Transcript Highlights:

• Right. So budget for three schools. Right.
• </c><00:15:49.519><c> Right.</c> not not to us. Right. not not to us. Right.
• &gt;&gt; Right. &gt;&gt; Right. &gt;&gt; Right.
• Right.
• So right to benefit that area. Right.

Summary: The joint House committees on Housing and Education heard HB 1713, HD1, which would repeal school impact fees and transfer remaining balances in the school impact fee and certain fair share accounts to the school facilities special fund. The Department of Education testified in opposition, while the Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation, the Attorney General’s office (with comments and suggested constitutional amendments), the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, the School Facilities Authority, Grassroot Institute of Hawaii, NAP Hawaii, Avalon Development Company, Mark Development, Maui Chamber of Commerce, Housing Hawaii’s Future, Landis Research Foundation, BIA Hawaii, and others testified in support. The Tax Foundation of Hawaii offered comments. The DOE said the bill would weaken a key tool for matching school facilities to residential growth, while supporters said the current program leaves funds unused or restricted in ways that limit their effectiveness. A lengthy discussion followed about the difference between the older school impact fee program and the separate fair share agreements tied to land use entitlements and change-of-zone approvals. DOE Deputy Superintendent Jesse Suki explained that fair share funds are tied to the district where they were collected, may be too small to build a full school on their own, and are held until needed for projects such as Core Ridge, Central and West Maui, and other planned schools. Committee members pressed DOE on why funds had remained unspent for years, how much money was in the accounts, and whether the department had reviewed audit findings about the program. Members also questioned whether homeowners ultimately bear these costs through developers passing them along. The committee did not take a vote during the portion of the meeting provided. The discussion ended with members and DOE debating whether the current statute should remain in place, whether past entitlements should be affected, and whether the bill should be amended to better address remaining construction-related obligations and the use of collected funds.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, disabled without this law in place.
• </c> delinquency at the way it is right now. delinquency at the way it is right now.
• </c> just don't have the infrastructure right just don't have the infrastructure right now<00:17:34.760
• We are not doing that right now.
• None of those apply right now.

Transcript Highlights:

• Right? When we talk about someone Ever. Right?
• Right.
• Right.
• Right.
• Right.

Bills: HF3611 , HF3659 , HF3909

Committee: House Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• It is right.
• It is right.
• All right.
• All right.
• All right.

Committee: Senate Education

Summary: The committee heard several education-related bills. SB 1154 would allow community college districts to use best-value procurement for public works projects over $1 million. The author and community college supporters argued it would give colleges flexibility similar to K-12, UC, and CSU and help avoid delays and costly change orders. Contractors and electrical subcontractors opposed the bill, saying its skilled-and-trained workforce requirement and safety provisions would narrow competition and disadvantage small and nonunion firms. The bill passed the committee on a due-pass vote and was placed on call. SB 1347 would clarify that stock albuterol may be stocked in all public schools, including preschool programs. The author and a physician testified that the bill would remove confusion in existing law and improve access to emergency asthma medication for students. School nurses, respiratory care advocates, and small school districts supported the measure, and there was no opposition. The bill passed unanimously on a due-pass to the floor vote and was placed on call. SB 1222 would create a pilot program to designate a lead county office to help regions struggling with career technical education implementation. Supporters said many students remain disconnected from school and work and that the bill would spread proven regional CTE practices. Some committee members questioned whether another pilot was needed, arguing existing CTE programs need more funding and fewer new structures, while the author and sponsor said the bill would build regional capacity and share successful models. The bill passed to Senate Appropriations and was placed on call. SB 1378 would create a California Excellence in Service Learning Designation Program to recognize schools and districts with strong service-learning programs. Supporters said it would validate existing work and encourage civic engagement, while one member raised concerns about adding more designations and workload for schools. The bill passed as amended to Senate Appropriations and was placed on call. SB 1048 would create a Seal of Climate Literacy for high school students demonstrating climate science knowledge through coursework and hands-on learning. Supporters, including the Department of Education and climate education groups, said it would align students with growing clean-energy careers; some members cautioned against adding more curriculum-related seals and noted equity and implementation concerns. The bill passed to Senate Appropriations and was placed on call. Later, SB 1101, the Higher Education Data Sharing Transparency Act, was presented. It would require CSU, community colleges, independent colleges, and request UC to notify students, faculty, and staff when their personal information is shared with federal agencies such as the Office for Civil Rights, and to limit disclosure to what is legally required. Supporters said recent federal investigations and subpoenas have created fear and a lack of transparency on campuses. Committee discussion focused on subpoena authority, constitutional limits, and whether notice should be required; one member said she would abstain because of legal concerns, while another said the bill would continue to be examined in the next committee. The transcript ends during discussion of SB 1101 before a final vote is recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• care at the right time in the right setting.
• All right.
• Right, so in our model.
• You just got it passed out, all right. All right, so the substitute.
• All right, so it's not just all overhead. Right. Thanks. Thank you.

