Transcript Highlights:

• </c> legislature had no idea who they were. legislature had no idea who they were.
• </c><00:13:43.680><c> doesn't</c> is that if if the legislature doesn't is that if if the legislature
• </c> regents, which is only the legislature regents, which is only the legislature unless<00:47:16.800
• </c> legislature. Period. legislature. Period. &gt;&gt; Thank<00:47:28.800><c> you.
• </c> wants the program as the legislature wants the program as the legislature wants<00:58:39.920><c>

Summary: The committee took up House File 4252 and first heard a walkthrough of a DE2 amendment that largely incorporated Office of Higher Education technical and statutory cleanup items, including reporting consolidations, updates to postsecondary registration and licensing statutes, and an anti-fraud provision. New provisions in the DE2 would require public postsecondary institutions to explain developmental courses before enrollment and obtain a written acknowledgement, revise the state grant tuition cap, add a $1.5 million ongoing appropriation in FY 2027 for an identity verification system to combat enrollment fraud, and provide $5,000 one-time funding for reforestation at Bemidji State University. Fiscal staff also noted additional special revenue fund revenue and expenditures tied to licensing and registration litigation response. The main debate centered on the A8 amendment offered by Representative Rarick, which would require the governor to appoint University of Minnesota regents only from candidates recommended by the joint legislative committee if the legislature fails to elect regents. Rarick argued the amendment was needed to address what he described as conflicts of interest and pay-to-play concerns in recent gubernatorial appointments. Several members questioned whether the language was constitutional, whether it actually addressed conflicts of interest, and whether it should instead refer to ARCAC-screened or ARCAC-recommended candidates. Nonpartisan staff said the governor’s appointment power is addressed in the university charter, not directly in the constitution, but could not definitively assess constitutionality if challenged. Members were divided: some supported the goal of cleaner governance but said the amendment was not ready or did not match the problem being described; others argued the legislature had failed to complete its own regent appointments and that the amendment was a response to that failure. No vote on the A8 amendment or the bill was reached in the portion provided, though a roll call was requested on the amendment and the chair indicated the bill would continue through amendment consideration before final discussion and vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• So to start off, the SBCC is a state agency created in 1974 by the Legislature.
• and then the rulemaking authority that's granted by the legislature with this body.
• and then the rulemaking authority that's granted by the legislature with this body.
• We're really reactive to both the legislature and the intent of the legislature, and then what the public—I
• Is there something that we as a legislature could do?

Committee: House Local Government

Summary: The committee heard first from the City of Ferndale and FutureWise on city annexation planning. Ferndale officials argued that Washington’s Growth Management Act leaves too much of the annexation process open-ended, which they said allows counties to approve incremental development in urban growth areas without adequate infrastructure planning, impact fees, or coordination with cities. They described Ferndale’s “annexation blueprint” or phased annexation plan as a way to set conditions for annexation up front, align capital facilities and service extensions with annexation timing, and provide clearer expectations for residents, developers, schools, and fire districts. They also urged stronger county standards in UGAs, including larger minimum lot sizes, limits on land division, and application of city roadway and impact-fee standards. FutureWise supported phased annexation planning, suggested countywide planning policy changes and financial incentives to encourage annexation, and noted that interlocal revenue-sharing and pre-annexation agreements could help address county and special-district concerns. Committee members asked about fire district revenue loss, county incentives to develop before annexation, and how to improve coordination; no vote was taken. The committee then received a primer and update from the State Building Code Council. Staff explained the council’s membership, committees, technical advisory groups, and rulemaking process, including normal, expedited, and emergency rulemaking. They outlined the current code cycle, with Group 2 proposals moving to CR-102 in August, hearings planned for November, final adoption due by December 1, and publication and implementation dates in 2026. The council also updated members on Senate Bill 5491 and the related single-exit/multiplex housing work, describing the technical advisory group process, public proposal period, and target completion timeline. Members asked about the difference between prescriptive and performance-based code approaches, how the legislature can better communicate intent in future bills, and how the council handles regional differences, especially for energy code and EV charging requirements. Council members said they are advisory and technical, stressed the importance of clear legislative direction, and noted that the council is willing to engage earlier on bills to help avoid ambiguity and enforcement problems. No formal action or vote was taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• But the reason why we think it's important to get put before the legislature this year, it really is
• It's not about the directors, their boards, or really even the members of the legislature.
• In 1963, the legislature ratified an agreement.
• The legislature, you know, it's okay if we don't have control over everything.
• I think we need to be a forward-looking legislature on some of these issues.

