Transcript Highlights:

• Generally, when we build a new armory, the state has a cost share of that, depending on the armory and
• Generally, when we build a new armory, the state has a cost share of that, depending on the armory and
• Generally, when we build a new armory, the state has a cost share of that, depending on the armory and
• Generally, when we build a new armory, the state has a cost share of that, depending on the armory and
• Generally, when we build a new armory, the state has a cost share of that, depending on the armory and

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• THANK YOU FOR INVITING US AND SHARING WITH YOU SOME OF THE THOUGHTS ABOUT THE OCEAN. ALL RIGHT.
• HAVING ESTABLISHED THE STATE OFFICE OF OCEAN ECONOMY FROM THE LAST SESSION AND FOR INVITING US HERE TO SHARE
• AS THE TITLE SUGGESTS., I WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU SOME BASIC THOUGHTS AND HOW TO ENSURE WE KEEP DOMINATING
• THE REASON I AM SHARING THIS WITH YOU IS TO SUGGEST THERE IS A PATH FORWARD.
• SO WE WERE PRETTY PLEASED ABOUT THAT. >> AND I ASKED HIM TO SHARE THAT STORY BECAUSE THESE GLASSES I'M

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll tell you, he comes to us by way of Utah and San Francisco, and... ...and I share an affection for
• Thank you for sharing a few moments with me in the Senate lounge earlier.
• Student Union, which works toward creating a culturally inclusive campus that shares indigenous culture
• Federal equitable sharing programs, providing that forfeiture proceeds seized by law enforcement go to
• And until we get to the very end of the session, I know that, anyway, I just wanted to share that custom

Transcript Highlights:

• All of us share a common knowledge that natural disasters once thought incomprehensible are now part
• All of us share a common knowledge that natural disasters once thought incomprehensible are now part
• If that increase goes over 1%, it's shared by employees and employers.
• The cost is shared between employers and employees.
• shared so far.

Summary: The committee heard several bills focused on public safety, labor enforcement, pensions, and workplace safety. AB 1054 would create a voluntary DROP-style retirement option for CHP officers and Cal Fire firefighters to help retain experienced personnel; supporters said it would be cost-neutral and help staffing, while an opponent warned it could affect bond ratings and create pension risk. The bill passed the committee 4-0 and was sent to Appropriations. AB 2129, which would improve Cal Fire compensation to aid recruitment and retention, also passed 4-0 to Appropriations with support from firefighters and no opposition. AB 1383, a broader PEPRA-related measure lowering retirement age and adjusting compensation caps for public safety workers, drew extensive support from firefighters and peace officers and strong opposition from cities, counties, and other local government groups over long-term pension costs; after debate over fiscal impacts, it passed 4-0 to Appropriations. The committee also considered AB 605 on refinery safe staffing during shutdowns, prompted by layoffs and reduced staffing at refineries such as Phillips 66 Wilmington. Supporters argued the bill would protect workers and nearby communities during refinery wind-downs, while petroleum and business groups said closures are not inevitable and opposed the bill’s premise. The bill passed 3-0 to Environmental Quality. AB 1859 would let joint labor-management committees access public works sites to help detect wage theft and safety violations; construction labor supporters backed it as an enforcement tool, while laborers, local governments, and builders raised concerns about duplication, property access, and project disruption. It passed 2-0 to Judiciary, on call. The committee then heard AB 2321, a pilot program allowing county district attorneys in Alameda and Santa Clara to investigate workplace deaths, which supporters said would address Cal/OSHA’s backlog and weak enforcement; employers and safety practitioners opposed it, citing expertise, due process, and overlapping investigations. It passed 2-0 to Appropriations, on call. Finally, AB 2575 began testimony on healthcare AI guardrails, with the author and nurses arguing that AI should support, not replace, clinical judgment and that patient safety requires human oversight.