Bills: SB500 , SB719 , SB912 , SB1232 , SB1467 , SB1777 , SB1864 , SB2023 , SB2119 , SB2458

Committee: Senate Health & Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• Right here. I can’t see because you’re right there. I’m sorry. And Kelly Pease.
• And we will get started right away.
• Right now, right now.
• Okay, all right, thanks. But they're obviously feeling the impact too even today, right?
• Right.

Committee: House House Committee on Federal Funding, Policy and Accountability

Summary: The hearing focused on the impact of recent federal policy and budget actions on Massachusetts libraries, humanities organizations, arts institutions, and tourism. Testimony from library leaders described the loss or jeopardy of Institute of Museum and Library Services funding, including statewide databases, local grants, staff positions, E-rate/hotspot support, and digital equity programs. Witnesses said the cuts have already forced reductions in services, canceled grants and workshops, and in some cases left schools, students, job seekers, and low-income patrons without access to key resources. Members of the committee asked for lists of affected communities and databases, and several witnesses said they would provide additional written detail. Arts and humanities witnesses said federal terminations from the NEA, NEH, and IMLS have hit organizations across the Commonwealth, including Mass Cultural Council, Mass Humanities, Mass MoCA, and local museums and historical societies. They described canceled or rescinded grants, layoffs, reduced programming, and a chilling effect on future applications and on artistic and scholarly work, especially where federal awards had already been matched with local or private funds. Several speakers also raised concerns about executive-branch DEI conditions attached to funding and about book challenges and book banning, saying these trends threaten intellectual freedom and public access to culture and history. Committee members emphasized the economic importance of the sector and the need to publicize the impacts. Tourism officials from Meet Boston and the Massachusetts Office of Travel and Tourism testified that federal cuts and broader geopolitical and tariff issues are hurting international visitation, especially from Canada and Western Europe, and could affect major upcoming events such as the 2026 World Cup and Sail Boston. They said reduced funding for Brand USA and Discover New England will weaken long-term marketing efforts and international partnerships, with downstream effects on hotel tax revenue, jobs, and workforce recruitment. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, with members mainly asking questions and requesting follow-up written testimony and data.

Transcript Highlights:

• Quite all right. Quite all right. Good afternoon, Chair and committee members.
• Right.
• Right.
• And with Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, right? Consumer Federation, California.
• All right.

