Transcript Highlights:

• Um, basically, so it was kind of—that was a little bit of a jarring statement from somebody. are actually
• But you also are requiring a short statement of explanation.
• I'm not interested in either version of this bill. amendment. I will say we would not be amendment.
• That lot of interest in this one. And online there were two in support, 12 opposed, zero neutral.
• Also, it would grant all of these listed exemptions from our investigations much more of a privacy interest

Committee: House Election Law

Transcript Highlights:

• This is more of a Frankenstein version of a bill, and so I'm going to walk you through each of these
• Throughout the state of Idaho, FFA members completed a total of 14,817 hours of community service.
• In Idaho, FFA members completed a total of 14,817 hours of community service. 4,068 of those hours were
• , but of deeds.'
• And so each of the five paragraphs starts with a different 'I believe' statement to represent kind of

Committee: Senate Education

Transcript Highlights:

• out of substance use disorder well out of mental health issues.
• Many of you have had the opportunity and the privilege of collaborating with for a number of years.
• of Hope.
• of children.
• of Department of Children and Families.

Transcript Highlights:

• But it was only as to the interest, I think. ...asking for a revision in the calculation of that money
• And the timeliness of the completion of those cases.
• I think I mentioned in my statement that I'm a daughter of an engineer, had several engineering degrees
• Of course.
• of the appointment of Dr.

Summary: The committee first approved several governor’s appointments not required to appear, including Arthur Krantz to the Public Employment Relations Board and Christopher Ferguson, Brian Haynes, Anna Marie de Mars, and Ronald Fiore to the Student Aid or Student Athletic commissions, all by unanimous 5-0 votes. It also approved references of bills to committees by a 5-0 vote. The committee then heard from Julia Montgomery, nominated for a third term as General Counsel of the Agricultural Labor Relations Board, who described her work on farmworker rights, outreach, and enforcement of labor protections. Members questioned Montgomery closely about card-check unionization procedures, signature authenticity, outreach to Spanish-speaking and indigenous-language farmworkers, make-whole enforcement delays, and a long-running Tri-Fanucchi farm case. Montgomery said objections and unfair labor practice charges can be investigated, that signature verification is handled by board staff rather than her office, and that delays often stem from appeals, difficulty locating workers, employer obstruction, and court backlogs. Vice Chair Grove voted no, while Senators Laird and Reyes supported the nomination; the committee advanced Montgomery to the full Senate on a 3-2 vote. The committee then considered three State Board of Education appointments: Cynthia Glover Woods, Brenda Lewis, and Gabriela Orozco Gonzalez. In opening statements, all three emphasized long careers in public education and support for students, teachers, and families. Questions focused on math achievement, the 2023 math framework and access to Algebra I in middle school, transitional kindergarten, community schools, and the effectiveness of education spending. The nominees said the framework still allows ready eighth graders to take Algebra I, pointed to new instructional materials, professional learning, TK expansion, and community schools as key improvements, and said they had not been involved in the governor’s proposed education governance changes. Public witnesses and education groups testified in strong support. The committee advanced Glover Woods 3-1, Lewis 4-1, and Gonzalez 3-1 to the full Senate.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that's about two-thirds of a billion dollars in interest alone.
• And then we have $220 million of interest payments that we don't have to make anymore.
• But I think there are other ways of funding some of it so that all of it is not laid on the backs of
• My name is Letitia, and I'm part of the Coalition of the Red of California for the Justice of Workers
• You know, interesting, Senator Richardson, I think when we had the hearing, you gave us a homework of

Transcript Highlights:

• I ask that the balance of my statement be included in the record.
• I ask that the balance of my statement be included in the record. I thank the gentleman.
• included</c> the balance of my statement be included the balance of my statement be included in<00:25
• ><c> the</c><02:54:51.680><c> signing</c><02:54:52.160><c> statement</c> One of the major goals of this
• of the Union, but it wasn't actually that. that I have a a special interest in.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, you know, that last slide kind of piqued my interest.
• Um, you know, that last slide kind of piqued my interest.
• Um, you know, that last slide kind of piqued my interest.
• of piqued my<00:47:11.599><c> interest.
• </c><01:27:01.679><c> of</c><01:27:01.840><c> that</c> be within the economic interest of that be within

