Transcript Highlights:

• Now, there are plans that we can meet that obligation.
• So, we developed another plan. It... work. So, we developed another plan.
• So, your question is different from the plan that we have and the plan... from the plan that we have
• and the plan that was presented.
• The idea of cost savings and such, that's from the old plan.

Bills: SB60 , SB103 , SB60 , SB103

Committee: Senate Finance and Taxation General Fund

Keywords: prison modernization, corrections finance, bonding authority, state debt, capital improvement, Department of Corrections, Alabama Corrections Institution Finance Authority, prison construction, prison renovation, prison replacement, bed space, overcrowding, women's prison, men's prison, Escambia prison, Tutwiler, Kilby, Elmore, Staton, St. Clair Correctional Facility

Transcript Highlights:

• And that's been causing a lot of strife for beneficiaries, taxpayers, and plan sponsors.
• We don't see this as a cost at the end of the day for any of our plan sponsors.
• From there, the PBMs will negotiate discounted rates for their plan sponsors.
• For all of our plan sponsors, our strategy is really around net cost.
• by us back to our plan sponsors.

Committee: Senate Insurance

Summary: The Senate Insurance Committee met on May 13, 2026, adopted the May 6 minutes, and then took up several bills dealing with pharmacy benefit managers, prescription access, behavioral health coverage, and Citizens Property Insurance. HB 938, as amended, was the main PBM reform measure. After the committee adopted a large amendment set that narrowed the bill, members heard extensive testimony in support from Mark Bloom, Justin Joseph of Capital Rx, and Kathy Ue of Pontchartrain Cancer Center, all emphasizing transparency, pass-through pricing, reverse auctions, and patient access. Supporters described savings from reverse auctions and administrative models, while the cancer center testified that PBM-owned specialty pharmacy requirements can delay cancer medications and create financial hardship. The committee reported HB 938 favorably with amendments. The committee also heard HB 1154, which prohibits prior authorization for certain generic medications prescribed by qualified physicians, with a $250 cap discussed as a safeguard against higher-cost generics. The bill was supported by representatives from Ochsner Health and the Louisiana State Medical Society and was reported favorably. HB 909, which requires commercial coverage for behavioral health crisis services, was amended to clarify the insurers covered and then reported favorably with support from the Office of Behavioral Health and several outside groups. Testimony on HB 909 focused on reducing emergency room and law enforcement burdens and expanding crisis response capacity across the state. HB 1187, dealing with excess emergency assessment funds from Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Corporation, was explained by the Insurance Commissioner as a way to transfer remaining Katrina-era assessment funds to the Fortified Roof Program. The committee reported the bill favorably. Finally, SB 511 and SB 512 were deferred and converted into a study resolution approach because there was not yet consensus on the underlying issue. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• I am here for the Fair Plan. We support AB 69.
• Insurance Strategy in depopulating the Fair Plan.
• We depend on the Fair Plan to fill insurance gaps, but we also depend on the Fair Plan to be transparent
• Chair, Armand Luciana, for the Fair Plan.
• paying and landed myself on the FAIR Plan.