Transcript Highlights:

• To start, I'd like to share a number. That number is 288.
• You know, we both share transportation, and we deal with planes, trains, and automobiles, and sometimes
• And when you think about a sidewalk, because the sidewalk is a shared pathway, like you said, somebody
• And so if you're on a shared pathway, 10 is like an appropriate speed where you can go and react.
• As I shared earlier, our trauma center is facing a surge in e-bike casualties, treating over 100 related

Summary: The Senate Committee on Transportation heard testimony on a large agenda of transportation-related bills, with several measures discussed before a quorum was established. AB 1588 focused on sideshows and street takeovers, with the author, San Francisco Police Department, and Streets Are for Everyone arguing the bill would modernize enforcement, add motorbikes and dirt bikes to the sideshow framework, and improve public safety; there was no opposition testimony. AB 2015 would require Caltrans to study the effects of third-party navigation apps on congestion, local streets, infrastructure, and emergency response, and was supported by Streets for All, AAA, and local agencies, with no opposition. AB 2717 would extend a sunset for off-site advertising displays at large sports venues; the Dodgers supported it, the San Jose Sharks and others noted amendments, and no opposition was heard. AB 1608 would strengthen the independence and transparency of the High-Speed Rail Office of Inspector General by requiring public reports, adding confidentiality protections for sensitive security information, and granting staffing and purchasing authority; the First Amendment Coalition supported the amended bill, while the Vice Chair raised concerns about transparency and limiting confidential notices to committee chairs. The committee also heard AB 2346 on e-bike safety, which would require speedometers on Class 2 e-bikes, lights, a statewide sidewalk speed limit, local authority over bike-path speeds, and point-of-sale disclosures. Support came from medical, law enforcement, local government, and safety groups citing rising injuries and confusion over e-bike rules; PeopleForBikes remained opposed unless amended, mainly over lighting and disclosure requirements, though Streets for All withdrew its opposition after amendments. Members broadly supported the bill and discussed helmet use, youth safety, and the distinction between e-bikes and higher-powered e-motos. AB 1919 would let Santa Cruz Metro place a citizens’ initiative on the ballot to secure transit funding and protect service and jobs; the sponsor, bus operators, and labor supported it, with no opposition testimony. AB 2012 would streamline permits for moving manufactured homes under an annual permit, and AB 2024 would clarify Outdoor Advertising Act permitting and relocation procedures; both drew support from industry and housing groups and no opposition. After quorum was established, the committee adopted the consent calendar, which included items 13, 6, 8, 11, 14, 15, and 21, by roll call vote. The committee then heard AB 2484, which would allow San Diego voters to authorize a local transit tax initiative for MTS; the author and MTS argued it would preserve service and allow voters to decide future funding, and the bill advanced on a 5-2 roll call with the roll left open for absent members. The committee also heard AB 2560, which would codify the state transportation climate principles known as CAPTI; supporters said it would lock in goals for transit, rail, active transportation, equity, and greenhouse gas reduction, while Orange County Transportation Authority opposed. The author closed by asking for aye votes, and the committee proceeded toward roll-call action on the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• They want what most people want: they want to move out of shared housing, they want to start families
• I have young teachers who, after a year or two of sharing tiny apartments or moving from seasonal rental
• We share our strong support for the local option transfer fee that's before this committee.
• We're glad to share this data by census tract for all communities in our region, and we can share that
• We share your concerns and commitment in addressing the Massachusetts housing crisis, but we strongly

Committee: Joint Committee on Revenue

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Revenue held a public hearing on a series of bills focused largely on local-option real estate transfer fees and housing funding tools for communities facing severe affordability pressures. Testimony strongly favored bills for Somerville, Concord, Martha’s Vineyard, Nantucket, Chatham, and a statewide local-option transfer fee, with speakers arguing that high-end real estate transactions should help fund affordable housing, anti-displacement efforts, workforce housing, and related capital improvements. Elected officials and local housing leaders described rising rents and home prices, investor activity, shrinking year-round housing stock, and difficulty recruiting or retaining teachers, police, health care workers, and other essential employees. Several witnesses emphasized that the proposals would be optional for municipalities, could include exemptions for first-time homebuyers or seniors, and would direct revenue into local affordable housing trust funds or housing banks. Committee members asked questions about who would pay the fee and whether it could make housing less affordable, and supporters responded that the fees would be targeted at higher-value transactions and designed with local flexibility. For Somerville, the delegation and Mayor Katjana Ballantyne backed both a local home rule petition and statewide enabling legislation, saying the city has already used zoning reform, inclusionary zoning, and local housing funds but still needs a new revenue source to address displacement and investor-driven purchases. For Concord, Representative Carmine Gentile and Concord housing advocates supported a home rule petition and the statewide bill, arguing that a modest fee on sales above $1 million could generate predictable revenue for affordable housing production and preservation. One committee exchange focused on whether the fee would affect most Concord sales and whether it would be passed on to buyers; supporters said the policy was intended to shift costs toward higher-value properties and help leverage other funding sources. The committee also heard testimony on House 4105, which would redirect a casino-related revenue stream to the Healthy Incentives Program. Farmers, advocates, and residents said the current funding was originally intended to support horse racing but has not met that goal, and that the money would be better used to support Massachusetts farmers and food-insecure residents through HIP. In a separate bill, Senator Becca Rausch testified in support of Senate 268, which would create a state-level hostile learning environment complaint process for higher education institutions and potentially strip tax exemptions from colleges or universities found to have such environments; she cited anti-Semitic and transphobic incidents on campuses and argued that existing federal protections should be mirrored in state law. The hearing also included testimony on college tuition debt reduction legislation from Senator Michael Moore, who said the bill would allow a deduction for tuition and fees paid to Massachusetts public colleges and universities to ease student debt and support the state’s workforce. A major portion of the hearing focused on Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket housing bank proposals. Hospital, school, housing, planning, and municipal officials from Martha’s Vineyard said the island’s year-round housing shortage is harming health care, schools, and the local workforce, and urged approval of a housing bank funded by a local-option transfer fee. Nantucket witnesses made similar arguments, pointing to a very high median home price, a large seasonal housing stock, and the need for a dedicated revenue stream to preserve and create year-round housing. Supporters repeatedly cited the long-running success of the islands’ land banks as evidence that transfer fees can work without harming real estate markets. Senator Julian Cyr and Representative Thomas Moakley Luddy also backed the Cape and Islands transfer-fee bills, saying the region needs bold action and a sustainable local funding source to address its housing crisis.

