Transcript Highlights:

• My only question is, on page 3, line 19, where you talk about the 96-hour psychiatric evaluation, how
• Under 632.704, this is beyond the patient's will during an emergency detention and evaluation.

Committee: House Legislative Review

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Is it just us really starting the process of trying to evaluate how an EITE would decarbonize?
• that the underlying purpose of the bill here remains the same: this is a requirement to develop and evaluate

Summary: The Environment and Energy committee met to executive three bills. SB 6291 would extend from two to four years the period a non-certified person may review designs and inspect on-site wastewater treatment systems under supervision of a certified individual; the committee adopted a striking amendment making a technical correction to the definition of an on-site wastewater treatment system and then passed the bill 18-0 with three excused. ESB 6246 concerns no-cost allowance allocations for emissions-intensive, trade-exposed facilities under the Climate Commitment Act; the striking amendment added an Ecology-contracted independent third-party report due in 2028 on emissions and job leakage, revised reporting and disclosure provisions, required unaffiliated licensed professional engineers for certain assessments, and clarified penalty language. Members discussed leakage, third-party review, and costs to industry, and the bill passed 11-7 with three excused after the amendment was adopted. The committee also took up ESSB 5975, which sets lead standards for certain cookware and adjusts the Safer Products for Washington process. Members described the bill as the result of multiple years of negotiation balancing public health concerns about lead exposure with industry concerns, and noted the striking amendment set specific 2030 and 2034 standards for pots and pans. After brief supportive discussion, the committee adopted the striker and passed the bill 18-0 with three excused.

Transcript Highlights:

• H. 5112 ensures that people are evaluated based on their real health, not hypothetical outcomes.
• Age 5112 ensures that people are evaluated based on their real health, not hypothetical outcomes.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Financial Services

Summary: The Joint Committee on Financial Services held a fully virtual public hearing because the State House was closed due to the prior day’s blizzard and ongoing cleanup and travel concerns. Chairs Paul Feeney and James Murphy opened by thanking first responders, DPW crews, plow operators, healthcare workers, and others who responded to the storm, and they explained the hearing was kept on schedule because of upcoming reporting deadlines. The committee heard testimony on H. 5112, An Act Prohibiting Genetic Discrimination, and also noted two other bills on the docket: H. 4914, An Act Relative to the Massachusetts Uniform Commercial Code, and S. 2921, An Act Relative to Travel Insurance. Representative Dave Rogers testified in support of H. 5112, joined by constituent Robin Biggs, who described her experience as a BRCA2 mutation carrier and said she was advised to secure life insurance before genetic testing because results could affect coverage. Biggs said genetic knowledge helped her make preventive health decisions, but she and others fear financial discrimination if insurers can use genetic information. Lindsay Jack of the ALS Association also supported the bill, arguing that people should not have to choose between learning about their health risks and protecting their financial future, and saying the measure would encourage testing and early intervention without harming the insurance market. Lisa Schlager of FORCE likewise backed the bill, saying many people with hereditary cancer risks avoid testing because of insurance concerns and that the federal law does not fully protect against discrimination in life, long-term care, and disability insurance. Committee members asked questions about whether insurers currently request genetic testing information and whether such information is used in underwriting. Testifiers said insurers routinely ask about genetic testing or obtain the information from medical records, and that the bill would prohibit using genetic test results in underwriting and would prevent insurers from requiring testing. No votes were taken; after testimony concluded and no additional witnesses came forward, the chairs closed the hearing and adjourned the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• They are going to re-evaluate that fiscal note as it goes to approval because of the proposed substitute
• They are going to re-evaluate that fiscal note as it goes to approval because of the proposed substitute