Committee: Senate State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• So what we recommend is that the Legislature retain the positions that are special funded.
• We tend not to take positions on legislation as it's still pending through the legislature.
• Our report to the legislature in January lays us out. All right. Thank you. I'll go back.
• Our report to the legislature in January lays us out. All right. Thank you. I'll go back.
• And we ask the Legislature...

Summary: The subcommittee met to discuss budget issues related to vacant positions across several natural resources and environmental departments, with no votes taken and all items held open for a future hearing. The Legislative Analyst’s Office and the Department of Finance explained the administration’s proposal to eliminate about 6,000 vacant positions statewide, including roughly 293 positions in the departments before the committee, as a way to capture salary savings and reduce flexible funding tied up in vacancies. The LAO recommended retaining special-funded positions, while noting that eliminating General Fund positions would reduce savings. Finance argued that vacancy levels have remained steady statewide, that departments need flexibility to manage operations and hard-to-fill jobs, and that some vacant positions can be reclassified to higher-priority work. Members raised concerns that many of the proposed eliminations would affect core public-safety, permitting, and environmental-protection functions. The Department of Fish and Wildlife said the cuts would affect permitting, environmental protection, and law enforcement, while State Parks said its proposed ranger reductions were chosen from historically vacant, hard-to-fill positions and would still leave many vacancies to fill through the academy. The Coastal Commission said its positions supported sea-level rise planning under SB 272. The Department of Pesticide Regulation and DTSC said the reductions would affect multiple program areas, though Finance said the special funds involved were not in structural deficit and the cuts could help avoid future fee increases. The State Water Resources Control Board said its proposed reductions were spread across programs, with public-health functions protected as much as possible. The committee then heard an overview from the State Water Resources Control Board on its responsibilities for water quality, water rights, drinking water, and funding for water infrastructure. Chair Joaquin Esquivel described ongoing work on the Bay-Delta Plan update, the Healthy Rivers and Landscapes voluntary agreements, and the need to actively administer water rights. Members also discussed the board’s response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s Sackett decision, which narrowed federal Clean Water Act jurisdiction. The board requested $2.6 million and 12 permanent positions to address resulting permitting and enforcement gaps; the LAO said the request met its high bar for new proposals and was supported by the board’s data and reporting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Within the legislature, we have the Auditor General, which is an appointed position.
• A future legislature could make really any change.
• And so I think as a part-time legislature, back Years after the fact.
• For example, the state of Nebraska is a unicameral legislature.
• They don't have two bodies in their legislature.

Summary: The Government Operations Subcommittee heard several measures focused on government structure, oversight, and public policy designations. The most debated bill was HJR 1325, which proposed a constitutional amendment to create a statewide Commissioner of Government Efficiency, abolish the lieutenant governor office and the Government Efficiency Task Force, and eliminate the constitutional requirement for an Auditor General appointment. Sponsors said the new commissioner would be a watchdog over waste, fraud, and abuse across state and local government, while opponents raised concerns about cost, single-subject issues, lack of implementation details, and whether existing oversight structures were sufficient. After extensive debate, the resolution was reported favorably by a recorded vote. The committee also approved HB 575, which redesignates the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America in Florida statute, and HB 1445, which requires certain state officials and agency heads to have stronger ties to Florida and, for some positions, to live in the county where their agency headquarters is located. HB 1445 drew questions about practicality and whether a proximity standard would be better than a strict county requirement, but the sponsor said he would continue working on that issue. Both bills were reported favorably, with HB 1445 passing unanimously. In addition, the committee unanimously approved HB 259, designating August 21 as Fentanyl Awareness and Education Day, with supporters emphasizing the need for public education about fentanyl overdoses. The committee also passed CS/HB 29, the public records and meetings bill linked to the social work licensure compact, which creates confidentiality and meeting exemptions needed for the compact to operate. Public testimony on that measure was supportive, and it too was reported favorably without opposition.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> legislators, not just the legislature. legislators, not just the legislature.
• </c> put because I think if the legislature put because I think if the legislature is<00:19:49.919><c
• </c><00:19:51.440><c> finds</c> is going to say the legislature finds is going to say the legislature
• </c> conflict when we have the legislature conflict when we have the legislature involved<00:26:43.360
• So with encouraged the legislature.

