Transcript Highlights:

• It has.
• It has.
• than trying to work around it, solving for it.
• And I have to call it for what it is.
• It is weakening it instead of finding a way to strengthen it, instead of finding a way to make it have

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It has.
• It has.
• than trying to work around it, solving for it.
• And I have to call it for what it is.
• It is weakening it instead of finding a way to strengthen it, instead of finding a way to make it have

Summary: The joint Senate Education and Budget Committee hearing focused on the Governor’s proposed education governance overhaul, which would shift day-to-day management of the California Department of Education from the elected Superintendent of Public Instruction to a new appointed education commissioner, while giving the Superintendent new voting roles on the State Board of Education and the Community College Board of Governors. Chair Perez opened by stressing that the proposal raises major policy questions beyond the budget process and should be evaluated for its effect on students, local control, and accountability. Brooks Allen of the State Board of Education argued the change would unify policymaking and implementation, reduce fragmented authority, and create clearer accountability, citing decades of reports criticizing California’s “crazy quilt” governance structure and noting the proposal is timed for the 2026 transition. Amber Alexander of the Department of Finance outlined the fiscal and staffing transfers, describing the plan as largely cost-neutral and explaining how positions would shift between the State Board, the Department, and the new Superintendent’s office over 2026-27 and 2027-28. Sarah Cortez of the Legislative Analyst’s Office said the LAO supports shifting management to an appointed commissioner but recommended several refinements: preserving legislative oversight, requiring Senate confirmation of the commissioner, clearly defining the Superintendent’s duties as a public representative/advisor/evaluator, and refining the State Board’s role to focus on major policies requiring public input. She also said the fiscal plan should be cost-neutral and more fully specified. Senators raised concerns about the timing during an election year, the constitutional status of the Superintendent, whether the proposal should instead be a constitutional amendment, and whether governance changes actually improve student outcomes or simply rearrange the org chart. Some members questioned whether the proposal would confuse voters and undermine democratic accountability, while others said the current structure is already confusing and that the reform could improve clarity for districts and local boards. The discussion also covered how curriculum is set, with LAO explaining that the Legislature has broad authority but has delegated much curriculum work to the State Board and the Instructional Quality Commission. Members asked how the new structure would affect local districts, who they would call for guidance, and whether the commissioner would have authority over policy; the presenters said policy authority would remain with the State Board, while the commissioner would handle administration and implementation. No votes were taken during the panel discussion, and the hearing was organized to continue with additional panels and public comment later in the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• We appreciate it.
• That's it.
• We prohibited it in the '20s, but then it created an underground market for it.
• It used to be you go to the store and the price, take it or leave it.
• it.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We appreciate it.
• We appreciate it.
• That's it.
• It didn't, we prohibited it in the '20s, but then it created an underground market for it.
• It used to be you go to the store and the price, take it or leave it.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 1159, which would update California student data privacy law for educational technology and college-level platforms. The author and supporters argued that students’ personal information is being collected and used far beyond educational purposes, including sensitive health and demographic data, and said the bill would limit misuse and add stronger privacy protections. Support came from privacy, labor, education, and civil rights groups, while opposition from college store and industry representatives focused on narrowing the definition of “operator,” preserving institution-related communications, and concerns about the bill’s private right of action. Members raised questions about how the bill would affect scholarships, financial aid, adult students, consent, and litigation; the author said the bill includes a right to cure and notice to the Attorney General. The committee voted 4-0 to pass the bill to Appropriations, with the measure placed on call. The committee then took up AB 1709, which would set a minimum age of 16 for social media accounts on platforms with specified addictive design features and create a youth safety commission. The author, pediatric and safety advocates, and several public supporters argued that social media companies intentionally design compulsive features that harm youth mental health, sleep, and development, and that the bill is a necessary product-safety response. Opponents argued the bill is overbroad, may be ineffective, raises First Amendment concerns, and could cut off vulnerable youth from important online support networks. Members focused heavily on possible amendments, especially a non-addictive feed option for younger users and strengthening the commission; the author said he was open to those changes and to further work with the committees. The bill was moved to Judiciary on a 5-0 vote and placed on call. At the end of the excerpt, the author began presenting a third measure, AB 2076, which would strengthen California’s Parents’ Accountability and Child Protection Act by adding nitrous oxide to the list of age-verified dangerous products, banning purchase with gift cards or store credit, and increasing penalties for large sellers. The author described nitrous oxide as increasingly accessible to minors online and cited enforcement gaps in the current law, but the transcript cuts off before testimony or action on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• And it needs a lot. It needs all that infrastructure.
• goes through, and it will make it harder for our most... ...bill, if it goes through.
• it.
• I mean, it has it, FY26, as 2.5.2.2.2.
• So it just, it, it, it, it, it, it, I don’t know what I’m trying to—I know what I’m trying to say.

