Transcript Highlights:

• Premium costs themselves are higher because of the impact on the market and the risk pool of these changes
• This, just for broader understanding, is what many states, including California, utilize to draw a pool
• Including California, utilize to draw a pool of funds that then draws down greater federal funds.

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:

• The resolution cited concerns regarding the reduced student application pool to dental schools across
• The resolution cited concerns regarding the reduced student application pool to dental schools across
• funding for that program that would expand access to dental care even though we're not expanding the pool

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 Witnesses from the carriers argued that mandates should be reviewed periodically because some are outdated, can create unintended costs, and may not align with current medical guidance.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

Transcript Highlights:

• .<00:37:56.240><c> Cess</c><00:37:56.560><c> pools</c><00:37:56.880><c> are</c><00:37:57.040><c> the<
• Cess pools are the biggest problem.
• Cess pools are the biggest wastewater<00:37:58.079><c> pollution</c><00:37:58.880><c> problem</c><00:

Bills: HB644 , HB1802 , HB1569 , HB1619 , HB1620 , HB1730 , HB1749

Committee: House Energy & Environmental Protection

Summary: The committee heard several environmental and energy bills, beginning with HB 644 on single-use plastics. DLNR and DOH supported the measure, and environmental advocates said it would reduce plastic waste in oceans and landfills. Testifiers urged the bill to avoid weakening existing county ordinances, and some supported delaying implementation to use up inventory, while Upstream opposed compostable-plastic exemptions and urged prompt passage. Committee members asked whether reusable and refillable foodware could be added to the PFAS prohibition, and Upstream said that would be consistent with the bill’s goals. The committee then took up HB 1802 on conservation mitigation banks, HB 1569 on microfiber filters for newly manufactured washing machines, and HB 1619 on electric vehicle infrastructure. HB 1802 drew mostly agency testimony from DLNR, with opposition testimony noted from environmental groups, and members discussed whether suggested amendments would address concerns. HB 1569 received limited testimony, with support from the Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition and opposition from the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers. HB 1619 was supported by the PUC, Hawaiian Electric, the Department of Transportation, and several advocacy groups; Earthjustice said the bill was needed to address a widening EV charging shortfall and described the funding increase as relatively small compared with the benefits. The committee also heard HB 1620, which would increase the barrel tax to fund the EV charging rebate program. The State Energy Office and PUC offered comments, while the Tax Foundation of Hawaii opposed the special-fund approach and said the bill should also address the non-petroleum fossil-fuel portion of the barrel tax. Earthjustice and youth transportation advocates supported the measure, and the chair asked for information on unused hydrogen fueling subaccount funds; PUC said no hydrogen program funds had been deployed and estimated the balance was likely around $2 million, with exact figures to be provided later. Finally, the committee heard HB 1730 on wastewater systems, which would create a wastewater technical advisory group and fund positions at DOH. DLNR, DOH, OPSD, UH, and several environmental groups supported the bill, emphasizing cesspool pollution, affordability, and the need for more staffing and technical assistance. Testifiers suggested amendments to create a separate cesspool conversion implementation working group and debated the size and composition of the advisory group, including whether to include outside engineers and whether SHIP should be on the panel. No votes were taken during the hearing segment provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• businesses, required businesses of 20 or more employees to either provide coverage or to pay into a pool
• , and that pool, along with some realignment dollars and also with the FQHC dollars, because the FQHCs
• The average cost is higher, and therefore the premium is higher, as you have a less healthy risk pool

