Transcript Highlights:

• And I want to thank you again for sharing the space with us, and I'll pass it over to Beth Long.
• Councilor Mejia said there is an opportunity to do work in that space and thanked the committee.
• But I know the importance of starting early, and again, we are grateful for this space.
• But I know the importance of starting early, and again, we are grateful for this space.
• So it was really about how do we make space, create space for folks to bring their gifts and knowledge

Committee: Senate Senate Committee on the Census

Summary: The Senate Committee on the Census held an early planning hearing on how Massachusetts can maximize participation in the 2030 census, with Chair Will Brownsberger and Vice Chair Rebecca Rausch emphasizing the need to start well in advance. The first panel, made up of leaders from the Massachusetts Voter Table, MassVOTE, MIRA, and MESA, stressed that grassroots community organizations are trusted messengers and should be funded early to do multilingual outreach, training, and direct assistance in hard-to-count communities. They described lessons from 2020, including the shift to internet response, reduced federal census infrastructure, the importance of coordinated statewide networks, and the need to begin messaging several years before Census Day because building trust and staffing outreach takes time. Panelists repeatedly warned that immigrant communities are facing heightened fear because of federal immigration enforcement and the possibility of a citizenship question or other federal changes, making census participation more difficult. They said 2020 funding arrived too late to fully staff and train outreach teams before the pandemic, and argued that future resources should be deployed earlier and more flexibly. In response to committee questions, they estimated Massachusetts should invest roughly $8 million to $10 million or more in state census outreach, with one proposed model of about $3 million to $5 million at the start, additional funding in the middle years, and a larger final push closer to 2030. They also suggested that funding should support communications infrastructure, translation, social media and ethnic media outreach, and possibly a permanent complete count structure or trust fund to preserve institutional knowledge. A second panel from Common Cause Massachusetts and the ACLU of Massachusetts echoed the call for stronger, earlier investment and stronger privacy protections. They urged the legislature to expand existing census line items, consider a trust fund or other dedicated funding stream, and coordinate census outreach with other state programs that already work through trusted community messengers. The ACLU testimony focused on racial inequities in census counts and warned that federal efforts to exclude non-citizens or add a citizenship question would deepen distrust and undercount immigrant communities. Committee members asked about the 2020 overcount/undercount results, funding levels, timing of grant distribution, and whether census outreach should be routed through the Secretary of the Commonwealth or other state mechanisms; no votes were taken, and the hearing moved on to a later panel on immigrant-community outreach.

Transcript Highlights:

• for additional comments, but this was the flag we wanted to make sure that we uplifted here in this space
• We urge you to, promise spaces that our families so desperately need.
• That's why we urge the Assembly to support the Senate Democrats by funding 44,000 new child care spaces
• That's why we urge the Assembly to support the Senate Democrats by funding 44,000 new child care spaces
• , and if... ...the Assembly to support the Senate Democrats by funding 44,000 new child care spaces and