Summary: The committee heard several insurance-related bills. AB 69, AB 1554, and AB 1680 all focused on California’s insurance market and the Fair Plan. AB 69 would require clearer notices to Fair Plan policyholders about coverage options, quarterly public reporting on clearinghouse programs, and additional broker/agent training to help depopulate the Fair Plan while preserving consumer choice. AB 1554 would require the California Earthquake Authority to post its annual report online and send it to relevant committees, and would direct the Insurance Commissioner to convene a working group on incorporating hazard mitigation into risk-transfer recommendations. AB 1680 would require the Fair Plan to comply with CDI examination findings, hire more staff, and improve clearinghouse operations; the Fair Plan moved from opposition to neutral after amendments, and the department said the bill would strengthen accountability and consumer protections. These bills were held pending quorum or taken up later, with authors requesting aye votes. AB 2198, by Assemblymember Rodriguez, would clarify title insurance rate-filing rules by specifying that title insurers file title rates and underwritten title companies file escrow rates, reducing duplicative filings and requiring rate schedules to be posted online. The California Land Title Association supported the bill, saying it codified longstanding practice and improved transparency, while the department continued discussions about possible revisions. The bill was left open for further questions and a later vote. AB 1795, by Assemblymember Gibson, would create statewide standards for inspecting, testing, and remediating smoke damage in wildfire-affected homes. The author and the Department of Insurance said the bill would establish science-based standards, protect survivors from unsafe reentry, require training and certification for relevant professionals, and improve claims handling; the department also described serious gaps found in its Fair Plan examination and recent wildfire claims. Insurers and some residents opposed or opposed unless amended, arguing the bill was still too broad, could raise costs, relied too much on industry standards, and left unresolved issues about legal standards, timing, and coverage. The bill remained under discussion, with the author saying negotiations would continue. AB 311, by Assemblymember McKinnor, would create an optional telematics-based auto insurance program to reward safer driving and improve road safety. Supporters, including road-safety advocates, victims’ families, and some insurance representatives, argued telematics could reduce speeding and distracted driving and save lives. Opponents, including privacy and consumer groups, argued the bill would create opaque surveillance pricing, undermine Prop. 103, and raise privacy and fairness concerns. After extensive debate, the committee passed the bill on a 3-0 vote and placed it on call. AB 1798, by Assemblymember Wilson, would bar life and disability insurers from using non-diagnostic genetic information from direct-to-consumer or other predictive genetic testing to deny coverage or raise premiums, while preserving use of medical history and family history and allowing consideration of certain high-value policies above $1.5 million. Supporters said the bill would reduce genetic discrimination and encourage testing; insurers argued genetic information is relevant to underwriting and warned the bill could raise costs and create inconsistencies. The committee chair and members noted the bill was close to agreement but still needed work, and the bill was moved with a 3-0 vote and placed on call.

Transcript Highlights:

• The state does have an action plan on homelessness and a plan to build 1 million new affordable homes
• But AB 1165 transforms those aspirations into a... ...plan.
• policy plan for land use within these jurisdictions.
• They don't have planning people on staff.
• every single city's plan when a number of the cities...

Summary: The Senate Committee on Housing met without a quorum at first and operated as a subcommittee, then later established a quorum and took up several housing-related bills. Early presentations included AB 2390, a cleanup bill on housing streamlining and project modifications, which was described as clarifying that minor and subsequent modifications are reviewed under the standards in effect when the original application was filed; there was no opposition, and the bill was moved on a due pass motion but held on call for absent members. AB 1890, which would increase state matching support for Napa County farmworker housing centers from $250,000 to $500,000 annually and extend the program through 2036, drew strong support from Napa County officials, the Farm Bureau, hospitals, and vintners, and was also moved to Appropriations and held on call. AB 956, an ADU bill allowing more flexibility in how accessory dwelling units are built and clarifying application of ADU law in common interest developments, drew support from housing advocates and opposition from the League of California Cities over density, infrastructure, and local control concerns; the committee discussed amendments to avoid triggering density bonus law, then passed the bill as amended to Local Government, with some members expressing reservations or abstaining. The consent calendar, including AB 739, AB 2162, AB 2320, and AB 2692, was also acted on and held on call for absent members. Later, the committee heard AB 939, which would remove a 180-day resale restriction for certain income-restricted ownership units when a nonprofit affordable housing organization is ready to buy and sell them to qualified low-income buyers. Supporters, including Habitat for Humanity and California YIMBY, said the bill would reduce vacancy, carrying costs, and delays in getting affordable homes to buyers; the California Association of Realtors opposed unless amended, arguing the bill could limit buyer choice, codify first-right-of-refusal provisions, and reduce wealth-building opportunities. Members questioned those concerns, and the author said amendments were being worked on; the bill was moved to Appropriations and held on call. AB 1165, the California Housing Justice Act, would require state housing agencies to develop a fiscal analysis and long-term financial plan for ending homelessness and addressing housing affordability; it received broad support from supportive housing, civil rights, and homelessness organizations, with no opposition filed, and was moved to Appropriations and held on call. AB 1184, an HOA transparency bill requiring more notice and access around litigation and recordings, was moved to Judiciary after discussion about whether it duplicated existing HOA law and whether the proposed amendments were too broad. AB 2035, a narrowly tailored bill for Laguna Woods Village to lower the vote threshold needed to petition a court to amend outdated CC&Rs, was supported as a one-time fix and moved to Judiciary. Finally, AB 1573, pulled from consent, would add survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and human trafficking to housing element target populations; supporters said these groups are overrepresented among people experiencing housing instability and should be explicitly included in local housing planning.

