Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:14:10.440><c> there</c> clarifications during the hearing there clarifications during the hearing
• </c> just open the hearing just open the hearing close<01:33:24.719><c> it</c><01:33:25.560><c> um</c
• I can only remember one grant hearing in like four years I've been going to meetings and hearings where
• We will open the hearing on House Bill 768. We have three hearings this afternoon.
• That concludes the hearing. hearing<06:51:32.558><c> e</c>

Summary: The committee first noted that House Bill 398, concerning Holocaust and genocide studies, and House Bill 131 had already been handled previously and were off the schedule. It then took up House Bill 740, which would require the Department of Education to maintain permanent records for closed charter schools. After brief discussion about overlap with another charter-school bill that already addressed closure and records, Representative Freeman moved to table the bill. The committee voted 16-0 to table/ITL the bill, and it was placed on the consent calendar. The main discussion centered on House Bill 557, which would require additional information on school budget ballots, including average cost per pupil, enrollment history, and teacher-to-administrator ratios. Members raised concerns that the bill was duplicative of existing law, overly detailed, costly to towns, and potentially electioneering or cumbersome on ballots. Supporters argued it would improve transparency and help voters who do not attend deliberative sessions or use online resources. The committee did not vote on the bill during the discussion; instead, members moved into caucus and later indicated they would hold the bill until Monday for further review. Later, the committee turned to House Bill 699 on special education definitions and considered Amendment 0606H. The sponsor explained the amendment was developed with the Department of Education after hearing testimony and was intended to align state definitions with federal law and incorporate recommendations from a prior audit, including changing “functionally blind pupils” to “students with visual impairments.” Some members supported the changes as responsive to the hearing and audit, while others objected that the amendment was still confusing, had not fully addressed stakeholder concerns, and should wait for a more comprehensive special education audit. The discussion also referenced House Bill 754 and another amendment, but the transcript ends before final action on HB 699 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing none, it is so ordered.
• Hearing none, it is so ordered.
• Hearing none, it is so ordered.
• Hearing none, it is so ordered.
• Hearing none, it is so ordered.

Bills: SB302 , SB1335 , SB1734 , SB1760 , SB1975 , SB2127

Committee: Senate Jurisprudence

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing none, it's so ordered.
• Hearing none, the substitute is adopted.
• Hearing none, the substitute is adopted.
• Hearing none, it is so ordered.
• Hearing none, it is so ordered. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, excellent.

Committee: Senate Jurisprudence

Transcript Highlights:

• We will hear from two panels today.
• Let's have a hearing about that.
• Let's have a hearing about that.
• Now we will hear from Mr.
• Now we will hear from Mr. Bardouche.

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome to the Assembly Local Government Committee hearing.
• Testimony for this hearing will be in person.
• Thank you for hearing our earlier bill.
• Thank you for hearing this really important bill today.
• Well, the housing hearing, hearing committee was last week.

