Transcript Highlights:

• I know you guys are part of that conversation as well on the insurance side, but basically if the bill
• Well, maybe.
• Thank you. as well.
• as well?
• Well, you tweeted.

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee heard a long agenda of health bills focused on access to preventive care, behavioral health, hospital services, and patient safety. Early items included AB 554, which would expand and protect access to HIV prevention drugs like PrEP, including injectable forms and coverage protections; supporters said it would shore up access amid federal threats, while insurers opposed it as a costly benefit mandate. AB 577 would limit insurer and PBM practices that steer medications away from physician offices and require more transparency and patient consent; doctors and patient advocates supported it, while health plans and insurers warned it could raise drug costs and disrupt specialty pharmacy networks. AB 546 would require coverage for portable HEPA purifiers for vulnerable enrollees during declared emergencies, especially wildfire smoke events, with support from air quality and public health groups and opposition from insurers concerned about benefit expansion and cost. The committee also heard AB 224, which would codify California’s updated essential health benefits benchmark plan after a public review process, adding infertility treatment, hearing aids, and durable medical equipment if approved by CMS for the 2027 plan year. DMHC said the state had completed the review and needed legislation to meet federal timing, and the measure drew broad support. AB 1032 would require plans and insurers to reimburse up to 12 additional behavioral health visits for enrollees in wildfire-affected counties for a limited period after an emergency; supporters argued it would fill gaps in trauma care after disasters, while insurers said existing parity and continuity-of-care rules already address the issue and that the bill could create inequities. AB 849 would require trained chaperones for sensitive ultrasound exams and training on how to observe and intervene; it was backed by a survivor and patient advocates, with hospitals and health districts raising staffing concerns. Later, AB 1196 would direct the Department of Public Health to update outdated rules requiring three surgeons for certain heart surgeries using cardiopulmonary bypass; supporters said the rule no longer reflects modern practice and strains staffing, while cardiology representatives had no formal opposition but wanted to review amendments. AB 1113 would codify a right to wear a mask for health reasons in public spaces, with support from disability and public health groups. AB 1386 sought to add perinatal care to the list of basic hospital services, prompting testimony about maternity ward closures, workforce shortages, and rural access; the author said the bill would be amended further and that the committee would need to revisit timelines and implementation details. The committee also heard AB 1429, which would address Kaiser’s repeated mental health parity violations and improve access to behavioral health care, though the transcript cuts off before any action on that bill is shown. Several bills were moved with motions and seconds, but many were held for quorum; AB 1196, AB 1113, and AB 1386 were among the measures advanced to a roll call or held on call, and the committee repeatedly noted that final votes would occur when quorum was available.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, thank you, Madam Chair.
• And I think that is a value of social media that should not be overlooked in this conversation as well
• But it's incredibly well done.
• the author as well.
• We also had very productive conversations last year with Assemblymember Krell's staff on AB 1137 as well

Summary: The committee heard AB 1988, which would require AI companion chatbots to respond to credible self-harm or violence-related crisis expressions by displaying the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline, warning users, and pausing the chat for human review after repeated crisis signals. The author and supporters said the bill is a measured safety standard to redirect vulnerable users to human help, citing research and cases where chatbots worsened suicidal ideation or violent behavior. Support came from crisis and medical advocates, while no opposition testimony was offered. The chair and members expressed strong support, and the bill was held pending quorum before later action on the agenda. The committee then took up AB 1709, which would set a minimum age of 16 for users to create or maintain accounts on social media platforms with harmful addictive features and would create an E-Safety Advisory Commission in the Attorney General’s office. The author argued the bill targets product design, not speech, and is intended to curb compulsive features such as infinite scroll, autoplay, and algorithmic feeds while allowing safer or non-addictive platforms to remain available. Supporters, including a psychologist and the Organization for Social Media Safety, described cyberbullying, predation, compulsive use, and mental health harms; opponents, including EFF, ACLU-Cal Action, TechNet, and youth advocacy groups, warned about privacy, First Amendment, and access-to-community concerns, especially for LGBTQ youth and other marginalized groups. Committee members debated whether the bill is a ban or a delay, how age assurance would work, and whether the proposal would be effective or could push youth to less safe spaces. Several members said they would support the bill as a first step, while others raised concerns about enforceability, privacy, and constitutional issues. The author emphasized that the bill is limited to specific harmful design features, not content or general internet access, and that the new commission would monitor evolving technology and recommend future updates. No final vote was taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, absolutely.
• conversation.
• Well, or a comment.
• Well, then talk.
• It didn't end well. Well, I love you, my brother.

