Transcript Highlights:

• One of the things that hasn't been included in this discussion is minimum wage and increases.
• Chair, here in San We increased our minimum wage from $15 to $17.50.
• I would like to have a review and understand what it would mean to have a minimum wage increase.
• However, with a wage increase like that, I still feel there would be challenges with the cliff effect
• I have recently heard from DD waiver providers in Santa Fe that with the increase in the minimum wage

Transcript Highlights:

• It can include things like a rent freeze or allowing only minimal increases or a certain percent increase
• Demanding huge increases is a form of eviction by rent increase that saves developers the trouble and
• Wages have remained largely stagnant while the cost of rent, bills, and child care have increased dramatically
• If you increase minimum wages, we’re going to have to lay off workers.
• “...to fall to increase?

Bills: H5008

Keywords: rent control, housing stability, tenants rights, affordability crisis, consumer protection

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-21, House Bill 508, an act to protect tenants by limiting rent increases. The chair explained the ballot process under Article 48 and outlined the hearing structure. The first witness, a Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies researcher, described Massachusetts’ worsening rental affordability, explained how rent regulation policies are typically designed, and reviewed research suggesting rent regulation can slow rent growth and improve tenant stability, while also noting concerns about reduced supply, quality, and implementation details. She compared the proposal to other state and local rent-stabilization laws and said the measure would cap increases at the lower of CPI or 5%, exempt certain housing types, and apply to new tenants as well as current tenants because it would not allow vacancy decontrol. Supporters of the petition argued that rent stabilization is needed to address displacement and immediate affordability pressures while broader housing production continues. The proponent from Homes for All Massachusetts said the policy is a grassroots response to corporate rent hikes and cited examples of tenants facing steep increases. A tenant from Arlington described a long dispute after a building was purchased by an investment firm and rents were raised sharply, saying the experience showed how rent increases can function as eviction. A union leader said high rents are forcing workers out of the communities they serve, and two experts testified that rent stabilization can reduce displacement and provide broad, immediate benefits. Committee members asked about the proposal’s exemptions, the 10-year new-construction carveout, vacancy decontrol, and whether the policy could discourage development; supporters said the bill targets large landlords, preserves room for small owners, and should be viewed as a complement to new housing production. Opponents, including small property owners, a chamber of commerce representative, a union official, and a landlord, argued the measure would hurt small landlords, reduce investment, and slow housing production. They said operating costs such as taxes, insurance, and maintenance rise faster than the proposed cap, and warned that capping rents would lower property values and tax revenues. Several opponents emphasized that many housing providers are not large corporations but local “mom-and-pop” owners, and one said the proposal would discourage pension funds and other investors from financing new projects. Committee members pressed opponents on what alternatives they would support for affordability, and opponents pointed to increased housing production and other housing policies instead of rent control. No vote or final action was taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• increases.
• The workers get wage increases that keep up with the cost of living, and that household budgets are not
• Dietz, that you talked about how increases in health insurance take so much out of worker wages, right
• keeps increasing... ...California are working low-wage jobs with unstable hours when the cost of living
• California are working low-wage jobs with unstable hours when the cost of living keeps increasing.

Summary: The joint informational hearing of the Senate and Assembly Health Committees focused on the “cost of uncertainty” in health coverage, access, and affordability amid federal policy changes. Opening remarks from committee leaders and members emphasized that California’s gains under the Affordable Care Act and Health for All policies—high coverage rates, consumer protections, and lower uninsured rates—are now threatened by federal rollbacks, including the expiration of enhanced premium tax credits and H.R. 1. Members repeatedly cited rising premiums, skipped care, medical debt, and the risk of coverage losses, especially for low-income Californians, workers, seniors, and immigrant communities. The first panel featured federal policy and state implementation experts, including Don Joyce, Jessica Altman of Covered California, and Elizabeth Lansberg of HCAI’s Office of Health Care Affordability. Testimony described the ACA’s coverage expansions and the current federal threats: shorter open enrollment, more verification requirements, loss of enhanced subsidies, and changes affecting immigrants and preventive coverage. Covered California reported that average monthly premiums could nearly double without the subsidies, new enrollment is down sharply, and more consumers are shifting into bronze plans with higher deductibles. HCAI explained its affordability strategy through spending targets, consolidation review, and primary care investment, while members asked about the impact of federal cuts on provider taxes, uncompensated care, and whether California can sustain coverage without new revenue. The second panel, with UC Berkeley Labor Center’s Miranda Dietz and California Health Care Foundation’s Christoph Stremikis, broadened the discussion to statewide cost drivers and consumer impacts. They highlighted that more than half of Californians under 65 rely on job-based coverage, yet premiums, deductibles, and out-of-pocket costs have risen faster than wages. They also pointed to medical debt, administrative waste, market consolidation, and underinvestment in primary care as major drivers of unaffordability. Members asked about the 25% of health spending that does not improve patient care, the role of fraud versus administrative friction, the effect of cost growth targets on workers, and the need for preventive care and possible revenue solutions. The hearing then moved to a third panel on human impacts, beginning with testimony from a Central Valley promotora describing how families are choosing lower-tier coverage, struggling with diabetes care, and facing higher premiums after subsidy losses.

