Transcript Highlights:

• A judicial officer, the Commonwealth, is making that determination. Released from custody.
• A judicial officer, the Commonwealth, is making that determination.
• A track may be laid out based on rider experience, and that input can be valuable.
• And in some instances, these actions occurred without judicial warrants.
• It means requiring school districts to have clear... ...without a judicial warrant.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on several public safety bills, with testimony first on S.2681, Colby’s Law, which would establish safety standards for BMX and motocross tracks. Supporters, including the family of a child killed at a track, argued the bill is needed because some tracks lack basic protections such as barriers, emergency plans, on-site medical staff, and adequate track maintenance. A motocross track representative opposed the bill as overregulation that could impose major costs and argued existing safety efforts and voluntary safety committees are preferable. No vote was taken during the hearing. The committee also heard testimony on S.2680, which would expand emergency preparedness requirements around aging nuclear power plants and nuclear waste sites from a 10-mile to a 50-mile radius. Supporters from Cape Cod Downwinders, Massachusetts Peace Action, physicians, and other advocates said current law is outdated and insufficient, citing risks from radioactive waste storage, limited federal oversight, and the need for broader evacuation and emergency planning. Testifiers urged the bill’s passage, and no action was taken. A major portion of the hearing focused on the Protect Act, H.5158, dealing with limits on cooperation between state/local agencies and federal civil immigration enforcement. Sheriffs testified about how ICE detainers and notification requests work in practice, emphasizing discretion, public safety, and the difference between sentenced prisoners and pretrial detainees. Supporters from labor, education, and health care groups said immigrant communities are living in fear and asked for stronger protections, including bans on 287(g) agreements and clearer limits on ICE activity in schools, hospitals, and other sensitive locations. The hearing also included testimony on H.4697 regarding training and certification of constables and civil deputy sheriffs, with the Hampshire County sheriff saying sheriffs are already working with POST and MPTC on training standards and that the bill may be duplicative.

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, so then you go on to the Judicial Council section, right?
• Yeah, so then you go on to the Judicial Council section, right?
• Yeah, so then you go on to the Judicial Council section, right?
• Yeah, so then you go on to the Judicial Council section, right?
• Yeah, so then you go on to the Judicial Council section, right?

Keywords: 928, house, all

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

Transcript Highlights:

• I like it better in the judicial I like it better in the judicial protection<00:08:42.400> and
• way the judicial way the judicial protection<00:08:54.520> works.
• family members in the judicial family members in the judicial protection<00:08:59.080> law
• being put on through judicial fiat. being put on through judicial fiat.
• properties transferred through judicial properties transferred through judicial sales.<00:47:24.520

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There's a difference between allowing the judicial process to function and sabotaging it.
• That merit-based process manifests itself in a judicial nominating board.
• <00:50:19.280> nominating as determined by the judicial nominating as determined by the judicial
• nonpartisan tradition of judicial nonpartisan tradition of judicial nomination<00:50:28.720>
• He reminded us of the danger of the judicial nominating process becoming politicized.

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And right now I'm a deputy district attorney at the 3rd Judicial District.
• So that is pretty much my experience with competency issues and also with juvenile issues.
• I understand the judicial system.
• But really, there are three evaluators that have served the 3rd Judicial District.
• So that's just my personal opinion based on my personal experience. Thank you, Chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• for me and I I I hope my experience for me and I I I hope my experience helps<00:10:37.600> in
• addresses that I got off the judicial addresses that I got off the judicial branch<00:23:09.159>
• six slide seven is our judicial six slide seven is our judicial headcount<00:39:01.359> we
• in judicial procedures based on my career, but I had very little experience in legislative procedures
• It's quasi-judicial.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met for its first meeting of the new session with opening remarks, member introductions, and a discussion of committee logistics. Members described their backgrounds and priorities, including criminal justice, right-to-know and privacy issues, domestic violence, death-with-dignity legislation, abortion, firearms, landlord-tenant policy, housing, and technology/privacy concerns. The chair noted there were already 34 bills assigned to the committee and expected more, and said the committee would likely continue to have a heavy workload this session. The chair also outlined how the committee would operate: meetings would generally be on Wednesdays, with possible Mondays as needed; hearings would not require a quorum, but executive sessions would; and members were asked to provide updated phone numbers and email addresses, especially cell numbers. He explained that the committee would continue its practice of seating members in a mixed partisan arrangement to encourage communication, and that the new clerk had joined the committee. A significant portion of the meeting focused on procedures for executive sessions and meeting times. The chair said the committee would follow the traditional rule allowing executive sessions on bills heard that day if proper notice was given, but he would avoid taking up controversial matters without full attendance. Members then discussed whether meetings should start at 9, 9:30, or 10 a.m., with concerns raised about long commutes, evening obligations, and winter driving after dark. No formal vote was taken in the portion provided, but the chair indicated he would try to accommodate the committee’s preference while balancing the workload.

Transcript Highlights:

• I oppose this bill mostly because the experience within my bill mostly because the experience within
• SB 1650 stipulates that this judicial immunity does not apply if the function was completed by a judicial
• This does not interfere with judicial independence.
• Judicial decisions, findings, or opinions.
• The police have a judicially issued arrest warrant.