Transcript Highlights:

• It should not be part of family planning.
• In Los Angeles County, Planned Parenthood Los Angeles and Planned Parenthood Pasadena and San Gabriel
• County, including for Planned Parenthood.
• In Los Angeles County, Planned Parenthood Los Angeles and Planned Parenthood Pasadena and San Gabriel
• County, including for Planned Parenthood.

Summary: The committee heard eight bills, mostly on local government, housing, and public agency contracting. AB 1658 would make permanent higher change-order authority for Santa Clara and Los Angeles counties on large construction projects; supporters said it would reduce delays and save money on major projects, and the bill passed 6-0. AB 2263 would authorize the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority to develop employee-preference affordable housing; supporters said it would help with workforce retention and long commutes, and it also passed 6-0. AB 2134 would require city councils to allow parental leave without forcing members to seek public approval or risk losing their seats; supporters described the bill as necessary to protect new parents in local office, and it passed 6-0. AB 2188 would raise Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District’s contracting authority to $250,000, with supporters citing administrative savings and faster project delivery; after committee amendments, it passed 6-0. AB 2033 would let general law cities use job order contracting for repair and maintenance work, with safeguards against employee displacement; supporters called it an efficiency tool, while AFSCME opposed it over workforce impacts, and it passed 8-0 after amendments. AB 1768 would authorize Los Angeles County and Contra Costa County to ask voters to approve a temporary transactions and use tax to help offset major federal health care cuts and preserve clinics and public health services. Supporters from community clinics, Planned Parenthood, labor groups, counties, and health organizations said the measure would let voters decide how to respond to funding losses; opponents, including CalTax and some cities, raised affordability and tax-burden concerns. Members also discussed equity concerns within Los Angeles County and the importance of local control. The bill was moved out on a 5-2 vote and left on call. AB 2415 would allow the city of Folsom to shift housing obligations away from its historic district and toward other transit-oriented sites; supporters said it would preserve the historic district while still meeting housing goals, and it passed 10-0. AB 2741, heard at the end of the meeting, would give cities a grace period to fix housing elements that were certified by HCD but later found noncompliant by a court, especially where cities relied on overlay zones. Supporters from the League of California Cities, Redondo Beach, and real estate groups said cities acted in good faith and should not be immediately subjected to builder’s remedy; opponents from California YIMBY and legal aid groups argued the bill would weaken housing accountability and reward noncompliance. The transcript ends during testimony on AB 2741, before a final vote is recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're planning on transferring those murals.
• So is there a plan for that region?
• But we do have that plan.
• And we have plans specifically for those as well.
• This plan could also include plans about innovative ways to use funding to finance new construction or

