Transcript Highlights:

• I am the General Counsel of Upside Foods.
• I also was General Counsel of Impossible Foods, another plant-based company.
• I am the General Counsel of Upside Foods.
• I also was General Counsel of Impossible Foods, another plant-based company.
• And now as General Counsel of Upside Foods, I'm at a cultivated meat company.

Summary: The Select Committee on Alternative Protein Innovation held its first informational hearing to examine the state of alternative protein research, industry growth, and policy needs in California. The chair opened by noting California’s $5 million public investment in UC research in 2022 and framed the hearing around three panels: the climate, environmental, and security potential of alternative proteins; industry scaling and commercialization; and university-led research and workforce development. Members emphasized that the committee will continue with site visits and additional hearings across the state. The first panel focused on the case for alternative proteins as a climate, land, water, biodiversity, and food-security solution. Shana Fertig of the Good Food Institute argued that plant-based, fermentation-derived, and cultivated proteins can reduce greenhouse gas emissions, land use, and water use while helping California meet its climate and conservation goals. Zane Swanson of CSIS added that alternative proteins could reduce risks tied to zoonotic disease, antimicrobial resistance, supply-chain disruption, and broader national security concerns. In questions, members discussed the role of pharmaceuticals in animal agriculture and how alternative proteins might complement, rather than replace, traditional farming by creating new markets for California crops and helping farmers diversify. The second panel featured industry leaders Ethan Brown of Beyond Meat, Myra Passick of Upside Foods, and Arye Elfenbein of Wildtype. Brown highlighted plant-based meat’s health and climate benefits, criticized misinformation campaigns against the sector, and urged better labeling, reduced subsidies for factory farming, and more plant-based food in public institutions. Passick described cultivated meat as a scalable food-production technology, said Upside Foods has already produced millions of pounds annually at its Emeryville facility, and asked for grants, low-interest loans, and possible participation in cap-and-trade or similar revenue programs. Elfenbein described cultivated seafood as a way to address overfishing, contamination, traceability problems, and the heavy import dependence of the U.S. seafood supply, while also noting conservation benefits and the need for California to remain a hub for the industry. The final panel centered on research and workforce development. UCLA’s Amy Rowat described state-funded work on technical bottlenecks such as growing fat cells and creating edible scaffolds, along with a Future Food Fellows program that trains students across science, engineering, law, and policy. UC Santa Cruz economist Galina Hale argued that alternative proteins are necessary to meet future protein demand while reducing food-system emissions, and said California must support the sector through grants, loans, procurement, and research centers to avoid losing leadership to other states and countries. The hearing ended with the chair thanking the witnesses, noting that all materials would be posted online, and saying the committee would continue building policy and budget proposals to support the sector.

Transcript Highlights:

• I am the General Counsel of Upside Foods.
• I also was General Counsel of Impossible Foods, another plant-based company.
• And now as General Counsel of Upside Foods, I'm at a cultivated meat company.
• I am the General Counsel of Upside Foods.
• I also was General Counsel of Impossible Foods, another plant-based company.

Summary: The Select Committee on Alternative Protein Innovation held its first informational hearing to examine the state of alternative protein research, industry growth, and policy needs in California. The chair framed alternative proteins as meat, dairy, and eggs made from plants, fermentation, or cell cultivation, and emphasized California’s prior $5 million public investment in UC research, the state’s large concentration of alternative protein companies, and plans for future site visits and hearings around the state. The first panel focused on the climate, environmental, food security, and national security rationale for alternative proteins. Representatives from the Good Food Institute and CSIS argued that alternative proteins can reduce greenhouse gas emissions, land and water use, methane, antimicrobial resistance, and supply-chain vulnerabilities tied to conventional animal agriculture. Members asked about pharmaceutical and disease risks in livestock systems, and witnesses said intensification of animal agriculture increases antibiotic use and disease transmission risks. The chair also raised the relationship between alternative proteins and traditional farming, and witnesses described the sector as complementary, with opportunities for California farmers to supply inputs such as nuts, legumes, and commodity crop side streams. The second panel featured industry leaders from Beyond Meat, Upside Foods, and Wildtype. They described plant-based, cultivated meat, and cultivated seafood products, argued that the products can match conventional foods on taste while improving health and environmental outcomes, and said misinformation and labeling battles have hurt public perception. They also discussed scaling challenges, the need for grants, low-interest loans, manufacturing support, and possible participation in cap-and-trade or other revenue-generating programs. The chair highlighted tasting events and efforts to educate legislators and staff, and noted that schools, hospitals, and prisons are important markets for healthier food options. The final panel featured UCLA and UC Santa Cruz researchers who described university-led advances in cultivated fat, publicly available datasets, and workforce development programs supported by state funding. They said the UC system is well positioned to provide foundational research, open-access data, student training, and extension support for farmers. The hearing ended with the chair saying the committee will continue its work through additional hearings, tours, and possible budget or legislative proposals, while acknowledging that the current budget climate makes additional funding uncertain.