Bills: SB1067, SB1234, SB1285, SB1295, SB1392, SB1413, SB1436, SB1470, SB1476, SB1489, SB1512, SB1535, SB1540, SB1556, SB1568, SB1569, SB1570, SB1573, SB1585, SB1609, SB1627, SB1634, SB1635, SB1644, SB1647, SB1648, SB1650, SB1653, SB1654, SB1655, SB1656, SB1657, SB1658, SB1661, SB1662, SB1664, SB1666, SB1667, SB1669, SB1709, SB1720, SB1723, SB1725, SB1743, SB1746, SB1748, SB1755, SB1786, SB1820, SB1822, SB1829, SCR1027, SCR1040, SCR1048

Keywords: tax lien, property tax lien, real property tax lien, foreclosure, right of redemption, redeem, excess proceeds, county abatement lien, abatement lien, lien priority, assessment lien, easement, county treasurer, certificate of purchase, tax delinquency, delinquent property taxes, property owner equity, judgment foreclosure, title report, Arizona Revised Statutes

Summary: The committee approved the minutes and then took up a long agenda of election, criminal justice, corrections, and county-government bills. Early election measures included SB 1436, requiring ballot language for certain school override and bond elections to estimate the secondary property tax impact; SB 1568, requiring election systems’ internal clocks to stay within 60 seconds of official time and making violations a misdemeanor; SB 1569, limiting special election board members from collecting or processing voter registration while assisting confined voters; and SB 1746, requiring voting centers to supplement rather than replace precinct polling places, requiring public offices and schools to provide polling space, and closing schools on primary and general election days for in-service training. SB 1436 and SB 1568 were eventually given do-pass recommendations, SB 1569 also passed committee, and SB 1746 passed despite concerns raised about school safety and access. Some bills were held earlier in the meeting and voted on later after testimony concluded. The committee also heard SB 1295, which would allow the Department of Corrections to release certain seriously ill inmates to contracted medical institutions if they qualify for ALTCS, with an amendment replacing disability language with illness-based criteria; the sponsor described it as a cost-saving measure that could shift care costs to federal programs. SB 1067, the so-called Gila County blight bill, would let counties place abatement costs for rubbish, debris, and dilapidated buildings on property tax bills and liens; county officials testified that it would help recover cleanup costs for blighted properties and heirs’ property, and it passed unanimously. SB 1413 would remove the $100,000 cap on restitution for serious injury or death caused by moving violations and passed after the sponsor said the cap had already been found unconstitutional. SB 1476 would make child neglect a class six felony when a custodian exposes a newborn to dangerous or narcotic drugs or causes fetal alcohol syndrome; supporters framed it as accountability and child protection, while opponents warned it could deter treatment and worsen family separation. The bill passed on a split vote. Later, the committee considered several criminal-justice and public-safety bills. SB 1512 would expand the definition of vulnerable adult and broaden “position of trust and confidence” for theft cases involving seniors and other vulnerable adults; testimony highlighted scams and exploitation of grieving or isolated elders, and the bill passed. SB 1585 would regulate sex-offender-specific evaluations, treatment, and polygraph services through the Sex Offender Management Board, add a surcharge fund and assessment on sexual-offense convictions, and appropriate funds to DPS; supporters said it would create uniform standards, while opponents questioned the need for additional fees, and it passed. SB 1662 would require probation conditions to be the least restrictive necessary and tailored to a defendant’s risk and needs; supporters from the Justice Action Network and criminal-defense advocates said it would improve rehabilitation and public safety, and it passed. The committee also began SB 1664, which would change constable petition-signature requirements in Maricopa and Pima counties, but the transcript cuts off before the full discussion and vote on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• intend to stop a judicial warrant to be executed by an ICE agent or anyone else.
• I just had a question for Judicial Council.
• County, so that way this wouldn't be an impact for Judicial Council? Well, L.A.
• The Judicial Council decides which counties have the feasibility to do that.
• and driver experiences, the vast majority of experiences are safe.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And then our judges have judicial performance evaluations.
• So let's talk about the First Judicial Magistrate cases.
• They wanted everything to go to the First Judicial District.
• Um, if the resources are needed, as I did in the First Judicial.
• The judicial ruling is that it is likely unconstitutional.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has held that this authority is a continuous power absolute
• Each branch, to some extent, exercises executive, legislative, and judicial powers.
• Lots of auditing experience.
• In your experience, does the GAO clear auditors to conduct audits? Is there a process?
• My experience is that the GAO would not clear anyone in any way.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The subcommittee hearing focused on whether the Office of the State Auditor may constitutionally audit the Massachusetts Legislature under Chapter 250 of the Acts of 2024 and what such an audit could include under generally accepted government auditing standards. Chair Cindy Friedman opened by explaining the background: voters approved Ballot Question 1 in November 2024, the law took effect in January 2025, and the Auditor then initiated audits of both chambers. The chair said the subcommittee was seeking expert testimony because the proposed audit scope, constitutionality, and possible bias concerns remained unresolved. Public testimony was invited, but no members of the public pre-registered; written testimony remained open for a short period after the hearing. The hearing then proceeded with invited experts on constitutional law/state government and auditing-related issues. Professor Lawrence Friedman testified that the ballot initiative’s approval by the Attorney General and by voters did not resolve constitutional questions, and he argued Chapter 250 violates the Massachusetts Constitution. He said the Legislature has constitutional authority to set its own rules and manage its proceedings, and that an executive-branch audit would intrude on legislative deliberation, speech and debate protections, and separation of powers. He also warned that even audits of supposedly administrative matters could become a vehicle for repeated document demands and litigation that would indirectly burden legislative functioning. In questioning, senators pressed him on the line between administrative and deliberative functions, the role of the Attorney General versus the courts, the possibility of retroactive audit scope, and whether prior legislative consent to audits mattered; he said prior consent would not bind future legislatures and that constitutionality is ultimately for the courts. Professor Ray La Raja also opposed the audit, framing it as a threat to institutional independence and representative democracy. He argued that allowing an executive-branch official to audit the Legislature without consent would upset separation of powers, chill internal debate, and create a precedent for broader executive intrusion. He said voters often support “transparency” reforms without fully appreciating institutional consequences, and that legislatures should defend their autonomy, especially amid what he described as broader executive overreach nationally. Senators asked about chilling effects, the practical distinction between administrative and core legislative functions, and whether the courts or the Legislature should resolve the issue; he said the courts would ultimately adjudicate disputes, but the Legislature should not waive its constitutional authority lightly. Jean Kempthorne took the opposite view, arguing the audit is permissible and should proceed. She said the state auditor is a constitutional officer accountable directly to the people, that the audit power can be expanded by statute, and that separation of powers does not require watertight compartments. She contended the audit would not displace core legislative powers because the auditor can only evaluate operations, report findings, and make recommendations. She also argued the Legislature itself already conducts audits of other branches, so it is inconsistent to claim an audit of the Legislature is unconstitutional. In response to senators’ questions, she said there are guardrails against truly intrusive requests, but that the administrative-versus-legislative distinction is not a workable bright line; she suggested disputes should be handled case by case, with objections, negotiation, or litigation if specific requests go too far. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, we want our judicial system to be fair and impartial.
• Studies consistently demonstrate that implicit biases affect judicial decisions.
• We all know this, we all have this experience.
• This bill addresses a critical challenge facing our judicial system.
• By guests seeking active memorable experiences.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is judicial review de novo?
• I don't think it will fly judicially. I don't think it'll go.
• Katherine, I think I heard you say you didn't think this is going to pass judicial muster.
• into the judicial branch?
• <00:31:36.919> branch<00:31:37.720> um into our judicial branch um into our judicial