Transcript Highlights:

• THAN MINIMUM WAGE.
• THANK YOU A LOWER WAGE IS BETTER THAN NO WAGE.
• FORCED TO PAY SOMEONE LESS THAN MINIMUM WAGE.
• EVERYBODY HEARD ON TV AND ON THE RADIO WAS THAT THE FEDERAL MINIMUM WAGE IS NOT A LIVING MINIMUM WAGE
• WHEN IT REALLY SHOULD BE AT ANIMAL WAGE?

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Higher wages and more people in the workforce traditionally drive increases in revenue to individual
• </c> should expect increased volatility. should expect increased volatility.
• Rather, the increase is driven by increases in non-wage income, principally in capital gains distributions
• income, both of which will non-wage income, both of which will increase<00:13:48.000><c> state</c><00
• The non-wage share of gross income reported by Minnesota taxpayers has been increasing over time, and

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: Minnesota Management and Budget officials presented the February 2026 budget and economic forecast, saying the state remains in a strong financial position but faces continued structural imbalance and significant uncertainty. Commissioner Aaron Campbell said the FY 2026-27 balance is now projected at more than $3.7 billion, up about $1.3 billion from November, and the FY 2028-29 planning period is projected to end with a $377 million positive balance. He emphasized that the improvement comes largely from higher projected revenues, especially individual income and corporate franchise taxes, but warned that the state is increasingly reliant on more volatile sources such as capital gains, interest income, and corporate profits. State Economist Dr. Anthony Becker said the national outlook improved slightly, with stronger projected GDP, consumer spending, and investment, but weaker payroll growth and ongoing trade-policy uncertainty. He noted that the forecast was complicated by missing federal data because of the federal shutdown, and that tariffs, immigration policy, equity markets, and possible AI-related shifts all present risks. Revenue projections were raised for the current biennium, including individual income tax receipts, sales tax revenue, corporate franchise tax revenue, and other revenues, while Becker stressed that federal funding threats, especially involving Medicaid and other entitlement programs, could materially alter the outlook. State Budget Director Anna Mingi said general fund spending in the current biennium is projected to be $68 million lower than previously estimated, but planning-year spending is up $152 million. The biggest spending changes came from education, where special education costs rose sharply after updated local spending data, and from human services, where a new prepayment review process for certain Medicaid benefits reduced projected spending by $133 million this biennium and $105 million in the next. She also said discretionary inflation is now estimated at $1.04 billion, up $104 million from November. Campbell closed by saying the state’s reserve remains at a record $3.8 billion and that Minnesota’s AAA bond rating and reserve policy help protect against downturns. He cautioned, however, that the long-term structural imbalance remains about $3.4 billion in the planning years, or $2.3 billion excluding discretionary inflation, and urged policymakers to offset any new spending with reductions. No votes or formal actions were taken; the meeting was a presentation and question-and-answer session on the forecast.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> below the wage rate that you deserve. below the wage rate that you deserve.
• , and we saw increases there.
• there. saw increases there.
• </c> Uh just wrapping up here, those wage Uh just wrapping up here, those wage claims<01:24:59.160><c
• </c><01:25:01.440><c> for</c> claims do result in uh back wages for claims do result in uh back wages