Summary: The Labor and Workplace Standards Committee met to consider four bills, though House Bill 2563 was removed from consideration before action. HB 2188 would require L&I to publish more information about workers’ compensation premium rates and actuarial rate-setting. Members described it as a transparency measure, and it passed the committee 8-0 with one excused. The committee then took up HB 2218, dealing with access to medical care in the workers’ compensation system. The proposed substitute made several changes to provider-network rules, rural access standards, utilization review timelines, and continued treatment after claim closure. Representative Schmidt’s amendment to add more claims managers was adopted, while earlier amendments on inducement and treatment language were withdrawn. The substitute bill passed 6-2 with one excused, with supporters emphasizing rural access and faster care, and opponents raising concerns about the fiscal note and some inducement-related language. HB 2524 would create a State Security Guards Industry Standards Board to set minimum employment standards for security guards and allow enforcement by L&I and, in the original bill, a private right of action. Amendment 236, making technical changes and delaying the board’s first meeting, was adopted, while Amendment 237 to remove the private right of action failed. The amended substitute passed 5-3 with one excused. Supporters said it would improve training, stability, and worker protections, while opponents cited cost concerns and argued it could interfere with existing compensation and bargaining arrangements.

Transcript Highlights:

• I am a professor at the University of Alabama School of Social Work, and I'm also the EV lead evaluator
• since it's something that they find so important, I think they... ...I think they don't know how to evaluate

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• unit mixed-use project as part of your environmental analysis and your project analysis and how you evaluate
• unit mixed-use project as part of your environmental analysis and your project analysis and how you evaluate
• unit mixed-use project as part of your environmental analysis and your project analysis and how you evaluate
• unit mixed-use project as part of your environmental analysis and your project analysis and how you evaluate
• unit mixed-use project as part of your environmental analysis and your project analysis and how you evaluate

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint House committees on Housing and Education heard HB 1713, HD1, which would repeal school impact fees and transfer remaining balances in the school impact fee and certain fair share accounts to the school facilities special fund. The Department of Education testified in opposition, while the Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation, the Attorney General’s office (with comments and suggested constitutional amendments), the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, the School Facilities Authority, Grassroot Institute of Hawaii, NAP Hawaii, Avalon Development Company, Mark Development, Maui Chamber of Commerce, Housing Hawaii’s Future, Landis Research Foundation, BIA Hawaii, and others testified in support. The Tax Foundation of Hawaii offered comments. The DOE said the bill would weaken a key tool for matching school facilities to residential growth, while supporters said the current program leaves funds unused or restricted in ways that limit their effectiveness. A lengthy discussion followed about the difference between the older school impact fee program and the separate fair share agreements tied to land use entitlements and change-of-zone approvals. DOE Deputy Superintendent Jesse Suki explained that fair share funds are tied to the district where they were collected, may be too small to build a full school on their own, and are held until needed for projects such as Core Ridge, Central and West Maui, and other planned schools. Committee members pressed DOE on why funds had remained unspent for years, how much money was in the accounts, and whether the department had reviewed audit findings about the program. Members also questioned whether homeowners ultimately bear these costs through developers passing them along. The committee did not take a vote during the portion of the meeting provided. The discussion ended with members and DOE debating whether the current statute should remain in place, whether past entitlements should be affected, and whether the bill should be amended to better address remaining construction-related obligations and the use of collected funds.

Transcript Highlights:

• defendant's attendance at initial defendant's attendance at initial competency<00:14:08.279><c> evaluation
• </c><00:14:09.279><c> and</c><00:14:09.600><c> at</c><00:14:09.839><c> any</c> competency evaluation
• and at any competency evaluation and at any treatment<00:14:11.000><c> appointments.
• ,</c><00:19:29.440><c> supporting</c><00:19:29.840><c> them</c> competency evaluations, supporting them
• competency evaluations, supporting them with<00:19:30.240><c> programming,</c><00:19:31.360><c> um,<

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• that the House did not hear the bill, is that we have not had an opportunity to fully debate and evaluate
• He asked whether the witness did not have a chance to evaluate the position before, during, or after
• He asked whether the witness did not have a chance to evaluate the position before, during, or after
• So, did you not have a chance to evaluate<00:12:50.720><c> this</c><00:12:51.120><c> position</c><00:
• 12:51.519><c> before,</c><00:12:52.079><c> during,</c> evaluate this position before, during, evaluate