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 90 / Senate Bill 17, a birth-related measure backed by the Kentucky Birth Coalition. Sponsors said the bill had been worked on for several years and described changes including a transfer agreement, insurance requirements, proximity to a hospital, informed consent, and accreditation/medical director standards that helped win neutral or non-opposition from the Hospital Association. The bill was reported favorably after a roll call vote with unanimous support. The committee then heard Senate Bill 65, presented by Senator Steve West and Representative Derrick Lewis. They said the bill would make regulations found deficient through the committee review process null and void by statute, and would bar agencies from reissuing the same or similar language for up to a year. Supporters argued this was needed to hold agencies accountable because deficiency findings alone had not led to action. After questions about specific Medicaid behavioral health regulations and concerns about legislative overreach, the bill passed the committee on a roll call vote, with some members passing or explaining reservations. Finally, the committee considered Senate Bill 84, with a House committee substitute. Sponsors said the substitute was intended to strengthen the bill and reflect the U.S. Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision by ending Chevron deference and requiring courts, not agencies, to interpret law. Opponents, including Audrey Ernsberger and Katherine Hargraves, argued the bill would intrude on the judiciary, violate separation of powers, and could harm public health, environmental, and workplace protections. Committee members also raised concerns about whether the bill told courts what standard to use; sponsors responded that agencies could still present persuasive arguments, but courts should not defer to them. The committee substitute was adopted, and the bill then passed the committee on a roll call vote, with several members passing or expressing constitutional concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• You've heard from judicial partners or people in the judicial system.
• I'm very concerned about the Seventh Judicial District and the 11th Judicial District.
• About the Seventh Judicial District and the 11th Judicial District, I know that the 11th Judicial District
• The 11th Judicial District and the Seventh Judicial District need to be adjusted. Would you agree?
• For the unified judicial budget? Okay.

