held open. Finally, the committee heard a high-level overview of school facilities funding under Proposition 2, with Finance proposing to continue $1.5 billion in bond spending in 2026-27. OPSC said that at the current pace all Prop 2 K-12 funds would likely be exhausted around 2029-30, and that demand is shifting toward modernization as enrollment declines in many areas. Members asked about school closures, reuse of unused sites, and the new small school district facilities program, which OPSC said is moving toward proposed regulations and would begin accepting modernization applications in November 2026 and new construction applications in January 2027. The committee also briefly noted community college facilities funding and asked for more information later in the process.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those are not part of the state budget.
• </c><00:10:16.959><c> Those</c><00:10:17.440><c> go</c> not part of the state budget.
• Those go not part of the state budget.
• </c> a clerical clerical error on on the part a clerical clerical error on on the part of<00:37:56.000
• </c><00:39:57.200><c> they're</c> I think for the most part they're I think for the most part they're

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The work session was limited to House Bill 1750, a supplemental appropriation for the Department of Health and Human Services’ SNAP administration. Before testimony, Representative Terski distributed a written statement from Representative Priest for the record. Department officials Karen Heert and Nathan White then walked the committee through a chart showing SNAP participation, federal benefit dollars, and state administrative costs, emphasizing that the benefits themselves do not flow through the state budget. They explained that the reported administrative cost includes overhead and cost-allocation methods used to maximize federal reimbursement, and that the current participant count is about 75,000 with the trend steady in recent years. Members questioned whether the reported costs were stable, how much of the administrative expense was directly tied to SNAP, and whether reducing overhead would lower the need for the appropriation. The department said the cost per participant and per dollar distributed would be lower if SNAP were isolated, but that the broader allocation system also supports federal claiming across multiple programs. Officials said SNAP eligibility is redetermined every six months, that the department processes nearly 50 eligibility programs with about 250 field staff, roughly 70 unfunded positions, and a vacancy rate around 25%. They also said most errors in the program are unintentional and can come from either staff or participant mistakes, and that the department reviews errors to identify systemic fixes. The committee discussed the fiscal impact of the bill and related budget issues. DHHS said the current adjusted authorization for 2026 is about $31 million, but actual spending is expected to be closer to $25–26 million because of vacancies and unfilled positions. Members asked whether the $4.4 million shortfall identified in the fiscal note would come from the rainy day fund; staff said it would not be taken directly from that fund, but would reduce the amount available to flow into it at the end of the biennium. The committee also reviewed Senate Bill 603 FN, which was described as an alternative approach that would require DHHS to transfer funds within its existing budget rather than provide new money; officials said it would simply codify an option the department already has. No vote or final action on House Bill 1750 was taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Back to the main part of the bill.
• Those students would not be part of the 6,500.
• Is there any part of this bill, because you said racial profile and the whole thing, which part?
• So that is just one part of this bill.
• I might be in the wrong part.

Summary: The Senate Appropriations Committee took up SB 2-C, a major immigration enforcement bill sponsored by Senator Gruters and co-introduced by Senator Fine. Gruters described the measure as a broad crackdown on illegal immigration that would replace a single immigration officer with a State Board of Immigration Enforcement, create a $250 million grant program for local law enforcement, fund additional Department of Agriculture interdiction staff and facilities, expand pretrial detention for certain unauthorized immigrants, increase criminal penalties, require more cooperation with ICE, and eliminate in-state tuition eligibility for undocumented students. He and supporters framed the bill as a way to support law enforcement, deter illegal immigration, and align Florida with federal enforcement efforts. Committee questioning focused heavily on the bill’s education, detention, and enforcement provisions. Senators pressed Gruters and Fine on why the bill did not address employer sanctions or E-Verify, whether the tuition changes would affect students who had grown up in Florida, how sanctuary-policy enforcement would work, and whether the bill would create practical burdens for prosecutors, jails, and local officials. Gruters said he was open to working on E-Verify in regular session but not to amending this bill, and Fine argued the tuition repeal would apply to undocumented students who had qualified under existing law. Sheriff Bob Gualtieri testified in support, saying ICE bed capacity was still insufficient and that county jails needed more resources to honor detainers. Mark Schlachman of FSU Law offered historical context, noting prior state-federal cooperation efforts and warning of unintended consequences, while several public witnesses opposed the bill as unconstitutional, costly, and harmful to immigrant families and the economy. Opponents from the Southern Poverty Law Center, ACLU of Florida, Florida Center for Fiscal and Economic Policy, Florida Policy Institute, AFL-CIO, and immigrant advocacy groups argued the bill would invite litigation, encourage racial profiling, harm the workforce and higher education, and punish law-abiding immigrants and their families. They emphasized that immigration is a federal matter, that K-12 education must be provided regardless of status, and that removing in-state tuition would reduce access to college and hurt Florida’s economy. Some speakers urged the committee to grandfather current students if the tuition waiver is repealed. The meeting ended with continued public testimony and no final vote reflected in the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're part of Already, that is really the core of who we are: the EERC's people.
• We're part of the University of North Dakota, a non-teaching unit.
• So we are part of the University of North Dakota and a part of the state of North Dakota.
• If you saw this in the hallway, it's very busy, but it is part of the record here.
• It stayed as part of it, with a sole focus on ...the U.S. Bureau of Mines.