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We are also planning to conduct a survey of turkey hunters this summer to evaluate the impacts on turkey
• that they don't have to go through the process that I was describing earlier, where you get the evaluation
• that they don't have to go through the process that I was describing earlier, where you get the evaluation
• that they don't have to go through the process that I was describing earlier, where you get the evaluation
• that they don't have to go through the process that I was describing earlier, where you get the evaluation

Committee: House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• To that end, we are continuing to work with the administration to evaluate options that sustain the project
• So bringing them on board is June 1st, and then they will need time to evaluate what financing they can
• no funds or the funds are less than what we can build the Merced-Bakersfield, that will be the evaluation

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• To that end, we are continuing to work with the administration to evaluate options that sustain the project's
• no funds or the funds are less than what we can build the Merced-Bakersfield, that will be the evaluation
• no funds or the funds are less than what we can build the Merced Bakersfield, that will be the evaluation

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 5 heard an update from the California High-Speed Rail Authority on its draft 2026 business plan and related budget proposals. The Authority reported continued Central Valley construction progress, including completion of 59 of 92 major structures, 80 of 119 miles of guideway under construction, 93% utility relocation completion, and plans to begin track laying and electrification soon. It said the revised goal remains completing the Merced-to-Bakersfield early operating segment by 2032-33, while also pursuing ancillary revenue opportunities, a private partner through a co-development procurement, and two budget change proposals to reappropriate $423 million for Link Union Station and $246 million in federal trust funds before they expire. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said it had no specific concerns with the budget change proposals but raised major concerns about the draft business plan and the project’s broader fiscal outlook. LAO said the plan appears incomplete in several respects, that funding is likely insufficient to complete the revised initial operating segment and would leave a larger gap for expansion beyond the Central Valley, and that borrowing costs, optimistic assumptions, and uncertainty around future greenhouse gas reduction fund revenues could worsen the outlook. LAO suggested the Legislature could wait for a finalized business plan and highlighted unresolved questions about the scope of the project, borrowing, public-private partnerships, and proposed statutory changes. Members focused on whether the project can be delivered on time and what financial obligations the state could face. Senators questioned the need for tax increment financing, value capture, and other legislative changes, with concerns about impacts on local governments and school districts. The Authority said utility relocation authority is its top legislative priority and that value capture is a longer-term tool that would not affect civil construction of Merced-to-Bakersfield, but could affect payback timing. It also said the state’s $1 billion annual cap-and-invest funding through 2045 is currently assumed to cover the Central Valley segment, while private partners could either finance against that state commitment or invest additional capital in other segments. Public testimony was mixed: building trades and labor groups supported the project and the Authority’s request, while local government and special district representatives opposed tax increment proposals and urged consent from affected agencies; environmental and rail advocates supported the project and urged action on utility relocation. No votes were taken, and the hearing adjourned after public comment.

Transcript Highlights:

• received and reviewed the temporary rule from the Sexual Offender Management Board: Psychosexual Evaluator
• Psychosexual Evaluator Education.
• Every year they get a re-evaluation, and DEQ or other agencies will come in and say, no, you need to

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Parenting time evaluation: IRFLP 1004 defines the PTE as an expert investigation and analysis of the
• The team conducts evaluations to determine program eligibility, and the judge holds the final decision
• for treatment court after they've entered a guilty plea in their criminal case the team conducts evaluations

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Rules

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• then beyond that, another really exciting project over from a faculty member at Boise State is evaluating
• a new remote sensing tool that just launched last year to actually evaluating a new remote sensing tool
• So number one, evaluating the existing aquifer recovery strategies and how they're supporting reach gains