Keywords: 996, all

Summary: The committee first heard an Aging and Long-Term Services Department budget presentation comparing the LFC and executive recommendations. The main differences were in the Aging Network, Adult Protective Services, Program Support, and Long-Term Care Division, especially the executive’s proposed $10 million infusion into the Kiki Savadra Senior Dignity Fund and $6.2 million for expanding New Mexico Care. LFC staff explained that the committee recommendation was lower in general fund and fund-balance use, while the executive emphasized rising senior population needs, meal and transportation costs, and the cost savings of keeping older adults at home. The secretary also reviewed the department’s special requests, including the conference on aging, outreach, emergency preparedness, and the Kiki fund, and described New Mexico Care’s growth, its evaluation results, and the department’s plan to separate Kiki into its own accounting fund. Members largely focused on senior services, rural meal delivery, transportation, caregiver support, and the Kiki fund. Several members urged stronger support for non-metro aging providers and for New Mexico Care, citing its role in keeping seniors out of nursing homes and the program’s reported savings and outcomes. Questions also covered eligibility, background checks for caregivers, respite care, dementia and Alzheimer’s screening, and whether Kiki funds can support home modifications such as ramps. The committee then voted to adopt the LFC recommendation with one executive language change: adding the executive’s page 14 language allowing an additional 12.5% distribution for initial payments to aging network providers at the start of FY27. Representative Dow opposed the motion. The committee then moved to the Attorney General’s budget. LFC staff explained that the office’s budget relies heavily on the Consumer Settlement Fund, with both recommendations reducing general fund revenue while increasing settlement-fund use, and that performance measures were in consensus. The Attorney General said the office was not seeking more general fund, but wanted greater ability to use funds it recovers. He highlighted major consumer and public safety work, including litigation against major social media and AI platforms, a case involving Snapchat and child exploitation/extortion, the statewide crime gun intelligence center, efforts to address oilfield theft, work on missing and murdered Indigenous persons, and efforts to protect federal funds coming into New Mexico.

Bills: HB 3902, HB 4420, HB 3269, HB 469, HB 336, HB 316, HB 5396, HB 993, HB 1342, HB 5216, HB 2046, HB 2188, HB 2450, HB 2813, HB 2857, HB 4075, HB 2911, HB 4682, HB 3117, HB 3253, HB 3442, HB 4820, HB 4336, HB 5356, HB 3669, HB 3428, HB 5465, HB 3662, HB 2590, HB 2288, HB 1886, HB 3458, HB 5603, HB 5620, HB 1489, HB 4101, HB 4990, HB 5685, HB 4950, HB 4980, HB 5684, HB 3507, HB 3566, HB 4487, HB 4462, HB 4876, HB 4915, HB 4663, HB 5570, HB 2929, HB 5261, HB 2920, HB 4642, HB 4746, HB 1609, HB 5403, HB 5453, HB 3844, HB 2336, HB 1572, HB 1226, HB 2806, HB 2617, HB 2827, HB 3948, HB 3945, HB 4266, HB 4542, HB 3319, HB 1772, HB 2496, HB 1970, HB 3434, HB 5545, HB 5577, HCR 59, HCR 135, HB 4, HB 46, HB 3221, HB 1403, HB 3892, HB 4234, HB 722, HB 4105, HB 4413, HB 170, HB 551, HB 3053, HB 3142, HB 3180, HB 3722, HB 1794, HB 1784, HB 1581, HB 2530, HB 4308, HB 1896, HB 2974, HB 3359, HB 4580, HB 2458, HB 2215, HB 3332, HB 2278, HB 3015, HB 3151, HB 1368, HB 40, HB 101, HB 112, HB 146, HB 214, HB 413, HB 1523, HB 493, HB 521, HB 594, HB 557, HB 305, HB 549, HB 854, HB 1057, HB 1052, HB 842, HB 3174, HB 3196, HB 824, HB 1039, HB 2529, HB 2713, HB 4936, HB 4995, HB 4830, HB 4864, HB 5219, HB 5263, HB 5154, HB 2674, HB 5525, SB 529, SB 541, SB 2004, SB 1012, SB 2269, SB 1886, SB 1236, SB 693, SB 2308, HB 2486, HB 4862, HB 4689, HB 4520, HB 2225, HB 168, HJR 218, HB 4921, HB 5623, HB 2494, HB 2545, HB 2587, HB 2625, HB 5520, HB 5436, HB 4926, HB 1573, HB 5165, HB 4811, HB 5081, HB 4755, HB 3179, HB 4310, HB 4611, HB 2159, HB 4626, HB 3637, HB 3153, HB 3066, HB 2786, HB 2966, HB 638, HB 640, HB 876, HB 497, HB 5539, HB 4809, HB 5308, HB 4687, HB 4070, HB 4421, HB 4412, HB 3284, HB 3369, HB 3420, HB 3449, HB 4098, HB 4281, HB 4120, HB 4504, HB 4370, HB 1106, HB 2370, HB 2404, HB 3863, HB 2407, HB 2253, HB 2273, HB 2040, HB 1586, HB 3788, HB 3993, HB 4690, HB 4309, HB 4696, HB 2308, HB 1142, HB 1533, HB 1621, HB 2242, HB 2012, HB 2193, HB 2442, HB 2464, HB 2348, HB 2313, HB 2289, HB 1942, HB 2011, HB 1629, HB 2993, HB 3592, HB 3824, HB 4076, HB 4535, HB 4623, HB 4773, HB 1091, HB 5115, HB 5515, HB 3372, HB 5659, HB 127, HB 386, HB 115, HB 2868, HB 1249, HB 4766, HB 3720, HB 4656, HB 4879, HB 105, HB 5383, HB 4621, HB 5431, HB 5678, HB 5534, HB 4174, HB 4212, HB 3954, HB 3966, HB 3636, HB 3918, HB 1422, HB 4765, HB 4732, HB 4742, HB 5122, HB 4518, HB 5084, HB 3986, HB 4045, HB 4144, HB 3911, HB 3976, HB 4473, HB 3425, HB 3641, HB 3642, HB 3475, HB 3509, HB 3424, HB 3383, HB 4744, HB 4531, HB 4539, HB 3159, HB 5228, HB 5370, HB 4359, HB 4398, HB 4443, HB 4466, HB 3861, HB 3849, HB 4240, HB 4706, HB 4685, HB 5354, HB 5141, HB 5686, HB 3629, HB 3554, HB 3567, HB 2015, HB 3575, HB 5381, HB 1431, HB 3514, HB 4614, HB 4546, HB 4683, HB 5681, HB 5673, HB 5663, HB 4271, HB 4350, HB 4035, HB 3807, HB 3812, HB 3552, HB 3540, HB 3715, HB 3710, HB 3664, HB 4196, HB 4233, HB 4173, HB 1998, HB 3333, HB 3510, HB 4222, HB 2070, HB 2854, HB 2347, HB 113, HB 983, HB 4847, HB 1449, HB 3833, HB 5151, HB 265, HB 1845, HB 782, HB 108, HB 1960, HB 158, HB 1954, HB 1955, HB 2512, HB 605, HB 2581, HB 2803, HB 627, HB 2667, HB 1738, HB 636, HB 3679, HB 2638, HB 2655, HB 871, HB 2438, HB 1107, HB 1765, HB 1822, HB 2153, HB 4099, HB 3732, HB 3171, HB 3178, HB 3182, HB 3749, HB 2814, HB 3977, HB 4204, HB 4207, HB 4449, HB 1820, HB 1876, HB 1939, HB 1347, HB 2593, HB 2136, HB 2132, HB 2658, HB 2413, HB 2757, HB 2080, HB 3154, HB 3063, HB 3009, HB 3448, HB 3006, HB 2844, HB 3241, HB 3680, HB 3169, HB 2078, HB 2507, HB 4559, HB 3946, HB 3460, HB 3405, HB 475, HB 3463, HB 3441, HB 3520, HB 2060, HB 4731, HB 4991, HB 1991, HB 5596, HB 2014, HB 2142, HB 2673, HB 2731, HB 2417, HB 2399, HB 2301, HB 3335, HB 3234, HB 3320, HB 5573, HB 4848, HB 4748, HB 4769, HB 4795, HB 2086, HB 2234, HB 2203, HB 4916, HB 5624, HB 4505, HB 139, HB 5093, HB 5302, HB 5402, HB 5606, HB 2333, HB 4630, HB 4701, HB 2583, HB 2983, HB 4924, HB 3339, HB 3793, HB 3631, HB 4882, HB 5509, HB 5499, HB 5430, HB 5561, HB 5611, HB 5043, HB 5064, HB 3733, HB 3781, HB 3219, HB 32, HB 4515, HB 5348, HB 3902, HB 4420, HB 3269, HB 469, HB 336, HB 316, HB 5396, HB 993, HB 1342, HB 5216, HB 2046, HB 2188, HB 2450, HB 2813, HB 2857, HB 4075, HB 2911, HB 4682, HB 3117, HB 3253, HB 3442, HB 4820, HB 4336, HB 5356, HB 3669, HB 3428, HB 5465, HB 3662, HB 2590, HB 2288, HB 1886, HB 3458, HB 5603, HB 5620, HB 1489, HB 4101, HB 4990, HB 5685, HB 4950, HB 4980, HB 5684, HB 3507, HB 3566, HB 4487, HB 4462, HB 4876, HB 4915, HB 4663, HB 5570, HB 2929, HB 5261, HB 2920, HB 4642, HB 4746, HB 1609, HB 5403, HB 5453, HB 3844, HB 2336, HB 1572, HB 1226, HB 2806, HB 2617, HB 2827, HB 3948, HB 3945, HB 4266, HB 4542, HB 3319, HB 1772, HB 2496, HB 1970, HB 3434, HB 5545, HB 5577, HCR 76, HCR 127, HCR 9, HCR 40, HCR 118, HR 559, HCR 59, HCR 135