Summary: The committee met in Grand Forks, approved the February 26 minutes by voice vote, and recessed for a tour of the Mincota Power Cooperative headquarters before returning for presentations on large energy consumers, especially data centers. The first presentations focused on how North Dakota should respond to rapid growth in energy-intensive projects, with speakers emphasizing the need for reliable transmission, local decision-making tools, and factual information for county and township officials who are being asked to weigh major projects with limited staff and technical support. The North Dakota Transmission Authority director said local governments are being asked to make high-impact decisions on pipelines, transmission lines, large agriculture, wind, solar, carbon dioxide pipelines, direct-air capture, and data centers, and urged development of simple statewide decision tools and support from the League of Cities and Association of Counties. The Department of Environmental Quality’s air division director said North Dakota’s air remains among the cleanest in the nation, but large data centers can create air-quality concerns because of diesel backup generation; he said the department is requiring air monitors at some facilities and expects grid power and, potentially, cleaner natural gas backup to reduce emissions. Members asked about emissions standards, misinformation, monitoring costs, and staffing succession at DEQ. The Department of Water Resources director said North Dakota’s water law is based on common ownership and prior appropriation, and that data centers generally use relatively small amounts of water, often in closed-loop systems. He said the Missouri River and groundwater supplies are ample for projected needs, that the department’s permitting process protects senior water rights, and that even a worst-case data center scenario would use a very small share of Missouri River flow. Members asked about downstream impacts and compared data center water use with fracking. Later, McLean County State’s Attorney Ladd Erickson urged the committee to study how other states regulate data centers, warned against litigation-driven delays and overly broad local ordinances, argued reclamation bonding should be handled at the state level if at all, and said data centers can bring jobs and tax base but should remain subject to local zoning. The committee ended the morning session for lunch and later heard an EERC update from CEO Charles Gorecki on the center’s 75 years of work in energy and environmental technologies, especially oil and gas development and related research.

Transcript Highlights:

• So regarding the first part of your question, please repeat it.
• That don't get to be part of this at all.
• They are people that reside in rural parts of the state.
• They are people who are— —parts of the state.
• By funding the CAC, you became a part of Sarah's healing journey.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So those would be the new functions as part of the trailer bill language.
• I will follow up. with the specifics of what is part of that grant scoring process.
• Is that something that is part of the Healthy Soils Program or considered to be part of it?
• That’s part of the grants themselves? Yes.
• Tell me your other parts of your question. That's general funding. The coordination piece.

Summary: The subcommittee heard a series of budget presentations from the Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA), the Department of Cannabis Control (DCC), and related agencies. CDFA discussed its overall budget, ongoing support for the Farm to School program and climate-smart agriculture, and a proposed climate bond expenditure plan. Members focused heavily on whether the Farm to School proposal should become ongoing, how schools and suppliers are selected, whether the program is reaching disadvantaged and food-insecure communities, and whether the trailer bill language creates new duties. The LAO recommended rejecting the ongoing Farm to School proposal as presented, suggesting the Legislature consider Prop. 98 funding instead, while CDFA argued the program supports children, farmers, and local economies and helps build long-term supply-chain infrastructure. Several members also questioned the bond plan’s timing, program metrics, and workforce impacts, while LAO said the bond plan was generally reasonable and should be guided by legislative input. The committee also discussed CDFA’s proposal to eliminate vacant positions; the department said the positions were largely long-vacant or unfunded and could be reclassified if needed, while LAO recommended retaining the special-fund positions and weighing the General Fund positions on their merits. CDFA’s IT support request for additional ongoing funding and four positions was presented as necessary to address staffing shortages, legacy systems, and cybersecurity risks, and LAO had no concerns. The committee then took public comment and voted to approve items 9 through 13, including CDFA dog importation and carcass disposal items, a Gambling Control Commission IT item and tribal grant fund item, and an ABC office relocation item. DCC presented a request to strengthen enforcement against the illicit cannabis market by opening a North State office in Redding and adding sworn and non-sworn staff. The department said most cannabis consumed in California still comes from the illicit market, that it receives about 1,500 complaints annually but can close only about 400 cases, and that it has a backlog of roughly 4,000 cases. DCC argued that a northern office would reduce travel time, improve coordination with local agencies, and help target cross-county and cross-border criminal networks. Finance supported the request as a targeted investment, and LAO had no comment. Members asked about public safety, office security, and whether a North State presence would increase complaints or referrals; DCC said safety is considered in every office opening and that a local presence would likely improve case development. The director also described the broader regulatory strategy as balancing consumer safety, illicit-market enforcement, consumer awareness, and reducing friction for legal operators. The discussion continued into broader concerns about the size of the illicit market and the long-term goals for the cannabis program.