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee held an informational hearing on the impact of federal H.R. 1 and related state budget actions on California’s health care system. Opening remarks framed the federal changes as a major threat to Medi-Cal, Covered California, hospitals, clinics, and the broader safety net, with warnings that millions could lose coverage and that costs would shift to providers, counties, and consumers. Testimony from the California Health Care Foundation and the Legislative Analyst’s Office focused on implementation challenges, the administrative burden of work requirements and more frequent renewals, the loss of federal funding, and the need for California to consider long-term structural changes to Medi-Cal, county safety-net programs, and cost containment. A Covered California enrollee, Chas Franklin, described sharply rising premiums for his family after losing subsidies, illustrating the personal impact of federal policy changes. Committee members raised concerns about whether premium increases were driven by H.R. 1 or insurer pricing, the cost of rebuilding county-based indigent care systems, and the need to account for the cost of inaction. Dr. Hernandez pointed to pre-ACA models such as Healthy San Francisco as examples of coordinated local safety-net care, while also emphasizing the importance of primary care, data interoperability, and the Office of Health Care Affordability in reducing waste and improving access. Department of Health Care Services officials then outlined the state’s implementation plan for H.R. 1, including work requirements, six-month redeterminations, reduced retroactive coverage, cost-sharing, and immigration-related eligibility changes. They said the department would try to automate eligibility checks, expand outreach, and train counties and partners, but estimated up to 2 million Californians could lose coverage over time. Covered California reported that the expiration of enhanced federal premium tax credits and new federal marketplace rules are already raising costs and reducing enrollment, with an estimated 400,000 enrollees at risk of dropping coverage. County, hospital, and safety-net representatives warned that coverage losses will increase uncompensated care and strain local systems, while one coalition proposed a temporary state-funded coverage option as a bridge if full-scope Medi-Cal cannot be maintained. The hearing concluded with a policy analyst urging stakeholder engagement, immigrant protections, and new state revenue options to preserve coverage and offset federal cuts.

Transcript Highlights:

• heard from Cal OSHA for the limited staffing were too few qualified candidates limiting the applicant pool
• So, not just going to colleges, et cetera, and trying to come from the same recruitment pool, but really
• a much wider recruitment pool than we haven't seen before.

Summary: The hearing focused on a state audit of Cal/OSHA titled “The Division of Occupational Safety and Health: Process Deficiencies and Staffing Shortages Limit Its Ability to Protect Workers.” Committee leaders and the audit team described serious workplace tragedies, argued that California’s worker protections are not being adequately enforced, and said the audit was prompted by concerns that Cal/OSHA was too often relying on letters instead of inspections, delaying investigations, and closing cases without enough documentation. Members repeatedly emphasized that the issue was not just staffing, but also outdated policies, weak oversight, and inconsistent enforcement. State Auditor Grant Parks said the audit found a 32% vacancy rate in 2023-24, heavy reliance on hard-copy files, outdated or unclear policies, and inconsistent decision-making in complaints, accidents, citations, and fine reductions. He said Cal/OSHA conducted on-site inspections in only about 20% of complaints, used letter investigations more than 80% of the time, often lacked evidence that hazards were corrected, and sometimes failed to inspect serious injury cases on time. The audit also found weak documentation for fine calculations and settlement reductions, with some penalties reduced substantially without clear explanations. Parks said the agency had accepted the findings and would provide progress updates later in the year. Committee members pressed the auditor on vacancy rates, the use of letter investigations, the low rate of criminal referrals, and whether fines were being reduced too often. Cal/OSHA and DIR officials responded that the vacancy rate had fallen to 12% partly because 66 vacant positions were eliminated in a statewide budget reduction and partly because of hiring; they said 126 people had been hired in the first half of the year. They also said they had hired a policy writer, were updating several policies, were planning periodic internal audits, and were developing a new data management system expected to go live in late 2026 or early 2027. On fines, officials said Title 8 sets base penalties and allows adjustments based on factors like employer size, history, and good faith, with appeals and informal conferences also affecting final amounts. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• The May Revision also allocates $200 million in Prop. 35 funds over two years for flexible housing pool
• Flex pools help individuals with significant behavioral health conditions who are experiencing or at
• and a small jurisdiction, and it has specific statutory requirements for each of those two applicant pools

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

Transcript Highlights:

• There's pooled time, pooled financial resources, pooled emotional resources that just result in better

Committee: House Veterans and Military Affairs Division

Transcript Highlights:

• But that's a subculture that we all— all of us in incarceration, or I would say in residential, I'd even
• say anywhere where it's residential congregate care.
• I was going to ask, from the fairest point of view, your feedback about that residential system in the
• It's a six- to eight-person residential substance use treatment.
• It's a six to eight person residential substance use treatment.