Committee: House Privacy and Consumer Protection

Summary: The committee heard several bills, with most of the discussion focused on AB 325, which would update California antitrust law to address algorithmic price fixing, and AB 1221, which would restrict invasive workplace surveillance tools. AB 325’s author and supporters argued that competitors using the same pricing software can facilitate collusion and drive up prices in sectors like housing, groceries, and frozen foods; opponents warned the bill was too broad, could sweep in lawful public-data pricing tools, and might chill ordinary business software use. Members raised concerns about housing applications, small businesses, intent standards, and whether the bill clearly distinguishes lawful market research from collusive conduct. Despite the debate, the committee voted to move AB 325 forward on a 6-2 roll call, holding the roll open for absent members. AB 75, dealing with insurers’ use of aerial imaging for homeowners’ coverage decisions, was also heard. The author and Department of Insurance said the bill would require notice before aerial images are collected, give homeowners access to the images, and require that any image used to cancel, non-renew, or reduce coverage be current enough to allow an in-person inspection if needed. Consumer advocates supported the measure as a privacy and transparency protection, while insurers opposed it unless amended, arguing aerial imaging is a low-cost tool that helps keep coverage available and affordable and warning that more in-person inspections would raise costs and reduce the number of policies they can write. The committee moved AB 75 to Appropriations, also holding the roll open. The committee also advanced AB 576, which the author said responds to stakeholder feedback after AB 488 by improving the Department of Justice charity registry process, including an API to help fundraising platforms update eligible charities more efficiently. AB 1160, on law enforcement drone data storage, was presented as a privacy and security measure requiring U.S.-based storage for drone-collected data and prohibiting its use, sharing, or sale by storage vendors; it too was moved to Appropriations. In addition, the committee heard AB 1221, which would ban certain workplace surveillance technologies such as facial, gait, and emotion recognition and add notice, data protection, and human-review requirements before discipline based on surveillance output. Supporters said the bill would curb discriminatory and invasive monitoring, while opponents argued it was overly broad and could interfere with legitimate security, safety, and HR uses; the transcript ends before a final vote on that measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• Right?
• I mean, it's not so that's a quarter of it right there. Right?
• Right, I welcome that. Thank you. Right, so the Guardian replacement.
• And it didn't work right.
• Because you've got to have the right people putting in the right information to get out the right results

Committee: House A&B General Government Subcommittee

Transcript Highlights:

• Right.
• All right. All right. All right.
• I think that's the right<01:50:33.440><c> title.</c> right title. right title.
• Right.
• Right. I would in the past, you know. Right.

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met to hear the Legislative Budget Assistant Office’s performance audit of the New Hampshire Commission for Human Rights. Auditors said the commission was inefficient and ineffective in investigating discrimination complaints and closing cases in a timely manner during fiscal years 2020 through 2023. The report contained 25 observations; the commission fully concurred with 24 and concurred in part with one. Auditors highlighted major problems with case processing delays, inaccurate case data, lack of a case management system, weak strategic planning and risk assessment, outdated and disorganized policies, confidentiality issues, expired administrative rules, fee-setting practices, incomplete financial-interest filings, and failure to complete required reports and reconciliations. Two recommendations, involving complaint screening and conciliation, may require legislative action. Several observations focused on the commission’s intake and investigation practices. Auditors said complaints may have been screened out before docketing, potentially preventing commissioner review required by statute, and that the investigation process lacked clear rules and guidance. They also found investigators were assigned non-investigative tasks, training was inadequate, interview requirements were unclear, supervisory duties were burdensome, and confidential information was not always protected by encrypted email. The audit recommended clearer administrative rules, better internal controls, more focused staffing, a supervisory investigator position, and improved training and documentation. Commission representatives said they had already made progress on several items since the audit began, including posting overdue biennial reports and moving toward a case management system expected to go live in June. They said they were working with EEOC counterparts and legal counsel, but emphasized staffing shortages and high turnover, noting the commission currently had nine people working out of 15 authorized positions, with three investigator vacancies and a vacant paralegal position. Committee members thanked the auditors and commission staff, discussed the history of the audit request, and raised concerns about how long the recommended corrective actions might take. The committee took no vote or formal action during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I'll briefly go over some of those right now.
• All right. Well, then I will go.
• away or if they have the right away.
• of way or if they have the right of way.
• As you see, I'm joined by drivers right here.