Summary: The committee heard eight bills, mostly on local government, housing, and public agency contracting. AB 1658 would make permanent higher change-order authority for Santa Clara and Los Angeles counties on large construction projects; supporters said it would reduce delays and save money on major projects, and the bill passed 6-0. AB 2263 would authorize the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority to develop employee-preference affordable housing; supporters said it would help with workforce retention and long commutes, and it also passed 6-0. AB 2134 would require city councils to allow parental leave without forcing members to seek public approval or risk losing their seats; supporters described the bill as necessary to protect new parents in local office, and it passed 6-0. AB 2188 would raise Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District’s contracting authority to $250,000, with supporters citing administrative savings and faster project delivery; after committee amendments, it passed 6-0. AB 2033 would let general law cities use job order contracting for repair and maintenance work, with safeguards against employee displacement; supporters called it an efficiency tool, while AFSCME opposed it over workforce impacts, and it passed 8-0 after amendments. AB 1768 would authorize Los Angeles County and Contra Costa County to ask voters to approve a temporary transactions and use tax to help offset major federal health care cuts and preserve clinics and public health services. Supporters from community clinics, Planned Parenthood, labor groups, counties, and health organizations said the measure would let voters decide how to respond to funding losses; opponents, including CalTax and some cities, raised affordability and tax-burden concerns. Members also discussed equity concerns within Los Angeles County and the importance of local control. The bill was moved out on a 5-2 vote and left on call. AB 2415 would allow the city of Folsom to shift housing obligations away from its historic district and toward other transit-oriented sites; supporters said it would preserve the historic district while still meeting housing goals, and it passed 10-0. AB 2741, heard at the end of the meeting, would give cities a grace period to fix housing elements that were certified by HCD but later found noncompliant by a court, especially where cities relied on overlay zones. Supporters from the League of California Cities, Redondo Beach, and real estate groups said cities acted in good faith and should not be immediately subjected to builder’s remedy; opponents from California YIMBY and legal aid groups argued the bill would weaken housing accountability and reward noncompliance. The transcript ends during testimony on AB 2741, before a final vote is recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome everyone who's here in the hearing room today and who's watching the hearing online.
• When we hear the bills on the agenda, we will hear from a maximum of two primary witnesses in support
• And so I'd like to hear how you try to make sure that...
• You hear me talk about how I represent the border region.
• I didn’t hear your organization.

Committee: House Elections

Transcript Highlights:

• President, you can understand when I hear the words rule suspension, my radar gets turned on.
• The Chair hears pass on that item. That's the main sub-bill for the day.
• And every day hearing from people that cannot afford to pay their bills.
• Hearing none, Amendment Number 4 is withdrawn.
• Chair hears none. Question now comes on adoption of the order. No.

Transcript Highlights:

• I am Chair Alvarez, and we welcome you to our hearing today.
• We'll hear from the UCNA. All right. Thank you, Assembly members.
• We'll hear from the UCNA. All right. Thank you, Assembly members.
• Education Code requires us to consistently revisit Title IX in hearings throughout the year.
• Let's hear from the Legislative Analyst's Office. Florence Buffe?

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance, chaired by Assemblymember Alvarez, held a hearing focused on University of California budget issues. The committee reviewed UC core operations funding, enrollment trends, federal funding threats, Title IX implementation, and basic needs support. Major themes included the end of the Governor’s multi-year UC compact, the state’s fiscal outlook, UC’s enrollment growth, and the potential impacts of federal policy changes on research, health care, and student aid. On core funding, the Department of Finance described the Governor’s proposal to continue compact-related support, defer some payments, and authorize a cash-flow loan. The LAO recommended a smaller or no base increase, earmarking some funds for capital renewal, retiring deferrals when possible, avoiding new compact commitments, and funding UC annually rather than through compacts. UC argued that the compact has supported enrollment growth, student services, and operating costs, but said campuses face rising expenses, structural deficits, and limited reserves. Members questioned the effects of deferrals on students and discussed the need to prioritize less harmful reductions if cuts become necessary. The enrollment panel focused on UC’s growth in California resident enrollment and the nonresident replacement plan at Berkeley, UCLA, and UC San Diego. The LAO recommended maintaining the current enrollment target, funding enrollment separately from base increases, pausing the nonresident replacement plan, and holding enrollment flat in 2027-28. UC said it has already met compact enrollment goals, grown California undergraduate enrollment by about 18,800 students, and that further growth depends on ongoing state support. The committee also discussed the cost of enrollment growth, possible differential nonresident tuition, and a reporting request for UC to analyze the nonresident replacement approach; the motion to adopt supplemental reporting language passed. The hearing also covered federal funding risks, with the LAO and UC warning that federal changes could affect research grants, medical center reimbursement, and student financial aid. UC said research cancellations and suspensions are disrupting labs and graduate student support, while federal health policy changes could increase uncompensated care at UC hospitals. In the Title IX update, UC described its systemwide civil rights structure, annual student training, and campus support offices, and members praised the work while asking about ongoing concerns and intersegmental collaboration. The final basic-needs item began with Finance stating the Governor’s budget does not change ongoing support, but the transcript cuts off before further discussion or action.