Keywords: Medicaid, reimbursement, nursing facilities, ownership change, healthcare policy, mental health, psychiatric beds, inpatient psychiatric treatment, acute psychiatric care, bed availability, bed capacity, hospital reporting, HHSC, Health and Human Services Commission, state hospitals, private mental health facilities, civil commitment, competency restoration, not guilty by reason of insanity, jail diversion

Summary: The Florida House passed Senate Bill 2510 relating to prekindergarten through grade 12 education funding and policies. Speaker Perez delivered remarks criticizing the Senate for breaking a budget deal and outlined the House's position on reducing state spending and revenue. He emphasized that the state has a spending problem, not a revenue problem, and proposed various tax cuts including sales tax, business rent tax, and communication services tax eliminations. The House also passed a concurrent resolution extending the 2025 legislative session until June 30, 2025. Perez stressed that property tax relief and state revenue reduction are separate issues, highlighting the House's tourist development tax reform proposal.

Transcript Highlights:

• A marshal under the school marshal program does not have to have law enforcement experience.
• I understand how painful it is to experience the abrupt and unexpected death of a loved one.
• Capriglione, Chairman Capriglione, is this something you have personal experience with?
• The bill relates to persons in a judicial system creating a criminal offense.
• Field and become difficult, and they get the experience, most of the problems related to them.