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held a hearing on the Governor’s May Revision, with no votes taken. The first major topic was child care and early education, where the Department of Social Services and Department of Finance outlined proposed changes to absorb federal Child Care and Development Fund and Proposition 64 revenue reductions, shift some funding between child care programs, end funding for prospective pay implementation now that the federal requirement has been rescinded, adjust the alternative payment administration structure, and fund child care infrastructure grants and a Low-Income Investment Fund contract closeout. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the budget makes progress on the structural deficit but recommended maintaining the administration’s solution level, making reserve deposits, and avoiding new ongoing commitments; it also raised concerns about shifting reductions to the California Alternative Payment Program and about the proposed administrative-rate change. Committee members strongly criticized the proposed loss of child care slots and said they would oppose eliminating those slots, while also expressing support for child care as essential infrastructure. The committee then reviewed California State Preschool Program proposals. Finance and CDE described reductions to the preschool COLA from 2.41% to 2.01%, removal of prospective pay funding, and increases for the QRIS block grant, audit support, and rate reform implementation. Trailer bill language would codify age-based rate categories, inclusion-rate documentation, family fee collection rules, portability, and excused absences. CDE supported the QRIS increase and some attendance and family-fee changes, but warned that aligning three- and four-year-old rates could reduce support for three-year-olds and that the budget does not fully cover enrollment growth. Members also questioned whether the preschool and child care slot reductions should be reallocated rather than terminated, and the administration said the reductions were intended to reflect current utilization and avoid harm to currently enrolled families. The hearing then moved to CalFresh and nutrition programs. CDSS said the May Revision includes a one-time CalFood augmentation, funding to cover federal SNAP administrative cost-share pressures, and additional staffing and technical assistance to implement HR 1 changes, including the able-bodied adults without dependents time limit and new non-citizen eligibility rules. The department estimated HR 1 could cut CalFresh funding by $2.3 billion to $3.7 billion annually and affect about 500,000 people, with roughly 806,000 adults potentially subject to the time limit and about 34,000 non-citizens expected to lose eligibility once fully implemented. Members pressed for stronger harm mitigation, including a $98 million backfill to protect families from losing food benefits, and raised concerns about county workload and the “chilling effect” on immigrant participation. The final portion of the transcript began the IHSS presentation, noting a revised budget of $33.7 billion total funds and $12.8 billion General Fund, with proposed reductions tied to Medi-Cal asset-limit changes and other federal conformity items.

Transcript Highlights:

• And this is an area where, you know, with the absence of federal leadership in the climate space, there
• And so while we're occupying this space, which is familiar to us, it is also a growing space for us.
• And we're seeing quite a bit of progress in this space. We have a lot more to do.
• So that's sort of the way that I see us focusing in this space first and foremost.
• So that's been something... ...that's been very challenging in the environmental justice space.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Climate Crisis, Resources, Energy, and Transportation heard an informational hearing with Secretary Garcia and CalEPA-related departments on the administration’s budget proposals and related environmental programs. Secretary Garcia highlighted CalEPA’s work on methane reduction, community air protection, water infrastructure, Exide cleanup, safer pesticide alternatives, Prop 4 implementation, and Bay-Delta water quality, while emphasizing the impact of federal rollbacks and the need for flexible state response. Members raised broader policy concerns about the polluter-pays principle, special fund vacancies, and whether the state is maintaining sufficient staffing and enforcement capacity, especially after recent fee increases. A major portion of the hearing focused on landfill support, response, and enforcement, particularly subsurface elevated temperature events at Chiquita Canyon and El Sobrante. CalEPA requested $5.1 million and 12 positions to improve monitoring, technical response, coordination, and enforcement across CalRecycle, CARB, DTSC, the Water Board, and OEHHA. Assembly Member Schiavo described severe community impacts from Chiquita Canyon and pressed for stronger state action, more transparency, and accountability from landfill operators; Assembly Member Rogers emphasized that accountability must mean forcing operators to take preventive measures and bear the costs. Agency staff said the proposal would help augment current response efforts, support local enforcement agencies, and improve early detection, while acknowledging that the causes of set events are not fully understood and may involve factors such as lithium-ion batteries, oxygen intrusion, and gas extraction practices. The committee then heard an update on the Safe and Affordable Drinking Water program and the effects of the new cap-and-invest structure. State Water Board Chair Joaquin Esquivel reported that the program has reduced the number of Californians without safe drinking water from 1.6 million to about 600,000 since 2019, while also bringing 320 systems back into compliance and distributing $1.8 billion in drinking water grants. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained that under SB 840, SAFER is now in a lower funding tier, which could reduce annual proceeds from the prior $130 million level to a projected $92 million in 2026-27 and delay funding until later in the year. Members expressed concern that this deprioritizes rural drinking water needs, while the board said it would continue using SAFER’s flexible funds for emergency water, technical assistance, and construction, and would keep pushing consolidations and other long-term solutions for the remaining failing systems.