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Corrections, Public Safety, Judiciary, Labor, and Transportation held a hearing focused first on courthouse facility funding and then on the Governor’s proposed court facilities budget. Legislative Analyst’s Office staff outlined the state’s court-facilities funding structure, including the 2002 shift of trial court facility responsibility from counties to the state, the main funding accounts, the insolvency of the construction fund, the move to General Fund support, the backlog of deferred maintenance, and the large estimated cost of needed new construction and repairs. Judicial Council representatives and judges from Los Angeles and Mendocino described severe seismic, safety, ADA, security, and maintenance problems, with examples of floods, elevator failures, asbestos-related closures, and long-delayed or underfunded projects. They argued that chronic underinvestment is making facilities less safe and more expensive to maintain, and that courthouse conditions directly affect access to justice and public confidence. Committee members pressed witnesses on how projects are prioritized, whether population and filing volume are adequately reflected, why reassessments have not been updated since 2019, how long acquisitions and construction take, and what level of funding would actually close the gap. Members also questioned the fixed county contribution, the use of General Fund backfills, and whether the state should set a clearer long-term funding target for the judicial branch. LAO staff emphasized that any new General Fund commitment would require tradeoffs with other budget priorities and said the Legislature must decide its appetite for funding. Judicial Council staff said the current prioritization was based on the 2019 reassessment and trailer bill language, that a new reassessment would cost about $14 million, and that acquisition delays are often driven by willing-seller issues and CEQA requirements. The chair asked for written testimony and indicated the committee would consider a future field hearing. In the second panel, Judicial Council and Department of Finance representatives reviewed the Governor’s budget proposals for court facilities. They said the proposal includes continued backfill for the State Court Facilities Construction Fund, several new construction and reappropriation items, relocation of Los Angeles courtrooms from the Spring Federal Building, and completion of a fire/life-safety project in Orange County. A court executive from Ventura testified that courthouse conditions affect public trust, employee morale, and the quality of service, citing roof leaks, elevator breakdowns, and HVAC failures as examples of why sustained facilities funding is needed.

Transcript Highlights:

• The 2025-26 budget plan does reduce CSU state support by $300 million.
• It's difficult for us to plan for the receipt of such deferrals in the future.
• Additionally, we have implemented an enrollment target and budget reallocation plan.
• In their initial plans, again this is Nathan Evans from the CSU.
• In planning ahead, it was reallocated to the campuses.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And that is what's driving primarily our new strategic plan.
• As part of our strategic plan, Unleashing Potential. Why?
• , and we review that plan, and court is with statute. pending plan.
• And we review that plan and court is with statute.
• Now the plan is they can't park next to their building.

Summary: The Higher Education Budget Subcommittee met to hear an overview of State University System finances from the Board of Governors and detailed budget presentations from Florida State University, the University of Central Florida, and the University of North Florida. The witnesses explained how university budgets are organized into fund categories such as education and general, contracts and grants, auxiliaries, local/designated funds, capital projects, and component units such as direct support organizations. They also described carry forward funds, the statutory reserve and spending-plan requirements, the PICO/HECO capital outlay process, and how universities use investment accounts, audits, and board oversight to manage restricted and unspent funds. The universities emphasized that most operating dollars are restricted to specific uses and that state support helps keep tuition low. Members asked about differences in funding levels among institutions, especially why FSU receives more funding than UCF despite lower enrollment. Officials said preeminence funding, performance funding, and special legislative appropriations explain much of the difference, and the Board of Governors noted that Florida now has four preeminent universities, with UCF nearing that status. Questions also focused on what happens to unspent carry forward money, how it is invested, and whether the Board of Governors or Legislature can require funds to be returned; officials said the money is invested conservatively, subject to board and audit oversight, and can roll forward under a detailed spending plan, though the Legislature can change funding levels. The committee also discussed capital projects, with members asking about delays, inflation, and whether more projects should be phased or funded faster; witnesses said PICO funds remain with the state until needed and are reimbursed as construction proceeds. A substantial portion of the discussion covered athletics, research, student fees, and endowments. The universities said athletics is generally expected to be self-supporting, though limited use of auxiliary or carry forward funds may be allowed for projects benefiting the broader student body. They also described the financial pressures from name, image, and likeness changes and new NCAA-related costs, and said institutions are planning for those changes now. On research, the universities explained sponsored research funding, indirect cost recovery, compliance obligations, and tech transfer, but did not provide specific commercialization revenue figures and said they would follow up. Members also asked about student fee increases, student input, counseling and wellness funding, and how housing costs affect affordability; the universities said student committees and boards review fees, and aid packaging is intended to keep student debt low. Endowments were described as being held in separate foundations/DSOs with independent investment committees and used mainly for scholarships, faculty support, and research.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think they would need a state amendment plan.
• We understand that the concept of a vision plan, a vision plan company is not working as they were intended
• Division plan is $30, representing a 58% reduction.
• So we had not dealt with vision plans before.
• It really depends on the type of plan and the size of the plan.