Summary: The committee held a work session on autonomous vehicles, beginning with an overview from the Washington State Transportation Commission on the state’s five-year AV work group. The commission described its 2018 legislative mandate, the 35-member executive committee and seven subcommittees, and the resulting 29 recommendations and “roadmap to the future.” The presentation emphasized six policy “building blocks” for Washington: agency readiness, public outreach, equity, safety, testing and pilots, and a path to deployment. It also noted current Washington law requires AV testing companies to self-certify with the Department of Licensing, carry $5 million in liability insurance, report collisions and violations, and notify local law enforcement before testing; three companies are currently certified. State regulators from California and Arizona then outlined their AV frameworks. California described its long-running permit system for testing with and without a safety driver and for commercial deployment, its current rulemaking to expand use cases to heavy-duty trucks and passenger shuttles, and new requirements for mileage, operational assessments, and more detailed crash and incident reporting. California also said it is creating a new enforcement tool allowing citations to be issued to manufacturers for moving violations by AVs. Arizona described its executive-order-based approach, later codified by statute, which allows testing and driverless operations through self-certification, law enforcement interaction plans, quarterly meetings with companies, and reporting of crashes or near misses; Arizona also said it tracks crashes monthly and has not recorded fatalities attributed to AVs. Industry representatives from Waymo, Zoox, and the Autonomous Vehicle Industry Association argued that AVs can improve safety, accessibility, and mobility while creating jobs. They described extensive sensor systems, community outreach, first-responder engagement, and current operations in multiple cities. Waymo cited more than 127 million rider-only miles and said its data show large reductions in injury-causing and pedestrian crashes; Zoox said it operates in Las Vegas, San Francisco, and Seattle and stressed its purpose-built electric robotaxi and local jobs; AVIA said its members have driven more than 145 million autonomous miles and that 26 states now expressly authorize driverless operations. Members asked about public education, crash and fatality tracking, enforcement, weather, school zones, first-responder interactions, and labor impacts. Labor and public-safety witnesses from the Teamsters, firefighters, and driver unions opposed commercial AV deployment without stronger safeguards. They argued Washington should not be an unregulated testing ground, especially for heavy trucks and hazardous materials, and warned of job losses for drivers, taxi and rideshare workers, and related occupations. Firefighters and driver representatives raised concerns about AVs interfering with emergency scenes, blocking responders, and creating risks in dynamic roadway incidents. Committee members also asked for comparisons to human-driven vehicles, data on citations and crashes, and more information on how AVs interact with pedestrians, first responders, and workers.

Transcript Highlights:

• All right.
• The chair then said, “All right.
• You're right.
• Right. Mr.
• But right here, you have the chance to make this right. Nothing else is on the table today.

Committees: House Education , House House Education Committee of Reference

Transcript Highlights:

• School districts that want to do right by their kids, right?
• That I know, greatest desire is to be right. We are right.
• That is absolutely right.
• That is not right.
• It's not right.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> this $500 fee that is in place right this $500 fee that is in place right now,<00:34:19.200><c>
• </c> appropriate that we are doing the right appropriate that we are doing the right thing.<01:03:22.400
• </c><01:08:19.040><c> 8</c> think that [laughter] number's right. 8 think that [laughter] number's right
• All right. So, minority &gt;&gt; There we go. All right.
• &gt;&gt; All<01:10:00.880><c> right.

Committee: House Fish and Game and Marine Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• You are the right questions.
• All right. The motion before us is do pass and refer to the Education Committee. That's right.
• All right. Other comments? Okay. I got to catch my breath. All right. Dr. Sharp Collins.
• All right. So this is file item 11? 17. 14. All right. So this is file item 11? 14. 14.
• All right. Do we have a motion? Really, every spoke to ask for your aye vote. All right.