Bills: HJR175, HJR88, HB21, HB49, HB216, HB346, HB573, HB565, HB954, HB1953, HB2686, HB1441, HB2734, HB1650, HB3161, HB2876, HB3185, HB3388, HB2761, HB3233, HB 1186, HB1534, HB5506, HB5129, HB3619, HB778, HB2867, HB3221, HB3672, HB2434, HB4903, HB3687, HB3675, HB4609, HB4582, HB4921, HB3866, HB3901, HB4534, HB2446, HB3984, HB700, HB4012, HB4491, HB4088, HB229, HB4234, HB722, HB4136, HB4105, HB4413, HB170, HB551, HB2858, HB3053, HB3142, HB3180, HB3722, HB2200, HB1794, HB1784, HB1581, HB2530, HB4308, HB1896, HB2974, HB3359, HB4580, HB2458, HB2215, HB3332, HB2278, HB3015, HB3151, HB1368, HCR9, HCR40, HB5138, SB17, HB4944, HB2284, HB3421, SB1569, SB2420, SB1968, SB2351, SB2544, SB1490, SB1349, SB1568, SB2776, HB3531, HB2149, HB4327, HB3158, HB3717, HB4520, SB888, SB552, HB3138, HB3704, HB2921, HB4853, HB4506, HB3892, HJR161, HJR175, HJR88, HB1937, HB3334, HB5444, HB5137, HB361, HB321, HB5447, HB464, HB678, HB2294, HB4172, HB3225, HB1769, HB5394, HB1837, HB1787, HB2271, HB2440, HB5134, HB5149, HB2151, HB2073, HB2186, HB2025, HB1936, HB1777, HB1663, HB 1306, HB 1290, HB1527, HB4802, HB3462, HB2963, HB2462, HB2560, HB644, HB2725, HB2621, HB2588, HB1443, HB1403, HB3032, HB1557, HB1664, HB2811, HB2088, HB2598, HB3062, HB3134, HB3940, HB4027, HB4097, HB4862, HB4170, HB4157, HB4205, HB4279, HB4377, HB4838, HB5424, HB5294, HB4870, HB4763, HB5639, HB4112, HB2275, HB1677, HB5014, HB3848, HB3797, HB3727, HB3709, HB3177, HB3057, HB4176, HB4202, HB2180, HB3528, HB3658, HB21, HB49, HB216, HB346, HB573, HB565, HB954, HB1953, HB2686, HB1441, HB2734, HB1650, HB3161, HB2876, HB3185, HB3388, HB2761, HB3233, HB 1186, HB1534, HB5506, HB5129, HB3619, HB778, HB2867, HB3221, HB3672, HB2434, HB4903, HB3687, HB3675, HB4609, HB4582, HB4921, HB3866, HB3901, HB4534, HB2446, HB3984, HB700, HB4012, HB4491, HB4088, HB229, HB4234, HB722, HB4136, HB4105, HB4413, HB170, HB551, HB2858, HB3053, HB3142, HB3180, HB3722, HB2200, HB1794, HB1784, HB1581, HB2530, HB4308, HB1896, HB2974, HB3359, HB4580, HB2458, HB2215, HB3332, HB2278, HB3015, HB3151, HB1368, HCR76, HCR127, HCR9, HCR40

Keywords: constitutional amendment, medium of exchange, currency rights, digital currency, financial autonomy, tax exemption, rainwater harvesting, graywater system, local government, ad valorem taxation, housing finance, multifamily residential, low income, audit requirements, affordable housing, development bonds, oil waste, gas waste, liability, treatment processes