Bills: HB0117 , HB0126

Committee: House Labor, Health & Social Services

Transcript Highlights:

• I think our committee and our Legislature has doubled down.
• And so it just puts a very difficult set of decisions before the Legislature.
• I do want to start by thanking the Black Caucus and the Legislature.
• Here to thank the Legislature, especially Subcommittee Chair Dr.
• We also urge the Legislature to include funding for preservation.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee met to consider the 2026 Budget Act, which leaders said was the negotiated compromise with the Senate and was expected to move to the floor that evening. Opening remarks emphasized that the plan balances the budget over two years, reduces the structural deficit, and builds reserves, while also protecting core services in the face of federal cuts. Jason Sisney outlined the legislative budget framework and the likely floor bills, including AB 109, SB 110, SB 122, and SB 125. Department of Finance representative Eric Khali said the administration appreciated the two-year balanced approach and supported the modification in SB 122, while noting the package uses additional revenues and new spending to soften or reject some proposed cuts. Most of the discussion focused on major spending areas. Members and subcommittee chairs highlighted protections and additions for health care and human services, including rejecting the proposed Medi-Cal asset limit change, delaying premium increases, restoring clinic and dental funding, supporting distressed hospitals and county indigent care, and expanding county eligibility staffing to handle H.R. 1-related workload. Education members described record or expanded support for TK-12 schools, child care, special education, community colleges, teacher recruitment, and higher education, including a change to extend Cal Grant eligibility to age 30 for some community college students. Housing and homelessness funding was increased for HAP, multifamily housing, and the low-income housing tax credit, while public safety members pointed to investments in victims’ services, restorative justice, and prison closure savings. Several members also raised concerns or priorities tied to the budget deal. Some praised the package as a moral document that protects vulnerable Californians, immigrant communities, LGBTQ residents, seniors, and people with disabilities. Others noted unresolved issues, including the MCO tax’s impact on districts, the need for more support for local journalism, arts, biotech R&D incentives, transit and GGRF-related concerns, and the need for continued work on Prop. 98 and long-term fiscal resilience. The vice chair cautioned that despite the current progress, the state remains vulnerable to revenue volatility and warned that the budget should build more resilience against a possible downturn. No formal vote was taken in the portion provided, but the committee was preparing the budget package for floor action and final negotiations.

Transcript Highlights:

• legislature? legislature?
• We would certainly stand legislature.
• . legislature. legislature.
• </c><00:31:54.280><c> should</c> commission and the legislature should commission and the legislature
• </c><00:43:00.960><c> the</c> the foresight of the legislature the the foresight of the legislature the

Summary: The subcommittee met on May 8, 2026, to narrow 12 proposed Legislative Audit Commission evaluation topics down to 8-10 semi-finalists for a legislative survey. Deputy Legislative Auditor Jodi Munson Rodriguez reviewed the selection criteria and explained which topics were promising now, which might be better deferred to fall because of timing or data limitations, and which were less promising because OLA would have limited ability to add value. She identified the Board of Behavioral Health and Therapy, DHS Adult Day Services Licensing, DHS county service approvals and provision, MDH mortuary science program, MPCA feedlot permitting, Minnesota paid leave, the Office of Cannabis Management, and several other DHS-related items as candidates, while recommending that DHS system modernization be shifted to an IT audit and that corporate concentration be narrowed substantially if pursued. Members discussed several topics in detail. Representative Lee asked how a broad DHS county services topic could be narrowed and suggested providing legislators with an addendum listing possible subprograms so they would know what they were ranking; Munson Rodriguez said OLA could add a few suggested subtopics and tailor the survey materials. Representative Hansen urged that the MPCA feedlot permitting review focus on effectiveness and environmental and health impacts, not just speed, and Munson Rodriguez said those kinds of questions could be added. The Office of Cannabis Management was viewed as promising but probably too new to evaluate immediately, and the MDH mortuary science program was also seen as worthwhile but potentially delayed because of overlap with other MDH licensing work. The Minnesota research tax credit drew the most extended discussion. Munson Rodriguez said it remained a weak fit for OLA because of limited data and unclear program goals, and Senator Rest argued it would be better handled by the Department of Revenue’s research staff or possibly the Legislative Budget Office’s tax expenditure research section. Representative Lee asked whether OLA’s financial audit division could review whether the credit “pays for itself,” but Munson Rodriguez said that would require econometric analysis outside the financial audit division’s normal work. The committee did not take a formal vote in the portion provided, but the chair indicated the tax credit issue should be brought to the full commission agenda, and the meeting continued with additional topic review, including the Attorney General Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, which staff said was heavily federally controlled and already reviewed by federal OIG, limiting OLA’s likely impact.