Transcript Highlights:

• congressionally chartered veterans organizations, and there are a lot more organizations now in this space
• congressionally chartered veterans organizations, and there are a lot more organizations now in this space
• We're talking about staff time and space in our facilities.
• </c><00:15:16.360><c> in</c><00:15:16.839><c> available</c><00:15:17.240><c> space</c><00:15:17.600><
• c> in</c><00:15:17.720><c> the</c> the space in available space in the the space in available space in

Summary: The Minnesota Senate Subcommittee on Veterans met on March 4, 2026, and began with a moment of silence honoring Sergeant First Class Nicole Amore of White Bear Lake, who was killed while serving in Kuwait. The committee then took up Senate File 3956, an MDVA policy bill giving the commissioner clearer authority to direct staff time and other non-monetary resources toward partnerships with organizations serving veterans, especially on food insecurity, homelessness, suicide prevention, and related efforts. MDVA and Disabled American Veterans testified that the bill would help them work more quickly and clearly with outside partners, including food pantry and outreach efforts, while remaining focused on non-monetary support. Senator Howe offered an A1 amendment narrowing the bill to the three named priorities and removing the broader “other critical issues” language; the amendment was adopted after discussion about whether the reporting language also needed adjustment. SF 3956, as amended, was laid over for further consideration. The committee then heard Senate File 3955, which would create a new procedure for temporary closure of a Minnesota veterans home if an involuntary termination notice requires it, bringing state law into closer alignment with federal expectations. MDVA emphasized that it had no intention of permanently closing any veterans homes and that the bill was intended only to establish a temporary closure plan to satisfy survey requirements. Senator Howe offered an A1 amendment clarifying that any closure would be temporary unless the legislature approved a permanent closure; MDVA and the Department of Health indicated the change was acceptable. The committee adopted the amendment and then voted to recommend SF 3955, as amended, to pass and refer it to the full committee. Finally, the committee began Senate File 4072, an MDVA cleanup and conformity bill. After adopting a technical A3 amendment, MDVA explained that the bill would reclassify the Chief of Staff/Deputy Chief of Staff role as Deputy Commissioner for Administration to better reflect the scope of the position, and would also repeal outdated statutes related to environmental hazards assistance and a data-collection requirement that the department said it could not implement. The bill was still being presented when the transcript ended, and no final committee action on SF 4072 was shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• But there were a couple of things in the pharmacy space that were concerning to us that just never got
• But in the health insurance space, when we see words like a health plan shall cover or a health plan
• So we compete in that space. And then finally, self-pay and cash pay.
• I always complain that my counterpart in the P&C space doesn't work near as hard as I do... ...during
• We're very proactive in this prior auth space.

Summary: The committee met to review the history and current treatment of North Dakota health insurance mandates, with presentations from Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Dakota, Sanford Health Plan, the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS), and the Insurance Department. The discussion focused on how mandates apply differently to fully insured, self-funded, ACA, Medicaid, and PERS plans; how the state’s benchmark plan and federal essential health benefits affect coverage; and how the existing process requires cost-benefit analysis and, for certain measures, a PERS pilot period before broader application. Presenters also reviewed the long list of existing state mandates, including provider, beneficiary, and coverage requirements, and noted that many were enacted decades ago and have not been revisited despite changes in medical evidence and treatment options. Witnesses from the carriers argued that mandates should be reviewed periodically because some are outdated, can create unintended costs, and may not align with current medical guidance. Examples cited included PSA screening, off-label drug coverage, prior authorization rules, step therapy, and cost-sharing provisions for mental health and substance use treatment. They emphasized that carriers often cover services without a mandate when supported by clinical evidence, and that mandates can shift costs to employers and employees, especially in the fully insured small-group market. They also suggested possible policy improvements such as clearer mandate definitions, better transparency around cost-benefit analyses, a regular 10-year review of mandates, and more timely submission of proposals through the interim process. PERS and the Insurance Department highlighted a recurring tension over what counts as a mandate and when a measure triggers the state’s defrayal obligation under federal law. PERS described its interim committee process, the April 1 deadline for fiscal-impact proposals, and the limited pilot program used for certain measures, noting that only a few bills have gone through the full pilot process. The Insurance Department explained that it views new benefit mandates through the lens of the ACA benchmark plan and essential health benefits, distinguishing true new benefits, such as infertility coverage, from changes to existing benefits, such as telehealth or insulin cost-sharing caps. No votes were taken on policy changes; the meeting was informational, with members asking questions about costs, applicability, transparency, and whether a periodic mandate review should be established.