Transcript Highlights:

• But we did hear...
• All right, that will end the hearing.
• That will end the hearing for House House.
• Chairman and committee members for hearing this bill today.
• I was trying to weigh what I was just hearing there.

Committee: House General Laws

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm so happy that you're going to hear from her.
• So I guess you can already hear me. Thank you, Chair Mena, for that question.
• So next we'll hear from the University of Washington.
• Oh, Lauren, did you hear anything that I said there? I did.
• And that will conclude the hearing today. Thank you. Thank you so much.

Committee: House State Government & Tribal Relations

Summary: The committee held a work session on voting rights, beginning with testimony from Marissa Wright of Campaign Legal Center and David Montes of the ACLU of Washington. They described the federal Voting Rights Act’s main protections—preclearance, vote suppression, and vote dilution—and argued that Supreme Court decisions such as Shelby County and Brnovich have weakened those protections. They said state-level action is increasingly important, pointing to the Washington Voting Rights Act as a tool to address discriminatory election systems, with examples from Yakima, Sunnyside, and other parts of the Yakima Valley. Members asked about Washington’s history of discrimination, voter roll purges, noncitizen registration, remedies under the WVRA, ranked-choice voting, and how statistical evidence is used in vote dilution cases. No votes were taken. The committee then heard a joint presentation from the Office of Equity and several commissions, including the Hispanic Affairs Commission, Asian Pacific American Affairs Commission, and LGBTQ Commission. The panel described their role in advising state government, working with communities, and helping agencies improve equity and service delivery. They focused on the new immigration sub-cabinet created under Executive Order 2509, saying it is intended to coordinate across agencies, the legislature, the courts, and community organizations on issues such as data privacy, language access, communications, and protections for immigrant communities. Members asked about accountability under the Keep Washington Working Act, the use of NGOs, and the sub-cabinet’s goals. The panel said the effort is meant to make Washington residents feel safe, protected, and included. Next, researchers from the University of Washington presented findings from the Elections Database Project on vote-by-mail outcomes from 2020 to 2024. They reported that about 1.5% of ballots are signature-challenged in most elections, about 60% of those ballots are cured, and overall rejection rates are around 1% in general elections and 1.5% in primaries. They said younger voters and voters of color are more likely to have ballots rejected, and that cure rates do not fully eliminate those disparities. Committee members asked about tribal reservation data, turnout patterns, and access to election data. The researchers said they use publicly available data and will follow up with additional turnout information. The final panel featured Maria Fernandez and Vicki Frausto of EIA, who described voter education and leadership development work in Yakima County and Sunnyside. They said their organization helps residents understand ballot mechanics, language barriers, and misinformation, and they described harassment and intimidation tied to their civic engagement work. They supported stronger Washington Voting Rights Act protections and said at-large election systems continue to dilute Latino voting power in some jurisdictions. They also said turnout in Yakima County has risen modestly, which they attributed in part to community education and candidate recruitment. The committee thanked the presenters and adjourned the work session without taking action.

Transcript Highlights:

• Unfortunately, at the hearing, I didn't hear a commitment. explicitly or even theoretically to the investments
• We will now move into our hearing. Thank you.
• So, I look forward to hearing from Mr.
• Thank you for convening this hearing.
• Chairman, thank you for this hearing today.

Committee: Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee

Keywords: state policy, governance, legislative processes, public concerns, policy improvement

Summary: During the committee meeting, various issues surrounding state policy and governance were deliberated. Although the specifics of bills under discussion were not highlighted, comments from several committee members indicated a focus on improving legislative processes and addressing public concerns. The chairman facilitated discussions that included several points of critique as well as suggestions for enhancement of existing laws. The atmosphere remained constructive despite the complexity of the topics at hand.

Transcript Highlights:

• Comments are open until the end of our hearing and are posted upon adjournment from our hearing.
• Um, when the Senate hearings took place in Georgia.
• Is there an objection to hear, the chair hears none. The bill is left pending.
• I want to thank y'all for hearing this bill.
• The chair hears none. The bill is left pending.