Bills: SB48, HB250, SB17

Keywords: State Fairgrounds District, fairgrounds bonds, public financing, bond authorization, gross receipts tax, gaming tax, tax-backed bonds, infrastructure funding, Albuquerque fairgrounds, State Fair Tid, economic development, municipal bonds, revenue pledge, capital projects, New Mexico finance, technology, innovation, advisory board, entrepreneurial support, stakeholder representation

Transcript Highlights:

• If we can't get it done for Batch Zero, we will have it done for the next one and it will affect all
• Is it consumable water or is it a something less than that?
• It doesn't have gypsum, we just clean it up.
• It probably should. It probably should be.
• If we don't build and scale it here, it doesn't disappear—it moves offshore, and the jobs will follow

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• it.
• Because it took a lot of work and it took a lot of people to get this bill to where it is.
• It takes relentless work. It takes patience. It takes understanding the issues inside and out.
• I get it. There are technical questions of whether, is it the safety or is it this?
• I get it. There are technical questions of whether, is it the safety or is it this?

Summary: The House convened with prayer, a moment of silence for two fallen service members, the Pledge of Allegiance, quorum call, and several recognitions, including law enforcement officers and visiting students and advocates. Members then adopted the special order report and moved into the special-order calendar. The first major item was HB 7031, the annual tax package, which was explained as a broad measure covering sales tax holidays, property tax changes, tax credits, pari-mutuel tax reductions, vacation-rental tax collection, and decoupling from federal tax changes. Members asked about the fiscal impact of decoupling and the firearm-accessories holiday; supporters emphasized fiscal caution and the package’s mix of consumer and housing provisions, while opponents objected to the gun-related tax holiday. The bill passed 105-2. The House then passed CS/CS/CS HB 1177 on Space Florida and spaceport operations 107-0, with supporters saying it would strengthen Florida’s competitiveness in commercial aerospace. CS for SB 246 on specialty license plates also passed unanimously after a strike-all amendment that added several new plates, revised the Fraternal Order of Police plate, and tightened specialty-plate financial and nonprofit requirements. CS HB 697 on drug prices and coverage passed 100-0 after supporters said it built on prior PBM reforms by requiring fairer pharmacy reimbursement and limiting forced losses on drugs. CS/CS HB 1263 on the Office of Insurance Regulation passed 109-0 after an amendment clarifying fingerprinting requirements, and CS/CS HB 527 on insurance claim denials passed 100-0 with a requirement for human review before claims are denied or reduced solely by AI. The House also passed CS HB 1449 on the statewide provider and health plan claim dispute resolution program 100-0 after narrowing the bill to out-of-network emergency services and claims at or below $50,000. CS HB 93 on protection from surgical smoke passed 178-0 after extensive emotional debate, with supporters describing it as a long-sought patient and worker safety measure requiring smoke evacuation systems in hospitals and surgical centers. Later, CS HB 1217 on prohibited governmental greenhouse-gas policies passed 29-0 after questions clarified that it would bar net-zero policies and related funding arrangements but not general energy efficiency or incidental emissions reductions; opponents argued it would preempt local climate and resilience efforts, while supporters said it protected energy reliability and affordability. The House then began debate on CS/CS HB 1461 on advanced nuclear reactors, with sponsors describing a framework for licensing and oversight of small modular and microreactors and supporters arguing it would help meet future energy demand and improve reliability.