Bills: HB136 , HB451 , SB425 , SB466 , SB905 , SB1986 , SB2311 , SB2450 , SB2805 , SB2826 , SB2919 , SB3001 , HB136

Committee: Senate Health & Human Services

Keywords: Medicaid, lactation, healthcare, consultation, reimbursement, maternal health, infant care, commercial sexual exploitation, child sex trafficking, human trafficking, child welfare, foster care, DFPS, Department of Family and Protective Services, juvenile probation, risk assessment, needs assessment, trauma screening, child abuse prevention, exploitation screening

Transcript Highlights:

• will do a student-centered plan.
• So we should have safety planning for all students. and their team will do student-centered plan.
• So 266 we should have safety planning for all students.
• under different things where the plans would just carry.
• It 392 to create a safe plan.

Summary: The Student Academic Success Subcommittee met with a quorum and heard four bills, beginning with HB 423 on school elopement plans for students with autism or other elopement risks. The sponsors described the bill as a statewide framework for school elopement response plans, immediate parent notification, campus search procedures, and staff training. Public testimony from parents, disability advocates, and a teacher emphasized the dangers of elopement and the need for standardized procedures; members from both parties spoke strongly in support. The bill was reported favorably by a 15-0 vote. The committee next considered HB 1253, which allows coaches to use limited personal funds, up to $15,000 per athletic team per year, to support student-athletes with food, transportation, and physical rehabilitation services. An amendment added guardrails, including that the coach be a school employee, clarified the scope of athletic associations covered, and refined the rehabilitation language. Members discussed the bill as a way to help students in need while avoiding recruiting concerns, and the bill passed favorably 14-0 after the amendment was adopted. HB 1091 addressed dental screenings for K-12 students in districts that voluntarily offer them. The bill requires advance written notice to parents and an opt-out process, and clarifies that screenings are informational only, with any findings sent to parents rather than compelling treatment. An amendment added the language to student welfare provisions as well as school health services. Public testimony from dental and health advocates supported the measure, and the bill was reported favorably 14-0. Finally, the committee heard HB 765 on child care and early learning services. The bill expands before- and after-care options for certain school-based preschool programs without requiring a child care facility license, removes a flu brochure inspection requirement, bars insurance cancellation based on providing child care, creates a professional recognition program, and establishes a child care tuition fund. Two amendments broadened the bill to public and nonpublic elementary schools and created the Brighter Futures fund concept. After debate, the bill passed favorably 13-1, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• And it's not unusual for the person who's navigating what is in this plan.
• to plan.
• All this amendment does is that it will cover the public plans.
• If we're going to ask the privates and commercials, It will cover the public plans.
• I agree that I would like the bill to apply to all plans.

Bills: HB2555 , HB2658 , HB2683 , HB2685 , HB2168 , HB2196 , HB2545

Committee: House Health Care & Wellness

Keywords: Medicaid, healthcare, traditional practices, health insurance, coverage expansion, mental health, insurance coverage, transparency, consumer protection, efficiency, health carriers, providers relations, tribal data, data protection, privacy, sharing of information, Indigenous rights, overdose prevention, data sharing, public health

Transcript Highlights:

• to the Non-Represented Employees Compensation Plan.
• This 2030 plan is really...
• Will you support a statewide plan for aging?
• The aging of Minnesota needs planning and policies.
• And as our state changes, though, what is the plan?

Bills: HF1837 , HF361 , HF2725 , HF2566 , HF2744 , HF1685 , HF501 , HF1889 , HF1389

Committee: House State Government Finance and Policy

Keywords: state policy, employment, health insurance, fossil designation, public funds, community resources, Capitol Mall, grantmaking, community vitality, livability, funding, healthy aging, aging policy, older adults, seniors, elderly, gerontology, long-term care, assisted living, nursing homes

Transcript Highlights:

• phase and the planning phase is planning phase and the planning phase is absolutely<01:50:26.159><c>
• schools you have to have a work plan. schools you have to have a work plan.
• submitted plans?
• </c> plan would be. plan would be.
• Those plans are in process.