Committee: House Higher Education

Summary: The Assembly Higher Education Committee met for a policy hearing and first took up a consent calendar, approving several bills on consent before moving through a series of higher education measures. The committee heard AB 977, which would require the CSU to audit surplus land and work with California tribes to identify burial sites for Native American remains as part of repatriation efforts; the bill was supported by tribal representatives and others, with CSU expressing no formal position but saying it was working on repatriation. Members spoke strongly in favor of returning remains home, and the bill passed 5-0 to Appropriations. The committee then considered AB 1093, creating a California-Mexico higher education exchange program, but members raised concerns about border issues, sewage contamination, and funding; the author said the program would be funded through university dollars and was intended as a one-for-one exchange. AB 1035, which would extend the California College Promise to cover tuition for students pursuing community college bachelor’s degrees, drew support from community college leaders and faculty, but some members questioned the use of Prop. 98 funds and whether the bill would divert resources from other students; it passed 3-2 to Appropriations. AB 922, giving the UC statutory authority to maintain access to federal background-check systems for hiring, passed unanimously to Public Safety, and AB 1346, protecting in-state residency and tuition status for dependents of military service members, also passed unanimously to Military and Veterans Affairs. The committee also heard AB 1212, allowing UC campuses to use low-income housing tax credits to build affordable housing for faculty and staff on UC land. UC and labor supporters argued it would help recruitment and retention and increase affordable housing supply, while opponents objected to the preference for UC employees over the general public; the bill was supported by the chair in closing. Finally, the committee took up AB 500 and AB 684, both focused on UC admissions transparency: AB 500 would require consultation with students, K-12, and CSU before UC admissions changes, and AB 684 would subject UC BOARS meetings to the Bagley-Keene Open Meetings Act. Both measures were framed as transparency and accountability bills, with some UC opposition or neutrality, and both advanced on 5-0 votes to their respective committees. The committee also heard AB 1122 on universal dual enrollment access, with strong support from educators and community college partners and favorable comments from members about expanding college access.

Transcript Highlights:

• All right. Well, then I will go.
• Right?
• of way or if they have the right of way.
• As you see, I'm joined by drivers right here.
• All right. Okay. Are there any questions? All right. So, pause for a second.

Committee: House Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> things that they do not have the right things that they do not have the right to<00:24:46.760><c
• </c> administrator for disability administrator for disability compensation<00:36:03.040><c> Division
• </c><00:41:34.079><c> your</c> so hga your testimony right your so hga your testimony right your supportive
• Right now in statute it is collectively bargained.
• Is that right?

Committee: House Labor

Transcript Highlights:

• So how do you guys, right during this period that was running this pilot program, right, I assume you
• Right? Nope.
• <00:31:40.960><c> and</c> disabilities and disabilities and support<00:31:43.679><c> not</c> support
• Is there any flexibility in that, right?
• I'm curious, right, what would the...

Committee: House Labor

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> it's right. it's right.
• Right.
• So, if they're having Right.<01:46:30.480><c> Right.</c><01:46:31.199><c> So,</c> Right. Right.
• So, Right. Right.
• It would be the 14th, right? right? right?

Summary: The subcommittee met to begin work on HB 742, which would require catastrophic special education aid to be drawn from the education trust fund, and more broadly to study special education aid/differentiated aid and related costing issues. The chair said the group was starting early because the issue has been debated for years without resolution, local districts are being forced to absorb prorated costs, and the committee wants to send the Department of Education and HHS Medicaid a clear request for data and recommendations before retained bills return in the fall. A committee clerk was also selected, with Representative Reverend volunteering to take notes for the meeting. Members reviewed background materials on special education enrollment, high-cost students, and possible funding formulas, including data on students in high-cost brackets and prior ideas such as category-based funding and caseload-based approaches. The chair also referenced research on other states, including Arkansas, which uses a different special education funding structure and audits IEPs. The committee emphasized that it was focused on the funding mechanics and costs, not on questioning whether services should be provided. Henry Lipman of HHS explained how Medicaid-to-schools currently works in New Hampshire. He said 172 school districts participate, but utilization dropped during the pandemic and remains below historical levels, in part because districts need the capacity to bill Medicaid. Under the current system, schools receive reimbursement based on half of the Medicaid fee schedule, with the school district effectively providing the state share. He said the federal government is requiring a shift by July 1, 2026, to a true certified public expenditure model based on actual costs, which should allow schools to recover 50% of their true costs and some administrative overhead. The department has received a roughly $2.5 million grant to hire a vendor and support districts through the transition, and an RFP and stakeholder meetings are underway. Committee members asked about how costs would be determined, whether the new system would use actual district-specific costs rather than averages, and how the department would support districts that do not currently participate. Lipman said the cost model would be based on each district’s own reasonable costs, subject to audit standards, and that the department expects to provide templates and technical assistance through the vendor because its staff is limited. He also said about one in four New Hampshire children are enrolled in Medicaid, that child enrollment has been relatively stable, and that continuous coverage rules should reduce churn. No votes or formal actions on HB 742 were taken during the meeting beyond organizing the subcommittee and beginning testimony and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I think this is the exact right amendment right now. But you had to pay tax all year long.
• So I think this is the exact right amendment right now.
• So I think this is the exact right amendment right now.
• We right now have a birth dearth.
• They have a right to know what's not in this bill, and they have the right to decide. Mr.

