Transcript Highlights:

• And so I'd like to welcome Henry Lipman to our committee, first subcommittee session we've had.
• , this work subcommittee, that this be an area that I think that definitely it's something we have to
• , this work subcommittee, that this be an area that I think that definitely it's something we have to
• , this work subcommittee, that this be an area that I think that definitely it's something we have to
• Um, but this is not just We look towards an outcome from this subcommittee, this work subcommittee, that

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

Transcript Highlights:

• We have two panels ready for today: federal actions and elections, and then a second sort of work session
• in for next session.
• things that folks may want for this next session, and then working... ...elevating things that folks
• may want for this next session.
• With that, that concludes business for today's work session, and we will close the work session on the

Committee: House State Government & Tribal Relations

Transcript Highlights:

• Assembly Member Gabriel: I am very, very grateful for the work of our budget subcommittee chairs to make
• rare in our politics: steadiness, working toward balancing a budget that works for all Californians.
• I want to thank our budget chair for all of the work that you have done, Mr.
• the fortunate or solely for the wealthy, but that health care should be for regular people, for working
• And with that, dash the hopes of these working families for relief.

Transcript Highlights:

• For example, thank you so much for your leadership and work toward supporting shifting primary payer
• First, I'd like to thank you and the committee for all your hard work this legislative session.
• individuals, working families, and employers that buy coverage for their workers.
• So thank you for this innovative proposal and for all your work over the years, Senator Menjivar.
• So thank you for this innovative proposal and for all your work over the years, Senator Minjavar.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 3 on Human Services held its final hearing on the budget, with the chair framing the Senate’s plan as a counterproposal that rejected major cuts and preserved revenues. Public comment was overwhelmingly supportive of the subcommittee’s actions, especially on Medi-Cal, IHSS, PACE, behavioral health, child care, CalFresh outreach, immigrant legal services, and long-term care. Testimony from disability, aging, county, health plan, provider, labor, and advocacy groups urged the committee to keep rejecting asset tests, immigrant coverage reductions, IHSS cost shifts, PACE rate cuts, and behavioral health reductions, while supporting mobile crisis, 988, Title IV-E workforce funding, and the “Be Home Soon California” proposal to expand home- and community-based care. Several speakers also pressed for additional or related funding and policy changes, including county alternatives for people losing Medi-Cal under federal HR1-related changes, more support for public hospitals and indigent care, CalFresh and Cal Food investments, child care slots and COLAs, dental rate cut delays, and expanded immigration legal and food assistance. Others thanked the committee for restoring or preserving funding for behavioral health innovation and advocacy grants, public health IT and disease investigation, diaper banks, hearing aids for children, and distressed hospital loans. The committee also heard concerns about fee-for-service shifts, outpatient dialysis coverage, and other implementation details, with some groups asking for trailer bill language or guardrails. After public comment, the subcommittee took three votes on large blocks of budget items. The first block of consent items passed 3-0, the second block passed 2-1, and the final block passed 2-0, with the chair announcing that the items were approved and out of committee. The hearing then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now it was said that veterans issues were a key priority for the 2025 legislative session, and your committee
• It was new for you. In fact, you guys created a dedicated subcommittee for veterans.
• for the 2025 legislative<00:13:35.760><c> session</c><00:13:36.160><c> and</c><00:13:36.480><c> your
• So why was it subcommittee for veterans.
• Where would you like to see the state's resources focus on for agriculture next session?