Committee: House Resources, Recreation and Development

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Oh, who is the county planning manager from Pierce County?
• He's a long-range planning manager there.
• I’m the planning director for the City of Spokane.
• I've been at planning a long time now since 1978. I've been planning a long time now since 1978.
• You know, how do you manage the workload that is long-range planning, current planning, enforcement,

Committee: House Local Government

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The PAO report also quite correctly points out that DSL plans cost more than fiber plans. Why?
• California sent their plan in a little bit late.
• You know, California has one of the most generous Lifeline plans, state plans in the country.
• Generous Lifeline plans, state plans in the country. So, you know, that's congratulations for that.
• Finally, the means-tested plans.

Summary: The Assembly Communications and Conveyance Committee held an informational hearing on the state of broadband affordability in California. Chair Tasha Berner said the committee was examining how broadband prices, access, and affordability are affecting households, especially after the end of the federal Affordable Connectivity Program and amid concerns about federal resistance to state broadband regulation. She noted the committee’s continued interest in policy options for 2026 and referenced prior legislation, including AB 353, that would have required affordable home internet as a condition of doing business in California. Industry witnesses from U.S. Telecom and CTIA argued that broadband and wireless prices have generally fallen in real terms even as inflation and other household costs have risen, citing competition, infrastructure investment, and faster speeds as the main drivers. They said California’s higher costs are tied to permitting delays, taxes, copper theft, and legacy obligations such as COLR requirements, and they urged the Legislature to preserve market incentives, reduce fees and regulatory burdens, and support infrastructure deployment. They also discussed fixed wireless access, federal BEAD funding, and Universal Service Fund reform, arguing that more entities benefiting from networks, including tech platforms, should contribute to support programs. Consumer and public-interest witnesses presented a different view, saying California still has a serious affordability and adoption problem, especially for low-income households. Sunny McPhee of the California Emerging Technology Fund said broadband adoption has improved dramatically over time, but about 500,000 households remain offline or underconnected and many low-income households still pay above the FCC affordability benchmark. Ernesto Falcon of the CPUC Public Advocates Office said California’s market is losing its competitive edge, with prices higher than in other states and meaningful price pressure coming mainly from fiber competition at the gigabit tier. He said roughly 4.8 million Californians are limited to one gigabit option and estimated that more competition could save consumers more than $1 billion annually. Both witnesses emphasized the need for stronger transparency, targeted subsidies, and a permanent affordability solution, including extending and refining the CPUC broadband Lifeline pilot and advancing SB 716. Public commenters, including representatives from cable providers, nonprofits, and digital equity organizations, largely supported SB 716 and a permanent broadband affordability program. Several urged the committee to remove a cap on the Lifeline program, expand the CPUC pilot, and invest in digital navigators, outreach, and enrollment assistance. The hearing ended without a vote or formal action, after the chair thanked the witnesses and public commenters for their testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's not water planning; that's almost criminal.
• The City of Austin announced their plans for an ASR project, including it in their Water Forward Plan
• , discuss such plans and DFC achievement progress at least once during each five-year planning cycle.
• They get to do that on the 50-year planning.
• It's kind of like the state water planning process.

Committee: Senate Water, Agriculture and Rural Affairs

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• then forcing optometrists to contract with the vision plans.
• It really depends on the type of plan and size of plan, and probably, you know, the larger, more national
• plan is more likely to have more of their claim systems in-house.
• The smaller plan, you see them outsource or contract out.
• It is not a needed state amendment plan.