Transcript Highlights:

• e e e e e e e e e The first order of business is a pledge of allegiance.
• what</c><00:18:33.320><c> we</c> financial statements and also what we financial statements and also
• Our plan is, with the conversion of the new financial system, to... there's a module in the financial
• ><00:18:55.960><c> new</c><00:18:56.159><c> Financial</c><00:18:56.679><c> system</c> conversion of the
• new Financial system conversion of the new Financial system to<00:18:58.159><c> um</c><00:18:58.320>

Committee: Senate Ways and Means

Transcript Highlights:

• lot of the agencies wouldn't be able to leverage some of those match features that are part of those
• If we were to look at the full cost of those one-time expenses as part of that, it was a change of, I
• We can request a statement of work, and within weeks... ...we’re getting them a purchase order for either
• And with me today is Lisa Kopke, our chief financial officer, to help answer some of those deep questions
• of that.

Summary: The committee first heard a budget presentation for the Office of Information Technology Services (ITS), which is in the middle of a multi-year consolidation of IT staff and functions from other agencies. The analyst and administrator explained that ITS now has 243 authorized FTP, with more growth expected as Health and Welfare IT staff move over, and that much of ITS’s budget is driven by personnel, security, and pass-through technology purchases funded through dedicated revenues. The agency’s main 2027 requests included a personnel cash transfer to move costs off general fund and onto dedicated funds, $2.7 million for enterprise firewall/security upgrades, continued access to a federal E-CORE grant for an AI/data repository project, and funding for the Health and Welfare modernization/consolidation. Members asked about the grant, the 3% holdback, whether Health and Welfare’s budget would be reduced, the cost of delaying security upgrades, and why the agency’s FTP count has grown while overall IT costs are being centralized. ITS Administrator Alberto Gonzalez emphasized that the agency is defending against more than 100 million cyberattacks per month, with only a small fraction getting through, and said the firewall request was a critical security need. He said consolidation has produced efficiencies and a net reduction in IT personnel statewide, while also improving security and service delivery. He also explained that the agency is working on a possible policy change to separate continuously appropriated cash into a different fund for cleaner accounting. Questions from members focused on cybersecurity, bandwidth pressures from video/body-cam traffic, procurement speed, AI uses, and the rationale for office furnishings and equipment requests tied to the Health and Welfare move. The committee then moved to the Idaho State Tax Commission budget, another roughly $55 million portfolio with five programs and 447 authorized FTP. The analyst noted that the commission’s budget is heavily general-fund supported, but it also has several dedicated funds and large continuously appropriated flows tied to tax distributions and rebates. For fiscal year 2027, the commission requested additional dedicated-fund support for property tax outreach, $400,000 for GenTax automation, use of dedicated funds for the chief operating officer, replacement items, and the governor’s rescission. Chairman Jeff McRae said the agency returns more than $7.8 billion in revenue for about $55 million in spending, but warned the commission is at a “tipping point” where further cuts would reduce its ability to process revenue and serve taxpayers. Members questioned the commission about phone wait times, staffing levels, the multi-state tax compact, conformity work tied to the federal “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” and the parental choice tax credit program. McRae said the call center would need about 45 staff to meet standard service levels but currently has about seven, and that conformity changes would require significant software, form, and testing work, likely with overtime and possible taxpayer filing delays. He also explained that the tax credit program was designed with electronic-only applications, income prioritization, audits, and criminal penalties to reduce fraud. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion provided; the meeting consisted of budget presentations, member questions, and agency responses.

Transcript Highlights:

• On slide two, we have our mission for the New Mexico Medical Board, which is in the interest of public
• didn't have insurance, that kind of statement would really rise to the concern of the subcommittee because
• Madam Chair and members of the committee, that statement...
• We advocate for the interests of persons with disabilities. of all types, all ages.
• So, that is, I would be scared of making statements like that. Um, it is. Uh.

Committee: House Legislative Health & Human Services Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't know the specifics of each one of those.
• would be of the same understanding of how that is.
• of the state of California.
• I am Stephen Keck, the chief financial officer of Caltrans.
• of that.