Bills: HB429 , HB496 , HB640 , HB657 , HB665 , HB677 , HB952

Committee: House Elections

Keywords: Texas Election Code, elections, voting station, polling place, ballot marking, ballot reading, child accompaniment, minor, parental supervision, voter education, secretary of state, county election administrator, voter assistance, election administration, poll worker rules, ballot secrecy, HB 496, ballot option, none of the above, abstain from vote

Transcript Highlights:

• So definitely want to hear more about that going forward.
• So definitely want to hear more about that going forward.
• I think we hear that loud and clear.
• The other item that was in the hearing materials was around access.
• The other item that was in the hearing materials was around access.

Summary: The committee heard presentations on the Governor’s education budget proposals for the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), Learning Recovery Block Grant, and Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), followed by testimony from State Board of Education President Linda Darling-Hammond. On LCFF, Finance outlined the proposed 2.43% COLA, repayment of prior deferrals, and a trailer bill penalty for LEAs that fail to adopt Local Control Accountability Plans on time. The LAO said its COLA estimate was slightly lower and raised concerns that the Governor’s proposed TK staffing ratio increase may be more costly than estimated. Members also discussed whether the current COLA formula should better reflect California-specific or district staffing costs, and whether TK should be more clearly separated from the K-3 grade span adjustment to avoid larger K-3 class sizes. The chair asked staff to work with the LAO on both the TK/K-3 issue and alternative COLA calculations. For the Learning Recovery Block Grant, Finance proposed restoring the first of three delayed payments, $378.6 million one-time Proposition 98 General Fund, while the LAO recommended adopting the proposal but extending the expenditure deadline by at least a year. The LAO reported that districts had spent $1.6 billion of the $6.8 billion received through 2023-24 and said most districts were only now shifting from federal COVID relief to block grant spending. Members questioned whether the large state and federal investments were improving outcomes, citing declining reading and math trends, while Finance and the State Board president pointed to some signs of improvement, especially in math, attendance, and gains for some student groups. Darling-Hammond emphasized that student needs have grown, that recovery spending has gone to devices, ventilation, staffing, tutoring, summer school, and community schools, and that targeted interventions appear to be helping some districts recover faster than others. On ELOP, Finance proposed adding $435 million to expand universal access by lowering the Tier 1 threshold from 75% to 55% unduplicated pupils, bringing ongoing funding to $4.4 billion. The LAO said the estimate was reasonable but recommended delaying implementation for a year, aligning ELOP with ASES to reduce overlap, moving toward funding based on participation rather than enrollment, and considering a fixed Tier 2 rate. Members and witnesses discussed staffing challenges, the use of funds for students with disabilities, and uncertainty in Tier 2 funding caused by unspent dollars and opt-outs. Darling-Hammond supported ELOP as part of California’s broader after-school and summer learning strategy, said most districts are now offering full-day TK and expanded learning, and urged the state to reduce fragmentation across categorical programs and build more unified systems for funding, reporting, and support.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for hearing House Bill 5570.
• for hearing in other cases.
• And when these judges sit on these hearings, it contributes to the backlog by not hearing these hearings
• hearings.
• I'll hear from that. Okay. Thank you. I'll hear from some of the witnesses.

Bills: HB2242 , HB2446 , HB2799 , HB4502 , HB2920 , HB2790 , HB5620 , HB5060 , HB5076 , HB5080 , HB5081 , HB5128 , HB5130 , HB3847 , HB5116 , HB2969 , HB4546 , HB4202 , HB5624 , HB3964 , HB4803 , HB872 , HB4775 , HB4777 , HB4961 , HB5570 , HB2988 , HB4260 , HB1375 , HB5009 , HB5411 , HB5134 , HB4388 , HB3095 , HB1387