Transcript Highlights:

• That was part of that.
• That's part of probation, and that's okay.
• That's part of probation and that's okay.
• I was part of the team of people who helped draft Prop 207.
• But I don't believe... can you clarify that part?

Bills: SB1004, SB1012, SB1100, SB1110, SB1170, SB1213, SB1317, SB1402, SB1413, SB1416, SB1476, SB1511, SB1573, SB1655, SB1656, SB1709, SB1720, SB1723, SB1725, SCR1040

Keywords: sex offender registration, sex offender registry, A.R.S. 13-3821, sexual offenses, public safety, GPS monitoring, electronic monitoring, transient offender, homeless registrant, online identifiers, internet identifiers, sheriff notification, Department of Public Safety, DPS, DNA collection, juvenile adjudication, kidnapping of a minor, unlawful imprisonment of a minor, lifetime registration, community notification

Transcript Highlights:

• But reported numbers still tell only part of the truth.
• Just last year, I had an opportunity to be part of a collaborative...
• We're involved, but just wasn't aware, you know, originally with the specific part of it.
• We do our part. We partner with law enforcement on different things in the community.
• Part of this networked effort that everyone has spoken so highly about.

Summary: The Assembly Human Services Committee held an informational hearing with members of the API Legislative Caucus on California’s Stop the Hate Program and broader efforts to address hate incidents. Opening remarks emphasized the rise in hate during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, the importance of culturally and linguistically competent services, and the program’s role in serving not only AAPI communities but also Latino, Black, Jewish, Muslim, LGBTQ+, immigrant, and other impacted communities. Legislators and presenters repeatedly highlighted the value of trusted community-based organizations (CBOs) in reaching people who may not report to law enforcement or seek traditional services. The first panel included the California Commission on Asian and Pacific Islander American Affairs, the Department of Social Services (CDSS), and the Commission on the State of Hate. They described the program’s origins in the state’s equity budget, its funding structure, and its service model: direct victim services, prevention, and intervention. CDSS said 180 organizations statewide have participated, with grantees selected based on experience, capacity, and service to priority populations. The Commission on the State of Hate reported that hate remains widespread and underreported, citing survey data showing about 3.1 million Californians experienced at least one hate act in a year and that many victims need mental health, legal, and other supports beyond police response. Members asked about best practices, youth impacts, administrative costs, and the role of regional leads; CDSS said it would provide more detail on funding distribution and that the final evaluation is still in progress. The second panel featured grantees from Jewish Family Service San Diego, Inland Chinese American Association, Center for Empowering Refugees and Immigrants, and Equality California. They gave examples of how Stop the Hate funding supported culturally specific response teams, counseling, language-access services, self-defense and safety workshops, youth and elder programming, legal navigation, and reporting tools. Several speakers said the program helped build trust, reduce isolation, and connect people to services they otherwise would not use. Legislators pressed the panel on lessons learned, whether the model should be reauthorized, and what would be lost if funding ends. Panelists emphasized that the program’s flexibility, regional convenings, and support for small, trusted organizations were key strengths, while also noting the need for more direct funding to frontline providers and more data on what interventions work best.

Transcript Highlights:

• And in part, we exceeded the acres week.
• they do and then the part the PRC does.
• they do and then the part the PRC does.
• Part, Monica Tapia.
• Purchasing is part of the settlement.

Keywords: 996, all