Transcript Highlights:

• It is in no way intended to comment on the statute or even provide a thorough analysis of the statute
• This analysis is supported by the amendment to section 31-21-10.
• We heard the legal analysis of how. How this works, I'd like to hear Ms. Chavez-Cook's analysis.
• services, and then it's lacking behavioral health.
• So, for example, the health care authority certainly delivers behavioral health services.

Transcript Highlights:

• Furthermore, these tactics escalate unwanted behaviors.
• It is a continuum of behavior management techniques.
• Is it punishing a behavior or trying to stop a behavior?
• I don't understand, It is not punishment for a behavior.
• So, has any analysis been done to see whether they actually.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll also look into the behavioral health drugs.
• Is that part of your analysis, and can you tell us?
• So, behavioral health access to care.
• We have 13 behavioral health regions.
• Coming from Las Vegas with the State Behavioral Health Institute, we have many behavioral health initiatives

Transcript Highlights:

• It's been unprecedented, specifically for us to work through behavioral health.
• And also, we are developing the office of the behavioral health ombudsman.
• That's a subsidiary of the Florida Behavioral Health Association.
• The Office of Children's Behavioral Health Ombudsman.
• We had Senate Bill 330 that required us to do a bed capacity study and a gap analysis.

Summary: The Human Services Subcommittee met to review implementation of House Bill 7021, the recent overhaul of Florida’s Baker Act and Marchman Act, and to hear from DCF Assistant Secretary Erica Floyd Thomas about how the department is using the $50 million appropriation tied to the bill. Representative Maney, the bill sponsor, gave a lengthy background on why he pursued the reforms and emphasized that the goal was to improve access, reduce unnecessary crisis interventions, and give agencies the resources needed to carry out their responsibilities. He and the chair both noted that the bill was the product of many years of work and broad bipartisan support. DCF reported several early outcomes and implementation steps, including a statewide reduction in Baker Act initiations over the past five years, strong diversion rates from crisis through 988, mobile response teams, care coordination, and forensic multidisciplinary teams, and the creation of new tools such as a Baker Act dashboard and the first annual Marchman Act report. The department described key statutory changes: law enforcement discretion in initiating Baker Acts, a single-petition process, remote appearances, stronger discharge planning, interim services, updated parent notification and hold-period rules, an ombudsman office for children’s behavioral health, and regional collaboratives to identify local service gaps. DCF said it has updated manuals, FAQs, trainings, and rules, and that the managing entities have begun contracting for services. Members asked about how the $50 million was allocated, why much of it went to crisis capacity rather than outpatient care, how much has been spent so far, whether administrative costs are capped, and how the department will measure success. DCF said most of the money was used to preserve and expand crisis beds, detox beds, CSU beds, short-term residential treatment, discharge planning, and outpatient supports, with $1.3 million for the ombudsman and regional collaboratives and $48.3 million to managing entities. The assistant secretary said the department tracks readmissions, utilization, provider capacity, and monthly and quarterly reports from managing entities, but it is still early to see full effects because contracts were only recently executed. Members also raised concerns about children, families, veterans, workforce shortages, transparency, and gaps for hard-to-place individuals, including those with developmental disabilities or dementia. The meeting ended with no formal action beyond adjournment after questions were completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• We also have, along with that, our trust fund analysis that would reflect the actuals for 23, 25, and
• our trust fund analysis that would reflect the actuals for 23, 25, and then any revised estimates for
• So there will be two different fee schedules for the behavioral health clinics coming up.
• And the legal analysis confirmed that it is not that.
• So that, per our legal analysis, to just state buildings alone.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So there'll be cognitive<00:11:49.440> behavior,<00:11:49.920> there'll<00:11:50.160>
• > be cognitive behavior, there'll be cognitive behavior, there'll be education,<00:11:50.959>
• of, okay, this behavior— if I engage in this, what will happen here?
• <00:17:22.959> of risk management to do risk analysis of risk management to do risk analysis
• <00:49:49.760> change u recognized cognitive behavioral change u recognized cognitive behavioral

Keywords: 924, joint, all

Transcript Highlights:

• If we were to obtain behavioral health, we currently do not have any behavioral health specialists within
• In the past, ICASA has worked on behavioral health projects, and we've struggled to procure behavioral
• Harmful behavior focus, and that's what we are right now.
• Broadly behavioral health treatment? Not broadly behavioral health.
• Particular for students with behavioral disabilities.