Transcript Highlights:

• If not, I would like to start my first hour well and I appreciate your conversation.
• You've had a conversation with me before. you've had a conversation with me before we ever got into this
• Well, I appreciate that, Mr. President.
• Well, I tell you what, let’s do this.
• We had started this conversation earlier just before coming... ...conversation earlier just before coming

Bills: SJR 18, SCR 5, SCR 13, SCR 25, SB 3, SB 6, SB 10, SB 11, SB 12, SB 13, SB 15, SB 17, SB 18, SB 35, SB 388, SB 412, SB 441, SB 495, SB 666, SB 687, SB 706, SB 740, SB 815, SB 842, SB 917, SB 925, SB 995, SB 1006, SB 1281, SB 1300, SB 1379, SB 1451, SB 1902, SJR 36, SJR 18, SJR 12, SCR 13, SCR 25, SCR 5, SCR 22, SB 565, SB 372, SB 495, SB 842, SB 765, SB 62, SB 19, SB 18, SB 666, SB 707, SB 888, SB 687, SB 706, SB 847, SB 290, SB 11, SB 10, SB 13, SB 412, SB 441, SB 1248, SB 740, SB 14, SB 1006, SB 504, SB 917, SB 925, SB 388, SB 1902, SB 1121, SB 995, SB 857, SB 305, SB 296, SB 284, SB 35, SB 6, SB 815, SB 3, SB 1281, SB 1379, SB 1300, SB 1497, SB 1499, SB 1498, SB 1451, SB 1061, SB 15, SB 65, SB 241, SB 304, SB 402, SB 499, SB 621, SB 974, SB 1023, SB 1024, SB 1025, SB 1106, SB 686, SB 112, SB 371, SB 204, SB 400, SB 609, SB 1447, SB 670, SB 502, SB 427, SB 850, SB 854, SB 413, SB 1555, SB 1362, SB 1346, SB 1033, SB 1220, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 987, SB 1539, SB 893, SB 447, SB 875, SB 406, SB 509, SB 985, SB 965, SB 17, SB 1119, SB 1505, SB 12, SB 24, SB 57, SB 1194, SB 1253, SB 1215, SB 1532, SB 1268, SCR 12, SCR 24, SB 1302, SB 856, SB 650, SB 583, SB 673, SB 840, SJR 18, SB 11, SB 441, SB 10, SB 18, SB 412, SB 495, SR 238, SR 264, SR 266, SR 267, SR 268, SR 270, SR 271, SR 272, SR 278, SB 1169, SB 1169

Keywords: capital gains, taxation, constitutional amendment, state revenue, individual investment, SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame, football coach, school facility naming

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, sure it does.
• Well, Mr. President, I will say you have always run. our body so well. Thank you.
• Well, I wouldn't say that.
• It could very well be.
• Well done, well done. We all have copies of your billbook.

Bills: SJR18, SCR5, SCR13, SCR25, SB3, SB6, SB10, SB11, SB12, SB13, SB15, SB17, SB18, SB35, SB388, SB412, SB441, SB495, SB666, SB687, SB706, SB740, SB815, SB842, SB917, SB925, SB995, SB1006, SB1281, SB1300, SB1379, SB1451, SB1902, SJR36, SJR18, SJR12, SCR13, SCR25, SCR5, SCR22, SB565, SB372, SB495, SB842, SB765, SB62, SB19, SB18, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB706, SB847, SB290, SB11, SB10, SB13, SB412, SB441, SB1248, SB740, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB917, SB925, SB388, SB1902, SB1121, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB35, SB6, SB815, SB3, SB1281, SB1379, SB1300, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB1451, SB1061, SB15, SB65, SB241, SB304, SB402, SB499, SB621, SB974, SB1023, SB1024, SB1025, SB1106, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB400, SB609, SB1447, SB670, SB502, SB427, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1555, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB893, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB509, SB985, SB965, SB17, SB1119, SB1505, SB12, SB24, SB57, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1268, SCR12, SCR24, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB840