Transcript Highlights:

• It should be per exam to make it more manageable.
• It ensures continuous insurance coverage. Um, it.
• change, even though it knew from its own internal science that it did.
• It failed its first committee just last week.
• it?

Summary: The committee heard three major insurance-related bills. SB 1209 by Senator Allen would give the Insurance Commissioner new authority to require insurers to implement corrective actions found in market conduct and financial exams, with penalties for failure to comply. Supporters, including Commissioner Ricardo Lara and his deputies, said current law leaves CDI without a direct way to compel remediation of repeated violations or obtain needed financial information, while opponents argued the bill expands CDI authority too far, could duplicate existing penalties, and should be limited to legal violations rather than recommendations. After discussion, members and the author agreed to narrow the bill through amendments, including tying it to legal violations, applying penalties per exam rather than per policy, and clarifying accounting language; the committee then passed the bill 5-1 to Appropriations, with one member on call. SB 1301, also by Senator Allen, would reform residential property insurance non-renewals by requiring clearer written explanations, giving homeowners a chance to mitigate correctable issues, and prohibiting certain unfair non-renewal bases such as claims below deductible or claims not paid by the insurer. The author and supporters said Californians face unusually high non-renewal rates and often receive vague notices that make it hard to keep coverage, while opponents warned the bill’s original 180-day notice period and reporting requirements were too burdensome and could worsen availability. Senator Richardson said he would support the bill after the author agreed to reduce the notice period to about three months and continue working on a mitigation-based process; the committee then approved the bill 4-1, with one member on call. The committee also considered SB 1026 by Senator Gonzalez, which would strengthen regulation of bail fugitive recovery agents by allowing CDI to suspend or revoke licenses without a criminal conviction, expanding prohibited conduct, and tightening insurance and appointment requirements. Supporters, including Commissioner Lara, said the 2022 licensing law left loopholes that allow misconduct to continue and that the bill would improve public safety and accountability. Opponents from the bail industry and crime victims groups argued the bill requires unavailable or impractical insurance coverage, including coverage for willful acts, and could reduce the number of recovery agents and delay justice. Members raised concerns about the insurance language and availability, and the author said the bill was still being worked on with opposition; the committee passed it 4-1, with one member on call. Finally, the committee heard SB 982 by Senator Wiener, the Affordable Insurance and Recovery Act, which would let the Attorney General seek recovery from fossil fuel companies for climate-related costs affecting the Fair Plan and private policyholders. The author said Californians are paying rising insurance and disaster costs while fossil fuel companies that contributed to climate change are not, and witnesses from flood and wildfire communities and climate policy experts supported the bill as a way to fund recovery and resilience. Opponents, including business and labor representatives, argued the bill would impose broad liability, invite litigation, and harm jobs and energy affordability. The hearing included extensive testimony, but no vote was taken on SB 982 in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think that that's not right, but it is what it is.
• congenital CMV is common, it is preventable, and when it is caught early, it is treatable.
• We can deny it, but it is the absolute truth.
• People say it won't work, I want it work.
• take it and read it.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Health heard testimony on a wide range of bills focused on children’s health, tobacco control, newborn screening, pediatric cancer, palliative care, and professional licensure. Early testimony highlighted Senate bills to expand newborn screening for pyruvate dehydrogenase complex deficiency, lysosomal storage disorders, and congenital CMV, with families and clinicians describing severe diagnostic delays, missed treatment windows, and the benefits of early detection. Speakers also supported a bill to improve pediatric cancer research through a dedicated trust fund, and a bill to extend pediatric palliative care services to age 22, with parents and providers emphasizing continuity of care for seriously ill young people. Several witnesses gave personal