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy Committee met to discuss worker misclassification, beginning with approval of the March 4, 2026 minutes and a note that a late-posted bill would not be heard at this time. Chair Pinto opened the hearing by framing misclassification as timely and invited Lea Takapu of the Attorney General’s office to explain the issue. Takapu described misclassification as labeling workers as independent contractors when they are really employees, which can deprive workers of minimum wage, overtime, unemployment insurance, workers’ compensation, and other protections while also reducing tax revenue. She said the Attorney General’s office and the MEAP partnership have been working on the issue and cited estimates that Minnesota workers lose billions annually and the state loses hundreds of millions to over a billion dollars in revenue, while noting that legitimate independent contracting is not the target. Members questioned how the committee could rely on estimates when the exact number of misclassified workers is unknown. Takapu responded that the figures were based on studies and complaint data, and that underground or undocumented work makes exact counts difficult. Chair Pinto noted the numbers were estimates and referenced a 2024 Legislative Auditor finding that Minnesota lacked an adequate, coordinated approach to proper worker classification, while saying progress had been made since then. Several industry witnesses then testified in support of stronger enforcement. Kevin Pranis of LiUNA said misclassification remains rampant in parts of construction, especially drywall, stucco, thin stone, and broadband installation, and argued it is tax, unemployment insurance, and workers’ compensation fraud that harms law-abiding contractors and taxpayers. Matt Wollers of Braxton and Sons said his company loses bids to competitors that misclassify workers, creating a labor-cost advantage of 30% or more, and asked for meaningful enforcement rather than new legislation, including regular unannounced jobsite visits. Jesse Madison of Purple Tally Productions said misclassification is anti-competition and described examples from live events and entertainment, urging front-end checks on workers’ compensation, unemployment coverage, and W-2 versus 1099 status before work begins. The next testifier, Ben Ballou of the Minnesota Nurses Association, began his remarks as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• increases.
• The workers get wage increases that keep up with the cost of living, and that household budgets are not
• Dietz talked about: how increases in health insurance take so much out of worker wages, right?
• keeps increasing.
• California are working low-wage jobs with unstable hours when the cost of living keeps increasing.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Both proposals directly fund wage and benefit increases for the critical frontline workers like me who
• The wage increase recommendations by the Workforce Standards Board will be well over a million dollars
• The wage increase recommendations by the Workforce Standards Board will be well over a million dollars
• The wage increase recommendations by the Workforce Standards Board will be well over a million dollars
• But reverting to a flat percentage-based increase, we risk repeating past mistakes when caregiver wages

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So we have increased the conservative nature of that, so it increases costs.
• So Idaho’s prevailing wage is approximate to what we pay our commercial wages here.
• Their prevailing wage is about half of Oregon’s prevailing wage.
• , it’s very equal wages.
• You showed early on in the slideshow your wage increases over the last, I think it was nine years or

Keywords: 907, all

Summary: The committee first received an informational update on the Interstate Bridge Replacement Project from Carly Francis and Travis Brower. They described the project’s purpose as improving seismic resilience, safety, freight movement, transit, and bicycle/pedestrian access across the Columbia River, and said the updated cost estimate is $13.2 billion to $14.4 billion for the full corridor. They explained the increase from the 2022 estimate as driven by construction inflation, a more conservative inflation curve, schedule delays, more detailed engineering, and risk modeling. They also outlined the funding plan, including $2.1 billion in federal funds, $1 billion each from Oregon and Washington, and $1.5 billion in projected toll revenue, and said they are working to obligate federal funds by the end of September. The panel described a first funded phase that would include the bridge, highway connections, tolling infrastructure, bridge removal, and transit design, with light rail to Vancouver still intended but dependent on additional funding. Members questioned the risk of losing federal transit funds, whether bridge design decisions were being made with legislative input, and whether the space reserved for light rail could be used for buses if transit funding does not materialize. The committee then heard testimony on maintaining Oregon’s existing roads and bridges from representatives of Knife River, the Asphalt Pavement Association of Oregon, and CRH. Witnesses said pavement and bridge preservation is severely underfunded, with ODOT needing about $400 million per year for pavement preservation but receiving roughly $100 million annually. They showed examples of deteriorating highways such as U.S. 97 and I-84 and argued that delaying maintenance leads to much higher reconstruction costs, more safety risks, and higher user costs. Knife River described layoffs and reduced work in Oregon because of limited preservation funding, while witnesses also said rising wages, equipment costs, fuel, and permitting delays are increasing project costs. Committee members asked about the role of prevailing wage, diesel equipment, hauling distances, and whether preservation work could be prioritized more effectively. Finally, economist Joe Cortright presented on recent ODOT megaproject cost overruns. He said Oregon has experienced persistent overruns driven by overly optimistic revenue forecasts, heavy reliance on debt, consultant costs, inflation above forecast, and projects that have become much larger in scope than originally presented. He cited major increases in the Interstate Bridge, Rose Quarter, and Abernathy Bridge projects and argued that some designs are far wider and more expensive than necessary. Cortright said better accountability, clearer priorities, and more disciplined project sizing are needed, and committee members pressed him on why agencies proceed with larger designs even when consultants recommend narrower, less expensive alternatives.