Keywords: capital gains, taxation, constitutional amendment, state revenue, individual investment, SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame, football coach, school facility naming

Transcript Highlights:

• Let's not eliminate; let's have a real solid conversation.
• <00:36:04.880> about<00:36:05.119> the conversations about the conversations about the
• of this conversation?
• <00:47:43.760> at can't really have these conversations at can't really have these conversations
• <00:47:54.359> why<00:47:54.520> didn't this conversation why didn't this conversation

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House File 9 was heard as a proposal to alter Minnesota energy policy by creating exemptions and “off-ramps” from the state’s 2023 clean energy requirements. The bill would expand hydroelectric power’s eligibility, end the moratorium on new nuclear plants, delay certain carbon-free energy compliance requirements for utilities that do not meet a retail rate benchmark, restrict demolition of fossil fuel plants under that same benchmark, support carbon capture and sequestration, and expand the sales tax exemption for residential natural gas and electricity used as primary heat year-round. The author moved the A1 amendment, which clarified that the carbon capture policy language does not create a state funding obligation; the committee took up the amendment with no discussion and proceeded to a vote, though the result was not stated in the transcript. The bill was then referred to the Committee on Taxes. The author and supporters argued the bill is needed to improve reliability and affordability, especially during extreme cold, and said current mandates are forcing coal retirements faster than replacement generation can be built. They cited MISO and NERC reliability concerns, Xcel’s proposed rate increases, and the need for an “all-of-the-above” energy approach that includes nuclear and hydro. Supporters also said the bill would help keep energy costs down for families and businesses and would allow Minnesota to use existing generation assets longer if rate targets are not met. Testimony from the Minnesota Rural Electric Association and the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce supported the bill’s emphasis on reliability, affordability, nuclear power, hydroelectric power, and carbon capture. The Chamber said Minnesota’s electricity costs have become less competitive for businesses and argued that stable, affordable power is essential for economic growth and future technologies such as AI. The Minnesota Utility Investors also supported allowing new nuclear and all hydro power to be considered. In contrast, the Prairie Island Indian Community opposed lifting the nuclear moratorium without a viable long-term waste solution, describing its long history living near the Prairie Island nuclear plant and spent fuel storage and urging continued consultation on the issue. Xcel Energy said it supports low rates and sees nuclear as one option, but emphasized that any support for lifting the moratorium depends on full participation by the Prairie Island Indian Community and that decisions about retiring fossil plants should remain within the existing Public Utilities Commission resource planning process.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any further conversation? Do we, Senator Castioneda?
• And there are other states that limit that as well.
• Well, and my apologies. Well, and my apologies, Senator Lee.
• But that's a separate conversation.
• But that's a separate conversation.

Bills: HB1162

Keywords: Lake Agassiz, water authority, board of directors, state highways, water management, 908, all