Summary: The committee first heard a DMV budget presentation on the state-to-state verification system required for Real ID compliance and the Digital Experience Platform (DXP) modernization project. DMV officials said the state-to-state system is a pointer-based exchange used when a person applies for a license in another state, with only limited identifying data shared initially and the full driver history sent only after a qualified request. Members raised concerns about privacy, possible misuse by other states or federal actors, notification to Californians, hacking, and whether California could detect or stop abusive access. DMV said it can monitor requests, see patterns of access, work with AAMVA and legal counsel, and seek to block or challenge misuse; LAO said California is in a difficult position and should consider guardrails rather than opt out. On DXP, DMV said the project is on its revised schedule and budget, occupational licensing is complete, vehicle registration is expected by the end of calendar year 2026, and the full system should be finished by fiscal year 2028-29, with phased rollout and reappropriated funding to keep costs controlled. The committee then heard from the California High-Speed Rail Office of Inspector General on a trailer bill and AB 1608. The Inspector General said current law does not clearly authorize public reports or establish a framework for retaining and disclosing work papers, and the proposed trailer bill would create that framework while also adding authority to hire needed classifications and purchase goods and services. He also said the office needs a clearer statutory definition of “proposed agreements” and notice when the High-Speed Rail Authority is reviewing them, so the office can review contracts and related agreements effectively. LAO raised no concerns with the trailer bill language, and Finance said any amendments would come in the May revision. Members debated the scope of confidentiality in the Inspector General proposal, especially whether reports could be held confidential when they identify weaknesses in fraud controls, security, or other vulnerabilities. The Inspector General said confidentiality would be temporary, tied to articulating the risk, reassessing it every 120 days, and releasing the report once the risk is no longer substantial; he also said the office had already published reports at its discretion and had found at least one procurement violation involving an amendment that added services not in the original contract. Several members pressed for stronger transparency and suggested time limits or broader disclosure, while others argued the bill would improve oversight and make the Inspector General’s authority clearer. No votes were taken during the discussion, and the item was left for further work on the trailer bill and AB 1608 language.

Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Chair, just to rebut some of that, this is what is considered a pattern of coercive control.
• of evidence.
• financial support.
• So reading your credit card statement is monitoring or regulating financial activity.
• of resources.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill was filed at the request of the Secretary of State because of financial and operational issues
• </c> of contributions to ensure financial of contributions to ensure financial stability<03:57:28.399
• The RBC financial stability of insurers.
• </c> the financial and operational details of the financial and operational details of this<05:28:55.840
• The drastic financial certain of.

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 47, sponsored by Senator Regina Birdsell at the request of the Insurance Department. The bill would clarify that a birth mother’s health insurance is the primary policy for a newborn’s care unless the mother has no coverage or no employer-sponsored coverage. Birdsell and Insurance Commissioner DJ Benton Court said the measure simply codifies the department’s long-standing interpretation of existing law. Representative Miles asked whether the coverage would extend to a grandchild if a young woman on her parents’ plan had a baby, and Birdsell said it would. The hearing on SB 47 was then closed. The committee next heard Senate Bill 121, introduced by Grant Bosi for Senator Kevin Avard. The bill requires insurers to notify the Insurance Department when they stop writing an entire line of business or, in some cases, when they change Medicare Advantage offerings. Benton Court said the bill was prompted by disruption in the Medicare Advantage market, where consumers and the department were confused by carriers exiting, changing plans, or narrowing offerings. He said the department does not regulate Medicare Advantage itself, but does license the carriers, and the notice requirement would help the department advise consumers; he also said noncompliance could affect a carrier’s license and could lead to fines. Members discussed the notice period, and the department and AHIP indicated support for changing it from 120 days to 90 days to align with federal timing. The hearing was closed with plans to work on an amendment in subcommittee. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 247, introduced by Representative Brian Cole, which would prohibit network exclusion for pharmacies that refuse to dispense prescriptions when PBM reimbursement is below acquisition cost. Cole said the bill is meant to stop pharmacies from being forced to sell at a loss. Members questioned whether pharmacies voluntarily enter PBM contracts, whether the bill would raise consumer prices, and whether it would mainly affect independent pharmacies. Cole and others said the issue has changed over time because PBMs now control a much larger share of the market, and that the bill would let pharmacies refuse loss-making fills and direct patients to mail order instead. The discussion also noted that the bill excludes Medicare and Medicaid and that the current proposal does not create a middle-ground option for patients to pay a premium at the counter.

