Transcript Highlights:

• What I was able to receive from the county had redactions in, of course, Social Security and other PII
• Social Security and other PII, but I was able to receive right now the party in which a registrant is

Bills: SB1037, SB1040, SB1259, SB1281

Keywords: elections, voting systems, vote tabulation, election security, internet connectivity, offline voting, chain of custody, polling place equipment, counting center, central counting center, election management system, EMS gateway, tabulation equipment, secretary of state, certification, decertification, HAVA, Help America Vote Act, ballot images, audit logs

Summary: The Committee on Federal and Military Affairs and Elections heard a lengthy presentation on an investigative referral concerning alleged voter registration anomalies in Arizona from March 2023 onward. The chair described examples involving out-of-state residents, deceased registrants, military voters, duplicate or mismatched registrations, and registrations tied to Service Arizona, ACCESS, third-party vendors, and NGOs. Members also discussed alleged mismatches between county recorder data and Secretary of State reports, possible issues with automatic voter registration, and concerns about public records compliance. At the end of the presentation, members were asked whether they wanted to sign onto a criminal referral to the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice; several declined, while others agreed, and the committee proceeded after correcting a signature-block issue. The committee then considered Senate Bill 1259, which would allow certain protected individuals to use an alternate mailing address and attest to their residential address on candidate and financial disclosure filings. After questions about residency verification and confidentiality, the bill received a do pass recommendation by a 6-1 vote. Senate Bill 1281, dealing with state land department procedures for covered federal designations and notification of land takings, was heard next; after opposition testimony from the Sierra Club Grand Canyon Chapter, it passed 4-3. Senate Bill 1037, concerning election equipment security and internet connectivity, drew substantial debate. A Marquez strike-everything amendment that would have shifted the bill toward voting centers, ERIC participation, early voting changes, and election funding failed on a 4-3 vote. The underlying bill then failed to receive a do pass recommendation on a 3-3-1 vote. Finally, Senate Bill 1040, which would make voter registration rolls publicly accessible online and downloadable, passed 4-3 after questions about what information would remain redacted and concerns about public access to voter data.

Transcript Highlights:

• > our grants that are generated by our our grants that are generated by our our lead lead lead piis
• 24:44.880> use<01:24:45.119> this<01:24:45.239> for<01:24:45.440> cross piis
• uh so we use this for cross piis uh so we use this for cross Institute<01:24:46.199> support<
• the<01:37:36.320> university<01:37:37.199> with<01:37:37.400> less uh piis
• within the university with less uh piis within the university with less than<01:37:37.920> 5%

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• A name along with a unique identifying account number is what constitutes PII under Texas code.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• collection of data from ride-sharing vehicles, had that standard that the basic record has all kinds of PII
• collection of data from ride-sharing vehicles, had that standard that the basic record has all kinds of PII
• collection of data from ride-sharing vehicles, had that standard that the basic record has all kinds of PII
• collection of data from ride-sharing vehicles, had that standard that the basic record has all kinds of PII
• collection of data from ride-sharing vehicles, had that standard that the basic record has all kinds of PII

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee approved the October 15, 2025 minutes and then held a broader discussion on current challenges with data retention and government transparency. Judy Randall of the Office of the Legislative Auditor said historical data is essential for post-audits, which often look back three to five years, and that retention decisions must balance audit needs with the burden of separating public and nonpublic data. She described the records-retention panel process as informal and largely based on individual judgment, noting she had objected to a proposed 60-day email retention period and generally uses a three-year guideline, though she said that standard is not grounded in a formal rule. Members discussed whether auditing standards should set retention periods, with Randall saying auditing is a good starting point but other offices, including the attorney general, also have needs, and that some agency discretion is unavoidable because of the gray area between official records and non-records. Representative Elkins raised the related principle of data minimization, arguing that government should not keep data longer than needed and citing a University of Minnesota legacy data warehouse breach as an example of the risks of retaining unnecessary sensitive information. Randall agreed that data no longer needed is a liability and said her office purges workpapers after five years. Representative Scott pressed whether three years is enough for fraud investigations and financial records; Randall responded that a reasonableness standard is needed and that longer retention can produce diminishing returns, though she said she would follow up on whether financial records should be treated differently. Tanya Tacker of the Rum River Special Education Cooperative testified in support of updating Minnesota’s data-retention laws for schools. She said districts want to protect student information and maintain transparency, but the current general retention schedule dates to 1985 and 2000 and does not reflect digital records, modern systems, or the volume of special education data. She urged modernizing the schedule, clarifying what must be kept in paper versus digitized form, aligning state rules with IDEA and other federal requirements, and providing practical guidance and tools. Members praised the specificity of her recommendations. Dr. BB Newman testified that retention failures in St. Anthony Village have made it difficult to obtain routine municipal and police data, with records delayed, missing, or inconsistently produced and no clear explanation of what systems were searched or whether records were destroyed. Newman argued these gaps undermine statutory access rights and force residents into costly litigation, and recommended stronger retention auditing, documentation of destruction, mandatory disclosure of systems searched, and consequences for noncompliance. In response to questions, Senate counsel said there is generally no direct penalty, but affected parties may seek mandamus, Data Practices Act claims, or informal mediation/opinions from the Data Practices Office. The discussion closed with calls for clearer standards and possible legislative updates to improve compliance and transparency.