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 1162, which would add the West Fargo mayor as a voting member of the Lake Agassiz Water Authority board. The sponsor and Fargo’s mayor argued West Fargo has grown into a major regional water stakeholder and should have a formal vote, while members questioned the board structure and why the change was not framed more specifically. The bill was supported in testimony, closed without opposition, and received a 6-0 do pass recommendation. The committee then took up House Bill 1259 on annual legislative sessions and session structure. Members adopted an amendment that left the structure and logistics of sessions to legislative management rather than prescribing details in statute, after discussion about flexibility, committee workload, annual versus biennial sessions, and concerns about preserving debate and committee process. The amended bill received a 4-2 do pass recommendation, with some members voting no because they preferred a different committee recommendation or had concerns about the broader change. House Bill 1254, which would allow any North Dakota resident to obtain a State Library card, drew supportive testimony from the bill sponsor and State Library staff. They said the change would align law with current practice and expand access to books, e-materials, and other resources statewide, including for military families and out-of-state state employees. The committee closed the hearing and approved the bill 6-0. The committee also considered House Bill 1469, which narrows financial disclosure requirements so only business or trust interests directly related to the office sought or held must be disclosed. After brief discussion that the change would reduce unnecessary disclosure burdens, the committee adopted the amendment and then gave the bill a 6-0 do pass recommendation. House Bill 1368, dealing with administrative rules and the standard for challenging them, was opposed by committee counsel as too broad and legally problematic; the committee rejected it on a 4-2 do not pass vote. Finally, House Bill 1219, which would reduce the required perpetual care fund set-aside for certain cemeteries from 20% to 10%, received supportive testimony from the sponsor, cemetery representatives, and local users, but also concern about long-term fund health. The committee ultimately recommended do pass on a 5-1 vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• the job and they can do the job well. the job and they can do the job well.
• senior engineer, well, wait a minute. senior engineer, well, wait a minute.
• So somehow the argument that, well, we're really the first conversation that got brought to me after
• we should be having that conversation. we should be having that conversation.
• homes as well as the inspection fees. homes as well as the inspection fees.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• You'd be like, well, for purposes of the sexual assault crime, our conversation is privileged, but for
• You'd be like, well, for purposes of the sexual assault crime, our conversation is privileged, but for
• You'd be like, well, for purposes of the sexual assault crime, our conversation is privileged, but for
• You'd be like, well, for purposes of the sexual assault crime, our conversation is privileged, but for
• You'd be like, well, for purposes of the sexual assault crime, our conversation is privileged, but for

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• conversations.
• on this as well.
• You heard CFA talk as well.
• You heard CFA talk as well.
• So I appreciate our conversations and the conversations going forward.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, it appears that Ms.
• Well, Ms. Foote. Well, Ms. Foote served on its board of directors.
• that as well, right?
• Well, let me... At least that's the... Again. We don't believe it applies to us. Well, let me...
• I'm happy to have a conversation with them. I welcome a conversation. I take this very seriously.

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:

• But your point is well taken.
• But your point is well taken.
• Well taken.
• Well, thank you very much.
• Well, they've been on the project since day one. They've been part of the conversion.

Summary: The committee met to hear an update from Washington State Ferries on capital projects and workforce issues, beginning with a briefing on the agency’s long-term fleet and terminal needs. WSF officials described the history of underinvestment after the late 1990s, the current fleet reduction from 25 to 21 vessels, and the need to keep older boats in service while moving toward a 26-vessel long-range fleet and hybrid-electric operations. They said the agency is transitioning to a new vessel procurement strategy, with Eastern Shipbuilding selected to build up to three 160-car hybrid-electric ferries, and outlined a schedule that includes contract execution, about a year of design work, steel cutting in fall 2026, and several years of construction. Members raised concerns about the higher cost of electrified vessels, the length of the schedule, the adequacy of liquidated damages and incentives, the risks of building in Florida and transporting vessels to Washington, and whether the contract sufficiently protects the state from cost overruns and design problems. The committee also received an update on the Wenatchee conversion, which officials said is days away from entering service as the first large hybrid-electric ferry conversion. WSF explained that the conversion combined required midlife preservation work with propulsion upgrades and battery installation, and that the project took longer and cost more than originally expected because it was a prototype with significant lessons learned. Officials said the Tacoma and Puyallup conversions would follow later, but those decisions were being delayed until after the World Cup to avoid service disruptions. Members asked about the cost-effectiveness of the conversion, the expected fuel and emissions reductions, and what happens to engine crews during long conversion periods; WSF said crews were embedded in the project and that the conversions should reduce diesel use substantially once terminal charging is available. The meeting then shifted to workforce development, with Siegel consultants reviewing their 2021 and 2024 studies of ferry staffing, overtime, recruitment, and workplace culture. They said the earlier problems stemmed from seasonal staffing practices, low winter hours, limited career progression, a narrow maritime recruiting pipeline, and a culture that made retention difficult. Since then, they reported major improvements: staffing has increased from about 1,500 to 1,900, turnover has fallen, captain and engineer shortages have eased, and recruitment has broadened beyond the traditional maritime pool, including more women and other underrepresented workers. They credited new programs such as guaranteed hours, paid pilotage, AB-to-mate pathways, and the “Turning of the Tide” culture campaign, while noting remaining issues with communication, HR access, accountability, and quality of life. Members generally acknowledged the progress but asked whether staffing levels are now sufficient and how interchangeable crews are across vessels and routes. Finally, terminal engineering staff began a presentation on capital terminal work, starting with the Fauntleroy Ferry Terminal. They described the terminal’s age, low elevation, vulnerability to sea level rise and earthquakes, and the need for replacement piles, beams, and improved vehicle circulation. The agency said it has completed a planning and environmental linkage study, is moving into NEPA/state environmental review, and has been working with the community to balance the needs of Southworth and Vashon riders with neighborhood concerns in Fauntleroy. The preferred alternative is a larger offshore dock footprint that would improve capacity and reliability while reducing impacts to eelgrass habitat. The meeting ended before the terminal discussion was complete.