Transcript Highlights:

• Financial Management.
• the hands of minors.
• So I have a couple of questions.
• But that is kind of the lay of the land. Okay, does that answer your question?
• But that is kind of the lay of the land. Okay, does that answer your question?

Committee: House State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• I know that many of the people that were not able to testify at that first hearing were interested in
• in the hundreds of billions of dollars.
• In our efforts to try to minimize some of the financial impacts that we are suffering, we do that constantly
• , all of the impacts of...
• So that's all the statements I want to make, but if I could return to the beginning of my comments and

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee held an oversight hearing on the impacts of H.R. 1 on California’s safety net, focusing on Medi-Cal and CalFresh. The chair and vice chair framed the issue as a major federal disruption that would reduce benefits and shift costs to the state, counties, hospitals, and other local systems. The first panel included the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the Department of Finance, the UC Berkeley Labor Center, and the Food Research and Action Center, each describing projected enrollment losses, higher state and county costs, and implementation challenges. The LAO outlined H.R. 1’s main changes: new and expanded work requirements, more frequent eligibility redeterminations, restrictions on certain non-citizen eligibility, and financing changes affecting provider taxes and federal matching rates. The LAO estimated that 1 to 2 million people could be disenrolled from Medi-Cal and more than 600,000 could lose CalFresh, with additional costs from reduced federal support and possible state and county administrative burdens. The Department of Finance said the Governor’s budget includes about $1.4 billion General Fund in 2026-27 to respond to H.R. 1, with larger out-year reductions in federal funds and projected Medi-Cal caseload losses of up to 2 million by 2029-30. The UC Berkeley Labor Center projected up to 3 million Californians could lose full-scope Medi-Cal by 2028 when H.R. 1 is combined with state budget changes, while noting the state could choose policies that would reduce some of those losses. The Food Research and Action Center warned that CalFresh cuts and time limits would increase hunger, worsen health outcomes, and strain local economies and emergency systems. Members questioned the witnesses about procedural disenrollments, regional variation, the overall growth in Medi-Cal spending, the future of the MCO tax, the CalFresh error rate, and the downstream effects on hospitals and county indigent care. Several senators argued that the federal law was driven by tax cuts for high-income earners and would disproportionately harm low-income Californians, immigrants, and communities of color. Administration witnesses said some impacts are still being analyzed, that counties and departments are working on implementation, and that the Legislature may need to use statute, reporting, and oversight tools as federal guidance develops. No votes or formal actions were taken during this portion of the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• some of the land management and wildlife management agencies, How this is in the best interest of Floridians
• A total of $28.4 million to fund the Bright Futures program and financial aid programs. $81.8 million
• of many of the circuits.
• People should be able to seek justice and financial compensation if someone is negligent because of the
• Justice and financial compensation if someone is negligent because of the loss of pregnancy is Florida

Bills: HJR 99 , HB 1399 , HB 1400 , HB 1094 , HB 365 , HB 1109 , HB 647 , HCR 35 , SB 14 , HB 12 , HB 1522 , HB 422 , HB 675 , HB 204 , HB 748 , HB 912 , HJR 99 , HB 1399 , HB 1400 , HB 1094 , HB 365 , HB 1109 , HB 647 , HCR 35 , HCR 123 , HCR 124 , HR 57 , HR 87 , HR 111 , HR 228 , HR 230 , HR 322 , HR 624 , HR 625 , HR 626 , HR 627 , HR 628 , HR 630 , HR 631 , HR 634 , HR 635 , HR 636 , HR 637 , HR 638 , HR 639 , HR 640 , HR 645 , HR 646 , HR 648 , HR 649 , HR 651 , HR 652 , HR 653 , HR 654 , HR 664 , HR 665 , HR 668 , HR 675 , HR 676 , HR 678 , HR 679 , HR 680 , HR 683 , HR 686 , HR 688 , HR 689 , HR 694 , HR 695 , HR 697 , HR 698 , HR 699 , HR 472 , HR 622 , HR 632 , HR 633 , HR 643 , HR 655 , HR 657 , HR 660 , HR 661 , HR 662 , HR 663 , HR 667 , HR 670 , HR 674 , HR 681 , HR 682 , HR 696