Bills: HB3902, HB4420, HB3269, HB469, HB336, HB316, HB5396, HB993, HB1342, HB5216, HB2046, HB2188, HB2450, HB2813, HB2857, HB4075, HB2911, HB4682, HB3117, HB3253, HB3442, HB4820, HB4336, HB5356, HB3669, HB3428, HB5465, HB3662, HB2590, HB2288, HB1886, HB3458, HB5603, HB5620, HB1489, HB4101, HB4990, HB5685, HB4950, HB4980, HB5684, HB3507, HB3566, HB4487, HB4462, HB4876, HB4915, HB4663, HB5570, HB2929, HB5261, HB2920, HB4642, HB4746, HB1609, HB5403, HB5453, HB3844, HB2336, HB1572, HB 1226, HB2806, HB2617, HB2827, HB3948, HB3945, HB4266, HB4542, HB3319, HB1772, HB2496, HB1970, HB3434, HB5545, HB5577, HCR59, HCR135, HB4, HB46, HB3221, HB1403, HB3892, HB4234, HB722, HB4105, HB4413, HB170, HB551, HB3053, HB3142, HB3180, HB3722, HB1794, HB1784, HB1581, HB2530, HB4308, HB1896, HB2974, HB3359, HB4580, HB2458, HB2215, HB3332, HB2278, HB3015, HB3151, HB1368, HB40, HB 101, HB 112, HB146, HB214, HB413, HB1523, HB493, HB521, HB594, HB557, HB305, HB549, HB854, HB 1057, HB 1052, HB842, HB3174, HB3196, HB824, HB 1039, HB2529, HB2713, HB4936, HB4995, HB4830, HB4864, HB5219, HB5263, HB5154, HB2674, HB5525, SB529, SB541, SB2004, SB1012, SB2269, SB1886, SB1236, SB693, SB2308, HB2486, HB4862, HB4689, HB4520, HB2225, HB168, HJR218, HB4921, HB5623, HB2494, HB2545, HB2587, HB2625, HB5520, HB5436, HB4926, HB1573, HB5165, HB4811, HB5081, HB4755, HB3179, HB4310, HB4611, HB2159, HB4626, HB3637, HB3153, HB3066, HB2786, HB2966, HB638, HB640, HB876, HB497, HB5539, HB4809, HB5308, HB4687, HB4070, HB4421, HB4412, HB3284, HB3369, HB3420, HB3449, HB4098, HB4281, HB4120, HB4504, HB4370, HB 1106, HB2370, HB2404, HB3863, HB2407, HB2253, HB2273, HB2040, HB1586, HB3788, HB3993, HB4690, HB4309, HB4696, HB2308, HB 1142, HB1533, HB1621, HB2242, HB2012, HB2193, HB2442, HB2464, HB2348, HB2313, HB2289, HB1942, HB2011, HB1629, HB2993, HB3592, HB3824, HB4076, HB4535, HB4623, HB4773, HB 1091, HB5115, HB5515, HB3372, HB5659, HB 127, HB386, HB 115, HB2868, HB 1249, HB4766, HB3720, HB4656, HB4879, HB 105, HB5383, HB4621, HB5431, HB5678, HB5534, HB4174, HB4212, HB3954, HB3966, HB3636, HB3918, HB1422, HB4765, HB4732, HB4742, HB5122, HB4518, HB5084, HB3986, HB4045, HB4144, HB3911, HB3976, HB4473, HB3425, HB3641, HB3642, HB3475, HB3509, HB3424, HB3383, HB4744, HB4531, HB4539, HB3159, HB5228, HB5370, HB4359, HB4398, HB4443, HB4466, HB3861, HB3849, HB4240, HB4706, HB4685, HB5354, HB5141, HB5686, HB3629, HB3554, HB3567, HB2015, HB3575, HB5381, HB1431, HB3514, HB4614, HB4546, HB4683, HB5681, HB5673, HB5663, HB4271, HB4350, HB4035, HB3807, HB3812, HB3552, HB3540, HB3715, HB3710, HB3664, HB4196, HB4233, HB4173, HB1998, HB3333, HB3510, HB4222, HB2070, HB2854, HB2347, HB 113, HB983, HB4847, HB1449, HB3833, HB5151, HB265, HB1845, HB782, HB 108, HB1960, HB158, HB1954, HB1955, HB2512, HB605, HB2581, HB2803, HB627, HB2667, HB1738, HB636, HB3679, HB2638, HB2655, HB871, HB2438, HB 1107, HB1765, HB1822, HB2153, HB4099, HB3732, HB3171, HB3178, HB3182, HB3749, HB2814, HB3977, HB4204, HB4207, HB4449, HB1820, HB1876, HB1939, HB1347, HB2593, HB2136, HB2132, HB2658, HB2413, HB2757, HB2080, HB3154, HB3063, HB3009, HB3448, HB3006, HB2844, HB3241, HB3680, HB3169, HB2078, HB2507, HB4559, HB3946, HB3460, HB3405, HB475, HB3463, HB3441, HB3520, HB2060, HB4731, HB4991, HB1991, HB5596, HB2014, HB2142, HB2673, HB2731, HB2417, HB2399, HB2301, HB3335, HB3234, HB3320, HB5573, HB4848, HB4748, HB4769, HB4795, HB2086, HB2234, HB2203, HB4916, HB5624, HB4505, HB139, HB5093, HB5302, HB5402, HB5606, HB2333, HB4630, HB4701, HB2583, HB2983, HB4924, HB3339, HB3793, HB3631, HB4882, HB5509, HB5499, HB5430, HB5561, HB5611, HB5043, HB5064, HB3733, HB3781, HB3219, HB32, HB4515, HB5348, HB3902, HB4420, HB3269, HB469, HB336, HB316, HB5396, HB993, HB1342, HB5216, HB2046, HB2188, HB2450, HB2813, HB2857, HB4075, HB2911, HB4682, HB3117, HB3253, HB3442, HB4820, HB4336, HB5356, HB3669, HB3428, HB5465, HB3662, HB2590, HB2288, HB1886, HB3458, HB5603, HB5620, HB1489, HB4101, HB4990, HB5685, HB4950, HB4980, HB5684, HB3507, HB3566, HB4487, HB4462, HB4876, HB4915, HB4663, HB5570, HB2929, HB5261, HB2920, HB4642, HB4746, HB1609, HB5403, HB5453, HB3844, HB2336, HB1572, HB 1226, HB2806, HB2617, HB2827, HB3948, HB3945, HB4266, HB4542, HB3319, HB1772, HB2496, HB1970, HB3434, HB5545, HB5577, HCR76, HCR127, HCR9, HCR40, HCR118, HR559, HCR59, HCR135