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, thank you for the conversation... You know, thank you for the conversation.
• I mean, those are all parts of this conversation that needs to happen, and it has to—but that conversation
• You want to have a conversation.
• to continuing them as well.
• We appreciate the author and sponsor as well for engaging with us in the conversation.

Summary: The committee heard several local government-related bills, with testimony focused on permitting, transportation funding, EV infrastructure, and commercial revitalization. AB 1578 by Assembly Member Jackson would require elected local and state officials to take anti-hate speech training through existing sexual harassment training. Supporters said elected officials should understand the impact of their words on hate and democracy; opponents argued the bill lacked a definition of hate speech and could chill protected speech, especially around sex-based issues. AB 2083, also by Jackson, would authorize a regional child care special district serving Moreno Valley and Paris to expand child care facilities and programs for five years. The California Association of Local Agency Formation Commissions opposed the bill’s mechanism but said it was working with the author. AB 1693 by Assembly Member Suber would streamline retail tenant improvement permits by extending a process similar to a prior restaurant permitting law, with qualified professional certification and tighter local review timelines. It drew broad support from retail, business, and property groups and no opposition. Assembly Member Gonzalez presented AB 1679, which would create a temporary commercial activation permit for pop-up businesses to operate in vacant storefronts for up to 120 days. Supporters said it would help fill vacancies and lower barriers for small businesses; there was no opposition, and the bill advanced. Gonzalez also presented AB 2418, which would set timelines for nonresidential plan checks and inspections and allow private plan checkers after excessive delay. Business groups supported it as a way to reduce costly delays, while local government groups had no position but continued discussions with the author; the bill advanced with amendments. Assembly Member Shevlin presented AB 1820, which would cap local permit fees for EV charging installations and create a statewide fee schedule. Supporters said fees vary too widely and can deter charger deployment, while cities and counties argued existing law already requires reasonable cost recovery and that the bill could undercut local budgets and public safety review. Assembly Member DeMaio presented AB 1783, which would prohibit state and local mileage taxes or road user charges. Supporters framed it as a defense against a new tax burden, while opponents said studying road user charges is necessary to address declining gas tax revenue and future transportation funding needs. AB 1693, AB 1679, and AB 2418 were moved forward with motions and roll calls; AB 1783 was taken up with a motion and roll call left open, and AB 1820 remained under discussion at the end of the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, thank you. Nothing further to you. Well, thank you.
• Well, sorry.
• positions as well. positions as well.
• Well, sorry. So if you look Senate side. Well, sorry.
• as well.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Higher Education Conference Committee reviewed differences among the Governor’s, House, and Senate proposals for state grant parameter changes and their effects on state grant spending, North Star Promise spending, and average student awards. Nonpartisan staff explained that the proposals use different combinations of parameter changes, with the Governor’s and Senate plans modeled to avoid or minimize rationing, while the House plan would require rationing to balance the program. Staff reported projected biennium balances of a positive $29.836 million for the Governor’s proposal, a negative $60.758 million for the House proposal without rationing, a positive $994,000 for the House proposal with rationing, and a positive $3.623 million for the Senate proposal; North Star Promise balances also varied, with the Senate showing a positive balance and the Governor and House with rationing showing negative balances. Staff also said the Senate proposal would extend availability of the state grant appropriation and suspend surplus procedures through fiscal year 2029, allowing the balance to carry forward. The committee then focused on the House-only tuition and fee cap provision, which would limit the tuition recognized for state grant purposes for four-year programs to the University of Minnesota Twin Cities level, with 1% annual increases in fiscal years 2026 and 2027. House members said the cap was intended to address rising tuition, especially at the University of Minnesota, and to produce savings in the state grant program. The governor’s office confirmed the provision was not included in the Governor’s bill. Representatives from the University of Minnesota and the Minnesota Private College Council opposed the cap, arguing it would reduce awards for low-income students and shift costs to students rather than address underlying tuition pressures; they also said it could discourage enrollment at higher-cost institutions. Supporters from Minnesota State argued the cap would improve fairness because students at lower-tuition institutions are effectively capped lower, while students at more expensive institutions receive larger awards, and they said the legislature should intervene in a variable that has grown substantially over time. Committee members questioned how the cap would work and whether it was tied to the Twin Cities campus rate. Testifiers clarified that the state grant formula is tied to the University of Minnesota level, but because Minnesota State institutions are below that level, the cap effectively limits their students to their own lower tuition while allowing higher awards at the University of Minnesota and private colleges. No formal vote or final action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided; the chair indicated the committee would continue with item-by-item review of the remaining parameter changes and hear additional testimony from agencies and institutions.