Transcript Highlights:

• for Wellness Action Project.
• presumptive work-related injuries, improved employee morale, and eligibility for inclusion on the peace
• I truly thank the author for bringing this bill, and respectfully ask for your aye vote.
• Subcommittee 1 will meet upon adjournment of session or 2:30 p.m. in Capitol Room 127.
• Session as follows: Tuesday, April 7, check-in session; Wednesday, April 8, check-in session; Thursday

Summary: The Assembly convened after a quorum call, prayer, and Pledge of Allegiance, then handled a series of procedural motions including suspending rules, re-referring several bills to committees, and allowing committee notices for pending re-referrals. Members also received guest introductions, including LA28 leadership for an informational hearing on preparations for the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games in Los Angeles, and advocacy groups focused on reproductive health and equity. On the floor, the Assembly took up several third-reading bills. AB 1944 by Assembly Member Lee, which would delay implementation of lower axle weight limits for zero-emission buses to give transit agencies more time to adapt to battery technology limits, passed 49-1. AB 2305 by Assembly Member Caloza, prohibiting private equity and other corporate investors from controlling or influencing litigation decisions, passed 55-0. AB 2004 by Assembly Member Al-Annees, authorizing Fresno and San Joaquin counties to designate county correctional officers as peace officers if locally agreed, passed 52-0 after supportive remarks from Assembly Member Tangipa about a Fresno County correctional officer who died after being injured in a jail shooting. The Assembly also adopted the second-day consent calendar, including ACR 161 on Special Districts Week and HR 87 on school accountability, with 57 co-authors added to the resolutions and unanimous votes on the consent items. The session concluded with an adjournment in memory for Marcella Villanueva, a longtime California Commission on Aging employee remembered for her service and compassion, followed by announcements of upcoming committee hearings and the next floor session before adjournment until Thursday, April 9 at 9 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• I worked for Julian Holt and then also went to the 6th Judicial Circuit. Working for Bob Dillinger.
• By Judiciary Committee, Criminal Justice Subcommittee, and Representative Daley, CS for CS for House
• By Judiciary Committee, Criminal Justice Subcommittee, and Representative Daley, CS for CS for House
• I want to thank Whitney in Judiciary for your hard work on this.
• When we started the session, we talked about things we are trying to make good for this 2025 session,

Bills: HJR 99 , HB 1399 , HB 1400 , HB 1094 , HB 365 , HB 1109 , HB 647 , HCR 35 , SB 14 , HB 12 , HB 1522 , HB 422 , HB 675 , HB 204 , HB 748 , HB 912 , HJR 99 , HB 1399 , HB 1400 , HB 1094 , HB 365 , HB 1109 , HB 647 , HCR 35 , HCR 123 , HCR 124 , HR 57 , HR 87 , HR 111 , HR 228 , HR 230 , HR 322 , HR 624 , HR 625 , HR 626 , HR 627 , HR 628 , HR 630 , HR 631 , HR 634 , HR 635 , HR 636 , HR 637 , HR 638 , HR 639 , HR 640 , HR 645 , HR 646 , HR 648 , HR 649 , HR 651 , HR 652 , HR 653 , HR 654 , HR 664 , HR 665 , HR 668 , HR 675 , HR 676 , HR 678 , HR 679 , HR 680 , HR 683 , HR 686 , HR 688 , HR 689 , HR 694 , HR 695 , HR 697 , HR 698 , HR 699 , HR 472 , HR 622 , HR 632 , HR 633 , HR 643 , HR 655 , HR 657 , HR 660 , HR 661 , HR 662 , HR 663 , HR 667 , HR 670 , HR 674 , HR 681 , HR 682 , HR 696

Transcript Highlights:

• The law and the regulation work together to establish new tools for financial regulation of insurers
• I know at the end of last session, we set aside $100 million for Medicaid.
• And during the session on many, many issues, members were begging for input from DHS about why this,
• When this could have been worked out before the legislature even convened, we asked DHS for a formal
• On Act 567, I think for me personally, I knew that to be an issue during the session.