Keywords: Medicaid, reimbursement, nursing facilities, ownership change, healthcare policy, mental health, psychiatric beds, inpatient psychiatric treatment, acute psychiatric care, bed availability, bed capacity, hospital reporting, HHSC, Health and Human Services Commission, state hospitals, private mental health facilities, civil commitment, competency restoration, not guilty by reason of insanity, jail diversion

Transcript Highlights:

• and a judicial warrant. and a judicial warrant.
• c><00:53:59.520> would<00:53:59.600> be judicial warrant or that would be judicial warrant
• daycare employees to request a judicial daycare employees to request a judicial warrant.<00:54:12.200
• If there is a signed judicial warrant If there is a signed judicial warrant and<00:55:31.800> somebody
• We've done this experiment.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Morgan Larry Zabal, legislative advocate with the Judicial Council...
• I just had a question for Judicial Council.
• County, so that way this wouldn't be an impact for Judicial Council? Well, L.A.
• So the Judicial Council decides which counties have the feasibility to do that.
• and driver experiences, I think that the far majority of experiences are safe.

Summary: The committee heard several bills focused on civil rights, housing, public safety, and administrative process. Early items included SB 46, which would authorize the Secretary of State to remove constitutionally ineligible presidential and vice presidential candidates from California ballots; SB 1078, requiring notice to the Civil Rights Department when court filings involve civil rights violations; SB 989, expanding access to Care Court by letting first responders refer cases through county behavioral health agencies; SB 998, clarifying and expanding discrimination prevention coordinators in the new Office of Civil Rights; SB 1146, requiring disclosure for AI-generated health advertisements and giving physicians a limited private right of action; SB 1164, a California Voting Rights Act expansion responding to federal voting-rights rulings; SB 1256, a housing bill aimed at limiting repeated litigation over the Harmony Grove Village South project; SB 1267, addressing HOA liability and indemnification for EV charger installations; and SB 1425, authorizing an encroachment permit program for high-speed rail right-of-way management. The committee also later heard SB 873, restricting ICE arrests near courthouses, and SB 1160, requiring eviction data reporting by zip code. Most bills drew support from sponsors, advocacy groups, labor organizations, or local officials, while opposition centered on concerns about county workload, due process, fire safety, civil liberties, or the scope of the policy changes. Members generally expressed support for the bills while noting unresolved issues and the need for amendments or further stakeholder work, especially on SB 1164, SB 1256, SB 1267, SB 1425, and SB 1160. The Judicial Council opposed SB 1160 because of the burden of adding zip-code reporting to court systems, while the author and supporters argued the data would help target eviction-prevention efforts. SB 873 drew strong support from public defenders, immigrant-rights groups, and court-related stakeholders, with the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department opposing. SB 989 drew support from firefighters and family advocates, while Disability Rights California opposed, arguing Care Court is too costly and diverts resources from community-based services. SB 1164 received broad civil-rights and voting-rights support, with cities opposing unless amended over definitions, cure periods, and litigation risk. SB 1256 drew support from housing and labor interests and opposition from local residents and environmental groups concerned about fire safety and evacuation. SB 1267 was supported by the HOA and utility stakeholders after amendments addressing liability concerns. After quorum was established, the committee voted to pass a consent calendar and then approved the listed bills, sending them to the appropriate committees or to Appropriations, including SB 46, SB 873, SB 989, SB 998, SB 1078, SB 1146, SB 1164, SB 1256, SB 1267, and SB 1425. The transcript ends with SB 1160 still under discussion, with members indicating support for the bill’s goals but acknowledging the Judicial Council’s implementation concerns and the need for further work.