Transcript Highlights:

• If we need, yeah, if we need an extra space, we can be up.
• If we need an extra space, we can be up there on the dais.
• We have now had numerous conversations in this space.
• Some of the people who work in the space know what it's like.
• I know that this is one of the most elusive spaces to work in, to get what people want.

Summary: The subcommittee first heard an informational presentation on the May Revision’s proposed reorganization of the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency into separate housing-focused and consumer/business-focused entities. Administration officials said the split would improve oversight, streamline decision-making, and create a dedicated California Housing and Homelessness Agency with a new housing development and finance committee. The Department of Finance said funding was needed in 2025-26 to begin implementation, while the LAO recommended rejecting the proposal without prejudice because the Little Hoover Commission review was still pending and the plan would require ongoing General Fund costs. Members raised concerns about the timing, the lack of alignment with the budget process, and whether the reorganization would improve accountability for homelessness spending; several public witnesses supported the concept but stressed it could not substitute for new housing and homelessness dollars. The committee then took up the Department of Veterans Affairs. CalVet requested funding for phase three of its electronic health care record project and a trailer bill to preserve authority for federal background checks, but the May Revision withdrew requests for deferred maintenance and additional administrative support. The LAO noted deferred maintenance can prevent larger future costs, and the chair criticized the withdrawal of less than $1 million for veterans’ homes as short-sighted given existing repair needs. No vote was taken. Next, the Department of Housing and Community Development presented its budget. HCD said the May Revision provides no new affordable housing or homelessness funding, but does retain existing rounds of funding and proposes a $31.7 million reversion from undersubscribed housing programs. Members from both parties expressed concern about zeroing out ongoing housing and homelessness investments, especially for LIHTC, the Multifamily Housing Program, and HAP. HCD also defended its homelessness accountability and compliance work, saying the unit includes about 30 program staff and six attorneys, with three additional attorneys requested mainly to handle public records and litigation workload. Public commenters largely opposed the lack of new funding and urged continued support for housing and homelessness programs, while some supported the reorganization and accountability efforts. Finally, the committee heard Go-Biz proposals. The administration requested authority to increase funding for a federal trade program match if needed, plus reappropriations for administrative funds tied to the Containerized Ports Interoperability Grant Program, zero-emission vehicle operations, and the Women’s Business Center Enhancement Program. It also proposed withdrawing the Cal Competes grant request and reverting remaining funds from the Performing Arts Equitable Payroll Fund. The LAO said Cal Competes is generally effective but could be cut as a budget solution, while warning that the performing arts fund was close to awards and should be considered carefully. Members objected to pulling back committed funds for performing arts organizations and questioned why the state would withdraw support after applications had already been submitted.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our mission is to protect voting rights in California and the space between the actions that the 14th
• Amendment... ...rights in California and the space between the actions that the 14th Amendment permits
• It's like one single space.
• Parking lots are considered public spaces. That's why immigration enforcement raids happen there.
• Namely, it addresses a problem that has grown increasingly common in the medical lien space.