Committee: House Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence

Keywords: constables, civil rights, local government, law enforcement, policy-making authority, affidavit, medical bills, civil actions, reasonable charges, healthcare services, judicial statistics, court performance, family law, civil cases, efficiency reporting, court security, emergency management, harassment penalties, judicial safety, court committee

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills affecting civil practice, judicial conduct, and attorney regulation. HB 4961 and the similar HB 3095 would bar uninsured motorists from recovering non-economic damages after a collision, with HB 3095 also addressing certain exceptions and limiting economic damages in some cases. Supporters said the measures would encourage insurance coverage and fairness for insured drivers, while opponents argued they would unfairly punish injured people who were not responsible for the lack of insurance, including pedestrians, passengers, children, and others. HB 3095 drew constitutional concerns from witnesses, and the committee later withdrew the committee substitute and left the bill pending; HB 4961 was also left pending after questions about its scope, including passengers. HB 5570 would expand a continuing legal education exemption to attorneys appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Senate who serve on boards or commissions. The author and witness said the bill would free up time for public service while still requiring ethics training. A committee member raised a discrepancy in the number of attorneys covered, and the bill was left pending. HB 2969 would prohibit the State Bar from adopting rules or penalties that unreasonably burden attorneys’ religious exercise or free speech, especially in relation to sincerely held religious beliefs. Supporters framed it as a protection for lawyers of faith against an ABA-style speech code, while no one testified in opposition; the bill was left pending. HB 4260 would prohibit county judges and county commissioners from practicing law in courts over which they have jurisdiction. The author described it as an ethics measure to avoid conflicts of interest, but county officials and the County Judges and Commissioners Association opposed it, saying existing ethics rules already address conflicts and that the bill would impose hardships, especially in rural counties. The bill was left pending. HB 4388 would require all judges, including those who serve only in administrative roles, to remain subject to the Code of Judicial Conduct; supporters said some judges avoid discipline by relinquishing judicial functions, while opponents said the bill was unnecessary and could burden county judges who serve as administrators. It was also left pending. The committee also heard HB 5134, which would limit Rule 202 pre-suit depositions to people who have suffered or reasonably expect to suffer actual damages and allow attorney’s fees against abusive petitioners. The author said the bill would curb harassment and fishing expeditions, but members questioned how the standard would work in practice; the bill was left pending. Finally, HB 3964 would narrow common-law public nuisance claims by barring suits over lawful conduct, conduct already addressed by other remedies, and products, while preserving other causes of action. Supporters said the bill would prevent regulation through litigation and protect legislative authority; opponents said it would eliminate important remedies and that no Texas abuse had been shown. The author indicated he would revise the bill, and it was left pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> note in time for the committee hearing note in time for the committee hearing today,<00:07:55.120
• </c> around and hope that when you get hear around and hope that when you get hear the<00:10:35.360><
• That's the reason why we're here and the reason why you're hearing what you're hearing.
• </c> here and the reason why you're hearing here and the reason why you're hearing what<01:20:30.640>
• I'm sorry, I didn't hear the question.

Committee: House Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to hear some bills this morning.
• We're going to hear some bills this morning.
• Not hearing any, we'll close that testimony.
• </c><00:42:17.440><c> today</c> Baker for um having this hearing today Baker for um having this hearing
• Just want to make sure we can hear you.

Bills: HF2582 , HF2266 , HF2518 , HF2039 , HF1941

Committee: House Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:18:08.400><c> was</c> thing he just had another hearing was thing he just had another hearing
• No, I hear you.
• No, I hear you.
• sure sure no I I hear you I me thank you sure sure no I I hear you I hear<02:00:08.079><c> you</c><02
• bail hearing.