Summary: The commission opened an informal discussion focused on developing recommendations for its September report on correctional consolidation and cooperation. Chairs Dan Hunt and Senator Brownsberger emphasized that the group is still in an information-gathering phase, but should begin putting ideas on the table, including possible written recommendations, further hearings, and additional facility tours. Members discussed whether the commission should seek more input from frontline stakeholders such as sheriffs, probation, parole, reentry centers, unions, and the judiciary, and whether recommendations should be organized around specific issue areas like medical costs, programming, reentry, and facility operations. A major theme was the need for a more integrated and consistent correctional system. Participants raised concerns about fragmentation across DOC, county sheriffs, probation, and parole, and suggested exploring step-down pathways, minimum security, pre-release, day reporting, and regional reentry hubs to improve outcomes and reduce recidivism. Several speakers stressed the importance of uniform standards, evidence-based programming, better data on outcomes and spending, and clearer alignment between custody conditions and rehabilitation goals. There was also discussion of looking to other states and international models, as well as revisiting older reports and plans, including the 2009 commission report and the 2010 corrections master plan. Facility-specific issues were also raised, including the need to examine women’s facilities such as Framingham, Bridgewater, and restrictive housing practices in light of suicide concerns and mental health needs. Members discussed the relationship between correctional custody and behavioral health, the role of the judiciary in sentencing and reentry planning, and whether judges should be better informed about available programming and step-down options. There was broad agreement that collaboration, transparency, and accountability should be strengthened, with some members urging that recommendations be based on firsthand facts and data rather than opinion alone. The meeting also included presentation of a written set of eight high-level recommendations compiled by advocacy and legal organizations, which focused on clearer and more consistent programming, equitable application of rules, and reducing punitive conditions that function like solitary confinement. The chairs said the document would be shared with members and posted online. No formal votes were taken during the discussion, and the meeting ended with plans to continue the conversation at a future session, including possible follow-up on reentry centers, restrictive housing, and other systemwide reforms.

Transcript Highlights:

• commercial kitchen spaces, because generally you cannot build a fully equipped commercial kitchen in a residential
• control, which DLNR already has the right to do on its properties and is wildly unpopular in our residential
• </c><00:58:20.200><c> our</c> wildly unpopular in you know our wildly unpopular in you know our residential
• <00:58:21.079><c> commercial</c><00:58:21.680><c> industrial</c><00:58:22.319><c> areas</c> residential
• commercial industrial areas residential commercial industrial areas it<00:58:22.880><c> is</c><00:58

Committee: House Agriculture & Food Systems

Transcript Highlights:

• <01:45:02.639><c> rap</c><01:45:02.960><c> pair</c> residential rap pair residential rap pair subscriptions
• We'll be able to provide 1,500 subscribers, and the project is targeting residential subscribers.
• The project is targeting residential subscribers.
• In this case, I think it's going to be more than 50% residential.
• In this case, I think it's going to be more than 50% residential.

Transcript Highlights:

• that critical health care issues are funded, such as direct support professional rate increases, residential
• Additionally, this bill helps our communities by committing $2 million for residential and childhood
• in current law that allows landlords who provide counseling services to claim exemption from the Residential
• in current law that allows landlords who provide counseling services to claim exemption from the Residential