Transcript Highlights:

• Members of the committee, Luke Wickham, Committee Counsel. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• Members of the committee, Luke Wickham, Committee Counsel.
• Luke Wickham, Committee Counsel.
• and the youth get more one-on-one chances to counsel and get more opportunities to get more help and
• We observe that in many communities in the state, particularly outside of cities, these resources do

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 2456, which would create a juvenile firearm early intervention alternative for youth charged in juvenile court with unlawful possession of a firearm in the second degree. Staff explained that the program would require prosecutor agreement, intensive community supervision, random suspicionless searches, therapy and mentoring services, periodic court review, and dismissal of the charge upon successful completion. The bill would also raise concealed pistol license fees by $100 each and dedicate the revenue to a new account funding the alternative. Representative Davis said the bill is intended to fill the gap between firearm possession charges and later juvenile sentencing, and to fund evidence-based services; one member questioned whether the fee increase functions more like a tax than a fee. The chair then paused testimony on HB 2456 to return to the other bill. The bulk of the hearing focused on House Bill 2389, which would expand suspended disposition alternatives, reduce some juvenile robbery sentencing ranges, add a midpoint review for certain youth committed to DCYF, and create new rules for juvenile rehabilitation capacity and emergency transfers. Supporters, including youth currently or formerly in juvenile facilities, defense advocates, restorative justice providers, and some judges, argued the bill would reduce overcrowding, improve rehabilitation, address racial disparities, and give judges more individualized options. Several testified that youth need treatment, family connection, and incentives for progress rather than long confinement, and that current sentencing practices are outdated and underuse suspended dispositions. Opponents, including sheriffs, prosecutors, county officials, victim advocates, and some judges, argued the bill would shift costs and responsibility to counties, require resources that do not exist, and weaken accountability for serious offenses such as robbery, assault, and trafficking. They raised concerns about expanded appeals, added court workload, the need for more staffing and programming, and the impact on victims and public safety. DCYF said it supports reducing overcrowding but wants clearer emergency transfer authority for Green Hill; facility staff described improved conditions as population has fallen, but said overcrowding still creates safety and programming problems. No vote was taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Cap L.A. has seen a 70% increase in cases in which we need appointed counsel.
• Cap L.A. has seen a 70% increase in cases in which we need appointed counsel.
• and haven't had counsel for months.
• This is a failure to support the court-appointed counsel system.
• that haven't had counsel for months.

Summary: The subcommittee heard May Revision presentations for the Office of Emergency Services, Judicial Branch, CDCR, and the Department of Justice, with the LAO offering comments and recommendations throughout. For Cal OES, the administration outlined funding for relocating the Red Mountain communications site, increased FEMA reimbursement authority, cybersecurity grants, next-generation 911 support, and a reduction to the Flexible Cash Assistance for Survivors of Crime program. Members raised concerns about VOCA backfill and disaster reimbursement, while the LAO recommended approving the 911 request with reporting, adding contingency planning for cybersecurity grants, clarifying the FEMA reimbursement language, and increasing reporting on emergency spending. For the Judicial Branch, the May Revision included funding for implementation of the Trial Nations Access to Justice Act, reductions tied to court facilities and employee benefits, and General Fund solutions such as a reduction to the pretrial release program, a reversion from the Trial Court Trust Fund, and elimination of the jury duty pilot program. The LAO cautioned that the pretrial reduction could affect detention and release decisions and recommended tighter legislative oversight over the trust fund transfer and reallocation language. Members questioned the impact of the pretrial cut, the lack of Prop. 36 court funding, and the rationale for the jury pilot elimination; the Judicial Branch said it was generally supportive of the budget as proposed. CDCR presented requests for roof repairs, fire alarm replacements, CalAIM-related costs, and trailer bill changes on incarcerated college students, mental health hiring, and tuberculosis testing, along with a planned prison closure by October 2026. The department also proposed reducing or delaying several items, including radio replacement, ADA improvements, COVID mitigation, and some facility upgrades, while adding a $125 million placeholder for consultant-driven operational savings. The LAO recommended rejecting or reducing several San Quentin-related proposals, questioned the staffing and contract medical requests, and urged more transparency on the consultant savings plan; members expressed concern about the realism of the savings targets and the potential legal or operational risks from delaying ADA and radio projects. For DOJ, the May Revision proposed ongoing funding and 44 positions to defend against federal actions, IT and accounting system upgrades, implementation funding for AB 1877, and a special fund loan. The LAO supported the KLETS connection but asked for a contingency plan if the new DMV link is delayed, noted that AB 1877 would not be fully implemented without additional funding, and recommended limiting and reporting on the federal accountability workload. Members questioned the size and permanence of the DOJ request, the use of the earlier $25 million special session appropriation, and the pace of federal litigation; DOJ said the new request would support ongoing litigation, expert assistance, and coordination across multiple cases and states.