Transcript Highlights:

• But it's largely to maintain. where the legislature left last session.
• To that end, we encourage the legislature to adopt the formula...
• We are grateful to the legislature for the.
• The legislature provided the initial seed funding for that last legislative session.
• And again, that was started from the legislature, but. philanthropic support as well.

Committee: House Appropriations - S/C on Article III

Transcript Highlights:

• The legislature would set the uniform procedure for this provision.
• The legislature on homesteaders in their jurisdictions.
• That is really up to the Legislature, after it passes in November, for the Legislature to come back and
• The Legislature would allow for them, if they needed to, by referendum, and um... ...the Legislature
• With this amendment, if it is enacted and the Legislature chooses, you know, chooses, the Legislature

Summary: The Committee on Appropriations took up SJR 2-F, a proposed constitutional amendment to reduce property taxes by lowering assessment caps on non-homestead property, expanding homestead exemptions over time, and allowing local governments to increase exemptions further. The sponsor argued the measure would provide broad property tax relief while requiring revenues to be directed to core services such as public safety, education, infrastructure, and natural resource projects, with a trust fund intended to help local governments transition. Senators raised concerns about the lack of a fiscal score, the effect on counties, cities, school districts, and special districts, and whether the proposal would shift costs to fees or other taxes. Several amendments were debated. Senator Polsky’s amendment to explicitly authorize user fees and non-ad valorem assessments to offset lost property tax revenue failed. Senator Avila’s amendment broadening permissible uses of ad valorem revenue to include county constitutional officers and other expenditures approved by local governing bodies was adopted after debate over whether the bill would otherwise underfund essential functions. Senator Smith’s sunset amendment, which would have made the constitutional changes expire after five years, failed. Senator Smith’s amendment to allow tourism development tax revenue to support public safety and education also failed. Senator Graal’s amendment removing the constitutional trust fund language was adopted, with supporters arguing the Constitution should not promise an unfunded account. Additional late-file amendments were considered. Senator Berman’s proposal to change the ballot title to more neutrally describe the measure as affecting property taxes and local community service reductions failed. Senator Trumbull’s amendment removing school board ad valorem taxes from the proposal was adopted, preserving school taxes. Senator Smith’s amendment narrowing the non-homestead assessment cap reduction to small businesses only failed. The committee then returned to the bill as amended and continued questioning the sponsor about eligibility, fiscal impacts, and whether the proposal could lead to local governments offsetting lost revenue through special assessments or other charges.

Transcript Highlights:

• The legislature will figure out how they want to pay for it.
• And then that becomes conversation for the governor to consider in his proposal to the legislature.
• And then that becomes conversation for the governor to consider in his proposal to the legislature.
• The legislature. And that becomes also an issue for our budget writers as well.
• Or maybe the legislature then... ...from coming from the governor's office.

Committee: Joint Select Committee on Pension Policy

Summary: The Executive Committee of the State Committee on Pension Policy approved the June minutes and received updates from staff and counsel. The attorney reported on two class action matters: the Fowler/Probst Fowler teacher interest case, where a court ordered the state to pay $118 million and the state has appealed and sought a stay, and the Dawson case challenging last year’s HB 2034 related to the LEOFF 1 plan, where the complaint was amended and the state plans to move to dismiss. The actuary also provided a brief update on asset smoothing and offered to provide additional education on the topic. The committee then focused on interim work planning and the September agenda. Members discussed an ad hoc COLA for PERS and TRS Plan 1 retirees, with staff explaining options for making a COLA part of the base budget or otherwise structuring it. The committee agreed to move forward with a bill for a Plan 1 ad hoc COLA and to have it considered in October, with a request for fiscal analysis. The committee also heard from a Washington State Patrol Troopers Association representative about survivor medical benefits, and staff said a cost estimate could be prepared for October if the proposal included retroactive coverage. For September, the committee set the agenda to include PERS eligibility for animal control officers, a LEOFF 1 medical study update with possible action, and the Plan 1 ad hoc COLA item. Staff said the work plan would also add the ongoing Plan 1 COLA and survivor medical topics to October, along with preliminary 2027 meeting dates. The meeting ended with informal approval of the September agenda and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is incumbent upon the legislature to address these shortcomings.
• I haven't heard anybody in the Legislature not talk about enforcement in the illicit market.
• And again, would like to work with the Legislature on solutions on the policy side as well.
• And it sounds like we might have some work to do as a Legislature to make sure that happens.
• And in like any situation, you can have the Legislature figure this out.