Committee: House Agricultural Affairs

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from Monday, February 16, 2026, and then heard a presentation from the University of Idaho College of Agricultural and Life Sciences. The dean highlighted the college’s land-grant mission, student placement rates, research and extension work, and major facilities projects including the new Meat Science and Innovation Center, the Idaho Center for Agriculture, Food and the Environment (CAFE), and the deep soil ecotron. Members asked about genetics research at CAFE, herd acquisition timing, the status of a proposed Jerome-related center, and how endowed positions are handled. The dean also explained how the college is responding to budget cuts by delaying hires and reducing some temporary support. The committee then heard from Dr. Kendra Kaiser of the Idaho Water Resources Research Institute, who described the institute’s statewide water research priorities and its use of advisory committees, public submissions, and data tools to guide projects. She discussed work on snowpack visualization, flood mapping, managed aquifer recharge water quality, harmful algal blooms, monitoring gaps, canal seepage, Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer modeling, and other water supply and quality issues. Members asked for the project selection materials, clarification on snow-water content and water budget modeling, and more detail on the value of independent review and data access. Dr. Kaiser said the institute is building interactive public data tools and expects initial water quality trend results later in the year. The committee then considered House Bill 630, which would move the airborne shooting of coyotes, wolves, and other predatory animals from rule into statute. Representative Schurz said the bill codifies an existing program to help producers address predation. The committee voted to send HB 630 to the floor with a due pass recommendation. It also heard House Bill 631, which would move agricultural certificates of free sale into statute, and voted to send that bill to the floor with a due pass recommendation as well. At the end of the meeting, the committee recognized its page, Kaylyn, for her service. She spoke briefly about learning how to advocate for agriculture and the importance of family farm operations. The committee presented her with a Capitol-flown flag, a governor-signed certificate, and a necklace before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• It goes to staff; it does its evaluation... ...for a tax abatement with us.
• It goes to staff; it does its evaluation.
• Albuquerque Development Commission, which is required by state statute that we have a commission to evaluate

Summary: The committee first took up HB 294, the Cannabis Product Packaging Regulation Act, with a committee substitute. The sponsor and Regulation and Licensing Department said the bill would tighten cannabis packaging rules to reduce appeal to minors by limiting colors, materials, and design elements, while allowing some color for warnings and approved logos; the substitute also addressed misbranding and third-party manufacturing liability. Public testimony was split: cannabis industry representatives and related businesses argued the bill would create major packaging costs, waste inventory, hurt small businesses and tertiary industries, and was better addressed through education, safe storage, and stronger enforcement; supporters from public schools, state police, and a cannabis company said the bill would help protect children and make violations easier to identify. Committee members debated whether “reasonably appealing” should be defined in statute or rulemaking, whether packaging changes would actually reduce youth access, and whether stronger penalties or warning labels would be more effective. The committee adopted the substitute and advanced HB 294 on an 8-3 do pass vote. The committee then heard HB 298, as amended, which would create a 50% state income tax credit for maintaining or replacing existing short-line railroad track, capped at $5,000 per mile, after an amendment removed a proposed credit for new rail and reduced the fiscal impact. The sponsor and railroad representatives said the measure would help preserve and improve short-line infrastructure that supports mines and other customers, while committee members asked about the amendment, the scope of the credit, and why the state should be involved in what they viewed as a local economic development tool. The bill drew no opposition in testimony and passed unanimously, 10-0, as amended. Finally, the committee considered SB 58, which would extend the property tax abatement period for metropolitan redevelopment areas from seven years to up to 14 years, with flexibility for shorter terms under the Senate amendment. Supporters from the City of Albuquerque, Realtors, and the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce said the change would improve project feasibility, attract investment, and help revitalize blighted areas; the sponsor explained that MRAs are locally designated redevelopment districts and that the longer abatement period reflects current construction costs and project timelines. Committee members asked about which areas qualify, how abatements work, why the state sets the term, and whether local governments could do this on their own. The bill passed on an 11-0 do pass vote, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We then evaluated those projects based on relevance, impact to community, feasibility, and then geographic
• We then evaluated those projects based on relevance, impact to community, feasibility, and then geographic
• A project that's specifically looking at new remote sensing mechanisms to evaluate snow depth is being

Committee: House Resources and Conservation

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• preserve the authority of counties to protect their citizens and their land, and also engage the DNR evaluation
• So there's no evaluation of the impact on anybody who's adjacent or within it. Understand?
• We're going to conclude per our IRP now, and we're going to re-evaluate that this year, but we look to