Summary: The committee heard several bills focused on civil rights, housing, public safety, and administrative process. Early items included SB 46, which would authorize the Secretary of State to remove constitutionally ineligible presidential and vice presidential candidates from California ballots; SB 1078, requiring notice to the Civil Rights Department when court filings involve civil rights violations; SB 989, expanding access to Care Court by letting first responders refer cases through county behavioral health agencies; SB 998, clarifying and expanding discrimination prevention coordinators in the new Office of Civil Rights; SB 1146, requiring disclosure for AI-generated health advertisements and giving physicians a limited private right of action; SB 1164, a California Voting Rights Act expansion responding to federal voting-rights rulings; SB 1256, a housing bill aimed at limiting repeated litigation over the Harmony Grove Village South project; SB 1267, addressing HOA liability and indemnification for EV charger installations; and SB 1425, authorizing an encroachment permit program for high-speed rail right-of-way management. The committee also later heard SB 873, restricting ICE arrests near courthouses, and SB 1160, requiring eviction data reporting by zip code. Most bills drew support from sponsors, advocacy groups, labor organizations, or local officials, while opposition centered on concerns about county workload, due process, fire safety, civil liberties, or the scope of the policy changes. Members generally expressed support for the bills while noting unresolved issues and the need for amendments or further stakeholder work, especially on SB 1164, SB 1256, SB 1267, SB 1425, and SB 1160. The Judicial Council opposed SB 1160 because of the burden of adding zip-code reporting to court systems, while the author and supporters argued the data would help target eviction-prevention efforts. SB 873 drew strong support from public defenders, immigrant-rights groups, and court-related stakeholders, with the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department opposing. SB 989 drew support from firefighters and family advocates, while Disability Rights California opposed, arguing Care Court is too costly and diverts resources from community-based services. SB 1164 received broad civil-rights and voting-rights support, with cities opposing unless amended over definitions, cure periods, and litigation risk. SB 1256 drew support from housing and labor interests and opposition from local residents and environmental groups concerned about fire safety and evacuation. SB 1267 was supported by the HOA and utility stakeholders after amendments addressing liability concerns. After quorum was established, the committee voted to pass a consent calendar and then approved the listed bills, sending them to the appropriate committees or to Appropriations, including SB 46, SB 873, SB 989, SB 998, SB 1078, SB 1146, SB 1164, SB 1256, SB 1267, and SB 1425. The transcript ends with SB 1160 still under discussion, with members indicating support for the bill’s goals but acknowledging the Judicial Council’s implementation concerns and the need for further work.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our mission is to protect voting rights in California and the space between the actions that the 14th
• Rights in California and the space between the actions that the 14th Amendment permits of the states
• It's like one single space.
• Parking lots are considered public spaces. That's why immigration enforcement raids happen there.
• Namely, it addresses a problem that has grown increasingly common in the medical lien space.

Committee: House Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• So it is just taking up time and space with a minority, oftentimes of people who are not even from the
• Books provide a safe space to encounter and navigate harsh truths.
• Books provide a safe space to encounter and navigate harsh truths.
• I'm under no delusion that Muslims, Arabs, or Palestinians are not welcome in many of our spaces.
• We restrict things based on facility space. We restrict it based on budget.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Tourism, Arts and Cultural Development

Summary: The hearing focused on several bills related to access to library materials, including measures addressing book bans and censorship in public and school libraries, as well as legislation on digital library collections and e-book licensing. Committee leaders said testimony would be limited to three minutes and encouraged written submissions. Early testimony from Chair Brian Murray highlighted H. 3595, which would address challenges facing public libraries and digital resource collections by limiting restrictive publisher-library contract terms, protecting patron confidentiality, and creating a special legislative commission to study the issue. A large number of legislators, librarians, authors, students, publishers, and advocacy groups testified in support of the free expression bills, including H. 3594 and S. 2328, arguing that book challenges in Massachusetts disproportionately target LGBTQ+ and BIPOC titles and that librarians and educators need protection from retaliation and harassment. Witnesses described local incidents of book removals, threats, and pressure campaigns, and several said the bills would create transparent challenge procedures, keep materials available during reviews, and ensure decisions are made by trained professionals rather than political actors. Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley’s office also submitted support, and multiple speakers cited national trends and Massachusetts-specific censorship attempts. Testimony on the digital access bills emphasized that e-books and audiobooks are essential for readers with disabilities, homebound patrons, students, and others who rely on accessible formats, but that current licensing terms are far more expensive and restrictive than print purchasing. Library representatives said libraries spend millions on digital content, face long wait times for popular titles, and often must repeatedly re-rent the same materials. Legal and library experts supported the proposed commission as a practical step toward fairer licensing and stronger bargaining power for libraries. The hearing ended after extensive testimony; no votes or final committee action were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• I was looking at legislation around that space.
• California is very much leading the country in the space with the college and with the work that we've
• California is very much leading the country in the space with the college and with the Thank you. is
• And then the fourth and final issue we wanted to cover has to do with the type of space prioritized.
• That's projects to add space.