Transcript Highlights:

• The services we provide are substance use counseling and testing. We do psychological things.
• So it really just depends on the needs of the child and of the parent: domestic violence counseling,
• Thank you. the parent, domestic violence, counseling, anger management, all those kind of things.
• for further investigation that's outside of the function of this body.
• for further investigation that's outside of the function of this body.

Committees: House Government , House House Government Committee of Reference

Transcript Highlights:

• ,</c> couple lines, you mentioned counseling, couple lines, you mentioned counseling, but<00:13:15.519
• ><c> counsel</c><00:47:40.560><c> them</c><00:47:40.800><c> on</c> counseling women, you counsel them
• We offer them counseling in outside clinics, excuse me.
• ,</c> um in outside clinics, um in outside clinics, excuse<00:52:36.800><c> me.
• </c> outside the box. He gets things done. outside the box. He gets things done.

Committee: House Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• It was done inside of his house; it wasn't done outside.
• amendment, so why don't we have counsel describe that amendment?
• amendment, so why don't we have counsel describe that amendment?
• amendment, so why don't we have counsel describe that amendment?
• amendment, so why don't we have counsel describe that amendment?

Committee: Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection

Transcript Highlights:

• At least there's no white outside; it's all inside.
• At least there's no white outside; it's all inside.
• </c><00:29:59.519><c> that</c> highlighting the counseling that highlighting the counseling that children
• </c> for anyone other than the wearer outside for anyone other than the wearer outside of<01:43:34.159
• </c><02:16:37.840><c> of</c> be medical necessity entirely outside of be medical necessity entirely outside

Committee: House Health, Human Services & Elderly Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• Every other funding source is from outside either VA or out of pocket from veterans themselves.
• a model we've chosen from some other States that we might get donations and other folks from the outside
• It's mostly gone to fines for legal counsel.
• So we're resetting our team, and we are going to be using the general counsel for OA to come over and
• This new general counsel, you said that he worked the consent decree in Washington.

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Greco, is the public counsel opposed to this bill?
• The public counsel is an appointed position in the legislative branch, and we didn't feel that it was
• for the coaches, or would they have to hire outside counsel?
• counsel, whatever it may be, for coaches, and would that be for coaches that are only teachers?
• counsel, whatever it may be, for coaches, and would that be for coaches that are only teachers?

Summary: The House convened with prayer, a moment of silence for former Lee County Judge John Carlin, the Pledge of Allegiance, and recognition of Officer Cody Popple of the FSU Police Department for his actions during the April campus shooting. The Speaker also outlined the final week of session, noting the chamber had passed 253 House bills and 149 Senate bills to date, with budget negotiations still unresolved and the 2026-27 budget not expected to be completed that week. The special order report was adopted, setting the day’s calendar and debate times. The chamber then took up several Senate bills, mostly technical or open-government sunset review measures, and passed them with little or no opposition: SB 100, SB 104, and SB 102 on Florida statutes; SB 7006, SB 7014, SB 7002, SB 7012, SB 7024, SB 7016, SB 7026, SB 7008, SB 7000, and SB 7004 on public-records or meeting exemptions; and SB 7022 on public records related to exams. Members asked questions on a few of these bills, especially the exam-records bill and the military and gaming-related exemptions, but the measures generally advanced without amendment. Votes ranged from unanimous to modest opposition, with SB 7026 passing 106-3 and SB 7022 passing 101-8. The most substantial debate centered on SB 7040, which recreates the emergency preparedness and response trust fund in the Executive Office of the Governor. Rep. Eskamani offered an amendment to let the fund expire, arguing the money had been misused and that the Legislature should retain control over spending; several members supported her position, while others said the fund is needed for rapid disaster response. A strike-all amendment from Rep. Griffiths was adopted instead, adding accountability provisions and expanding the fund to cover man-made emergencies as well as natural disasters. The bill then passed 82-25. The House also passed CS/CS/SB 302 on coastal resiliency, CS/CS/SB 984 on firefighter cancer benefits, CS/SB 474 on military affairs, and SB 488 on Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles issues, with SB 488 still under amendment debate when the transcript ends.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the question is for legislative counsel if he gets paid double for being on two committees today or
• But sometimes fees are used to pay for things outside of justice systems as well.
• But sometimes fees are used to pay for things outside of justice systems as well.
• And so in that sense, It's really, we. ...things outside of justice systems as well.
• Travis Fink, Executive Director, Commission on Legal Counsel for Indigents.