Transcript Highlights:

• They had to end up getting a lot of sharing agreements signed.
• Transportation cost share. At this point, and we'll see those in House Bill 19.
• Transportation cost share, Senate. Low-volume roads, Senate.
• So I shared that plan with the budget.
• So I shared that plan with the budget.

Committee: Conference Committee on Budget

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And judging by the lighting, their attire, and the times of the posts, these bipartisan shared drinks
• </c><00:10:52.520><c> drinks</c><00:10:53.080><c> occurred</c> these bipartisan shared drinks occurred
• these bipartisan shared drinks occurred right<00:10:53.720><c> in</c><00:10:53.800><c> the</c><00:10
• ,</c><00:25:09.120><c> sometimes</c> sometimes through ride share, sometimes sometimes through ride share
• This information will also be shared with the complainants. Signed by your two co-chairs.

Committee: Ethics

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I did just want to point out that I have shared information through this process with the chair, with
• I did just want to point out that I have shared information through this process with the chair, with
• </c> uh, the process for data sharing uh, the process for data sharing involves<00:17:35.400><c> a</c
• It conforms to both 2028 provisions on cost-sharing and home equity.
• ><c> and</c><00:29:32.760><c> home</c> provisions on cost-sharing and home provisions on cost-sharing

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 4466, the Health Finance and Policy bill, and first adopted the A8 amendment, described as a set of technical fixes. Members then considered a large A9 amendment that bundled a wide range of Children and Families provisions, including child care licensing modernization, crisis nursery licensing, SNAP/MFIT-related language, child care provider self-reporting, a physical abuse recognition poster, child protection and welfare provisions, funding for parent support outreach, and forensic interview training scholarships. Supporters described it as bipartisan work with relatively small fiscal impact, while opponents said it greatly expanded the bill and should be handled separately; after a roll call, the A9 amendment failed 7-14. Representative Scott then offered the A11 amendment, raising concerns about new all-payer claims database language and whether it should have been heard in the Judiciary and Civil Law Committee. Department of Health staff explained the data-sharing safeguards, de-identification process, fee structure, and enforcement provisions, but Scott remained concerned about privacy and the scope of the program and withdrew the amendment. The committee then moved to final bill discussion. Members and authors described HF 4466 as a lean health finance bill largely conforming Minnesota law to federal HR1 Medicaid-related changes, including work requirements, retroactive eligibility limits, cost-sharing, and home equity provisions. Supporters argued conformity was necessary to avoid major federal funding losses and noted a few additional member bills in the package; opponents criticized the federal changes as harmful, especially for vulnerable populations such as victims of trafficking and domestic violence. Fiscal staff said the bill would save just over $2 million in FY 2026-27 and almost $98 million in FY 2028-29. No final vote on the bill itself was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So what we're looking to do is share that opportunity for that growth.
• And any other things that you could share with us regarding that? Sure. Last year...
• I should share with us regarding that. Sure.
• So we'd have more of the system share existing tracks, for example, with Metrolink.
• About one-third of our revenue comes from our share of the 1% local property tax.