Transcript Highlights:

• This carries the health committees' MinnesotaCare adjustment, medical assistance, and the behavioral
• 01:33.000> assistance<00:01:34.000> and<00:01:34.320> the<00:01:34.560> behavioral
• medical assistance and the behavioral medical assistance and the behavioral health<00:01:35.280>
• But the fiscal analysis assumed it.
• Um but the fiscal analysis specify MAT. Um but the fiscal analysis assumed<00:07:50.160> it.

Bills: HF2995, HF2434

Keywords: human services, funding, appropriations, MinnesotaCare, behavioral health, general assistance, healthcare, personal care assistance, worker retention, disability services, state funding, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, then there would be an analysis that would be done about whether it's covered under the bill.
• The determination of whether the image is private is going to be a very fact-specific analysis by the
• The second part about that fact-specific analysis: what this act is really looking to prevent is the
• So, what this act is really analysis.
• <00:20:41.679> is<00:20:41.919> really um that fact-specific analysis is really um

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee first took up SB 2567, a Judiciary package measure concerning temporary restraining orders for threats and harassment tied to a public employee’s official actions. Representatives from the Attorney General’s Office and the Judiciary said they had worked out a compromise to address earlier concerns, including a two-year pilot project, broader coverage for state officers and employees across all branches and counties, a special fund to pay for private counsel in some cases, and authority for Judiciary staff attorneys or Judiciary funds to represent Judiciary personnel. Members asked about coverage for retired judges, funding limits, and whether the measure could be used for workplace disputes; the witnesses said retired judges and per diem judges could be covered if the harassment related to their work, the fund would be limited and subject to available appropriations, and petitions would not be allowed between employees in the same branch. The chair recommended passage with amendments, and the committee adopted the recommendation unanimously. The committee then heard SB 2448, which creates a civil remedy for the unauthorized disclosure of intimate images under the Uniform Civil Remedies for Unauthorized Disclosure of Intimate Images Act. The bill’s proponent from the Uniform Law Commission explained that a plaintiff would need to show intentional disclosure or threat of disclosure of a private intimate image without consent, and said the privacy question would be fact-specific. Supporters, including the Commission on the Status of Women and Imua Alliance, favored giving survivors civil recourse. Opponents from the Sex Abuse Treatment Center and others warned that the term "private" could invite victim-blaming and broad discovery into a survivor’s past, while still acknowledging the need for some privacy limitation to avoid overbreadth, especially for people who intentionally distribute intimate content online. Committee members questioned whether the definition of "private" should be tightened. The bill’s proponent said the term should remain because it aligns with the related criminal statute and helps keep the measure focused on classic revenge-porn situations, while still allowing Hawaii-specific changes if needed. The committee did not take final action on SB 2448 in the portion provided, but testimony and discussion centered on balancing survivor protections with concerns about discovery and the scope of liability.

Transcript Highlights:

• Behavioral health, um, package, a large behavioral health package was passed.
• So this analysis from the Tax Policy Center is only how much GDP New Mexico could lose from exclusively
• The Foundation actually did an analysis on how much they think states stood to lose from including car
• We've seen a lot of analysis over in the last several months, um, or, or trying to dig into what is the
• Um, you might have similar situations with the grow and the Behavioral health trust fund.