Summary: The House convened with a quorum present, opened with a moment of silence for Ted Williams, prayer, and the Pledge of Allegiance. Members then accepted the previous day’s minutes and moved into a series of recognitions, beginning with House Resolution 27 designating June 24, 2026 as Staff Appreciation Day. The resolution was adopted by voice vote, and the chamber spent much of the meeting honoring legislative staff across both caucuses, with members and staff introducing themselves and being recognized for years of service and behind-the-scenes work. The House also recognized staff member Justin, who is leaving for a position with the Delaware State Board of Education, and later gave farewell remarks for Representative Kevin Hensley and Representative Charles Postles, both of whom are retiring. Numerous members spoke in tribute to their service, constituent work, and personal character, and both Hensley and Postles offered remarks thanking colleagues, staff, and family. The House then received communications from the Senate, including several bills and resolutions passed and returned, and a notice of Senate concurrence on other measures. Representative Wilson-Anton made a brief statement explaining her vote on Senate Bill 100 and reaffirming support for marriage equality and related civil rights issues. The chamber also took up Senate Joint Resolution 16 and Senate Joint Resolution 17, which set the official revenue estimates for fiscal years 2026 and 2027; both were read, called to roll, and passed by constitutional majority votes of 37-4 and 40-1, respectively. Finally, the House considered Senate Bill 335, the operating budget for fiscal year ending June 30, 2027. Representative Williams presented the budget on behalf of the Joint Finance Committee, describing major funding items including raises for state and education employees, health insurance and retiree benefit funding, developmental disability services, Medicaid growth, purchase of care, and maintenance of reserve funds. Several members praised the committee’s work, while Representative Shupe said he would vote no, citing concerns about the budget’s 6.3% growth despite appreciating the committee’s effort. After the budget presentation and comments, Leader Harris moved that the House recess for party caucuses, and the House stood in recess until the call of the bell.

Transcript Highlights:

• be right on the border, having an intersection right on the border of Campbell and San Jose, a residential
• be right on the border, having an intersection right on the border of Campbell and San Jose, a residential
• intersection would have one of the highest... ...of Campbell and San Jose, a residential intersection
• If you're going 60 miles an hour on a regular residential road and a kid jumps out in front of you, you

Committee: Senate Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• But if there is a Medicaid beneficiary and that person has been harmed in a behavioral health residential
• particular rule would require the health care provider or the, I’m sorry, the behavioral health residential
• that minor who wants a particular service that is outside of the scope of the behavioral health residential
• it’s one of those services or something else, it could be another physical health service... ...residential

Summary: The Committee on Director Nominations met with four members present and approved the prior minutes without objection. Chair Jay Kaufman outlined the committee’s role in reviewing executive nominations and explained the hearing process for three nominees: Mary Foote for the Office of Economic Opportunity, Debbie Johnston for the Department of Health Services, and Chuck Bassett. Foote did not appear for her hearing, and members discussed her absence and alleged omissions in her disclosure materials, including prior service with Planned Parenthood-related organizations. The committee then moved to reject her nomination, and the motion passed 3-2, recommending that the full Senate reject Mary Foote. Debbie Johnston, nominee to lead the Department of Health Services, appeared and gave an opening statement describing her Arizona background, prior Senate staff work, and more than 20 years with the Arizona Hospital and Health Care Association. She said her priorities at ADHS include rebuilding trust in public health licensing, improving stakeholder engagement, standardizing rulemaking communication, addressing alleged religious discrimination and retaliation concerns in licensing, and using technology and AI to improve efficiency. In questioning, senators pressed her on her management style, conflict-of-interest safeguards given her prior industry role, enforcement priorities, budget pressures, behavioral health and assisted living oversight, and the department’s response to COVID-19. Johnston said she would follow statutes, recuse herself from enforcement matters involving former contacts, and resign if directed to carry out an unlawful policy. She also said the department does not regulate therapy itself, only facilities, and that it would rely on legal counsel regarding the governor’s conversion-therapy executive order and related federal civil-rights allegations. Several senators focused on public health trust and the department’s pandemic response, with Johnston acknowledging concerns about closures, data collection, and communication during COVID-19 while saying she would review past after-action materials and be better prepared in the future. Public testimony from stakeholders in aging services and health care strongly supported her confirmation, praising her accessibility, responsiveness, and collaborative approach. After testimony, the vice chair moved to recommend Johnston’s confirmation to the full Senate. The roll call was underway when the transcript ended, with several members voting aye and one member expressing reservations about her not reviewing the pandemic after-action report before another crisis occurs.