Committee: All ALC-ADMINISTRATIVE RULES

Summary: The Administrative Rules Subcommittee of the Arkansas Legislative Council reviewed several agency rules and requests. The Insurance Department’s amendment to its holding company system rule was reviewed and approved, as were two State Board of Election Commissioners rules: one clarifying poll watcher conduct, vote challenges, and provisional voting, and another increasing pay for certified election monitors and defining training, observation, and report-writing compensation. The Arkansas Financial Education Commission also had its rule reviewed and approved after removing membership requirements tied to DEI language to comply with Act 938. The committee held over the Department of Education’s request to be excluded from reporting requirements for one month to allow further discussion about who should write or implement the rules. A major portion of the meeting focused on the Department of Human Services’ request to be excluded from reporting requirements for Acts 567, 568, 967, and 1025. DHS said CMS had raised comparability and other federal approval concerns, especially for the dental and diagnostic lab provisions, and that it might not be able to meet the acts’ effective dates. DHS described several possible paths forward, including broader benefit changes, waivers, or splitting the dental provisions so the pediatric rate increase could move separately from the special-needs adult cap increase. The Arkansas State Dental Association disputed DHS’s conclusion that the acts could not be implemented as written, argued that Act 1025 is workable, and urged DHS to continue pursuing implementation and preserve the September 1 effective date where possible. Public testimony also supported expanded dental access for adults with disabilities and special needs. After discussion, the committee voted not to exclude DHS from reporting requirements for those acts. The committee then reviewed the Division of Higher Education’s Act 781 report. The division said it has 32 rules in effect, asked to repeal three rules—two replaced by new rules and one no longer supported by authority or current law—and to continue the remaining 29 rules. The committee approved that request, with the repeals effective upon adjournment of the Legislative Council meeting on January 16, 2026. The meeting concluded with no questions on the remaining written rulemaking updates from prior and current sessions, which were filed without further action.

Transcript Highlights:

• I would like to invite our policy chief, Whitney Hall, to introduce our subcommittee for the session.
• I would like to invite our policy chief, Whitney Hall, to introduce our subcommittee for the session.
• I am the Policy Chief for the Subcommittee.
• I am the Policy Chief for the Subcommittee.
• I commend you for the work that you're doing. It's very important.

Summary: The Criminal Justice Subcommittee held its first meeting of 2025, took roll, confirmed a quorum, and heard member introductions before turning to an informational panel on how a criminal case moves through Florida’s system. The chair emphasized respectful committee process and introduced staff, then invited the panel to explain the path from arrest through prosecution, first appearance, arraignment, discovery, trial, plea negotiations, and sentencing. Sheriff Bob Gualtieri described law enforcement discretion, probable cause, misdemeanor and felony arrest rules, pre-arrest diversion, jail operations, and the statewide uniform bond schedule. He also discussed jail overcrowding, supervised release, mental health and substance abuse issues in jails, and the need for better case management and diversion resources. Judge Frank Allman explained first appearance, bond setting, arraignment, trial procedures, plea colloquies, and sentencing under Florida’s punishment code, including downward departures and victim impact statements. State Attorney Jack Campbell outlined charging decisions, the higher proof burden prosecutors must meet, coordination with law enforcement, Baker Act proceedings, victim notification, informations versus grand jury indictments, and the role of diversion and treatment courts. Public Defender Matthew Mets described indigency screening, discovery, the growing volume and technical complexity of evidence, mitigation work, and the importance of treatment-based resolutions. Members asked about time-served credit for supervised release, mental health recidivism, homelessness enforcement, ICE holds, and sentencing discretion; no votes were taken and the meeting ended after the informational presentation and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for the question.
• Thank you for the opportunity to address the committee and for the good work over this session.
• You know, as someone who's worked on data privacy for many years, I more than many have an eye for the
• Out of session, that we'll have some type of immediate reprieve for the users of that system, either
• We had one CIO for our company. Thank you so much for being here. Appreciate that.