Transcript Highlights:

• We had a lovely conversation yesterday.
• We view that as very favorable as well.
• We view that as very favorable as well.
• So thank you as well. Thank you, Ms. Kelly.
• So thank you as well. Thank you, Ms. Kelly.

Bills: S7010

Keywords: Roth contributions, deferred compensation, retirement savings, Florida Statutes, tax benefits

Summary: The Senate Committee on Appropriations met to take up SB 7010 by Senator Mayfield, which would authorize Roth post-tax contribution options in state and local deferred compensation plans. The bill was briefly explained, received one appearance in support, had no debate, and was reported favorably by roll call vote. The committee then heard a lengthy presentation from the Governor’s Office of Policy and Budget on the governor’s recommended $117.4 billion “Floridians’ First Budget.” The presentation highlighted major spending areas including education, health care, public safety, transportation, environmental restoration, and economic development. Key proposals included increased FEFP funding for K-12 schools, teacher salary funding, higher education support, Everglades and water quality funding, emergency preparedness reserves, corrections staffing and pay increases, law enforcement recruitment bonuses, cybersecurity, and affordable housing and infrastructure investments. Members asked extensive questions about property tax reserve planning, litigation funding, emergency response fund balances and expenditures, the use of federal reimbursement for the Everglades detention facilities, the animal abuse hotline, Hope Florida, corrections staffing, and the proposed reduction in ADAP eligibility for HIV/AIDS medication assistance. A member of the public also testified at length about concerns that the ADAP changes would harm access to life-saving medications and alleged improper shifting of program funds. Committee members and the presenter acknowledged follow-up questions on several items, but no additional votes or formal actions were taken beyond the favorable report on SB 7010 and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:12:43.240> I and or by others um because I well I and or by others um because I well I
• <00:18:37.240> you're was at that time she goes well you're was at that time she goes well
• It's just kind of, um, the conversation will just continue, just be conversation that doesn't result
• It's just kind of, um, the conversation will just continue, just be conversation that doesn't result
• It's just kind of, um, the conversation will just continue, just be conversation that doesn't result