Transcript Highlights:

• schedules, transcript generation, transcript transfers, issues with HR, issues with housing, large-scale PII

Transcript Highlights:

• that are already in statute: voter registration number, ID, Social Security number, those kinds of PII

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The Republican caucus reviewed a long list of Senate bills and one House concurrent memorial, most of them described as third-read consent items. Topics included claims against the state, CPA licensing, creditor assignments, insurance adjuster licensing, school equivalency instruction, extending a credit enhancement board, firearm safety instruction in schools, student eligibility restrictions for school activities, Celebrate Freedom Week, release-time courses, voter registration roll access, campaign and disclosure mailing addresses, federal land designation tracking, public records review standards, workers’ compensation burial and death benefits, condominium flag displays, restrictions on sexually explicit material in schools and libraries, agency guidance posting, standardized state hiring, mental health court-ordered treatment procedures, autopsy supervision, tribal MOUs, controlled substance scheduling, emergency medical technician data privacy, dense breast tissue notice repeal, assisted living referral agency requirements, attorney disciplinary claims, fentanyl penalties, campus firearms rules, suppressors, defamation standards, mandatory reporting, attorney licensing, emergency service fee limits, forcible detainer changes, utility worker assault penalties, water basin reporting, small modular nuclear reactors, water recovery assumptions, ICE notification after arrests, military police certification pathways, and scholarship organization tax credits. Most bills were presented without debate and were noted as available for questions, with no votes taken in the caucus itself. A few items drew discussion. On SB 1040, members asked what information would be redacted from voter registration rolls; staff said existing statutory redactions such as voter registration numbers, ID numbers, Social Security numbers, and other personal identifying information would remain. SB 1193 prompted comments that EMT data being open source was surprising and that the issue might be expanded to paramedics. SB 1243 was described as strengthening guardian notification rights in court-ordered treatment, and SB 1318 was characterized as a cleanup measure to remove redundant state notice requirements for dense breast tissue. The most extended exchange came on SB 1148, which would require the Arizona Supreme Court to directly license attorneys rather than delegate that function to another organization; members asked whether the bill was shifting responsibility away from the State Bar, and staff explained that the court already has the duty but currently staffs part of the process out. SB 1418, which limits county regulation of certain small modular nuclear reactor projects, drew criticism from one member who argued it would reduce local control. The caucus also heard a sponsor presentation on H.C.M. 2009 urging Congress and the President to amend the Antiquities Act, compensate states for subsurface minerals, and streamline mining permits, with the sponsor emphasizing Arizona’s mining history and the need to access mineral resources more easily.

Transcript Highlights:

• Your PII was lost.” The question then became how to monetize that.
• <00:34:27.119> Your<00:34:27.280> PII<00:34:28.240> was<00:34:28.800> was
• Your PII was was was identity theft. Your PII was was was lost.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We possess the crown jewels of data and PII information.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• that you know I think if you go through the fiscal note they say well you know we have to provide some PII
• It'd be easier for the agencies or the other governmental bodies to be able to search through it for PII

Bills: HB 111, HB1545, HB2145, HB2467, HB2520, HB4136, HB4181, HB4214, HB4218, HB4219, HB4359, HB4437, HB4822, HB111

Keywords: Texas Public Information Act, open records, public records, government transparency, confidentiality, attorney-client privilege, governmental body, Chapter 552, public information law, nonprofit association, quasi-governmental entity, economic development, trade secrets, proprietary information, commercial financial information, Alamo restoration, local workforce board, TDCJ contract facility, civil commitment facility, water supply corporation

Transcript Highlights:

• And, and PII information, um. We have about 30 million driver records, the DL data.