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 1183, by Rep. G. Lombardo, as amended by a strike-all. The bill would provide liability protection for local governments and private-sector entities that substantially comply with certain cybersecurity practices, including multi-factor authentication, disaster recovery plans, and related policies and procedures. Rep. Lombardo said the measure is intended to create incentives for better cybersecurity and to limit class-action exposure after incidents, while still allowing suits where negligence can be shown. Supporters included TechNet, the Florida Justice Reform Institute, the Florida League of Cities, Associated Industries of Florida, the Florida Association of Counties, and Dr. Edward Long of the James Madison Institute; Vice Chair Steele, Rep. Blanco, and Rep. McFarland also spoke in favor. Ranking Member Bracy Davis opposed the bill, saying she was not comfortable granting liability protections to entities that may have contributed to breaches and questioning whether substantial compliance would be self-attested. The amendment was adopted, and the bill was reported favorably by a 14-2 vote. After the vote, the committee shifted into an extended discussion about Florida’s state IT governance structure, procurement, and project management. Members criticized the current federated model as fragmented and lacking clear accountability, with repeated references to long-running problems such as cost overruns, weak vendor oversight, workforce shortages, and the troubled I-Connect system. Several members argued that the state needs a single accountable leader or stronger enterprise authority over agency technology decisions. Ranking Member Bracy Davis raised concerns about the impact of broken systems on vulnerable populations and asked about the role of advisory councils. Rep. G. Lombardo, Vice Chair Steele, Rep. Miller, and Rep. Groh all emphasized the need for centralized leadership, better alignment of authority and budget, and more disciplined procurement and integration practices. A public witness, Victoria Zep of Team 180, testified in support of a more enterprise-wide approach and said the private sector also wants more organization and transparency. She criticized short procurement timelines, limited competition, and poorly written scopes, and urged the state to post procurements more openly and seek broader vendor input. She also discussed the need to respect agency-specific federal requirements while still improving statewide coordination. The chair closed by asking members to bring forward ideas for immediate and long-term reforms, including review of Senate Bill 7026, and the meeting adjourned without further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think we're going to get done early this session. That's what I'm hoping for.
• They have asked me to stay and keep working for them, and they deserve representation.
• They have asked me to stay and keep working for them, and they deserve representation.
• for them and they deserve working for them and they deserve representation. representation. representation
• </c> p.m. will not work for me tonight. p.m. will not work for me tonight.

Committee: Senate Rules and Administration - Subcommittee on Ethical Conduct

Transcript Highlights:

• I work for Satoshi Action Fund.
• </c><01:30:45.040><c> the</c><01:30:45.239><c> subcommittee</c> don't you save that for the subcommittee
• </c><01:56:11.440><c> Market</c> um what works best for a healthy Market um what works best for a healthy
• </c> I don't um the organization that I work I don't um the organization that I work for<04:52:26.958
• Thank you. for the subcommittee also I will do my for the subcommittee also I will do my best<04:54:21.760

Summary: The House Commerce Committee opened a public hearing on House Bill 310, sponsored by Representative Keith Ammon, which would create a study commission to develop a legal framework for stable tokens and tokenized real-world assets. Ammon described stable tokens as blockchain-based digital tokens backed by U.S. dollars or treasuries, and tokenized real-world assets as representations of ownership in items such as gold, real estate, or artwork. He said the bill is intended to help New Hampshire get ahead of emerging financial markets while waiting to see how federal legislation develops. Committee members asked about the purpose of the bill, the difference between this proposal and Bitcoin, whether state regulation could be preempted by federal law, and whether the commission could be balanced and avoid becoming a vehicle for fraud or money laundering. Ammon said the proposal is blockchain-agnostic, could apply to multiple networks, and is meant to regulate asset-backed tokens rather than create a state-issued coin. He emphasized that the state would not be guaranteeing the underlying assets, but would set rules requiring audits, proof of reserves, and honest representation of backing, with the Secretary of State’s securities office involved in oversight. Several members raised concerns about the risks of stablecoins, including money laundering, tax evasion, and possible harm to the dollar or confusion about whether the state was endorsing a new currency. Ammon responded that the bill would not undermine the dollar and argued that tokenization could actually expand demand for U.S. currency by making it easier to use globally. He also said the state would not be in the business of weighing assets or directly valuing them, only ensuring a valid audit trail and one-to-one backing. The discussion ended with general agreement that the subject is complex and that a commission could help develop future legislation, but no vote or final action was taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• for the 2025 legislative<00:02:05.040><c> session</c><00:02:05.520><c> and</c><00:02:05.840><c> your
• It was new for you. Um, and in fact you guys created a dedicated subcommittee for veterans.
• out a form for him, not for advocating for him, just filling out a form for him.
• ,</c><00:04:03.840><c> not</c><00:04:04.000><c> for</c> filling out a form for him, not for filling out
• a form for him, not for advocating<00:04:04.640><c> for</c><00:04:04.799><c> him,</c><00:04:04.959><