accounts in support of the newborn screening measures. Families described children who endured years of misdiagnosis before receiving diagnoses such as Gaucher disease, Fabry disease, Pompe disease, Niemann-Pick disease, and CMV, often after irreversible damage had already occurred. Medical and advocacy witnesses said Massachusetts already collects some of the relevant screening data and argued that results should be reported to families, while others urged the committee to add conditions to the state panel because effective treatments already exist. The committee also heard support for a bill to establish a fetal alcohol spectrum disorder program and training for providers. On tobacco and youth health, testimony supported bills to ban internet tobacco sales, strengthen youth protections, and reduce lung cancer deaths through point-of-sale information and quit-line access. A student testified about easily purchasing flavored nicotine products online without meaningful age verification, and public health advocates backed measures to keep tobacco out of children’s environments. The committee also heard testimony on a bill to ensure parents have access to their children’s medical records through age 16, with exceptions for sensitive services already protected by law. The committee additionally took testimony on an optometry licensure bill, where ophthalmologists opposed language they said could broaden scope of practice and allow optometrists to use the title “optometric physician,” while optometry educators and students supported the bill as a modernization measure with no scope expansion. No votes were taken during the hearing; the chair repeatedly reminded speakers of time limits and noted that written testimony could be submitted for additional comments.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm here to strongly oppose AB 2698 unless it is fundamentally revised to align with California's modern
• I'm here to strongly oppose AB 2698 unless it is fundamentally revised to align with California's modern
• Let's do it.
• It gives agencies the clarity that it needs.
• It is personal. It is lasting.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Guess the offshore wind is having—that's it. That's it. It makes you go, wow, wow.
• It looks at the risk that the utilities identify, looks at modern technology, advancing technology, and
• So they understand it. It is a business that we need.
• Do we have it? How much is it going to cost? How soon are we going to get it?
• It's not meant to replace it, not meant to improve it; it's meant to supplement it.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Energy, Utilities and Communications held an oversight hearing focused on electric rates, utility regulation, affordability, wildfire costs, and the California Public Utilities Commission’s role. Chair and members framed the discussion around the challenge of transitioning to a cleaner grid while maintaining reliability and keeping bills affordable. The hearing also served as the annual update from the CPUC and the Public Advocates Office, with testimony from Professor Severin Borenstein and CPUC President-designate Alice Reynolds. Borenstein gave a primer on utility regulation, explaining that generation is largely deregulated while transmission and distribution remain regulated, and that most rate-setting follows cost-of-service regulation. He emphasized that the hardest issue is setting the allowed return on equity: too high can raise bills and encourage capital-heavy spending, while too low can deter investment and harm reliability. He argued there is no silver bullet, said performance-based regulation and price caps have limits, and suggested some costs now charged through electric bills—such as climate programs, low-income subsidies, and wildfire-related public policy costs—might more appropriately be paid through the state budget. Reynolds described the CPUC’s oversight role, saying the commission reviews utility spending through general rate cases, balancing accounts, and other proceedings, and that affordability is addressed through front-end scrutiny, post-spend accountability, and legislative direction. She highlighted wildfire mitigation as a major driver of rate increases, noted recent progress on clean energy procurement and battery storage, and said the CPUC is working on return-on-equity decisions, FERC advocacy on transmission costs, and implementation of SB 254 and other statutes. Members pressed on a range of issues, including wildfire securitization, load growth from EVs and data centers, gas-system stranded assets, balancing accounts, and a water-service dispute in Keene involving Union Pacific. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, with several follow-up commitments from the CPUC to provide data and updates.