Summary: The Judiciary Interim Committee met to begin its study of charitable gaming and the ownership of alcoholic beverage establishments by licensed charitable gaming organizations, a study directed by Senate Bill 2334. Legislative Council gave an overview of the constitutional and statutory framework for charitable gaming, site authorizations, rent limits, proceeds, and recent legislative changes. The Attorney General’s Gaming Division then clarified the financial flow of gaming, explaining that in fiscal year 2025 North Dakota had about $2.5 billion in gross gaming proceeds, with roughly 88-90% paid back in prizes and about $256 million available to organizations after taxes; most of that activity came from electronic pull tabs. Members asked for more detail on winnings, replays, rent, and the breakdown of manufacturer/distributor revenues, and the AG’s office agreed to provide supplemental information. The committee also heard from the League of Cities and the Association of Counties about local site authorization. Cities said they have a limited role in approving gaming sites, can adopt policies after public hearing, may charge up to $100, and can set certain conditions, including local nexus requirements, but cannot require donations or force a specific charity or site. The League said it had worked with stakeholders on a model policy to provide more consistency, though members raised concerns that local requirements could become too restrictive for charities serving broader areas. Counties said the issue is mostly a city matter, with little county involvement beyond minimal site fees and general site approval. The North Dakota Gaming Alliance testified in support of the study and provided IRS-related material suggesting charities may use asset diversification, while emphasizing it had not taken a position on whether charities should own bars. Members questioned whether bar ownership is being used for site stability or to channel charitable gaming dollars, and whether city policies might disadvantage charities with broader missions. The committee also discussed the relationship between gaming organizations, manufacturers, and distributors, including restrictions on incentives and interference, and asked for more information on those entities and their ownership. Later in the meeting, the Racing Commission gave its regular update on live racing, pari-mutuel wagering, ADW providers, purse and promotion funds, a new TRPB contract, and concerns about cease-and-desist actions from other states. Finally, the State Hospital superintendent briefly reported on the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s support services, including the SORT team, training, and security assistance for the hospital campus.

Transcript Highlights:

• counsel from religious anti-abortion<00:59:29.680><c> centers.
• </c><01:24:52.000><c> women</c> pregnancy cent's right to counsel women pregnancy cent's right to counsel
• We heard hours of testimony and also heard from legal counsel as to the need for the bill.
• </c> not you'll hear um, from legal counsel not you'll hear um, from legal counsel again,<01:29:10.239
• </c><01:48:37.600><c> the</c> the the centers that do counsel the the the centers that do counsel the

Bills: HB0003 , HB0117 , HB0041

Committee: Senate Labor, Health & Social Services

Transcript Highlights:

• Nobody did anything like that at all, from inside this building or outside this building.
• I really don't care what goes on in the other communities outside of Texas.
• I asked our legal counsel to review it, to see if they came to the same conclusion that House counsel
• But I think what's occurred is they've used outside counsel and...
• with with the House and tried to find out what their counsel had said.

Transcript Highlights:

• You have a job waiting for you on the outside.
• They look at what kind of support they have on the outside, and they decide if someone can get out.
• We also have committee counsel down in Las Vegas, which you may know.
• Committee counsel Brad Wilkinson.
• We also have committee counsel down in Las Vegas, which you may not know.