Transcript Highlights:

• I was looking at legislation around that space.
• And so however we can be helpful in that space to continue to push, we really want to make sure we've
• California is very much leading the country in the space with the college and with the... Is doing.
• And then the fourth and final issue we wanted to cover has to do with the type of space prioritized.
• That's projects to add space.

Summary: The committee heard an overview of the California Community Colleges budget proposal, including Proposition 98 funding, a 2.41% COLA for apportionments, enrollment growth funding, repayment of an apportionment deferral, and one-time investments for a student support block grant and deferred maintenance. The Department of Finance described the Governor’s package as providing significant new resources, while the LAO recommended prioritizing COLA and enrollment growth within available funds but raised concerns about some smaller proposals, including making the Healthy School Food Pathways Program ongoing and adding more funding for credit for prior learning before outcomes are known. The Chancellor’s Office supported the COLA, enrollment growth, and one-time investments, and said current projections suggest enrollment growth closer to 3%, with about $85 million to $90 million in ongoing costs if fully funded. Members focused heavily on enrollment growth, the 10% district cap, and whether the state should continue funding growth in the current year and budget year. The Chancellor’s Office said some districts, especially in the Inland Empire and Central Valley, are growing rapidly and that about seven districts are above the cap, with roughly 1,563 FTES and about $30 million in ongoing costs tied to that issue. Members also discussed hold-harmless districts and whether declining campuses should be required to produce turnaround or right-sizing plans. The Chancellor’s Office said districts are already having local conversations and that state funding provides time to adjust, but no formal plan requirement was proposed. The committee then took up common course numbering, where the Chancellor’s Office said all 115 community colleges have implemented the first phase and more than 550,000 students enrolled in the first six commonly numbered courses. The office argued that CCN improves clarity but does not yet guarantee that credits will transfer with full value across UC and CSU, because articulation is still handled campus by campus and can require more than 3,500 separate reviews. Members expressed concern that students can still be forced to retake courses such as calculus or ethnic studies even when they have the same common number, and urged the systems to develop a stronger statewide articulation mechanism tied to outcomes and transparency. The item was left open. Finally, the committee heard the Governor’s proposal to make Calbright College’s funding ongoing at $53.1 million. The LAO recommended instead transitioning Calbright to the student-centered funding formula, with one-time bridge funding in the meantime, arguing the Governor’s proposal lacks a clear enrollment-based rationale and performance expectations. Calbright’s leadership defended the college’s competency-based, flexible model for adult learners, citing more than 6,800 students served, over 2,200 certificates awarded, and wage gains for graduates; they said enrollment is expected to grow from about 7,000 students now to roughly 8,000 to 9,000 next year and around 10,000 over the next couple of years. Members pressed for clearer enrollment and funding data before deciding how Calbright should be funded going forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• Relying on gambling proceeds really takes a lot of that stability out of that space.
• Somebody under 21 can't go into the space where people are playing these games that will eventually be
• Somebody under 21 can't go into the space where people are playing these games that will eventually be
• This is not, you know, it's not defining what this separate space looks like, right?
• And I think one of the of these spaces. Yeah, I think it's a good question.