Bills: HB136 , HB451 , SB425 , SB466 , SB905 , SB1986 , SB2311 , SB2450 , SB2805 , SB2826 , SB2919 , SB3001

Committee: Senate Health & Human Services

Keywords: Medicaid, lactation, healthcare, consultation, reimbursement, maternal health, infant care, commercial sexual exploitation, child sex trafficking, human trafficking, child welfare, foster care, DFPS, Department of Family and Protective Services, juvenile probation, risk assessment, needs assessment, trauma screening, child abuse prevention, exploitation screening

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and announced it would vote on pending bills at 10:30, with public testimony limited to two minutes. It first took up Senate Bill 905, a TDLR cleanup bill on licensing regulation of speech-language pathologists and audiologists. Senator Zafferini said the committee substitute would streamline advisory board consultation, remove obsolete provisional licenses, and allow any licensed physician to authorize hearing instruments for minors; the substitute was adopted and the bill left pending. The committee then heard House Bill 451, which would require universal screening for commercial sexual exploitation risk for children in DFPS conservatorship and youth under TJJD jurisdiction. The author and witnesses from Children at Risk, the Fort Bend Anti-Trafficking Collective, and Texas CASA supported the bill as a prevention tool with existing infrastructure and training; the committee adopted the substitute and left the bill pending. The committee next considered Senate Bill 466, which would clarify that families may request a fetal death certificate at any gestational age, while keeping existing filing requirements for physicians. A constituent father testified about losing his 11-week-old daughter and being told he could not obtain a certificate, which he said prevented funeral arrangements; the substitute was adopted and the bill left pending. Senate Bill 2311 followed, requiring residential treatment centers to have a written agreement with the school that will educate resident children before becoming operational. The author cited a local dispute where an RTC and school district lacked communication, and witnesses from Texas CASA and Disability Rights Texas supported clearer educational planning while suggesting the Education Code may need conforming changes; the bill was left pending. The committee then heard Senate Bill 2826, known as Alyssa’s Law, which would create a statewide education program on medical child abuse for medical students, health care professionals, and CPS caseworkers. The author and Sheriff Bill Weyburn described Alyssa’s case as involving repeated unnecessary surgeries and argued the bill would improve awareness and early identification, while several witnesses and members raised concerns about false accusations, impacts on medically fragile children, and the need for scientific, peer-reviewed training and safeguards. After extensive discussion, the chair left the bill pending. The committee also heard House Bill 136, which would add certified lactation consultants as Medicaid providers to expand breastfeeding support; witnesses from lactation and nutrition fields said the bill would improve access, maternal and infant health, and long-term savings, and the bill was left pending. Finally, the committee took up Senate Bill 2805, a surprise-billing/arbitration measure that would clarify provider identifiers and shift arbitration costs to the losing party. The author said the substitute was a legislative counsel draft with no substantive difference, and witnesses from the Texas Medical Association, Texas Society of Anesthesiologists, and U.S. Anesthesia Partners supported the bill as a modest improvement that would reduce administrative confusion and make arbitration fairer without weakening patient protections. Members discussed how arbitration costs affect settlement behavior and how to define the “winner” in close cases. The bill was heard but not voted out during this segment.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:14:55.519><c> to</c> council and our council and we plan to council and our council and we plan
• Um uh I change their spending plans.
• There have been, plans already.
• </c><00:19:50.960><c> at</c> they can amend their spending plan at they can amend their spending plan
• </c> what they're looking to change the plan what they're looking to change the plan to<00:20:04.880>

Committee: Senate Taxes

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Metro, and others, on their plans.
• Metro, and others, on their plans.
• Is there a plan?
• Is there a plan? So my question is, based on what I just shared, is there a long-term plan?
• And the very best security plan that we could come up with is a good transportation plan.