Transcript Highlights:

• We could name it, and you know, we could name it.
• We could name it, and you know, we could name it.
• We could name it, and you know, we could name it.
• > mut um is what we call it um to keep it mut um is what we call it um to keep it simple<00:45:36.119
• </c> that piece before it was pretty clear it that piece before it was pretty clear it was<00:47:02.960

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It is.
• It basically, it talked about.
• it.
• When you have adverse investment experience, it diminishes it. It magnifies it.
• IT.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But when we talk about how we structured the cap-and-invest program, it was looking at it in its totality
• Is it out there?
• I'll point it out.
• We have to do it through bonds and we have to do it through GGRF.
• It would simply shift it away from on-road transportation.

Summary: The meeting began with a budget subcommittee hearing on a proposed sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) tax credit trailer bill. Assembly Members Ávila Farías and another member spoke in support, emphasizing union jobs, refinery investments, and the need to decarbonize aviation. The Department of Finance said the Governor’s proposal would provide a $1 to $2 per gallon credit against the diesel excise tax for SAF sold in California from 2026 to 2036. The Legislative Analyst’s Office recommended rejecting the proposal, arguing it is a relatively expensive way to reduce emissions, has uncertain environmental benefits, could significantly reduce transportation revenues, and conflicts with the spirit of voter restrictions on transportation taxes. Committee members questioned whether the credit would mainly benefit out-of-state producers, whether firms would have diesel tax liability to use the credit, and whether the proposal would shift production away from renewable diesel and raise fuel prices. Administration and CARB staff said the credit is intended to support aviation decarbonization, preserve jobs, and help keep California on track toward its 2045 climate goals. LAO and UC Berkeley testimony countered that the policy could mostly subsidize existing technologies, that feedstock supply is limited, and that the net emissions benefit may be small relative to the cost. Members also asked about the effect on local streets and roads, SHOP, and trade corridor funding; Finance estimated a $165 million annual revenue impact would reduce those programs, while LAO said the reductions would mean fewer projects over time. No vote was taken, and the chair said the issue would remain open for further discussion. The committee then moved to a zero-emission vehicle incentive trailer bill proposing a one-time $200 million appropriation to CARB for a new point-of-sale incentive program focused on first-time buyers and leases of new and used light-duty ZEVs. Supporters said the program would help offset the loss of the federal EV tax credit, maintain momentum in California’s ZEV transition, and use a one-to-one match with participating automakers to double the state’s investment. LAO recommended rejection, saying the proposal does not meet the high budget bar this year, lacks enough program detail to evaluate, is unlikely to move sales significantly given the size of the appropriation, and could duplicate existing state and utility programs. Members asked about current incentives across light-, medium-, and heavy-duty sectors, the recent decline in ZEV sales, and whether the program would help lower-income buyers rather than subsidize purchases that would have happened anyway. CARB said the proposal is meant to fill a gap in the light-duty market, where sales fell sharply after the federal credit expired, and noted existing programs for other vehicle classes. The Department of Finance also addressed a separate question about the Motor Vehicle Account, saying a previously planned GGRF transfer was no longer needed because updated forecasts showed the fund had sufficient balances, though LAO said the account still has a structural long-term imbalance. The discussion ended before any vote or action on the ZEV proposal.

Transcript Highlights:

• it...
• It is cost control. That is what it is.
• And it controls costs largely because it deters, it denies, or it deters care.
• It is cost control. That is what it is.
• And it controls costs largely because it deters, it denies or it deters. because it deters it denies