Transcript Highlights:

• important consumer protections for a new financial product called Rent Now, Pay Later, used for residential
• sent to voters when they change their mailing address but are not able to receive mail at their residential
• Our communities in the high desert continue to struggle for those residential units where they need to
• there is an open question that's unresolved right now about whether, for all of the other small residential

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:

• establishes important consumer protections for a new financial product called Rent Now Pay Later used for residential
• sent to voters when they change their mailing address but are not able to receive mail at their residential
• Our communities in the high desert continue to struggle for those residential units where they need to
• is an open question that's unresolved right now about whether or not, for all of the other small residential

Transcript Highlights:

• So the nullity provision is focused on either the 35-day for general or, if there's like a residential
• Thank you. 35-day for general or if there's a, like a residential contract, it would be 60.
• One 35 day for general or if there's a, like a residential contract, it would be for 60.
• So this will cover everything from the smallest, you know, a residential, all the way up to the big industrial

Committee: Senate Judiciary A

Summary: The committee first approved the May 5 minutes and then heard House Bill 578, which would define sex in Louisiana law as biological sex, replace references to gender with sex in various statutes and forms, and direct the Law Institute to make conforming changes. Supporters from the governor’s office said the bill would bring clarity and consistency, while opponents argued it could create conflicts with existing law and weaken protections tied to gender identity. After debate, the committee reported HB 578 favorably. Members then considered House Bill 1250, a measure aimed at aerospace-related litigation. The bill would allow a special motion to strike certain claims against aerospace flight entities when the claims are preempted by federal law. Senators raised concerns that the language was broad enough to affect airports, airlines, contractors, and even unrelated incidents, and the author said he was willing to work on narrowing amendments. The committee nevertheless reported HB 1250 favorably. House Bill 718, dealing with liability protections for private airstrips used for recreation, was amended to narrow its scope and then reported favorably, while House Bill 163, a narrower related airstrip bill, was voluntarily deferred so the committee could work from the other measure. The committee also approved House Concurrent Resolution 61, which asks the Louisiana Law Institute to review possible conflicts between the constitution and statutes on expropriation. House Bill 180, defining foreign adversaries and agents of foreign adversaries for a proposed constitutional amendment, and House Bill 192, a constitutional amendment barring foreign adversaries from expropriating land in Louisiana, were both reported favorably. House Bill 1008, which sets out academic freedom and whistleblower protections for higher education, was rejected on a roll-call vote after concerns about its scope and limits on university discipline. House Bill 638, a prompt-payment bill for contractors, was set aside while amendments were being located. Finally, the committee took up House Bill 71, which would extend existing liability protections for justified use of force to properly trained armed security guards. The author and the Board of Private Security Examiners said security officers receive training and often face dangerous situations, but opponents argued the bill would give too much protection to personnel with far less training than law enforcement and could shield bad shootings. After debate, the committee voted to defer HB 71. The last measure discussed was House Bill 1082, which would change venue rules for lawsuits involving the Municipal Police Employees’ Retirement System so actions by the system would be filed where the employer is located; the author said the bill was meant to help small municipalities, and members indicated they were open to narrowing amendments.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the nullity provision is focused on either the 35-day for general or if there's like a residential
• contract, it would be Thank you. 35 days for general or if there's a residential contract, it would
• One 35 day for general or if there's a, like a residential contract, it would be for 60.
• “So this will cover everything from the smallest, you know, a residential, all the way up to the big

Committee: Senate Judiciary A

Transcript Highlights:

• wrong that the thousand-foot buffer would now put this into areas where there's businesses and residential
• 59.120><c> and</c> into areas where there's businesses and into areas where there's businesses and residential
• 34:00.640><c> are</c><00:34:00.799><c> not</c><00:34:00.960><c> part</c><00:34:01.120><c> of</c> residential
• homes that are not part of residential homes that are not part of the<00:34:01.440><c> state</c><00:

Bills: HB1577 , HB1870

Committee: Senate Government Operations

Summary: The committee reconvened on March 19, 2026, for decision-making on measures heard earlier in the week. It first took up HB 812 on agriculture, agreeing to move it forward with amendments and a Senate draft, and then HB 2388 on public notice, which was also passed with amendments after concerns about transparency and the need for local newspaper notice on Maui were discussed. HB 1414 on procurement and HB 2469 on a regular session review working group were both deferred to March 24 for further work with the author, while HB 322 on voter registration was deferred indefinitely in favor of a Senate vehicle. The committee then heard HB 1577, which would create a statewide emergency safety profile system pilot program and working group for 911. Testimony from disability advocates, emergency medical services, and others strongly supported the bill, emphasizing benefits for people without smartphones, better sharing of medical and emergency information, and improved response in the field. Committee members and witnesses discussed whether the 911 Board already had the authority to implement the system without legislation, and the bill was not immediately acted on in the portion of the transcript provided. The final major item was HB 1870 on protected community locations. Testimony in support came from the University of Hawaii, the Legal Clinic, immigrant-rights groups, public health advocates, and many individuals, while the Department of Education supported the measure but requested clarity on federal compliance and raised concerns about a 1,000-foot perimeter beyond campus. Supporters said the bill would protect sensitive locations and help immigrant families feel safe accessing schools, health care, and other services. No final vote on HB 1870 is shown in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Draft<00:23:13.480><c> 2</c><00:23:13.680><c> relating</c><00:23:14.080><c> to</c><00:23:14.200><c> residential
• </c> Draft 2 relating to residential Draft 2 relating to residential condominiums.<00:23:15.760><c> Is
• Standing Committee Report No. 2917, third reading of Senate Bill 2061, Senate Draft 2, relating to residential

Transcript Highlights:

• sales and use tax base expansion to reduce their sales tax rates, personal property tax rates, residential
• of the sales or use tax, the operating levy for personal property taxes, the operating levy for residential
• sales and use tax base expansion to reduce their sales tax rates, personal property tax rates, residential
• of the sales or use tax, the operating levy for personal property taxes, the operating levy for residential

Summary: The Missouri House met with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, approval of the prior House journal, and numerous guest introductions, including a tribute to Harris-Stowe State University President Dr. Latanya Collins-Smith during Women’s History Month. The chamber then took up House Committee Substitute for House Joint Resolutions 173 and 174, which would place on the ballot a constitutional change to gradually eliminate Missouri’s individual income tax and allow the legislature to broaden the sales tax base to services if needed. The sponsor and supporters framed the proposal as a long-term tax reform that would let Missourians keep more of their earnings, spur economic growth, and ultimately let voters decide the state’s tax structure. Supporters argued that no-income-tax states have stronger growth, more business relocation, and better population trends, and said the resolution includes triggers and revenue-neutral safeguards, including protections for school funding and local governments. Several members said the measure is only a referral to the voters, not an immediate tax change, and emphasized that the plan is designed to phase out the income tax only as state growth allows. Opponents countered that the measure would ultimately require a large sales tax increase on goods and services, shifting the burden onto working families, seniors, renters, and low-income Missourians, while threatening public schools, services, and tax-credit-supported nonprofits. They also criticized the ballot language as misleading and warned that the fiscal impact could be as high as an $8.5 billion revenue loss. Members debated comparisons to Tennessee, Texas, Florida, Washington, Oregon, and Kansas, with supporters citing those states as evidence that lower or no income taxes can attract growth, while opponents said Missouri’s economy, tourism, and budget structure are not comparable and that the Kansas example shows the risks of tax-cut experiments. The sponsor and several allies repeatedly stressed that the proposal is a constitutional amendment for voters to decide, not a final legislative tax hike, and said the plan is different from Kansas because it uses triggers and a defined path to zero. The transcript does not show a final vote on the resolution in the excerpt provided.