Transcript Highlights:

• VetPro and match it in with our county's information exchange, that, by the way, protects PHI, let alone PII—to
• And match it in with our county's information exchange that, by the way, protects PHI, let alone PII,

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Military and Veteran Affairs held an informational hearing focused on the effects of federal budget cuts and policy changes on veterans, military readiness, and California’s veteran support systems. The chair and members emphasized that federal reductions to the VA, Medicaid/Medi-Cal, SNAP, and the federal workforce are disproportionately harming veterans by threatening health care, employment, housing, crisis lines, and suicide prevention services. The chair also highlighted California’s progress on veteran homelessness and the importance of preserving state programs that leverage federal dollars. Major General Matthew Beavers of the California Military Department described the department’s structure, its response to the Los Angeles fire emergency, and concerns that federal cuts could reduce readiness through less training, older equipment, and fewer resources. He also discussed state programs such as Work for Warriors, STARBASE, youth and community schools, and the counterdrug task force, saying they are valuable but vulnerable if funding is redirected away from readiness. Members asked about the impact of federal changes on the Guard and how the Legislature could help, and Beavers said the state should advocate for recapitalized equipment and continued support for key programs. A second panel focused on veterans’ benefits and claims support. CalVet, Los Angeles County, and Swords to Plowshares testified that county veteran service officers, legal aid, and community-based partnerships are essential to helping veterans access VA benefits, especially after the PACT Act expanded eligibility and increased claims volume. Witnesses said these services bring substantial federal dollars back to California, but county offices and legal providers are underfunded and overburdened. Members discussed data sharing, staffing shortages, and the need for more resources to reach veterans who are not connected to VA care. In the final panel on mental health and suicide prevention, CalVet and nonprofit providers described state-funded programs such as the Veterans Support Self-Reliance program and the California Veterans Health Initiative, which place services in permanent supportive housing and provide no-cost counseling statewide. Witnesses said these programs are showing measurable improvements in health, medication adherence, and emergency room use, but they depend on sustained funding and are vulnerable to step-down grants and federal instability. Committee members expressed support for the programs and raised questions about access, staffing, and the role of non-veteran family members in Vet Center services.

Transcript Highlights:

• No medical records or PII are shared.
• 00:05:09.960> or maternal deaths no medical records or maternal deaths no medical records or pii
• c> shared<00:05:11.960> specific<00:05:12.400> hospitals<00:05:12.840> and pii
• are shared specific hospitals and pii are shared specific hospitals and Healthcare<00:05:13.400>

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And there's no mention of PII, which is the privacy information, doesn't say anything about that either
• there's no don't see that and the other there's no mention<04:30:23.680> of<04:30:24.920> pii
• which<04:30:26.040> is<04:30:26.159> the<04:30:26.359> Privacy mention of pii
• which is the Privacy mention of pii which is the Privacy Information<04:30:27.520> doesn't<04

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 180, which concerns critical incident stress management teams. Representative Mark PR, the bill sponsor, proposed an amendment to add a definition of “team leader” and to clarify that teams may or may not be affiliated with a municipality. He argued that a certification test offered by the International Critical Incident Stress Foundation is unnecessary and too expensive at $400, since team members are volunteers who already receive training and continuing education. Committee members asked about the training structure and certification language, and the sponsor explained that the teams are self-certified and that the amendment was intended to clean up the bill’s language. The committee then voted on HB 180 in executive session. Amendment 0261H was adopted 11-0, and the bill was then moved as amended and passed 11-0. The committee placed the bill on consent. Later, the committee heard House Bill 438, sponsored by Representative Timothy Horan, dealing with immigration detention and related state policy. Horan described the bill as an update to earlier legislation and said it would codify best practices, prohibit state cooperation with mass deportation efforts, bar for-profit operation of immigration detention facilities, and require Executive Council approval before the governor could deploy the National Guard for immigration deportation activities. Committee members questioned whether the bill could be read as authorizing detention facilities and discussed the relationship between the state and Strafford County Jail. An amendment presented on behalf of Representative Patrick Long was described as a technical rewrite that removed several sections and changed language, but the hearing ended before any vote was taken on HB 438.

Transcript Highlights:

• official body made up of people like us who are officials, there would be no further protection for PII
• official body made up of people like us who are officials, there would be no further protection for PII
• any further be no not necessarily any further protection<04:45:04.320> for<04:45:04.878> PII
• c> in<04:45:05.920> the<04:45:06.560> in<04:45:06.718> that protection for PII
• in in the in that protection for PII in in the in that committee. committee. committee.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a hearing on House Bill 1571, which would direct the Department of Education to review and revise statewide academic standards and curriculum and make an appropriation. Representative Kristen Noble, the sponsor, said the bill is intended to update outdated standards, especially in math, and to have the department create a list of high-quality curriculum and materials aligned to the revised standards. She noted she would likely amend the bill to change a requirement that districts “shall” select from the list to “may,” and said a misplaced crossed-out section would need to be restored and moved by amendment. She also said assessments would need to be updated to match any new standards. Testimony from Marie Banfield strongly supported the bill and the move away from a mandate, arguing that current standards are outdated and that Common Core and related standards have not improved student outcomes. She criticized the math standards for emphasizing multiple strategies and written explanations over computation, and said stronger standards would better support students, including those with learning or communication challenges. She also argued that New Hampshire should follow examples such as Massachusetts, which she said used rigorous standards successfully. Nate Green of the Department of Education did not take a position on the bill but explained that the bill would affect statewide academic standards, state assessments, and potentially federal compliance. He distinguished academic standards from minimum standards in statute, said any standards revision would require work with content experts, State Board approval, and then a corresponding assessment update that could take about two years. He estimated assessment development costs could range from about $200,000 to $500,000 for minor revisions and $1 million to $2 million for a wholesale new set of standards. He also said the bill would apply to public and charter public schools, not private or homeschool students, and that the department does not currently provide a statewide list of curriculum materials because curriculum decisions have historically been local.