Transcript Highlights:

• judicial judicial oversight<00:08:12.199> we<00:08:12.400> realize<00:08:13.000> that
• I'm a family court judge in the 28th Judicial Circuit.
• I'm a family court judge in the 28th Judicial Circuit.
• uh have an interplay with the judicial uh have an interplay with the judicial branch<00:54:47.000
• <00:55:13.119> branch critical role within the judicial branch critical role within the judicial

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The subcommittee met to discuss the guardian ad litem system, including appointment qualifications, training, payment, and whether any changes are needed. Roll was called, the February 25, 2025 minutes were approved, and the chair emphasized that the meeting was informational only and no vote would be taken. Representatives from the Court of Justice, including Chief Justice Deborah Henry Lambert and several family and district judges, testified about how the system has evolved since concerns raised in 2019 about overappointment and fees. Court witnesses said the judiciary responded to earlier concerns by requiring open appointment lists of trained and qualified attorneys, improving training, and increasing oversight of fee orders. They reported that statewide GAL fees have fallen from a little over $14 million in 2019 to about $12 million, even as caseloads have grown, and said the average payment works out to about $650 per case, with the statutory cap for trial-level GAL fees still set at $500 since 1986. They argued that the current local appointment model works well, especially in rural areas, and warned that moving to a DPA-style regional model would create serious scheduling and conflict problems because of overlapping dockets and related criminal cases. Judges from rural districts described shortages of available attorneys, high burnout, travel burdens, and the difficulty of finding enough counsel in smaller counties. They also said the Court of Justice cannot seek certain federal Title IV-E reimbursements, but urged the legislature to encourage the Finance and Administration Cabinet and the Cabinet for Health and Family Services to pursue that funding through an MOU. One judge noted that some appointed attorneys are effectively underpaid relative to private rates and that better compensation would help attract and retain lawyers. The discussion also covered training standards adopted after the 2019 audit. Witnesses said Rule 37 now requires initial training and four hours of multidisciplinary continuing training every two years, with topics including child development, trauma-informed care, substance use, child welfare, forensics, ethics, and communication with clients. They said the Court of Justice has offered in-person regional trainings and remote options, and that the goal is to keep qualified attorneys on the appointment lists while improving representation for children and parents in dependency, neglect, abuse, and termination-of-parental-rights cases.

Transcript Highlights:

• I am here because that was such a terrible experience to watch.
• On behalf of the Judicial Council, I support that. I support that.
• But I do have some of the concerns that Judicial Council brought up.
• I'll go ahead and hand it over to judicial counsel. Was there a... Thank you.
• I'll go ahead and hand it over to Judicial Council.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills, beginning with SB 41 by Senator Wiener, which would regulate pharmacy benefit managers by increasing transparency, banning patient steering and spread pricing, and requiring full pass-through of rebates. Supporters, including independent pharmacists and health advocates, said PBM practices are driving up drug costs and closing neighborhood pharmacies. Opponents from PBM and health plan groups argued the bill overlaps with recently enacted licensing and reporting requirements, would not lower consumer prices, and may be preempted by ERISA. Members discussed confidentiality issues, consumer savings, and the relationship between SB 41 and the new budget trailer bill; the author asked for an aye vote. The committee then took up SB 378, also by Senator Wiener, aimed at online marketplaces that advertise illegal intoxicating hemp and unlicensed cannabis products. Supporters from labor, public health, and the licensed cannabis industry said online sales are undermining regulated businesses and exposing children to unsafe products. Opponents from tech and hemp industry groups warned the bill is overbroad, could sweep in general-purpose platforms and lawful hemp wellness products, and raises Dormant Commerce Clause and First Amendment concerns. The author said he would narrow the bill, remove industrial hemp references, and address strict liability and standing issues; members largely focused on how to target illegal products without capturing lawful marketplaces. SB 243 by Senator Padilla addressed AI companion chatbots, with supporters including Common Sense Media and transparency advocates warning that these systems can be addictive, manipulative, and dangerous for minors and vulnerable users, citing studies and the death of a Florida teenager. The bill would require disclosures, anti-addiction design limits, self-harm protocols, audits, reporting, and a private right of action. Tech and business groups opposed the measure as overly broad and said its definitions could sweep in general-purpose AI tools; several members supported the goal but questioned the breadth of the definitions and the private right of action. Finally, SB 522 by Senator Wahab would extend just-cause eviction protections to rental units that were previously covered by the Tenant Protection Act but were destroyed in disasters and later rebuilt. Supporters, including Los Angeles city officials and tenant advocates, said the bill would help keep displaced renters housed after wildfires and other disasters. Apartment and realtor groups opposed it, arguing it would remove a key exemption needed to finance rebuilding and could discourage post-disaster reconstruction. Members expressed support for tenant protections in disaster areas, and the author asked for an aye vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• So does the steps correlate to work experience and education?” “Yes, absolutely.”
• readiness as a top economic concern, so this resolution helps ensure students gain meaningful career experience

Bills: HR118, HR196, HR237, HR285, HCR85, HB442, HB443, SCR5, SCR29, SCR33, SCR63, SB25, SB202, SB319

Keywords: water utility, tax credit, excessive rates, residential service, subcommittee, fallen trees, property damage, insurance, property values, hurricanes, storm damage, local government, homeowners, risk management, committee study, census, military population, Department of Defense, representation, federal funding