Summary: The House Judiciary Committee opened with a hearing on CACR 7, a proposed constitutional amendment to explicitly state that defendants are innocent until proven guilty in all cases and suits brought by the state. The prime sponsor argued the amendment would strengthen due process, prevent government overreach, and extend the presumption of innocence beyond criminal cases into civil and administrative matters such as forfeiture and family court proceedings. In testimony and questioning, the sponsor cited New Hampshire constitutional provisions, historical examples, and concerns about courts shifting burdens onto individuals. Committee members raised questions about the amendment’s wording, its relationship to existing law, and whether it would have practical effect if current statutes already place the burden on the state. The hearing was then closed without further witnesses. The committee next moved to executive session on House Bill 480, which establishes a procedure for restoring competency and creates a pilot forensic liaison position in Merrimack or Strafford County to assist with that process. After discussion about prior concerns, including an email from the Disabilities Rights Center and whether enough members were present, the committee voted to adopt Amendment 2025-61H and then voted ought to pass as amended. The amendment passed unanimously, and the bill passed on a 10-1 roll call, with Representative Andrew voting no. The chair noted the bill would not go on consent and that no minority report was planned. Finally, the committee opened a hearing on House Bill 666-FN, which would add restitution for violations of library-use confidentiality and expressly include library cards and membership status among confidential records. The sponsor said the bill was intended to strengthen privacy protections after a local dispute and to provide a remedy and deterrent for improper disclosure. Committee questions focused on whether the restitution penalty would apply to accidental disclosures, how the bill interacts with existing exceptions such as court orders or investigations, and whether the language was consistent with current confidentiality law. The hearing remained open at the end of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• We will now open the public hearing of House Bill 1995 by Representative Irwin.
• Love to hear it. Appreciate that, gentleman.
• By this being a hearing and exec, do witnesses still testify online tonight?
• The hearing was on, yes. During the hearing, yes. Yes, absolutely. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.
• We just had a hearing last week on this exact same topic.

Committee: House Government Efficiency

Transcript Highlights:

• I would like to take this opportunity to welcome you to today's informational hearing.
• To today's informational hearing.
• Okay, hearing none. Thank you. I really appreciate the groundwork.
• Can you hear me? Can you hear me? Yes. Can you hear me? Yes, we can.
• Okay, hearing none. I thank you, Chairman, for your brief presentation.

Committee: House Governmental Organization

Summary: The Assembly Governmental Organization Committee held an informational hearing on four Tribal-State Gaming Compacts and amendments, with Chair Blanca Rubio noting that no formal vote would be taken because the Legislature cannot amend the compacts. The hearing was framed as a briefing on AB 1527 and SB 864, the ratification bills for the agreements, and committee members were told the compacts reflect negotiations under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and recent Ninth Circuit guidance in Chicken Rancheria v. State of California. Governor’s Office Senior Advisor Matthew Lee explained the first compact, with the Sherwood Valley Indian Community of the Trinidad Rancheria, as a 25-year agreement consistent with recent compacts: up to 1,200 gaming devices at three facilities, worker protections through a tribal labor relations ordinance, minimum wage and anti-harassment/retaliation provisions, state regulatory cost recovery, and revenue-sharing tied to operations above 350 devices. He said the second item, a fourth amendment with the Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians, would extend the existing compact to preserve the status quo while the parties continue litigating in federal court, and would add the state’s standard off-track wagering appendix. Lee then described the first amendment with the Pinoleville Pomo Nation as an update to an older compact to align it with current law and recent agreements, including removal of environmental review and family law provisions, narrowing of tort requirements, revised revenue-sharing, and updated financial disclosure rules. For the first amendment with the Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation, Lee said the parties used a collaborative dispute-resolution process to remove Chicken Ranch-related provisions, narrow tort and facility definitions, extend the compact through 2016, and add a commitment to bargain in good faith over any future legalization of new class III gaming forms. Sycuan Chairman Cody Martinez testified in support, thanking the Governor’s Office and noting the tribe employs more than 3,000 people, most of whom are non-Indian, and that the tribe has operated Indian gaming since 1983. No opposition was recorded, and the committee adjourned after the presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing none, it is so ordered.
• Hearing none, the substitute is adopted.
• Hearing none, it's ordered. Same thing here. OK.
• Hearing none, is so ordered. Chair lays out.
• Hearing none, it is so ordered.

Committee: Senate State Affairs