Transcript Highlights:

• I believe that this will actually increase employment opportunities and will increase wages because it
• Are the increase in the child tax credit, a 25% increase?
• And in this bill, we have given them a 25% increase on that.
• wages for Arizonans."
• Now, this bill also provides a 25%... ...wage-earning workers.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I believe that this will actually increase employment opportunities and will increase wages because it
• Are the increase in the child tax credit, a 25% increase?
• And in this bill, we have given them a 25% increase on that.
• wages for Arizonans.
• Now, this bill also provides a 25% ...wage-earning workers.

Summary: The House convened, approved the journal, recognized the Doctor of the Day, and welcomed several guest groups, including JAG students and students from Heila Ben High School. The chamber then moved into Committee of the Whole to consider HB 2153, the annual tax conformity bill, which was described by supporters as aligning Arizona tax law with recent federal changes and providing relief through no tax on tips and overtime, a larger child tax credit, a new child care expense deduction, and a deduction for certain retirement income. Opponents argued the measure would primarily benefit wealthy individuals and corporations, reduce state revenue, and leave some seniors out because the retirement-income deduction is tied to retirement accounts. Members also discussed the Department of Revenue’s already-issued tax forms and the need for certainty for filers. After extended debate, the Committee of the Whole gave HB 2153 a do pass recommendation by a vote of 31-26, and the House adopted the report and sent the bill to engrossing. The House then took up the Senate mirror bill, SB 1106, substituted for HB 2153, and after floor explanations of vote, passed it 31-27 with 2 not voting. Supporters said the bill would help working families, seniors, and small businesses and prevent filing confusion, while opponents repeated concerns about cost, fairness, and impacts on public services. The bill was transmitted to the Senate. Following the tax vote, members made several announcements, including birthday wishes and a tribute to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and committee chairs announced upcoming cancellations. The House then recessed and reconvened for first reading and referral of a long list of new bills covering topics such as elections, health care, education, transportation, public safety, taxation, housing, and appropriations. The session ended with a motion to adjourn until the next scheduled meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Let me underscore: minimum wage standard, which means you have Minimum wage standard, which means you
• There are no prevailing wage adjustments in this bill.
• It does not replace prevailing wage. It does not undercut prevailing wage.
• This bill protects prevailing wage.
• The seed manufacturers have requested that we increase the fee.