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on planning for the 2028 Los Angeles Olympic and Paralympic Games, focusing on infrastructure, transportation, sustainability, ticketing, community benefits, and legacy planning. LA28’s Joey Freeman reported on overall progress, including new soccer venues across the country, strong ticket demand, a volunteer program launched early, $2.5 billion in corporate sponsorships, and recently enacted state laws to support route networks, temporary infrastructure, medical staffing, and EMS coordination. He also said LA28 is sponsoring AB 2436 to extend in-state tuition eligibility for Team USA student-athletes training in California. Members pressed LA28 heavily on ticket affordability and access, saying the local presale and low-cost ticket rollout had not met community expectations. Several senators asked for clearer numbers on how many tickets were available, how many were under $100, and how community ticketing would work, with concerns that nonprofit distribution could still miss low-income residents. LA28 said $28 tickets were offered, roughly 500,000 low-cost tickets were placed with local residents during the presale, and a community ticketing program seeded by philanthropy would provide free tickets through nonprofits. Senators also raised concerns about gender parity data, security funding, and whether federal support would remain stable. Mayor Karen Bass said the city’s theme is “Games for All” and emphasized that Los Angeles wants the Games to benefit every neighborhood through small-business contracting, cultural programming, and lasting infrastructure. She described city-run small business summits, a broader Cultural Olympiad effort tied to murals and neighborhood storytelling, and watch parties and fan fests as free community alternatives. Bass also requested state help speeding approvals for key public-land improvements, allowing mutual aid for law enforcement without a state of emergency, and addressing freeway trash and encampments that could affect access to venues. Members asked for follow-up on those requests, including details on permitting, Caltrans coordination, and business participation. The final panel began with an infrastructure presentation from Councilmember Paul Krekorian, who said the Games are a no-build, transit-first event and outlined requests for street and sidewalk improvements, accessibility upgrades, energy and charging infrastructure, a joint operations center, active transportation projects, and cleanup of Caltrans rights of way. He argued the Games could generate $18 billion in economic output, support 90,000 jobs, and produce at least $700 million in state and local tax revenue, while also leaving behind permanent community benefits. He closed by pointing to Los Angeles’ history with the 1932 and 1984 Games as evidence that the city can deliver a successful and financially positive Olympics.

Transcript Highlights:

• The declaration should include if they are planning, if they are or planning to or currently receiving
• home-based instruction or planning to enroll in a public or private school.
• So in the bill there's a mention of a plan that they have to submit, so what kind of plan would that
• or planning to enroll in public or private school.
• What we know is simple: having a plan saves lives.

Summary: The committee began by waiving the five-day notice rule for Senate Bill 6320, then heard Senate Bill 6222, which would let school districts and educational service districts sell or grant surplus technology hardware such as laptops and tablets to public school students and recent graduates, with priority for low-income students. The sponsor and supporters said the bill would help students keep access to devices they need for homework, college, and work, while preserving existing surplus procedures. Testimony was generally supportive, including from district technology staff and students, though one question raised whether tribal compact schools would be included. The committee then heard Senate Bill 6263, which raises school district public bid thresholds to reflect inflation and reduce procurement costs. The sponsor said the limits had not been updated in about 20 years and should be aligned with other local governments. Supporters from school employees, finance officers, and school coalitions said the change would save time and money and reduce delays in maintenance and purchasing. Testimony on Senate Bill 6261, which would require parents of six- and seven-year-olds not enrolled in school to file annual declarations of intent about their child’s education, was overwhelmingly opposed by homeschool families and advocates. Opponents argued it would add bureaucracy, create privacy concerns, and burden families, while the superintendent of public instruction supported the bill as a way to improve enrollment data and planning. The sponsor said it was about knowing where children are and right-sizing school systems. The committee also heard Senate Bill 6118, requiring cardiac emergency response plans in schools and athletic facilities. The sponsor, who spoke about losing her brother to heart failure, said schools need faster, better-prepared responses to cardiac emergencies. Supporters, including parents, students, and community advocates, described personal experiences with sudden cardiac events and said the bill could save lives by ensuring AEDs, CPR training, and practiced response plans. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 6320 on alternative learning experiences. The bill would restrict online and remote ALE providers to public or nonprofit entities and reduce levy equalization funding for remote/online ALE, with limited exceptions for medically fragile or severely bullied students. Supporters argued it would keep public education public and encourage in-person learning, while opponents—including superintendents, online program operators, students, and homeschool advocates—warned it would displace thousands of students, harm successful programs, and reduce family choice. No final votes were taken on the bills in the portion provided.