Transcript Highlights:

• It seems to me there must be some scientific analysis that comes into play as well.
• So where would you see this scientific analysis coming from in this measurable term?
• A threshold analysis.
• , well, not just corporate behavior, but the best... ...the best corporate behavior on behalf of a utility
• It's like doing an appropriate social cost-benefit analysis.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy held a hearing on the California Earthquake Authority’s SB 254 report and broader options for reforming California’s utility wildfire recovery system. The chair framed the discussion around the Palisades and Eaton fires, the scale of wildfire-related costs on utility bills, and the need to weigh trade-offs among survivors, ratepayers, utilities, insurers, and taxpayers. The first panel featured wildfire survivors William Abrams and Joy Chen, who described long delays in compensation, housing insecurity, and what they viewed as a system that protects utility shareholders more than victims. They urged greater transparency, clearer accountability for utility spending and safety performance, faster and fuller compensation for survivors, and reforms such as independent audits and better alignment of utility incentives with wildfire prevention and restitution. The second panel began with Tom Welsh of the California Earthquake Authority, who explained that the SB 254 report was intended as a broad inventory of policy pathways rather than recommendations. He described the report’s process, including stakeholder submissions, workstreams, and a convergence process, and outlined the current wildfire fund structure: utilities remain liable, the fund reimburses eligible claims after a covered wildfire, and the CPUC later determines prudency and possible reimbursement back to the fund. RAND’s Lloyd Dixon summarized compensation data, saying utilities paid about $38 billion between 2017 and 2024, with major shares going to injured parties, insurers, and public entities, while litigation costs and survivors’ own losses remain substantial. He noted that legal fees and delays reduce the amount survivors ultimately receive. Utility and public-interest witnesses offered differing views on the report’s pathways. PG&E’s Tyson Smith said the report shows inaction is the worst outcome and argued for community wildfire risk reduction, equitable allocation of catastrophe costs, and state-led resilience tools. LADWP’s Fernando Valero emphasized the vulnerability of municipal utilities and cities, and supported inverse condemnation reform, a state-sponsored liability insurance framework, damages and subrogation limits, and stronger insurance access. Consumer Attorneys of California’s John Fisk argued that IOU-caused fires are not natural disasters but the result of negligence and sometimes criminal conduct, and opposed reducing utility liability while supporting stronger oversight and audits. The Public Advocates Office’s Nathaniel Skinner focused on affordability, saying ratepayers already bear large and growing wildfire costs and warning against shifting more costs onto bills without measurable risk reduction and tighter accountability. Committee members then began questioning witnesses about what counts as measurable mitigation, how to define full and fair compensation, and how any fast-pay process should work.

Transcript Highlights:

• AB 277 would require employees who provide behavioral health treatment to undergo a background check
• However, there is currently no background check requirement in state law for employees of behavioral
• However, there is currently no background check requirement in state law for employees of behavioral
• They did no analysis to see what sort of at-risk population was in the community.
• It says that in the bill analysis.

Summary: The Assembly convened after a quorum call, offered a prayer and Pledge of Allegiance, and then spent much of the session on guest introductions recognizing visitors, community college delegations, students, caregivers, a retired Assembly staff member, and a championship high school football team. Members also observed an adjournment in memory for Alex Preddy, a VA nurse killed in Minnesota, and later for Kathy Wooten and Rowena Ramos. The chamber then moved through the daily file and third reading file, with several items passed, retained, or continued. Among the bills taken up, AB 34 on renewable portfolio standard exemptions for publicly owned utilities passed 55-0; AB 35 to accelerate implementation of Proposition 4 climate resilience funds passed 62-0; AB 52 on food and agriculture equity passed 50-6; AB 72 creating an EV economic opportunity zone passed 58-0; AB 96 removing a diploma requirement for Medi-Cal peer support specialists passed 55-0; AB 230 extending Pierce’s disease control programs passed 64-0; AB 277 requiring background checks for behavioral health employees passed 59-0; AB 647 clarifying a county RV disposal pilot passed 54-0; AB 664 authorizing limited bachelor’s programs at Southwestern Community College passed 60-1; AB 673 creating a support grant for unaccompanied homeless youth passed 55-1; AB 710 on dynamic electricity pricing passed 54-0; AB 748 streamlining pre-approved housing plans passed 65-0; AB 767 expanding protections around sexually violent predator placements near schools and daycares passed 65-0; AB 883 protecting officials’ personal information from data brokers passed 66-0; AB 946 expanding 30x30 conservation efforts to urban areas passed 65-0; AB 1054 creating a deferred retirement option program for CHP and Cal Fire passed 61-1; AB 1070 on missing middle housing code simplification passed 66-0; AB 1159 strengthening student data privacy passed 54-4; AB 1204 revising the Local Control Funding Formula passed 54-1; AB 1265 extending the historic building tax credit passed 64-0; AB 1349 banning speculative ticketing passed 61-0; AB 1359 allowing seniors 80+ to opt out of jury service without a doctor’s note passed 67-1; AB 643 on organic waste procurement credits passed 48-4; AB 685 creating a small business resiliency fund passed 63-0; AB 714 tightening oversight of commercial driving programs passed 65-1; and AB 805 establishing a youth apprenticeship bridge program passed 66-0. Several other items were passed and retained or continued without debate. Debate on AB 1054 drew the sharpest disagreement, with opponents warning about pension costs and supporters arguing it would help retain experienced CHP officers and firefighters. AB 767 also prompted strong comments about public safety and placement of sexually violent predators in rural communities. On AB 1349, supporters from both parties backed the anti-speculative ticketing bill as consumer protection, while AB 664 drew support from members emphasizing access to higher education in underserved regions. The Assembly then adjourned until January 29, 2026, after announcing upcoming session dates and recording a few vote changes from the dais.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the first board is the Board of Behavioral Sciences.
• So the first board is the Board of Behavioral Sciences.
• We'll begin with representatives of the Board of Behavioral Sciences.
• The behavioral health landscape is evolving rapidly, and ...done.
• Just a reminder for folks, this is for the Board of Behavioral Sciences.