Transcript Highlights:

• Here are showing themselves here in the state legislature.
• Diego is shadowing me today in exploring the complexities of our state legislature.
• will be the next state legislature in this House.
• But this legislature doesn't learn because they don't care.
• But this legislature doesn't learn because they don't care.

Summary: The Assembly convened after a quorum call, adopted the previous day’s journal, and handled several procedural motions, including suspending rules to allow committee notices and moving some bills and items on and off the file. Members also introduced a number of guests and fellows on the floor, including Equality California Comcast Fellows, tribal youth visitors, interns, local officials, and community representatives. On the floor file, the Assembly concurred in Senate amendments to AB 1216 (TK-12 omnibus education technical changes), AB 377 (high-speed rail), and AB 951 (health care coverage), and adopted ACR 103 declaring July 14-18, 2025 as California Western Monarch Protection Week. The body also adopted AJR 18, a resolution calling for an official legislative apology to California Native Americans for historic injustices and affirming support for healing and reconciliation, and ACR 71 designating a portion of State Route 101 as the Little Saigon Freeway. Each of these measures drew supportive remarks from multiple members, and co-author rolls were opened before final adoption. The Assembly also adopted SCR 66 proclaiming Law Day, after a lengthy partisan debate over the rule of law, executive power, and recent federal and state actions; the resolution was ultimately adopted by voice vote after 51 co-authors were added. Members then adopted SJR 3 urging Congress to reverse SNAP cuts and protect CalFresh benefits, with debate focused on food insecurity, fraud, work requirements, and the impact on low-income Californians; the resolution passed with 69 ayes and no noes after 70 co-authors were added. SB 757, authorizing local governments to use nuisance abatement liens or special assessments to collect abatement costs, also passed 68-0, and ACR 94 on anti-microbial resistance was adopted on the consent calendar. The session concluded with adjournments in memory honoring Jane Day, agricultural leader John C. Harris, and Willie Earl Arno, followed by announcements of committee meetings and the schedule for the next floor session. The Assembly adjourned until Thursday, July 17, 2025, at 9 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so we never like when we get a request from the legislature about how long does it take, on average
• And so we never like when we get a request from the legislature about how long does it take on average
• And then once the legislature makes its appropriation, they use this. Around the state.
• We have any number of information requests from the legislature.
• That's where we mine a lot of data that we include in that report to the legislature.