Committee: Transportation

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee held an informational hearing on the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s 2026 draft business plan, with testimony from the authority, the Legislative Analyst’s Office, and the High-Speed Rail Inspector General. Chair Cortese framed the hearing around the project’s recent changes: a new CEO, revised delivery strategy, loss of federal funds, renewed interest in private financing and value capture, and proposed adjustments to the Merced-to-Bakersfield segment. He also raised concerns about statutory compliance, transparency, and whether the draft plan fully reflects required elements and true costs and timelines. Authority CEO Ian Chaudhry said the project has made substantial construction progress in the Central Valley and is moving toward track installation, with the state’s $1 billion annual cap-and-invest funding providing a stable base. He argued the plan uses design optimization, direct procurement of materials, and revised sequencing to reduce costs and support an early operating segment by about 2032-33. He also promoted broader commercialization of the corridor through real estate, energy, broadband, logistics, and public-private partnerships, saying private sector interest is now real. Several senators pressed him on station locations, tax increment financing, utility relocation authority, permitting delays, transparency, and whether the project can realistically reach Los Angeles and San Francisco on the current timeline and budget. The LAO and Inspector General were more skeptical. LAO analyst Helen Kirstine said the draft plan assumes major scope changes, including a shorter segment, a Merced station outside downtown, more single-tracking, and several statutory changes that have not yet been enacted. She warned that the plan may not comply with recent legislative requirements, that funding may still be insufficient even for the reduced segment, and that borrowing against future cap-and-invest revenues is risky because those revenues are uncertain and volatile. Inspector General Ben Belknap said the draft plan fails to comply with newer statutory requirements, especially regarding the Merced-to-Bakersfield scope, the funding plan, and missing procurement milestone dates. He said the presentation obscures cost increases and schedule delays and limits the Legislature’s ability to compare current estimates with prior reports. Committee members generally supported continued oversight and some form of project delivery reform, but several expressed concern that the plan relies on legislative changes that have not been approved and on private financing that may not materialize. Chaudhry said the authority would address the Inspector General’s findings in the final business plan and continue to pursue federal grants, private capital, and corridor commercialization. No vote was taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So what we're looking to do is share that opportunity for that growth.
• And any other things that you could share with us regarding that? Sure.
• So we’d have more of the system share existing tracks, for example, with MetroLink.
• So we’d have more of the system share existing tracks, for example, with MetroLink.
• About one-third of our revenue comes from our share of the 1% local property tax.

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee held an informational hearing on the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s 2026 draft business plan, with testimony from the authority, the Legislative Analyst’s Office, and the High-Speed Rail Inspector General. Chair Cortese framed the hearing around the project’s recent changes: a new CEO, revised delivery strategy, proposed station and scope changes in the Merced-to-Bakersfield segment, the loss of major federal funds, and the authority’s push for private investment and ancillary revenue. He also raised concerns about financing risks, the proposed changes to the initial operating segment, and the Inspector General’s finding that the draft plan may be missing required statutory elements. Authority CEO Ian Chaudhry said the project is now in a more disciplined phase, citing major construction progress in the Central Valley, near-completion of right-of-way and utility work, and plans to begin track and systems procurement. He said the authority expects the Merced-to-Bakersfield segment to be completed around 2032-33, with broader Phase 1 service later, and argued that design optimization, direct procurement, and public-private partnerships could reduce costs and attract private capital. He also described plans for ancillary revenue from real estate, broadband, energy, and logistics, and said the authority is discussing station locations and value-capture tools with local governments rather than locking them in yet. Several senators questioned the legality and practicality of tax increment financing, utility relocation authority, transparency, and whether the project’s revised scope still meets high-speed rail standards and public expectations. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the draft plan assumes major statutory changes, including changes to station locations and scope, and warned that the plan’s cost and schedule estimates depend on assumptions that may not materialize. LAO said the plan lacks transparency because it does not clearly disclose the assumed station changes, and it questioned whether even the shorter segment can be delivered within existing funding once borrowing costs and other risks are included. The office also noted uncertainty around future greenhouse gas reduction fund revenues and said ancillary revenues are not yet credit-worthy for financing. The Inspector General’s office said the draft business plan does not appear to meet several statutory requirements, including requirements added in AB 377, and reiterated that the final plan must address those omissions. Chaudhry said the authority would respond to the OIG’s findings in the final business plan and committed to resolving the compliance issues before final adoption.