Transcript Highlights:

• So, uh, this is a subcommittee work session. It's not a hearing.
• work session.
• Normally, it's not a matter of taking testimony or hearing from people in a subcommittee work session
• Normally, it's not a matter of taking testimony or hearing from people in a subcommittee work session
• However, it's a work session for not only legislators but also from the public, and I understand the

Summary: The subcommittee met on House Bill 637, which was described as a measure to make whole certain New Hampshire Retirement System retirees who were not included when Senate Bill 57 was incorporated into the 2023 budget. The chair and several members reviewed the bill’s legislative history and fiscal impact, citing estimates that the broader change would cost about $1.4 million to the state and $5.74 million to municipalities, with an actuarial liability increase of about $45 million. The chair argued that the omission of already-retired members was not an oversight but a policy choice made in the Senate, based on the bill’s prospective language and the budget process used in 2023. Testimony and discussion focused on whether the bill should be treated as a fairness correction or as an expensive policy expansion. Supporters, including retirees and representatives of employee groups, said the language was unclear, the fiscal note did not match the bill’s effect, and the change would unfairly leave out actual retirees who had expected the same treatment as active members. They also argued that the retirement system historically linked benefits to Social Security and that the bill would restore equity for those affected. Opponents emphasized the cost, the prospective nature of the original language, and the view that the Senate knowingly chose not to extend the change retroactively. After discussion, the chair moved to recommend the bill inexpedient to legislate, and the motion was seconded. Members then heard brief public comments after the motion was withdrawn and reintroduced because of the weather and the public’s travel. At the final vote, the subcommittee recommended inexpedient to legislate on a 3-2 vote, with the chair noting that the full committee would take up other bills at a later subcommittee hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And as always, thank you for your continued partnership and support of the Commission's work.
• I mean, you're ambassadors for folks looking for work.
• And thank you, Emily, for your work and for the presentation.
• For the advisory council to support and strengthen the work of the commission.
• And I'm going to turn it over to each subcommittee chair for their updates for this group.

Summary: The Massachusetts Permanent Commission on the Status of Persons with Disabilities met virtually and in person for its June meeting. Members approved the March meeting minutes and heard a chair’s report on recent “Meeting the Moment” community conversations, including the successful Lowell event and plans for a July 14 Northampton event and an October National Disability Employment Awareness Month celebration at the State House. The October event will include a panel with MassAbility on artificial intelligence and its impacts on people with disabilities, with discussion of both accessibility benefits and risks such as bias and discrimination. A major presentation came from the Supplier Diversity Office on its Empowering Abilities in Contracting and Employment (EAC) program. Staff described the program’s evolution from a pilot launched after 2016 legislation to a statewide policy now included in new state contracts. The program aims to increase certification of disability-owned and service-disabled veteran-owned businesses, expand workforce participation by people with disabilities, and use vendor reporting to track progress toward a 3% workforce goal. The office reported about 292 active certified businesses, roughly 40 vendors currently on EAC contracts, and expectations that the number of participating vendors will grow to about 130 by November. Commissioners praised the program and asked about its reach, data, and potential replication in other states or institutions. The advisory council update highlighted broad engagement across topics including accessibility, employment, youth transition, housing, health equity, transportation, technology, AI, and supported decision-making. Members were asked to share fact sheets and resources for posting on the commission website, and two council members will help plan the October employment event. Subcommittee reports followed: the employment subcommittee reviewed transition-to-employment barriers, the disability employment tax credit, veteran services, and a SEED policy brief; the workforce supports subcommittee discussed apprenticeships and a May webinar on addressing workforce barriers through apprenticeships; and the long-term services and supports/health equity subcommittee heard about care coordination training resources and a presentation on post-COVID health care inequities for people with disabilities. The executive director also reported on ongoing work with state agencies, MassHealth-related conversations, caregiver and aging issues, and AI planning. The meeting ended with commissioner announcements on the Paul Spooner Generational Leadership Summit and a Medicaid summit, followed by adjournment by vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I'd like to say to everybody, thank you very much for this session.
• So I'd like to say to everybody, thank you very much for this session, and thank you for all the hard
• work that everybody's been doing for all these years.
• It was a lot of work and trying to also do the subcommittees.
• for this work.