Summary: The House debated a series of amendments to a major income tax bill, with repeated arguments over tax fairness, affordability, administrative feasibility, and the role of the Department of Revenue. Early motions to reconsider a failed child care amendment were rejected, and Amendment 2561, which would have restricted data sharing with the IRS, was also defeated after debate over privacy, federal relationships, and whether the proposal was administrable. Amendment 2579, which would have required annual reporting on the tax’s effects on filers, businesses, and charitable donations, likewise failed, with supporters emphasizing transparency and opponents arguing DOR was not the right agency and the report was too speculative. Amendment 2598, proposing to use half of new revenue for a broad sales tax cut, was rejected despite arguments that it would reduce regressivity and provide immediate relief; Amendment 2556, expanding sales tax exemptions for diapers and other child-care essentials to include adult diapers and earlier implementation, also failed after debate over scope and timing.

Transcript Highlights:

• &gt;&gt; Right. &gt;&gt; Right. &gt;&gt; Right. &gt;&gt; Right. &gt;&gt; Right. &gt;&gt; Right.
• &gt;&gt; right? &gt;&gt; right?
• That's right. Close family. That's right.
• &gt;&gt; right? &gt;&gt; right?
• That's right. Cuz our, you know, &gt;&gt; right? That's right.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Health and Human Services held an informational briefing on the federal shutdown’s impact on state benefits, with the main focus on SNAP. DHS Benefit, Employment and Support Services Division Administrator Scott Morish explained that SNAP serves about 86,229 households statewide, or 168,947 individuals, and averages roughly $58–60 million in monthly federal benefits. He said USDA directed states to suspend November SNAP benefits effective November 1 if the shutdown continues, while existing October balances on EBT cards remain usable and cash benefits such as TANF, General Assistance, and AABD are not affected. DHS said it has continued processing applications, recertifications, interviews, and required reporting, and has posted public guidance on its website. Morish also reviewed other SNAP-related changes taking effect November 1 under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, including expanded able-bodied adult work requirements and tighter non-citizen eligibility rules. He said the work requirements now extend from ages 18–54 to 18–64 and apply to additional groups previously exempt, while only lawful permanent residents, COFA residents, and Cuban or Haitian entrants will remain eligible among non-citizens. He also noted Hawaii’s ongoing SNAP benefit reduction tied to a federal calculation error in the thrifty food plan, which has lowered benefits by about $8 per person per month for the past three years. On the state response, DHS said it is working with the Hawaii Food Bank and seeking $2 million in state funding to support it, and is also developing a Hawaii Relief Program using TANF reserve funds. The program is intended as a short-term housing and utility assistance program for families with dependent children under 300% of the federal poverty level, with up to four months of assistance. Senators questioned why rainy day funds were not being used and whether the state could directly fund EBT cards; DHS responded that the TANF approach was the fastest available option, that EBT delivery involves significant technical and administrative mechanics, and that the department is still in discussions with the vendor and other stakeholders about additional options.