Transcript Highlights:

• the rulemaking process if this were to move forward, because it would be a violation of the public interest
• the rulemaking process if this were to move forward, because it would be a violation of the public interest
• the rulemaking process if this were to move forward, because it would be a violation of the public interest
• <c> in</c> violation of the public interest in violation of the public interest in order<00:48:17.440
• So, if you are all interested in joining us over at Cheers, uh, down off of Main Street, I don't remember

Summary: The committee first took up several Senate messages on House bills. It recommended non-concurrence and a committee conference on HB 428 after Representative Pearson raised a constitutional concern about a retroactive provision in the building code bill. It also recommended non-concurrence on HB 156, which had been rewritten by the Senate to create a permanent subcommittee related to food/procurement; members said they did not want to create a permanent subcommittee and preferred to let the issue return next year if needed. On HB 85, concerning temporary student licenses for respiratory therapists, the committee concurred with a Senate rewrite that added restrictions but preserved the bill’s main purpose. On HB 82, a cleanup bill for occupational licensing, the committee concurred with a Senate amendment explicitly allowing the electricians board to create subcommittees, with members noting they did not think the authority was necessary but that it would not do harm. The committee then considered SB 178 on laboratory water testing. Representative Leyon offered amendment 2025-1743H to clarify how fees would be deposited and to direct a portion of certain fees and grants into a non-lapsing lab equipment and replacement fund rather than the general fund. Members said the amendment made the bill’s fiscal flow easier to understand. The amendment passed unanimously, and the committee then voted ought to pass as amended on SB 178, also unanimously, and placed it on consent. For SB 180, dealing with Coos County distressed-area designation, the committee adopted amendment 1748H to remove a provision requiring commissioners to give extra consideration to Coos County and to add a 20-year sunset on the designation. The amendment passed 14-2, and the committee then voted ought to pass as amended 15-1; Representative Schmidt said he would file a minority report because he viewed the provision as unenforceable rather than objectionable. The committee also voted to retain SB 185, which concerned OPLC-related issues, so the agency could continue working on a policy and report back later; that motion passed 16-0. Finally, the committee voted inexpedient to legislate on SB 198, establishing New Hampshire Service Dog Week, after debate over whether the recognition should be statutory or left to a gubernatorial proclamation. Supporters argued the bill would raise awareness and help promote service dogs, while opponents said the effort could continue without a statute and that special-day statutes often lose attention once enacted. The committee also voted inexpedient to legislate on SB 182 after extensive discussion of proposed changes to the maternal mortality review process. Opponents argued the bill would broaden access to personally identifiable information, change panel structure, and affect data comparability; supporters said it was a housekeeping update requested by DHS that would add DCYF and Corrections and improve review of maternal deaths. The ITL motion passed 10-6, and Representative Long said he would file a minority report and explain the committee’s reasoning to the bill’s sponsor.

Transcript Highlights:

• Can I get a show of hands of those that are here for...
• It requires the development of these policies, of course. Then already, most of this is here.
• And sometimes it’s not really in the best interest of the child.
• I am prepared to read a statement that I made in front of our personal school board.
• I am prepared to read a statement that I made in front of our personal school board.