Summary: The joint sunset oversight hearing reviewed five regulatory entities: the Board of Behavioral Sciences, the Board of Psychology, the Physician Assistant Board, the Podiatric Medical Board, and the California Massage Therapy Council. Across the hearing, each entity described recent accomplishments, licensing and enforcement workload, workforce shortages, and efforts to modernize processes. Common themes included streamlining licensure, expanding access to care, addressing telehealth or emerging technology, and balancing consumer protection with workforce needs. For the Board of Behavioral Sciences, members discussed workforce shortages in mental health, supervision barriers, telehealth confidentiality, AI in therapy, interstate compacts, school-based services, and military spouse licensure. The board said it has expanded outreach, improved licensing processes, and created temporary practice authority tracking, while also expressing concern about counseling compacts and emphasizing California-specific law, ethics, and cultural competency. Public commenters supported the board’s work and the possible move to a national MFT exam, while also urging more resources. The Board of Psychology highlighted fee adjustments, streamlined licensure pathways, enforcement process improvements, new CPD requirements, and proposed changes including a psychotherapist-client privilege exception for investigations. Committee members and public witnesses focused heavily on that privilege proposal, with some members opposing it as too broad and privacy-invasive, while the board argued it is needed to obtain records in bias and sexual misconduct cases. The board also discussed workforce shortages, processing improvements, and the use of inactive status for psychological associates. The Physician Assistant Board reported growth in the PA workforce and education programs, SB 697 implementation, and financial pressure from rising enforcement costs. The main policy debate centered on physician-to-PA ratios and practice agreements, with board representatives and many public commenters arguing that current restrictions limit access to care, especially in rural areas, while the California Medical Association defended the need for explicit ratios and agreements. The board also discussed AI, fee increases, and tracking temporary practice authority. The Podiatric Medical Board described licensing and renewal reforms, residency expansion, enforcement support, and budget constraints, while public testimony raised concerns about a proposed fee increase and about reimbursement parity and practice recognition for podiatrists. Finally, the California Massage Therapy Council defended the certification model over licensure, citing lower costs, local government collaboration, anti-trafficking work, and its role in vetting applications and disciplining bad actors; no formal votes or final actions were taken during this portion of the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Happy to accept the amendments outlined in the analysis.
• The Board of Behavioral Sciences and the Board of Psychology.
• Thank you chair Ashby and thank you to the Board of Psychology and Board of Behavioral Sciences their
• First, I want to accept the amendments in the committee analysis and thanks to the committee staff for
• As the fourth largest producer of behavioral health practitioners in California in our sector, we play

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , please ensure that we have welcome a new staff member to the team Miss Hanna Vagos, our policy analysis
• This just gives an analysis of of what the the overall market looks like across the admitted market,
• I mentioned we would talk about this where this is a glide path analysis of of what the rate looks like
• Language added the required analysis Turman defending.
• You can't have the talent you need making for this kind of actuarial analysis work.