Summary: The Assembly met on May 7, 2026, after an initial delay caused by the absence of a quorum, then proceeded with prayer, a moment of silence for victims of a hate-motivated attack at the Islamic Center in San Diego, and the Pledge of Allegiance. The Speaker pro tempore then moved through the daily file, repeatedly urging members to be on time and at their desks as the House of Origin deadline approached. Procedural actions included dispensing with the journal, deferring some items, and moving AB 1667 to the inactive file. The bulk of the session was devoted to floor consideration of many bills, most of which passed with little or no opposition. Measures approved included bills on artificial intelligence provenance information (AB 2713), community college trustee compensation (AB 2528), transit camera enforcement and privacy (AB 1837), excess proceeds claims in taxation (AB 2705), HOA technical cleanup (AB 1892), hepatitis C treatment access (AB 1843), child care planning in local general plans (AB 1914), greenhouse energy code flexibility (AB 2200), rent-now-pay-later consumer protections (AB 2350), housing cleanup and density bonus measures (including AB 2390, AB 2480, AB 1567, AB 1751, and others), spay/neuter access (AB 2010), workforce housing financing tools (AB 2110), supportive housing and homelessness-related changes (AB 2146), mental health and health plan notification measures (AB 1598, AB 2613), student aid and education bills (AB 1534, AB 1636, AB 1669, AB 1728, AB 1784, AB 1871), public safety and criminal justice bills (AB 1546, AB 1572, AB 1872, AB 1877, AB 1932), and several health and social services measures (AB 1602, AB 1628, AB 1680, AB 1825, AB 1845, AB 1906, AB 1907, AB 1925). Most bills were described as support measures, often with bipartisan backing and no opposition, and passed by wide margins. A few bills drew more discussion, especially AB 1751, a housing/townhome bill that sparked extended debate over wages, prevailing wage, stakeholder engagement, and whether the measure could depress pay for construction trades; despite concerns and an opposition speech, it ultimately passed 44-0. AB 1793, which would allow symmetrical rounding of cash transactions to the nearest nickel in light of the penny’s phaseout, also drew light debate and passed 47-1. AB 1932, an urgency measure expanding community-based crisis response, passed with one no vote on both the urgency and the bill. Several urgency or 54-vote bills, including AB 1534 and AB 1932, required later roll calls or calls to be lifted, but all measures described in the transcript were ultimately approved.

Transcript Highlights:

• Issues such as wage theft, health and safety violations, and poor-quality construction are not readily
• And importantly, both RCPs specifically do not require the payment of prevailing wage.
• Low-wage jobs exacerbate the widening inequality that we're seeing today.
• Do you see a... ...to 30% increases in infrastructure development.
• Do you see a spike increase in terms of housing?

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Public Employment and Retirement heard two bills. AB 1054 by Assembly Member Gibson would create a deferred retirement option program for eligible CHP officers and Cal Fire firefighters, allowing them to work up to five additional years while accumulating retirement benefits in an interest-bearing account. Supporters said the bill would help retain experienced public safety personnel, address staffing strain, and remain cost-neutral to the state. There was no opposition, and members generally supported the measure. The committee voted 7-0 to pass AB 1054 and refer it to Appropriations. The committee then heard AB 1439 by Assembly Member Garcia, sponsored by the State Building and Construction Trades Council. The bill would require state and local public pension systems to ensure development projects financed with pension funds include specified labor protections such as prevailing wage, skilled and trained labor, and neutrality in organizing. Supporters argued current responsible contractor policies are too weak and that stronger labor standards improve project quality and protect pension investments. Opponents, including county retirement systems, the California Building Industry Association, housing groups, and local government associations, warned the bill could interfere with fiduciary duties, raise costs, reduce housing production, create litigation risk, and be difficult to implement. Several members expressed support for labor standards but raised concerns about scope, definitions, and impacts on pensions and housing; the author said he would continue working on amendments. The committee voted 5-0 to pass AB 1439 and refer it to Appropriations. At the end of the hearing, members offered farewell remarks to committee consultant Lauren, who was leaving for a position in the Senate, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• increases.
• Dietz, that you talked about how increases in health insurance take so much out of worker wages, right
• The Medi-Cal eligibility changes will increase the uninsured population and increase uncompensated care
• keeps increasing.
• California are working low-wage jobs with unstable hours when the cost of living keeps increasing.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on the cost of uncertainty in California health care, especially the effects of federal policy changes on coverage, access, and affordability. Opening remarks from committee leaders and members emphasized that California’s uninsured rate had fallen to historic lows under the Affordable Care Act and state policies, but that the expiration of enhanced federal subsidies, H.R. 1, and other federal regulatory changes could reverse those gains. Members repeatedly cited rising premiums, skipped care, medical debt, and the strain on low-wage workers, families, clinics, hospitals, and public programs. The first panel reviewed the federal landscape and state response. A federal policy analyst described the ACA’s coverage gains and consumer protections, then outlined current threats: H.R. 1’s Medicaid and marketplace cuts, the end of enhanced premium tax credits, shorter open enrollment, more verification requirements, and changes affecting preventive services and vaccines. Covered California reported that the loss of subsidies is expected to nearly double average monthly premiums, reduce enrollment, and push more consumers into bronze plans with higher deductibles; it also noted that California’s $190 million affordability fund is helping the lowest-income enrollees. HCAI’s Office of Health Care Affordability explained its work on spending targets, market consolidation review, and primary care investment, saying the goal is to slow spending growth rather than impose price caps. Committee members pressed witnesses on the practical effects of bronze plans, administrative burdens, immigration-related disenrollment, provider taxes, uncompensated care, and whether California can sustain current coverage levels without new revenue. Witnesses said bronze plans preserve essential benefits but shift more costs to consumers, and that H.R. 1’s verification and auto-renewal changes will likely reduce enrollment. They also said provider tax reductions could significantly weaken state financing over time, and that higher uninsured rates may increase uncompensated care and pressure premiums elsewhere in the system. The second panel, featuring UC Berkeley Labor Center and California Health Care Foundation experts, highlighted broader affordability problems across job-based coverage and Medi-Cal, citing medical debt, skipped care, and the role of underlying system costs, administrative waste, and lack of competition. They pointed to medical debt relief efforts such as Los Angeles County’s program as a short-term mitigation strategy while the Legislature considers longer-term policy and budget responses.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've seen wages go up.
• We've seen wages go up.
• We've seen wages go up.
• Uh, and then our tracking wages, etc.
• of the wage scale.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• and increased costs for workers, employers, and the system.
• The legislature did a tremendous job in 2020 in protecting the rights of lower-wage and moderate-wage
• employees,” “In protecting the rights of lower-wage and moderate-wage employees.
• Employees may file wage complaints with L&I, alleging violations of wage payment requirements.
• for a wage complaint.