Summary: The committee heard AB 1887, which would speed prior authorization for FDA-approved rare disease treatments prescribed by specialists and, if a plan does not act within 30 days, deem the request approved. The author and supporters, including patients and clinicians, said delays can cause irreversible harm, hospitalizations, and death, especially for children and people with progressive rare diseases. Health plans and insurers opposed the bill’s automatic-approval provision and said the measure lacked safeguards for incomplete requests and shared responsibility for timely information. The chair encouraged continued work with opponents, and the author said the bill was narrowed from an earlier version that would have waived prior authorization entirely. The committee also heard AB 1979 on artificial intelligence in health care, AB 2161 on Medi-Cal work requirements, AB 539 on extending approved prior authorizations, AB 2311 on physician employment at public hospital districts, AB 1148 on banning phthalates and bisphenols in food packaging, AB 1825 on mental health offender reentry coordination, and AB 2282 on a temporary emergency stabilization unit in Patterson. AB 1979 would preserve licensed clinicians’ professional judgment, bar AI from directing unlicensed clinical functions, and protect medical records used by consumer chatbots; after amendments, several hospital, medical, and industry groups moved from opposition to neutral. AB 2161 would limit the harm of federal Medi-Cal work-reporting rules by using existing data, improving notices, and protecting due process; it drew broad support from patient, provider, and advocacy groups. AB 539 would keep prior authorization approvals valid for up to one year or the course of treatment, with supporters citing continuity of care and opponents warning about utilization, fraud, and cost concerns. AB 2311, as amended, would let certain high-payer-mix or distressed public health care districts directly employ physicians; CMA withdrew opposition after the bill was narrowed, while some hospital interests still objected to the carve-out. AB 1148 would prohibit two chemicals commonly used in food packaging, with supporters citing cancer and endocrine-disruption risks and opponents arguing DTSC should handle the issue through its existing regulatory process. AB 1825 would improve transition planning and Medi-Cal enrollment for offenders with mental health disorders leaving state hospitals, and AB 2282 would authorize a temporary rural emergency stabilization care unit in Patterson until a permanent hospital is built. Several bills were held for later action because the committee lacked a quorum, and the chair repeatedly noted that motions would be taken once enough members returned.

Transcript Highlights:

• It certainly is about that, but it is so much more.
• Would it hurt it?
• It does.
• It promotes economic prosperity, and it secures the nation.
• It will save jobs, it will help crucial research continue to advance, and it will probably benefit the

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee on Economic Development held a hearing on the DRIVE Act, a proposal to invest $400 million in Massachusetts research and innovation without new taxes. Governor Healey and administration officials said the bill would direct $200 million to public higher education research and regional partnerships and $200 million to a research funding pool for hospitals, universities, and other institutions, with the goal of retaining talent, leveraging private and philanthropic dollars, and offsetting major federal R&D cuts. They argued that research is a core economic engine for the state, supporting jobs across labs, construction, services, and surrounding businesses, and said the bill would help protect the Commonwealth’s tax base and competitiveness during a period of federal uncertainty and cuts to SNAP, Medicaid, and other programs. Committee members raised concerns about whether Fair Share surtax dollars should instead be used for K-12 and other community needs, whether the proposal is enough given the scale of lost federal grants, and how the money would be allocated. The governor responded that the funds are one-time surplus dollars, that most surtax revenue already supports education, and that the bill is meant as a bridge to stabilize public higher education and research. She also said the legislation includes a review board and could support a revolving or matched-fund approach in some cases. Several members pressed for more detail on selection criteria, future funding, and whether private companies and large endowments should contribute more. University of Massachusetts leaders and researchers testified that federal grant cancellations and delays are already causing layoffs, furloughs, rescinded admissions, and lost research capacity. UMass officials said the bill would help preserve faculty, postdocs, graduate students, and research programs in medicine, climate science, marine science, Braille instruction, and AI decision-making. They emphasized that the funding should be merit-based and that the state needs to act quickly to prevent talent from leaving Massachusetts. Business, labor, and industry groups, including MassBio, the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, AIM, the AFL-CIO, and Building Trades, supported the bill, saying it would protect jobs, sustain the innovation ecosystem, and reinforce Massachusetts’ national leadership in research and life sciences. No vote was taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• It was... It was... I can't. There you go. Will the Senate please come to order.
• It It is probably other high problem. It It is probably other high cost. cost. cost.
• Um, and what it does is it allows each board And what it does is it allows each board shall adopt term
• It just changes the name of it.
• ><c> it.