Summary: The House convened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, then approved the House Journal by roll call vote, 115-6. Members then used points of personal privilege to honor Redd Foxx for Black History Month and to remember former Mayor Frank Klipsch, followed by the introduction of a first-grade special guest page for the day. The chamber also received first readings of three bills on mental health efforts in public schools, public labor organizations, and state contracts with certain telecommunications companies, along with committee reports recommending passage of several bills. The House then debated and passed several measures. A large vehicle-inspection bill, House Committee Substitute for House Bills 1838, 1692, 1695, 1983, 2036, 2662, and 2743, drew extended debate over whether inspections improve safety or impose unnecessary costs; it passed 104-43. House Bill 1917, a Jefferson County water district bill aimed at removing a local obstacle to a long-planned development, passed 148-2. House Bill 261, as amended, was approved 109-21 to require Missouri schools and universities to adopt nondiscriminatory policies protecting Jewish students from antisemitic harassment, using the IHRA definition as a guide while stating it would not limit First Amendment rights. Members also passed House Committee Substitute for House Bill 2384, 92-61, which would limit local energy-code mandates and reduce housing construction costs, despite objections that it would preempt local control and roll back newer codes. The chamber then moved into perfection and took up House Committee Substitute for House Bill 2989, a major gaming-regulation bill intended to legalize and regulate video lottery terminals and crack down on illegal machines. Multiple amendments were adopted, including a $250-per-terminal fee dedicated to developmental disability services, local opt-out and operating-hour provisions, a shorter grace period for existing machines, property-tax language, a 21-and-over restricted area requirement, a larger warning label, and a historical funding provision for the steamboat Arabia. Debate continued on the bill and its amendments, with supporters emphasizing regulation, local control, and new revenue, and opponents warning about gambling expansion, enforcement problems, and social harms.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, thank you for creating this space and opportunity to speak with you today about the future of
• Thank you. our faculty in our engineering technology space, working with local high schools, as well
• I'm happy to spend a lot more time with you individually outside of this space, but I am going to assume
• And so that's a different space than we've been in.
• So I really appreciate all the comments and work and efforts in that space, and look forward to future

Summary: The joint Assembly Higher Education and Budget Subcommittee hearing focused on the future of the California State University system, with opening remarks emphasizing CSU’s major role in California’s economy, workforce, and degree production. Chairs and members said the hearing was intended to inform 2026 budget decisions and to examine three main issues: declining enrollment at some campuses, cost controls and possible consolidation, and oversight of recent state investments at campuses such as Humboldt and Sonoma. The meeting was briefly delayed by microphone and sound problems before reconvening. The first panel featured CSU Academic Senate Chair Dr. Elizabeth Boyd and Cal State Student Association Vice President Katie Karam. Boyd urged the Legislature to protect academic freedom, strengthen faculty governance, provide stable ongoing funding, end unfunded mandates, support student food and housing security, fund flexible course schedules, improve transfer systems such as ASSIST, avoid over-centralizing academic programs, protect immigrant students, and expand intersegmental collaboration. Karam said students are feeling the effects of budget shortfalls through fewer course sections, reduced advising and services, longer time to degree, and tuition pressure, and she called for transparency, meaningful student involvement in budget decisions, and sustained state investment rather than cuts that harm the student experience. The second panel covered enrollment management and included CSU Chancellor’s Office and campus administrators from Chico State, Cal State L.A., and San Diego State. Dr. Delcy Perez said CSU Forward and the new systemwide enrollment plan are aimed at expanding access, aligning programs with workforce needs, and increasing resident enrollment; she reported systemwide enrollment gains and strong application numbers, including a direct-admissions pilot that expanded from Riverside to more campuses. Campus representatives described local recruitment and retention strategies, including early outreach to high school students, community college partnerships, guaranteed admission programs, and expanded advising and student support. San Diego State highlighted record enrollment and high demand, while Cal State L.A. described efforts to recover from impaction and rebuild enrollment. Members pressed CSU officials on the accuracy of enrollment data, the gap between funded targets and actual enrollment, and the system’s reallocation formula. CSU staff explained that campuses below target will see a 5% ongoing reallocation beginning in 2026-27, with one-time reserve funding also being directed to campuses that can grow, and that fiscal health reviews have been completed for 21 of 22 campuses. Legislators also asked about turnaround plans required by the budget act; CSU said those plans are being developed and will be shared in the spring after campus consultation. No formal votes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• we have the big hot fires that we're having is because we've gotten rid of that variability across space
• And so, as such, I do a lot of work in this outdoor education space.
• But I will say that a lot of this work is happening in this out-of-school Time space summer program space
• I think on your paper handout, there's a space between the Lee and the Dee, Madam Chair.
• That space Should have not been in there. Thanks for my joke.

Committee: House Water & Natural Resources Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• and having access to those this space and having access to those attendance<00:34:39.200><c> records
• Just another way to make sure that we're seeing less waste in the food space, but then also repurposing
• Just another way to make sure that we're seeing less waste in the food space, but then also repurposing
• Just another way to make sure that we're seeing less waste in the food space, but then also repurposing
• Um but then in the in the food space.