Transcript Highlights:

• So what we're looking to do is share that opportunity for that growth.
• And any other things that you could share with us regarding that? Sure. Last year...
• I should share with us regarding that. Sure.
• So we'd have more of the system share existing tracks, for example, with Metrolink.
• About one-third of our revenue comes from our share of the 1% local property tax.

Committee: Transportation

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We share a fence. I can go out onto your property 10 feet.
• And as I just shared the... ...let the industry put it to work.
• And as I just shared the stats, it's done wonderfully.
• Finally, I want to share the experience.
• Finally, I want to share the experience of a fellow colleague.

Summary: The House first established a quorum after a quorum call, then moved into House Bills for Perfection. House Bill 2297, a fence-law bill, was presented as a way to let livestock owners enter up to 10 feet onto neighboring property to repair fence lines and remove brush or debris on the fence line without being treated as trespassers. Supporters said the current law leaves livestock owners responsible for fences but without a practical way to fix them, creating safety and liability problems; the bill was described as a long-running issue in rural areas. Members discussed property-rights concerns, but the substitute was adopted and the bill was ordered perfected and printed. House Bills 2142 and 2058, dealing with the Missouri film tax incentive program, were then taken up. Sponsors said the program has produced strong economic returns, more productions, jobs, and spending in Missouri, and the bill would modernize the program by combining separate film and TV funding buckets while removing the proposed sunset extension. An amendment to keep the original sunset was adopted, and the bill as amended was perfected and printed after debate over tax credits, workforce development, and whether the incentives should be expanded or curtailed. The House also perfected House Bill 3004, a truth-in-labeling measure for wood products. The sponsor said the bill would protect Missouri’s hardwood industry by requiring products sold in the state to be labeled accurately if they are actually laminate, plastic, rubber, or other non-wood materials. Supporters called it a consumer-protection and industry-preservation bill, while one member questioned how it would apply to online and out-of-state sellers and expressed some reservations. The substitute was adopted and the bill was ordered perfected and printed. House Bills 3283 and 3306 were taken up together and described as a framework for resolving municipal public-employee contract disputes, especially for firefighters and other public employees under the State Board of Mediation. The bill sets a timeline for bargaining, mediation, and arbitration and defines good faith in negotiations; an amendment clarified that teachers and law enforcement are excluded under existing statutory definitions. Supporters said it would prevent years-long contract stalemates and save taxpayer money, while one member raised concerns about whether it would alter existing authority of public governing boards. The amendment and substitute were adopted, and the combined bill was perfected and printed. Finally, House Bill 2536, a restroom and private-space designation bill, drew extensive debate. The sponsor said it would require government-controlled multi-occupancy restrooms, changing rooms, and sleeping quarters to be designated by biological sex, with exceptions for custodial work, emergencies, law enforcement, and adults assisting children or people with disabilities. An amendment was adopted to clarify duties for the Department of Corrections and public safety officers. Supporters framed the bill as a privacy and safety measure for women and girls, citing incidents at schools and Kansas City International Airport; opponents argued it would not prevent crime, could lead to intrusive enforcement, and would harm transgender people and families. The transcript ends with the bill still under discussion, with no final vote shown on the underlying measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• No, he’s sharing housing. No, he’s sharing housing. And...” “Oh, he’s sharing housing.
• I will share one example. And that is why we need this aggregated data by zip code.
• I will share one example.
• Her name is Kylie Barker to share her experience directly.
• But I would love to share a quote from her.