Transcript Highlights:

• the orderly conduct of legislative proceedings, and in particular, we will not accept disrupted behavior
• or behavior that incites or threatens violence.
• As the committee analysis points out CDE was required to contract for a study that examines non-public
• emergency reports, an assessment of staff professionalism, positive behavioral support reports, and
• The analysis really thoroughly lists many other missing pieces.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Behavioral Health uh from the Pearle Behavioral Health uh from the Pearle board<00:34:39.639> um
• trauma reactive symptoms and behaviors trauma reactive symptoms and behaviors that<01:38:10.080>
• often with very very violent behaviors often with very very violent behaviors um<01:38:40.840>
• um assaultive behaviors um harming um assaultive behaviors um harming others<01:38:44.400> um<
• <01:39:27.920> exacerbate system sometimes behaviors exacerbate system sometimes behaviors

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The Division 3 House Finance Committee opened a work session and announced scheduling updates, including a second Medicaid work session on March 5 at 9:00 a.m. and a reminder that recommendations or budget amendments must be moved to the full finance committee by the end of March. Members were told no motions, roll calls, or votes would be taken, and the chair also reviewed upcoming meeting dates and weather-related cancellation procedures. The day’s presentation was a budget work session on the Division for Children, Youth and Families (DCYF), with officials Marie Nunan and Nathan White introducing the agency’s budget materials and mission. DCYF’s presentation focused on its core mandates and recent operational changes. Officials described child protective services, juvenile justice services, and the Sununu Youth Services Center, then highlighted workforce improvements, including reduced vacancy rates for assessment caseworkers, juvenile justice officers, and youth counselors. They attributed the staffing gains to legislative pay raises, mass recruitment posting changes, a more stable and trauma-informed model at SYC, and broader flexibility after prior budget cuts and hiring freezes. Members asked about full-time versus part-time staffing, and DCYF said most positions discussed were full-time, with some harder-to-fill part-time youth counselor roles at SYC. The committee also discussed DCYF’s emphasis on serving families earlier through its Community Navigator hotline referrals and community-based voluntary services, which are intended to connect families to supports before abuse or neglect escalates. Officials said the Community Navigator program had received 807 referrals since August 2023. On juvenile justice, DCYF described its assessment and diversion process and said it had reduced juvenile probation involvement by 30% from 2019 to 2023; members were directed to slide 17 for 2024 data, and officials said the trend continued toward fewer in-home juvenile justice cases. The agency also reported progress in kinship care, saying initial out-of-home placements with kin now occur 74% of the time and that kinship placements are associated with more reunification. Officials said kinship caregivers are being licensed and paid similarly to foster parents, and that the legislature’s kinship law has helped. Finally, DCYF outlined transition-age youth supports, including the HOPE program, Youth Villages LifeSet, and housing vouchers. No votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• general behavior and work performance while they're inside.
• You know, we typically reserve that for the next meeting, next year's analysis.
• Chair and Secretary, you're asking for money for behavioral health and medical services.
• We know that behavioral health is a huge driver... Of why people end up in prison.
• Conversations that we're having about behavioral health.

Transcript Highlights:

• No verbal outburst, shouting, or disruptive behavior.
• developmental and behavioral developmental and behavioral intervention<00:09:53.880> services
• I am also the owner and president of Behavioral Dimensions in St. Louis Park.
• We provide in-home and telehealth services using the principles of applied behavior analysis under the
• We provide in-home and telehealth services using the principles of applied behavior analysis under the

Bills: HF3542

Keywords: data privacy, investigative data, welfare system, public funds, transparency, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The state provides the analysis, the care for the child.
• In the state hospital system we are equipped to to handle some more behaviorally complex patients in
• When you all finish your final analysis, we'll be back.
• Has there been, I know we're out of that now, but was there ever an analysis done on?
• We perform extensive research and analysis to evaluate the agency and identify problems.

Keywords: 1184, house, all