Summary: The Senate Labor and Commerce Committee heard testimony on several bills. SB 6152 would add physical and occupational therapists as attending providers in workers’ compensation claims. Supporters said it would reduce delays, improve access to care, and speed return to work; opponents, including the Washington State Medical Association, retail and business groups, and L&I, raised concerns about diagnosis, scope of practice, network enrollment, implementation time, and the $1.9 million fiscal note from accident and medical aid accounts. The committee also heard SB 5437, which would prohibit non-compete agreements and clarify non-solicitation rules. The sponsor and labor and physician groups supported ending non-competes as anti-competitive and harmful to worker mobility, while business, banking, and clinic representatives argued non-competes protect investments, confidential information, and patient/customer relationships and asked for narrower changes. The committee then heard SB 6058, which would give L&I discretion over whether to investigate wage complaints and would toll civil statutes of limitation when a complaint is filed. The sponsor said it would better match agency resources, and testimony was entirely supportive. SB 5944 would require language access provider compensation bargaining to include missed or canceled appointments and make CBAs prevail over conflicting agency policies; the sponsor and union representatives said it would create consistency across agencies, with no opposition testimony. SB 6039 would modernize L&I communications by allowing electronic notices while preserving a non-electronic option; supporters called it a permissive modernization, while worker advocates warned email could be missed and could burden vulnerable workers, though L&I said the bill preserves choice and has no fiscal impact. Finally, the committee heard SB 6117, which would place workers and employers not covered by the NLRA under PERC jurisdiction if federal law no longer applies, with card-check and secret-ballot procedures and interest arbitration provisions. Supporters said it would create a state backstop if federal labor enforcement fails and protect workers’ organizing rights; opponents from agriculture, business, and small business groups warned it was too broad, could sweep in agriculture and small businesses, and could weaken secret-ballot protections and disrupt harvest operations. The sponsor closed by saying the bill is intended to create a clear framework where federal jurisdiction is absent. No votes or executive actions were taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> Without that, it does risk increasing Without that, it does risk increasing the<00:55:54.960><c>
• </c> information wages. information wages.
• </c> activities for prevailing wage? activities for prevailing wage?
• government. which increases the funding that we're which increases the funding that we're asked<01:20
• address the increased referrals and address<01:25:04.520><c> the</c><01:25:04.640><c> increased</c><

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Issues such as wage theft, health and safety violations, and poor-quality construction are not readily
• And... ...and importantly, both RCPs specifically do not require the payment of prevailing wage.
• Low-wage jobs exacerbate the widening inequality that we're seeing today.
• Do you see a spike increase in terms of housing?
• ...to 30% increases in infrastructure development. Do you see a spike increase in terms of housing?