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Public Safety met on Wednesday, April 2 at 11:05 a.m. and began with housekeeping instructions for Zoom testimony and meeting conduct. The first major item was House Resolution 43, HD1, which urged the City and County of Honolulu to work with stakeholders on an emergency access road on the West Coast. The acting chair proposed a substantial HD2 amendment to add Makakilo language, expanding the resolution to call for two emergency access roads—one on the Ewa coast and one in Makakilo—and to request community meetings and a timeline for an alternative Makakilo access road by early 2026. Testimony on the resolution was strongly supportive overall, with 14 written testimonies in favor and none opposed. The committee then debated whether the proposed HD2 was appropriate without prior concurrence from the original introducer or prior committee chair. Several members objected to the amendment process and said they would vote no because the amendment had not been posted in advance and lacked concurrence, while the acting chair argued the rules did not require concurrence for resolutions and that the amendment was needed to address Makakilo residents’ safety concerns. The discussion also included references to prior conversations with leadership and the Speaker about whether resolution titles could be amended. After debate, the committee first voted on the amended version of HR 43, but the recommendation was not adopted. The acting chair then moved to pass HR 43 HD1 as originally presented, without the new Makakilo amendments. That motion was adopted, with the committee voting to pass the resolution as is. The record notes that members supporting the original measure cited the written testimony and the need for a second access point on the West Coast, while others voted no because they viewed the Makakilo language as duplicative or preferred a separate measure. After HR 43, the committee moved on to HCR 9, and the acting chair indicated that the committee would need to take a reconsideration vote before proceeding to a final vote on that resolution.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, it appears that Mrs.
• ... ...as well.
• that as well, right?
• Well, let me... At least that's the... Again. We don't believe it applies to us. Well, let me...
• We had great conversation.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It’s a conversation starter, in my opinion, and I think that is a good conversation to have.
• Then there was the conversation of evolving SIP. Well, then the ECO became the conversation.
• was the conversation of evolving sip<01:43:22.800> well<01:43:22.960> then<01:43:23.440
• the Eco became the sip well then the Eco became the conversation<01:43:25.560> oh<01:43:25.679
• It's great to have that conversation. I'm glad we're having that conversation.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And we, from the start in our conversations with the committee chair, as well as the opposition, were
• And I heard from a number of colleagues as well, and we met with a number of folks as well.
• And again, I'll just say that the conversations—and we will continue to have conversations.
• Well, I think at that point, there needs to be a conversation with the homeowner, if necessary, that
• Well, thank you. I apologize, but transportation is still going on. No problem. Well, thank you.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, my feeling is that she, in our conversation with us, that she would be providing a document to
• Okay, I see him here as well.
• Well, this is up for conversation here. Bev, I've talked a little bit with the retirees about this.
• Well, we can delay this issue till October as well and give you time to visit with them. Okay.
• Well, we could.

Summary: The Executive Committee of the State Committee on Pension Policy approved its June minutes and received updates from legal and actuarial staff. Counsel reported on two class-action matters: the Fowler/Probst case, where a court ordered the state to pay $118 million in additional interest to teachers and the state has appealed and sought a stay, and the Dawson case challenging last year’s HB 2034, where the complaint was amended to leave only a federal contract-impairment claim and the state plans to move to dismiss. The actuary also provided a brief educational update on asset smoothing and offered to provide more detailed follow-up, noting it affects funded ratios and contribution rates. The committee then discussed its interim work plan and September agenda. Members agreed to add a bill and fiscal analysis for a PERS/TRS Plan 1 ad hoc COLA, with discussion focused on whether it should be capped and how to frame the cost estimate. Staff also outlined a memo on possible approaches to a permanent COLA for Plan 1 retirees, including making it part of the base budget or otherwise structuring it so future budgets would address it; no action was taken, and the topic was deferred for further discussion. The committee also heard constituent correspondence supporting COLAs and raising concerns about survivor benefits. A representative of the Washington State Patrol Troopers Association testified in support of advancing survivor medical benefits, explaining that the smaller size of the State Patrol system makes new benefits more costly per member and that any new benefit would require member approval. Staff said a cost estimate could be prepared for September if the proposal excluded retroactive coverage, but October would be needed if retroactivity were included. The committee agreed to move the survivor medical issue to October, while keeping the LEOFF 1 medical study update, animal control officer eligibility, and the ad hoc COLA on the September agenda, along with preliminary 2027 meeting dates. The meeting adjourned without further action.