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• But those two are going to be presented in the order that they were filed with Legislative Counsel.
• So we had no discussions or any contact with any outside sources whatsoever.
• So we had no discussions or any contact with any outside sources whatsoever.
• And in doing so, between having your counsel disqualified and ...hiring new counsel, they exhausted the
• Our legislative council had to engage outside consultants to do this work as well.

Summary: The committee opened with roll call and a review of special-session procedure: bills would be heard in filing order, with related school-lunch bills grouped together, and any bill advancing would require a motion, second, and majority vote to be introduced. Members also discussed that the committee was functioning much like a delayed-bills committee, with final referral to either Appropriations or Policy depending on the bill’s fiscal impact. The first major proposal was Senator Schibley’s bill to create a narrow, statewide Bank of North Dakota bridge-loan program for struggling nonprofit medical facilities, prompted by Jacobson Memorial Hospital’s financial crisis. He argued the hospital and surrounding EMS services could close without short-term help, while committee members questioned the added language, the population cap, the $10 million fund with $5 million per applicant limit, and whether the program could open the door to future requests. Representative Headland then presented two cleanup bills from the prior property-tax session: one to fix notice and tax-certification issues for local taxing districts, and another to correct how the primary residence credit is applied so taxpayers receive the full benefit rather than counties retaining part of the reimbursement. Members asked about township hearing timing, the estimated $10–15 million annual impact, and whether the credit issue could be fixed retroactively; Headland said the bill was intended to correct the problem going forward. Three school-lunch bills drew extensive discussion. Representative Vetter proposed a small administrative appropriation to add an FTE to help eligible families enroll in the existing free/reduced lunch program, saying the goal was to ensure needy children are signed up and that the state should not subsidize meals for wealthy families. Representative Nathe offered a broader bill mirroring the pending initiated measure but placing the program in statute instead of the Constitution, moving implementation up a year, and funding it with a one-time $65 million from the strategic investment fund; he said this would preserve legislative flexibility and avoid constitutional entrenchment. Representative Dressler proposed raising the state-funded eligibility threshold from 225% to 300% of poverty, arguing it would expand access while still preserving federal reimbursements and encouraging better enrollment systems. Members debated costs, future budget pressure, whether the bills set a precedent for responding to ballot measures, and whether the program should include breakfast and other operational details. Other proposals included Senator Powers’ bill to create a hyperbaric oxygen board and support rural access to hyperbaric chambers for wounds, concussions, PTSD, and other conditions; Representative Tolman’s reporting-requirements bill to force new or expanded programs to justify purpose, alternatives, evaluation methods, and full implementation costs; Representative Frelich’s bill addressing the ongoing redistricting litigation and what happens if the Supreme Court or lower courts alter the current map; and a bill requested by the Public Service Commission and ITD for FERC litigation support and ADA website/document compliance. The committee also heard a rural-health eligibility bill from Representative Twait aimed at steering federal rural health dollars toward rural providers, with questions focused on whether the mileage limits would exclude some communities. One Holocaust education item was deferred until the sponsor could be located.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, uh let's have counsel describe the A2 amendment for us. Counsel. Uh, Mr.
• ><c> A2</c><00:02:16.959><c> amendment</c> counsel describe the A2 amendment counsel describe the A2
• Counsel. Counsel. Counsel. &gt;&gt; Uh<00:02:21.720><c> Mr.
• </c> Senate Counsel. I staff HHS. Senate Counsel. I staff HHS.
• </c> was restating what what counsel was restating what what counsel mentioned<00:48:22.240><c> in</c

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• So if they gave it to, you know, their counsel and, you know, if they didn’t intend through their aid
• So if they gave it to, you know, their counsel and, you know, if they didn’t intend through their aid
• </c><01:33:51.880><c> of</c><01:33:52.040><c> the</c> outside of the school outside of the outside of
• Was this the CFL bill on court-appointed counsel for kids?
• Was this the CFL bill on court-appointed counsel for kids? It's the bill.