Committee: Senate Appropriations Committee on Criminal and Civil Justice

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Criminal and Civil Justice met to continue its review of performance measurement in the criminal justice system. The first presentation, from State Courts Administrator Eric McClure, described how the court system uses multiple data sources to track filings, dispositions, clearance rates, workload, and support services, and how those data inform judge need, budget requests, resource allocation, and court administration. He also discussed ongoing efforts to improve case-level reporting, the use of case management systems in trial and appellate courts, and performance efforts in problem-solving courts and civil case management. McClure noted that the legislature provides dedicated funding for problem-solving courts and for medication-assisted treatment, and that the courts are required to report outcomes and monitor compliance with contract requirements. Melanie Brown-Whor of the Florida Behavioral Health Association then reviewed the medication-assisted treatment program funded through the courts budget. She said the program combines medication with counseling and behavioral supports, serves people involved in or at risk of criminal justice involvement, and has expanded over time to include additional medications and more counties. She reported improved engagement and retention, with more than 10,000 people screened over five years, about 9,200 receiving medication, and over 6,600 successfully discharged. Senators asked about racial and ethnic demographics, hospital referrals, and how services are delivered; Brown-Whor explained that local community providers deliver treatment under contract and that the program is working to improve data reporting and consistency. The Department of Law Enforcement then presented on investigations, forensics, and criminal justice information services. Deputy Commissioner Vaden Pollard outlined FDLE’s strategic plan and major investigative priorities, including cybercrime, targeted violence, crimes against children, mutual aid, and the SAFE fentanyl eradication program. He said SAFE has led to major seizures, arrests, and a reported decline in fentanyl deaths. Director Jason Bundy described FDLE’s forensic laboratory operations, DNA and rapid DNA capabilities, cold case and missing persons work, and the staffing and turnaround-time challenges tied to complex evidence testing. Director Lucy Saunders reviewed FDLE’s criminal history, biometric, incident-based crime reporting, and criminal justice transparency systems, noting that Florida is still transitioning agencies from summary reporting to incident-based reporting. The committee raised questions about Rapid DNA deployment, cold case coordination, and the slow pace of NIBRS/FIBRS adoption. No votes were taken, and the meeting adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are a few steps the Legislature may wish to take.
• We also may suggest that the Legislature...
• We urge the Legislature today to act boldly, as well as the Governor.
• So we think the Legislature, you guys came to our need.
• And in order for that to happen, the Legislature has to fund and take action.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Accountability and Oversight held its fifth hearing of the year to examine the newly enacted federal H.R. 1 and its effects on California. Members and the chair described the law as a major threat to state health, food, education, and climate programs, and emphasized that California would not be able to fully backfill the federal cuts. Several members also highlighted the bill’s tax provisions, including temporary deductions for tips, overtime, seniors, and auto loan interest, while warning that the largest benefits flow to higher-income taxpayers and that major cuts to Medi-Cal, CalFresh, and clean-energy incentives are delayed or phased in over time. The Legislative Analyst’s Office and the Department of Finance presented detailed overviews of the bill’s likely impacts and implementation timelines. They identified the main affected areas as health care coverage and financing, food assistance, higher education, personal income taxes, and clean-energy/electric-vehicle credits. They explained that H.R. 1 limits provider taxes used to finance Medi-Cal, adds work and redetermination requirements, restricts CalFresh eligibility and increases state costs, changes student loan and Pell Grant rules, extends and modifies federal tax provisions, and phases out many clean-energy credits. Finance also noted major rescissions of Inflation Reduction Act funds, new border and immigration enforcement spending, and the possibility of PAYGO sequestration if Congress does not act to offset the deficit increase. During member questions, the committee focused on likely enrollment losses, administrative burdens, and fiscal exposure for the state and counties. Witnesses said many details still depend on federal guidance, but they estimated significant impacts on Medi-Cal, CalFresh, and graduate/professional student borrowing, and noted that California’s high CalFresh error rate could increase state costs. UC testified that the elimination of Graduate PLUS loans would affect thousands of professional students, especially in health, law, and other high-cost programs. Members asked for follow-up data on county, health, and tax impacts, and staff agreed to provide additional tables and estimates as implementation guidance becomes clearer. Public commenters from counties, early childhood advocates, health coalitions, disability rights groups, immigrant-rights organizations, and other stakeholders urged the Legislature to mitigate the law’s effects. They warned of higher county costs, reduced access to health care and food assistance, increased administrative burdens, and harm to children, immigrants, people with disabilities, and low-income families. Several urged new state revenue solutions and stronger protections for Medi-Cal, CalFresh, child care, and home- and community-based services. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational and ended with a commitment to continue monitoring federal guidance and to work on state responses in the budget process.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> lobbying report that uh the legislature lobbying report that uh the legislature asked<00:00:54.120
• </c><00:19:44.120><c> approve</c> recommended in the legislature approve recommended in the legislature
• </c><00:50:26.880><c> but</c> here advocating in the legislature but here advocating in the legislature
• <01:03:18.559><c> has</c> legislature has legislature has abdicated<01:03:21.000><c> authority</c><01
• </c> represent townships at the legislature represent townships at the legislature now<01:09:52.600><

Committee: House Elections Finance and Government Operations

Transcript Highlights:

• junior that amends AB 109, the Budget Act of 2026, to represent a budget agreement between the Legislature
• We'll also hear... ...between the Legislature and the administration.
• So for this legislature to take the responsibility and say that we realize our economy is volatile.
• Under 1D, that requires annual reporting to the Legislature.
• J requires DMV to notify the Legislature at least 30 days in advance.

Committee: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review

Transcript Highlights:

• And these are decisions that we've made, that we in the Legislature have made.
• When we come before the Legislature, we propose a fund source, and the Legislature can choose to deny
• So I know that's sometimes a concern for the Legislature.
• We asked the legislature to fully fund AB 617.
• Along with funding, we urge the legislature to reform the program.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so the Legislature, of course, plays a key role in oversight.
• And so the Legislature does have some...
• And these are all areas the Legislature could explore.
• And this area also poses a lot of barriers to the Legislature.
• And so what are you anticipating that the legislature should be doing?

Committee: House Health

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there a directive from the legislature, or is it within the authority's purview?
• Those are the legislature. But I really look forward.
• The legislature abdicated a lot of their responsibility to CARB.
• And I certainly appreciate the recognition that the legislature creates the law, that the legislature
• Is the, as the legislature made that role clear? Is that sufficient?

Committee: Senate Rules