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Public Employment and Retirement heard two bills. AB 1054 by Assemblymember Gibson would create a Deferred Retirement Option Program for eligible CHP officers and CAL FIRE firefighters, allowing them to work up to five additional years while their retirement benefits accrue in an interest-bearing account. Supporters, including representatives of CHP and CAL FIRE, said the bill would help retain experienced public safety personnel, address staffing strain, and remain cost-neutral to the state. Members generally supported the measure, and the committee passed it 7-0 and referred it to Appropriations. The committee then heard AB 1439 by Assemblymember Garcia, sponsored by the State Building and Construction Trades Council. The bill would require public pension and retirement systems to apply stronger labor standards when investing in California development projects, including prevailing wage, skilled-and-trained workforce, and labor neutrality provisions. Supporters argued that public pension investments should not back projects with wage theft, unsafe conditions, or poor labor practices, and that stronger standards improve project quality and returns. Opponents, including county retirement systems, builders, housing groups, and local government associations, warned the bill could interfere with fiduciary duties, increase costs, create litigation risk, and reduce housing and development activity. Committee members raised concerns about the bill’s scope, definitions, and possible impacts on housing and pension stability, but several said they were willing to give the author a chance to continue working on amendments. The author committed to further revisions and said the bill was still in early stages. The committee approved AB 1439 5-0, with one member not voting, and sent it to Appropriations. The meeting ended with brief farewell remarks for a committee consultant who is leaving for the Senate.

Transcript Highlights:

• Not every discrete rate got a 16% increase, but that's the average overall increase.
• increases and how much, um, of a wage increase they implement.
• Um, to wage increases if these wages are still so low.
• Providers of these services have absorbed Healthy New Mexico Workplace Act costs, increased minimum wage
• , and all increased COVID-related costs with no increase in their reimbursement.

Transcript Highlights:

• The department took a 4.9% proposed increase and then adopted a 4.9% increase.
• disability and increases cost.
• disability and increases cost.
• It assumes that the duration and pension frequency would increase by 1.3%, and estimates the total increase
• Now, you might think because our state has a high wage income, well, California has higher wages, but

Summary: The committee first held a public hearing on Senate Bill 6136, which would require Labor and Industries to publish actuarial indicated workers’ compensation rates for each risk class and disclose when rate increases are capped below those indicated levels. The sponsor and supporters from the hospitality, retail, business, and construction sectors said the bill would improve transparency about how rates are set and how reserve funds and investment earnings are used to hold down premiums. L&I testified that the bill would require publication of a large amount of rate-setting information, but said it was already developed in the normal process and that the bill had no fiscal impact. Questions focused on reserve use, advisory committee involvement, and how the actuarial calculations interact with investment returns. The committee then moved to executive session and took action on several bills, adopting substitutes or amendments and advancing bills including SB 5292, 6014, 5972, 5869, 5874, 6058, 6039, 5944, and 6180, with most sent to Rules and SB 5292 sent to Ways and Means. The committee then heard Senate Bill 5847, which would expand injured workers’ access to medical care by allowing treatment outside the L&I provider network when no provider is available nearby, limiting employer steering to specific providers, shortening utilization review timelines, allowing provider deviation from L&I guidelines when medically appropriate, and expanding continued treatment and cancer monitoring. Labor and worker advocates argued the bill would better reflect the Murray decision and reduce delays in care, while L&I and employer groups said the current evidence-based guideline system works for most claims and warned the bill could weaken quality controls, create vague standards, and increase costs. Testimony also raised concerns about the 15-mile access rule, the employer communication restrictions, and the appeal process for provider removal. The sponsor said the goal was to improve individualized care and continue working with stakeholders. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 6067, which would change workers’ compensation time-loss calculations so that 100% of the employer-paid health insurance contribution is included in the benefit calculation instead of the current partial inclusion. Supporters said the bill would help injured workers keep health coverage during recovery and reduce pressure to choose between medical care and income, while opponents argued it would not guarantee the money is actually used for health insurance, could be diverted to other uses or attorney fees, and would significantly increase costs for employers and the accident fund. L&I said the bill would require IT and administrative changes and estimated substantial ongoing benefit costs. The hearing ended without further action on SB 6067, and the chair closed the session after public testimony concluded.