Keywords: 959, house, all

Summary: The House Utilities Committee resumed hearing on House Bills 2402 and 2816, which address utility-scale solar development. The chair asked witnesses to keep comments to informational purposes, and testimony focused on setbacks, taxation, land conversion caps, county authority, decommissioning, and impacts on neighboring landowners and rural communities. Several witnesses said they supported solar in limited settings such as rooftops or industrial sites, but opposed or wanted changes to the bills’ treatment of agricultural land, especially the proposed 4% cap on cropland conversion and the 500-foot setback from homes. Testimony from landowners and farm groups emphasized concerns about property rights, viewshed impacts, fire risk, drainage and floodplain issues, and the loss of agricultural tax base and local economic activity. They argued the proposed $2,500 per megawatt tax was too low and suggested higher rates, with some recommending $6,000 per megawatt or more, along with decommissioning requirements and stronger county-level protections. A Renew Missouri representative supported much of the bill but preferred a smaller setback and raised constitutional concerns about changing solar land from agricultural to commercial assessment. Other witnesses, including a county commissioner, described local regulations already in place in some counties and asked for clearer statewide standards. Industry and utility representatives said the legislation was generally workable but needed further discussion on setbacks and property tax treatment. Clean Grid Alliance and related witnesses argued that tax comparisons with other states should account for total tax burden, not just nameplate taxes, and said higher taxes would raise electricity costs for consumers. Ameren Missouri said it was acceptable with most provisions, but cautioned against overly aggressive real-property assessments and noted its current and planned solar buildout. The hearing ended without a vote; the committee adjourned after taking testimony on both bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• , the Senate Judiciary Committee struck the language because they did not have the time to fully evaluate
• , the Senate Judiciary Committee struck the language because they did not have the time to fully evaluate
• , the Senate Judiciary Committee struck the language because they did not have the time to fully evaluate

Keywords: 926, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• SINGLE NEUTRAL EVALUATIONS AND CONTINUED CARE FOR RETIREMENT COMMUNITY DISPUTES.
• AERIAL IMAGING IS BEING USED TO EVALUATE RISK EXPOSURES THAT MIGHT BE OCCURRING THAT ARE UNKNOWN OR EVALUATE

Transcript Highlights:

• essential public health need, increases transparency for consumers, and facilitates scientific evaluation
• by providing critical data as we conduct further research to evaluate potential impacts to human health
• Importantly, DTSC is already evaluating the menstrual products under its current work plan.

Summary: The Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee heard three bills after beginning without a quorum and later establishing one. SB 328 would cap DTSC hazardous waste generation and handling fees for infill housing and master development projects and set response timelines for cleanup reviews. Supporters said the current fee structure has made some housing and remediation projects infeasible, while opponents warned that capping fees for one sector could shift costs to other hazardous waste generators. The committee discussed the need for broader DTSC fee reform, and SB 328 was approved on a 7-0 vote and sent to the Committee on Revenue and Taxation. SB 754 would require manufacturers of disposable menstrual products to test for and disclose concentrations of certain contaminants, with DTSC able to verify results and publish them. Supporters framed the bill as a transparency and public health measure, citing recent studies finding toxic metals in tampons and emphasizing consumer right-to-know. Opponents, including manufacturers and hygiene product groups, argued the bill adds duplicative testing, vague requirements, and public disclosure that could be misinterpreted, and urged amendments. The committee members generally supported the goal of transparency, and the bill passed 5-2 with not voting members, moving to Appropriations. SB 466 would provide temporary legal protections for public water systems that are complying with approved chromium-6 compliance plans while they work toward the new drinking water standard. Supporters from Los Banos, Coachella Valley Water District, and other water agencies said the measure would help avoid costly litigation during a lengthy and expensive compliance period, especially for systems dealing with naturally occurring chromium-6. Committee members raised concerns about limiting recourse for harmed individuals and discussed possible alternative language, but the author said the bill would not affect state enforcement authority. SB 466 passed 7-0 and was sent to the Committee on Judiciary. The committee also adopted a consent calendar of additional measures by voice vote.