Bills: SF1959 , HF2444 , SF2298 , HF2445 , SF2216 , HF2443 , HF2130 , HF1943 , HF2436 , HF2442

Committee: House Ways and Means

Keywords: veterans, military affairs, Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of Military Affairs, omnibus veterans bill, appropriations, National Guard, state active service, armory, State Armory Building Commission, veterans homes, veterans cemeteries, county veterans service office, Minnesota GI Bill, Gold Star families, Blue Star families, Secret War in Laos, Hmong veterans, Laos veterans, special guerrilla units

Transcript Highlights:

• The quality of service is evident to occupants and those who visit the historic spaces in the Capitol
• Space for them and the conditions and so we're actually had the Travis letter on exhibit just last year
• 30th, and at the moment we have 225 applicants that have met all the eligibility for this so far. spaces
• It's a $300 million concert space.
• , the national, international convention space. hotels, our restaurants, transportation services, and

Committee: House Culture, Recreation & Tourism

Transcript Highlights:

• Given the dire need for more resources in the space, utilizing these funds to provide housing, counseling
• </c><00:16:06.560><c> utilizing</c> more resources in the space utilizing more resources in the space
• where we can use these that narrow space where we can use these three<02:04:14.239><c> specific</c><
• They're still in your possession; you own them, they're just in a different space.
• they're in a they're next door space they're in a they're next door they're<02:10:44.119><c> at</c><

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm sure other places that seem odd, but our registrants are across the state in various spaces.
• I'm sure other places that seem odd, but our registrants are across the state in various spaces.
• I'm sure other places that seem odd, but our registrants are across the state in various spaces.
• We have acquired a new permanent office space at that new permanent office space.
• </c> really coming in the enforcement space really coming in the enforcement space and<01:29:14.679><

Committee: Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection

Transcript Highlights:

• At least in the oncology space, people are very willing to share that data with the hope that what's
• But I also have to balance, I think, the interest of time and us in the room space that we have here
• To balance, I think, in the interest of time and us in the room space that we have here today.
• So we've stepped into that space.
• So we've stepped into that space.

Summary: The hearing focused on how artificial intelligence is being used across California’s life sciences sector, from research and drug discovery to digital health, medical devices, and patient care. Chair Ward and Chair Bauer-Kahan opened by emphasizing California’s leadership in biotech, the need to preserve that ecosystem, and the importance of balancing innovation with privacy, consumer protection, and equitable access. They also highlighted the potential role of public compute and public-private partnerships, including CalCompute, in keeping California competitive. The first panel featured representatives from UCSF, the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Dr. Ida Sim described AI-enabled digital health tools, including sensor-based blood pressure monitoring and efforts to connect wearable data with electronic health records through open infrastructure. Dr. Karen Knudson focused on cancer, saying AI can accelerate drug discovery, improve learning from every patient, and expand clinical trial access. Dr. Shankar Sundaram discussed AI for public health and biosecurity, including outbreak prediction, antibody redesign, and the need to unlock data, expand compute access, and support public health agencies. Panelists also discussed privacy, HIPAA/CMIA protections, open-source versus closed models, validation, and the need for faster, more modern FDA pathways. The second panel included speakers from Pangea Data, Dexcom, Eli Lilly Ventures, and Twist Bioscience. Dr. Vibhur Gupta described AI systems that identify care gaps in electronic health records and argued for reimbursement frameworks that would let such tools scale beyond large health systems into rural care. Dexcom’s Ginny Hu explained how the company uses AI in its continuous glucose monitoring products, with strong FDA-aligned verification, validation, cybersecurity, human oversight, and post-market monitoring. Eli Lilly’s Danjima Corliss emphasized AI as a scientific collaborator in drug discovery and highlighted Lilly’s high-performance computing investments in California. The discussion continued to return to data access, model transparency, regulatory modernization, and how California can support innovation while protecting patients.

Transcript Highlights:

• At least in the oncology space, people are very willing to share that data with the hope that what's
• But I also have to balance, I think, the interest of time and us in the room space that we have here
• So we've stepped into that space.
• So we've stepped into that space.
• We want to make sure California continues to lead in this space.