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It is Senate Bill 50.
• Part of it is electronic filing. That's a modernization, and the old statutes don't work very well.
• it and and record it and then it<00:08:06.479><c> counts</c><00:08:07.199><c> as</c><00:08:08.000><c
• </c><00:32:48.159><c> by</c> we'll get it we'll get it changed by we'll get it we'll get it changed by
• It looks like this. So each today. It looks like this.

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill, please pass it. It really does help. It really does work.
• This bill, please pass it. It really does help. It really does work.
• This bill, please pass it. It really does help. It really does work.
• Instead of 16 cents, it would be 18 cents; it would be 21 cents if it were a 5% increase, and then that
• </c><01:01:54.079><c> would</c> 16 cents it would um 18 cents it would 16 cents it would um 18 cents

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Health and Human Services Committee heard testimony on several measures related to child welfare, health care access, overdose response, disability services, and waste management. For SB 710 on child welfare, the Department of Human Services, the Office of Wellness and Resilience, the Attorney General’s office, and multiple advocacy groups testified in support, with the Governor’s office noting support but deferring to the Attorney General on implementation because of separation-of-powers concerns. For SB 952 on child welfare services, DHS, the Governor’s office, and child- and trauma-informed care advocates supported the bill, saying it would help families access services, provide basic material support, and reduce strain on the child welfare system. SB 954 on a home health services rate study also drew support, including from DHS, the Hawaii Healthcare Association, and a public testifier who said the study would help ensure funds reach low-income, disabled, and kupuna recipients. SB 957 on overdose prevention received support from the Department of Health and the Attorney General, who said overdose prevention centers are evidence-based but raised federal-law concerns and recommended amendments; the Hawaii Health and Harm Reduction Center and others also testified in support. The committee then moved to the 1:00 regular calendar and heard SB 850 on disability health disparity, which was supported by the Executive Office on Aging, the Hawaii State Council on Developmental Disabilities, the Hawaii Disability Rights Center, self-advocates, and others. Testimony emphasized that a disparity study could improve workforce development, training, and services for people with disabilities. SB 838 on continuous glucose monitoring drew support from health agencies and advocates, with testimony stressing that monitors can be critical for some diabetes patients. SB 829 on health care was supported by the Department of Health and health care stakeholders, who said it would help rotating physicians serve neighbor islands without local hospital privileges and align with CMS rules. SB 446 on waste management drew mixed testimony: the Department of Health and several public entities provided comments, the County of Maui opposed, and environmental advocates urged stronger aquifer protections and limits on ash reuse. During decision making, the committee adopted recommendations to pass SB 298, SB 322, SB 299, SB 450, SB 451, SB 949, SB 710, SB 957, SB 69, and SD 952 with various amendments, including technical changes, blank appropriations, and defective dates. SB 323, SB 324, SB 712, SB 950, SB 954, and SB 959 were deferred, largely because companion House measures were moving or similar Senate measures had already passed. The chair also announced recesses to find quorum and noted that some bills from the earlier Monday calendar were being deferred to avoid duplication.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is it this bill, or is it a quasi version of it?
• If they roll it up, roll it down?
• If they roll it up, roll it down?
• It was a great bill. It flew out of here. No one ever funded it. It was in a new term.
• So it kind of modernizes the rural infrastructure loan bill that I put in place.

Bills: HCR35, HB440, HB515, HB543, HB614, HB1010, HB1039, HB1088, HB1122, HB1179, HB1200

Keywords: tax delinquency, property sale, rehabilitation, Louisiana State Law Institute, legislation, homestead exemption, property tax, parish governance, Louisiana Constitution, voter approval, adjudicated property, real estate, political subdivisions, property sales, government authority, residential lease, tax credit, property valuation, Louisiana constitution, disaster response