Committee: House Elementary and Secondary Education

Summary: The committee first took up a combined substitute for House Bills 2115 and 1876, which would encourage cursive instruction and add a future cursive assessment. Members discussed that the substitute removed an immediate fifth-grade test and instead would phase in an assessment later, with no penalty for failure. Some members raised concerns about teacher training, costs, and added demands on elementary classrooms, while supporters said the measure was only a recommendation and could be improved on the floor. The committee adopted the substitute and then passed the House Committee Substitute for both bills on a roll call vote of 13-9, with several members present or absent. The committee then heard House Bill 2776, as amended and substituted, a teacher-certification bill aimed at addressing Missouri’s teacher shortage through a tiered associate certification system for pre-K and elementary grades. Sponsors explained that Tier 1 and Tier 2 certificates would be temporary and nonrenewable, with mentoring, literacy training, and a minimum salary floor, and that Tier 3 would lead to full certification and retirement-system participation. Members questioned the pay differential, the effect on teacher quality, the role of literacy training, and how the bill would treat leaves or incomplete years of service. After adopting an amendment and rolling it into a new substitute, the committee passed the House Committee Substitute for House Bill 2776 by a vote of 12-5 with one present. In open session, the committee heard House Bills 1698 and 2120 together, both anti-bullying measures that would strengthen reporting, parent notification, school-board awareness, and immunity protections for good-faith reporting. The sponsors described the bills as responses to a student bullying case that ended in suicide, and witnesses from the family gave emotional testimony urging immediate reporting and stronger accountability. Committee members raised questions about definitions of bullying, off-campus conduct, mandatory reporting to law enforcement, and the need to avoid sweeping in protected speech or sincerely held religious beliefs. No vote was taken on those bills in the portion provided. The committee then began testimony on House Bills 2230 and 2978, the Hands-on Learning Restoration Act, which would limit screen time and one-to-one device use in K-5 classrooms and emphasize books, paper, pencils, and cursive. Sponsors and supporters argued that heavy reliance on Chromebooks and other devices has harmed literacy, attention, and child development, citing low NAEP scores and research on handwriting and screen exposure. Teachers, physicians, and parents testified in support, while some members noted the bill may be too prescriptive and would need work on implementation, testing, and local flexibility. The hearing continued with additional testimony after the excerpt ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Members of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was created 15 years ago in the wake of the 2008
• Members of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was created 15 years ago in the wake of the 2008
• All of my payments went toward the interest.
• </c><00:53:00.280><c> financial</c> to compensate victims of financial to compensate victims of financial
• </c><00:54:04.839><c> some</c> financial crisis of 2008 including some financial crisis of 2008 including

Committee: Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection

Transcript Highlights:

• Um it is in the business interests of those companies, of localities, of our state.
• So, aren't we hindering their ability right now to make decisions for the best interest of the local
• So, aren't we hindering their ability right now to make decisions for the best interest of the local
• And again, what this is about is not representing any of their interests.
• Co-Chair Scott said she would be interested in knowing the significance of that phrase.

Bills: HF4077 , HF3809 , HF3639 , HF4478 , HF3363 , HF3874

Committee: House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law

Summary: The Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee approved the minutes from March 25 and March 26, then took up House File 4077, a bipartisan bill authored by Representatives Greenman and Roach. The bill would prohibit municipalities from entering into non-disclosure agreements with private entities that restrict disclosure about land development, economic development, or publicly funded projects, while preserving existing Chapter 13 data practices rules and trade secret protections. The authors argued the bill is needed to prevent secret agreements and backroom decision-making that undermine public transparency, and they moved that the bill be re-referred to the general register. Several local officials and residents testified in support, including a St. Louis County commissioner, the mayor of Lonsdale, and residents from Farmington and Hermantown. Supporters said NDAs had been used in connection with data center and other development projects to keep elected officials and the public in the dark, eroding trust and limiting community input. They described the bill as a common-sense transparency measure and said existing law already protects legitimate trade secrets. Opposition came from the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce and the Minnesota Business Partnership, which argued that NDAs are often necessary in early-stage economic development discussions to protect sensitive business information and remain competitive with other states. They warned the bill could discourage investment, jobs, and tax growth, and said it would impose a one-size-fits-all state mandate that limits local discretion. Committee members then debated whether the bill was too broad and whether it should be narrowed to data centers; supporters responded that the issue extends beyond data centers to other forms of economic development. A roll call vote was requested on the motion to re-refer the bill to the general register, but the final vote result was not stated in the transcript excerpt.