Summary: The Juvenile Justice Policy and Oversight Committee (JJPOC) met for administrative updates, approved the April meeting minutes, and discussed a proposed shift from monthly full committee meetings to a quarterly schedule beginning later this year. Members generally supported the change, saying it would reduce strain on agency and committee resources and allow more time for work groups to complete implementation tasks. Several members also asked for more flexible agendas and a clearer way to add issues between meetings, with staff suggesting a standardized form for submitting topics in advance. Work group updates covered cross-agency data sharing, diversion, education, incarceration, and community expertise. The data-sharing group reported continued work on the Equity Dashboard 2.0, a statewide expulsions analysis, municipal-level data collaboration with UConn’s IMRP, and a cross-system analysis of crossover youth. The diversion group described work on POST curriculum revisions for juvenile law, a youth-focused law enforcement interaction training, a community-police relationship toolkit, expansion of youth diversion teams, and pre-arrest diversion policy. The education group is reviewing implementation of the law creating educational oversight in juvenile facilities, along with a free public transportation pilot for high school students and truancy cleanup legislation. The incarceration group is tracking conditions of confinement, DOC restraint and chemical agent reports, the DOJ settlement monitoring process, the reentry success plan, and gender-responsive programming. The community expertise group emphasized elevating lived experience, youth voice, prevention, and conditions of confinement, with members urging the committee to focus on stability, infrastructure, and meaningful use of lived-experience perspectives. A major presentation from OPM outlined Connecticut’s effort to re-enter the federal Title II juvenile justice formula grant program. OPM explained the program’s core compliance requirements, including deinstitutionalization of status offenders, adult jail and lockup removal, sight-and-sound separation, and addressing racial and ethnic disparities. Staff said Connecticut is currently not fully compliant because of issues including youth being held in adult facilities and the state’s six-hour detention rule, and that Title II funding is on hold while OPM works toward compliance. OPM is developing a monitoring manual, identifying facilities to be monitored, and forming a state advisory group (SAG) to support the application and compliance process. Members questioned why a separate SAG is needed, whether JJPOC or the community expertise group could serve that role, and how lived-experience members would be selected; OPM said federal rules require the SAG to include youth or parents with lived experience and that the group cannot be composed of state or government employees in the key leadership roles. The committee agreed to circulate the federal parameters and ask members to suggest candidates for the SAG and to help move compliance work forward over the summer.

Transcript Highlights:

• The next one is revolving around subcommittees, and for that we removed any subcommittee... ...involving
• around subcommittees, and for that we removed any subcommittee.
• work that session.
• discussion about the rules for that session, how they may have worked, how they didn't work, which I
• So thank you guys for working towards that. The rest are all either, well, there's one here.