Summary: The committee first took up SB 934 by Senator Wiener, which would extend the time for survivors of conversion therapy to bring malpractice claims and clarify how expert testimony and scientific evidence may be used in those cases. Senator Wiener and supporters, including a survivor and a licensed therapist, described conversion therapy as harmful and argued that survivors often cannot come forward within current limitation periods. Opponents, including attorneys and advocacy groups, argued the bill was an unconstitutional workaround to California’s existing ban and could chill legitimate therapy or expand liability. Committee members pressed both sides on the bill’s scope, with the author emphasizing it does not bar exploratory therapy or medical treatment, only attempts to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity. The bill was moved on a 7-2-1 vote to the Senate Appropriations Committee, with the item placed on call; the consent calendar was also adopted 6-0 and placed on call. The committee then heard SB 1092 by Senator Allen, as amended, concerning manufactured home parks. The bill would require park owners who intend to sell to give residents or their designated representatives notice and an opportunity to submit a competitive bid, with timelines intended to allow residents to organize financing and complete due diligence. Supporters said the measure would help preserve naturally occurring affordable housing and give residents a fair chance to buy the land under their homes, especially after fire-related losses and increasing investor ownership of parks. Opponents from park-owner and realtor groups argued the bill would burden private property rights, devalue parks, and create an unconstitutional taking by imposing long timelines and restrictions that could deter buyers. Several senators questioned the 240-day process and whether the bill should include clearer good-faith or reciprocity provisions; the author said he was open to further adjustments. The transcript ends during committee discussion of SB 1092, with no final vote shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• State privacy laws prohibit health care providers, health plans, and insurance companies from sharing
• As another panel has shared, CMS recently issued three proposed rules and one declaration by the United
• And then the TGI website also shares information. Correct.
• Can you share what a minor can get under the whole umbrella of gender-affirming care without parental
• I'm grateful for this opportunity to share our story.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Real quick, does your group have any information, or maybe you could share with us...
• And do you know if that's something you can readily get and share with the group?
• Would you be willing to share information like that so we could actually see it? Oh, sure.
• Would you be willing to share information like that so we could actually see it?
• We see some, and I've had a few of them shared with me some bills.

Committee: Transportation

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• AB 1705 deals with an extremely sensitive issue: the non-consensual sharing of sexually explicit media
• Either recorded or shared online without their consent.
• The BB gun was then left unattended in a shared apartment courtyard.
• Algorithmic pricing models and everything can be used to inflate your profit share.
• I share Ms. Wilson's frustration with that. Mr. DeMio: Okay, so I'm open to supporting this.

Committee: Privacy and Consumer Protection

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I wanted to start with the next slide just by sharing some of the research and what we know.
• We have many examples from other states that we are happy to share.
• I hope to share my background. I'm an emergency physician.
• Generally, and you know what, I'm happy to share this data.
• I've been sharing this data packet with anyone who's asked.

Committee: Courts, Corrections & Justice Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:12:05.279><c> without</c><00:12:05.839><c> their</c> will not be shared without their will not
• be shared without their consent.<00:12:06.880><c> So,</c><00:12:07.760><c> um</c><00:12:08.240><c> I
• </c> forced to share forced to share rooms.<00:27:26.159><c> You</c><00:27:26.480><c> we</c><00:27:26.720
• That's something that we share.
• That's something that we share.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Whereas our liquor enforcement is obviously going to be in the lion's share of the establishments that
• in</c><00:12:37.600><c> in</c><00:12:38.320><c> the</c><00:12:38.560><c> lion</c><00:12:38.959><c> share
• </c><00:12:39.200><c> of</c><00:12:39.279><c> the</c> be in in the lion share of the be in in the lion
• share of the establishments<00:12:40.079><c> that</c><00:12:40.399><c> sell</c><00:12:40.639><c> these
• I guess I was more interested in knowing what they were sharing, what they were serving.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up several liquor-related bills. Senate Bill 24, allowing students under 21 to taste wine in educational settings, drew no opposition or amendment and was reported out 6-0. Senate Bill 79, authorizing self-pour automated systems under the liquor commission, also faced no opposition and was voted ought to pass 6-0. Senate Bill 80, shifting licensing, auditing, and enforcement for wholesale and retail e-cigarette sales to the liquor commission, prompted discussion about whether the change would add cost; members heard that the liquor commission already handles similar enforcement and that the change was meant to address nonreporting. It was voted ought to pass 6-0. The committee then discussed Senate Bill 87, concerning alcohol service in salons, barbershops, and spas. Members and staff focused on how to limit the amount served, whether to require recordkeeping, and privacy concerns about tracking what patrons drank. The discussion settled on removing references to alcohol type and quantity and keeping only patron records, with the understanding that the agency would set the details by rule. The bill was not formally amended at the meeting, but members agreed an amendment would be drafted for the following week; the bill itself was reported ought to pass with that amendment to be determined. Finally, the committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 245, the EMS No Surprises Act and System Stabilization Act. The sponsor, Senator Suprena, said the bill would prohibit balance billing for emergency ambulance calls and unscheduled transfers, while setting reimbursement at either locally set public rates or 325% of Medicare. She explained that the proposal was based on national work on ground ambulance billing and was intended to stabilize struggling EMS providers. Committee members sought clarification that the bill did not eliminate balance billing for non-emergency transfers, and the sponsor confirmed it did not. A second witness, Jerry Stringham, testified in support, citing his reimbursement background.