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 313 and, on motion by Representative Perez, voted to retain the bill because members felt it needed further work and was not ready for final action. The motion passed 18-0, and no further action was taken on the bill. House Bill 391, an anti-SLAPP measure, was then discussed; supporters said it addressed a real problem and should move forward, while opponents raised concerns that it was too broad, could affect criminal cases, and might create procedural complications. The committee voted 18-0 to retain HB 391 as well, and it was placed on consent. The committee next considered House Bill 462, establishing a cause of action for unwarranted video imaging of residential properties. Representative McFarland moved OTP, saying the bill raised First Amendment and property-rights concerns. The motion passed 18-0, and the bill was also placed on consent. The committee then turned to House Bill 509, which would require reporting on forfeitures. Supporters argued the information was useful for future legislation, while opponents said the reporting would be costly, duplicative, and potentially split data across fiscal years. The committee voted 11-7 to recommend OTP, with a minority of members opposed. House Bill 520, authorizing Department of Education hearing officers to issue subpoenas, drew the most extended debate. Supporters argued DOE needed the same tools other agencies have, while opponents said DOE already had access to needed information, the Attorney General could handle subpoenas, and the bill would create an unbalanced process and raise due process and student-record concerns. Representative Tur offered Amendment 0842H to shift subpoena power from DOE hearing officers to the Attorney General; after debate, the amendment failed 10-8. The transcript cuts off as the committee begins the roll call on the underlying bill after rejecting the amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those unexcused senators outside the chamber, please return to the chamber and record your presence.
• that there is no determined cost for outside in the school districts except what your school district
• Those unexcused senators outside the chamber, please return to the chamber and record your presence.
• We shouldn't be importing policies driven by outside... School.
• Those unexcused senators outside the chamber, please return to the chamber and record your presence.

Bills: LB878 , LB958 , LB958A , LB762 , LB1187 , LB966 , LB929 , LB962 , LB1209 , LB937A , LB962A , LB1050 , LB1050A , LB965 , LB1022 , LB753 , LB788 , LB913 , LB1055 , LB1195 , LB429 , LB721 , LB722 , LB727 , LB745 , LB749 , LB778 , LR293 , LR296 , LR422 , LR495 , LR496 , LR497 , LR498 , LR499 , LR500 , LR501 , LR502 , LR503 , LR504

Transcript Highlights:

• Finn Rose, managing policy analyst with the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel.
• Okay, thank you. ...to whether it would be possible to go outside that process. No.
• General Counsel.
• So with that, we'll turn the time to Associate General Counsel Jeff Van Holt.
• So we'll turn the time to Associate General Counsel Mike Curtis for the bill presentation.

Committee: Joint Education Interim Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• can't get everything you want in, we do accept written testimony and are willing to meet with people outside
• parents are not advised of their rights, including the right to remain silent, the right to legal counsel
• But there is the right to counsel once that case is filed in court. Thank you. Anyone else?
• I didn't know I could ask for legal counsel.
• And I have them in counseling and therapy.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Children, Families and Persons with Disabilities

Summary: The committee heard testimony on a package of Department of Children and Families bills focused on care and protection proceedings, sibling placement, parenting time, foster parent eligibility, adoption timelines, and a proposed Harmony Montgomery Commission. Rep. Marjorie Decker framed her bills as a set intended to reduce trauma for children removed from home by promoting sibling placement, visitation, cultural continuity, and limits on barriers to foster/adoptive placement. Witnesses from CASA, the Massachusetts Child Welfare Coalition, CPCS, and others generally supported the sibling-placement and parenting-time bills and the Harmony Commission, while several urged that the commission include a birth parent with lived experience and that its scope remain focused on child safety and family rights. A former juvenile court judge also supported the Harmony Commission, citing failures in the Harmony Montgomery case and broader concerns about DCF power and child representation. No votes were taken during the hearing. A large portion of the hearing focused on Senate 114, the “Family Protection and Transparency Act,” which would require DCF to provide families with written and verbal notice of their rights during investigations, including the right to remain silent, consult counsel, and refuse entry absent legal authority except in emergencies. Supporters included parents, former foster youth, attorneys, advocates, and a peer mentor, many of whom described personal experiences of confusion, coercion, retaliation, and family separation when DCF became involved. They argued the bill would improve due process, language access, transparency, and accountability without limiting DCF’s emergency powers. Several witnesses also described intergenerational DCF involvement and said families often need resources and legal guidance rather than punitive intervention. Testimony on House 268 emphasized the importance of keeping siblings together in foster care whenever possible. Advocates cited research showing better mental health, educational, and reunification outcomes when siblings remain together, and several young people testified about being separated from brothers and sisters and the lasting impact of that separation. CPCS supported the bill and said regular sibling visitation should be required when joint placement is not possible. House 269, 270, 271, 288, and 293 were also on the notice, but the transcript reflects little or no testimony on some of those measures. The hearing concluded after the committee heard from all scheduled witnesses and invited written testimony for additional details.