Summary: The conference committee on legislative rules, led by House Chair Michael Moran and Senate Chair Senator Creem, reviewed the many differences between House and Senate versions of the rules and reported that the branches had agreed on 24 of 52 disputed items. Members said they were moving closer to a final compromise, with several provisions already settled and others still being negotiated offline. The discussion emphasized transparency, committee administration, and ways to move bills through the process earlier in the session. Items agreed to included committee name changes such as adding fisheries to Agriculture and changing elder affairs to aging and independent, adopting House language on joint rules, making committee reports and bill/resolution materials available electronically and online, allowing public access to summaries, and several technical or administrative updates. The committee also agreed on rules for executive sessions, temporary employees, committee travel, favorable/unfavorable reporting, joint petitions, home rule expiration, and special commission meetings. Some provisions were tabled for further discussion, including Mason’s Rules, notice and posting timelines, hearing scheduling, in-person hearings, bill reporting deadlines, and several other administrative topics. A few issues remained unresolved, especially who should draft bill summaries, how to handle notice periods for hearings and postings, and how to structure committee votes and reporting deadlines. The committee also discussed Rule 35, agreeing in principle to a public hearing and broader public comment on rules review, which members said would improve transparency. At the end of the meeting, members praised the work of the committee and staff, said there was “light at the end of the tunnel,” and adjourned after a motion and second.

Transcript Highlights:

• You desire an ordered society that works for the good of each of your beloved children.
• May this work be for the glory of your name and the care of your beloved children.
• By Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee, Representative Black, CS for House Bill 4017, a bill to be
• By Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee and Representative Black, CS for House Bill 4017, a bill to
• By Government Operations Subcommittee and Representative Botana, CS for House Bill 4005, a bill to be

Summary: The House convened with prayer, a moment of silence for former member Terry Fields and the Parkland victims, the Pledge of Allegiance, and routine organizational actions including approval of the journal and adoption of a special order report. The chamber then took up House Bill 1119, relating to materials harmful to minors, which the sponsor described as a measure to clarify and strengthen standards for removing obscene or pornographic content from public school classrooms and libraries while preserving educational uses and not targeting classical literature, LGBTQ content, or other protected viewpoints. Members questioned the bill’s use of terms such as “predominantly,” its relationship to existing local review processes, the impact on AP/IB and college-level materials, the applicability to voucher-funded schools, and the risk of additional First Amendment litigation and costs. The sponsor responded that the bill was needed because current standards were being bypassed and that the legislation was aimed at material harmful to minors, not general literary value. The House considered numerous amendments, most of which were defeated. Amendments offered by Representatives Gant, Aristide, Bartleman, Eskamani, Nixon, Rainer, Woodson, and Harris sought, among other things, to preserve parental choice during review periods, restore a whole-work constitutional standard, limit repeated objections, protect educational and abuse-prevention materials, prevent LGBTQ-inclusive books from being labeled harmful solely on that basis, shield school districts from funding penalties, and delay enforcement in districts already under litigation. Supporters of the amendments argued that the bill would encourage censorship, remove books with clear literary or educational value, burden districts with costs and lawsuits, and harm students who rely on school libraries for access to reading material and representation. Opponents of the amendments argued the bill was necessary to protect minors from explicit content and that the proposed changes would weaken that protection. All of the amendments described in the transcript failed. After the amendment process, the House waived rules, read HB 1119 a third time by title, and entered structured debate on final passage. In closing debate, opponents repeated concerns about constitutional vulnerability, overbroad book removals, and the educational harm of limiting access to literature, while supporters framed the bill as a child-protection measure and a clarification of existing law. The transcript ends during the structured debate on final passage, before the final vote on the bill is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because we had issues of trust with our community based on administration and the board, we worked for
• So again, we worked very well, hand in hand with the district to figure out the best way for them to
• I've been working with the managers in-house to develop five-year plans for our operating budget, working
• Chair, I think the motion is for the AMS subcommittee recommendation for council approval of the PSFA
• I sent it out to the subcommittee to see if the revised dates work for them.

Committee: House Public School Capital Outlay Oversight Task Force

Transcript Highlights:

• We have already noticed over 60 hearings for our seven subcommittees where we will dig down into the
• I want to thank the staff and LAO for working on the...
• And as we're having those discussions in the subcommittee, something that we've argued for many years
• Approved in regards to the response and recovery for the LA wildfires through special sessions.
• But we are looking forward to the 60 subcommittee hearings ahead and looking for To this work of crafting

Committee: House Budget