Transcript Highlights:

• babies, and you say... ...identifying moms that just had babies, and you send through that through PII
• I'm just trying to understand about discount coupons based on PII or de-identified data.

Summary: The Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee met with a new membership roster and adopted its committee rules after quorum was established. The hearing then began with AB 412, the AI Copyright Transparency Act, which would require generative AI developers to provide copyright holders notice when registered copyrighted works are used in training data. The author and supporters, including SAG-AFTRA, the Transparency Coalition, voice actors, writers, labor groups, and other creators, argued the bill would give artists a practical way to learn whether their works were used and to vindicate their rights. Opponents, including EFF, CalChamber, RIAA, CCIA, Chamber of Progress, Bay Area Council, BSA, and TechNet, said the proposal was technically unworkable, could burden startups, conflict with existing law and pending litigation, and raise federal preemption concerns. Members discussed the bill’s amendments, including a fingerprinting approach and narrowing the bill to model developers, and the committee voted 8-2 to pass AB 412 as amended to the Judiciary Committee. The committee then heard AB 446, which would prohibit “surveillance pricing,” or the use of personal data to charge different prices for the same product or service. The author and supporters, including Consumer Watchdog, UFCW, labor organizations, and consumer/privacy groups, described examples of differential pricing tied to device type, location, shopping behavior, and digital price tags, and argued the bill would protect consumers from discriminatory and predatory pricing. Business and industry opponents, including CalChamber, grocers, retailers, travel, broadband, and other associations, said the bill could conflict with the CCPA, interfere with loyalty and rewards programs, and create confusion about personalized discounts and dynamic pricing. The discussion focused on how the bill would treat loyalty programs, whether existing privacy law already covers the issue, and whether the proposal would unintentionally affect legitimate discounts and promotions.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we're having a whole conversation on PII today, right?
• Personally, you know, and we're having a whole conversation on PII today, right?
• But when it comes to elections, personally identifiable information (PII) can also include the voters
• PII can also include the voters' selections when it comes to long ballots or perhaps even low turnout

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Now how do you do this in the world today when all of our PII is known?

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The House Science and Technology Committee met and heard two informational presentations, with no bills considered and no votes taken. Deloitte Infrastructure Insights presented a transportation AI tool, Infrastructure Insights Pro, focused on vulnerable road user safety and pedestrian crash analysis. The presenter described how the platform ingests agency data such as crash records, GIS layers, and project management systems to generate map-based insights, trust scores for data reliability, and draft concept reports. Members asked about how long similar reports took before AI, whether the tool had been used in other states, and whether it reduced cost or effort; the presenter said a report that once took six to eight months could now be drafted in hours, that the safety use case had been implemented at Caltrans, and that the main savings were in staff effort. The committee then heard from OCTA and Socure on digital identity, fraud prevention, and resident access to government services. The presenters argued that state and local governments should move toward a single, privacy-preserving digital identity experience that reduces multiple logins, improves security, and helps stop fraud by using contextual signals such as device, location, and document validation. They said Arizona already uses OCTA for more than 40,000 employees and some citizen services, and that Socure supports identity verification for public programs, including Arizona’s Empowerment Scholarship Account. A lengthy discussion followed about Real ID, state digital IDs, privacy, Fourth Amendment concerns, federal funding, and whether identity systems could become a national ID or surveillance tool. The presenters responded that states should retain control, that verifiable digital credentials can limit what information is shared, and that Arizona could centralize resident identity with privacy guardrails while preserving choice. The committee adjourned without further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• They could easily miss important information such as a PII number or what party's ballot they want for

Transcript Highlights:

• They could easily miss important information, such as a PII number or which party's ballot they want

Bills: HB3097, HB3691, SB108, SB827, SB1541, SB1862, SB2166, SB2216

Keywords: Texas elections, Election Code, uniform election date, November election, local elections, political subdivisions, general election date, election administration, municipal utility district, county elections, local government, ballot scheduling, candidate filing, voter turnout, election calendar, HB 3097, early voting, electronic application, mail-in ballot, voting accessibility

Transcript Highlights:

• 31:58.519> an<00:31:58.799> all-in<00:31:59.360> all-included<00:32:00.279> pii
• <00:32:01.279> payment is an all-in all-included pii payment is an all-in all-included pii

Keywords: 1183, house