Transcript Highlights:

• They matter every single day of every single year.
• You spoke about how you will be in these seats one day.
• As now we open it up to the dais for any questions.
• And have a good day. Thank you for your comments. Thank you.
• Because when we were taking care of and stewarding this land and taking care of our people, we didn't

Summary: The Select Committee on Native American Affairs held a historic hearing at Table Mountain Rancheria focused on tribal education, culture, resilience, leadership, and trust. The opening prayer and remarks emphasized the significance of holding the first committee hearing on tribal land. Members said the hearing was intended both to hear testimony about ongoing problems in schools and to identify next steps for legislation and policy, especially as the session neared its end. The committee also referenced recent efforts supporting Native students’ right to wear regalia at graduation and broader concerns about representation in education and state institutions. The first panel centered on Native students’ experiences in public schools. Bella Garcia described a two-year fight with Clovis Unified over wearing tribal regalia at graduation, including a restrictive approval form and administrators who she said denied Native identity and made her feel invisible. Morningstar Ghali connected those experiences to the legacy of boarding schools, racial profiling, suspensions, and the “boarding school to prison pipeline,” and called for culturally responsive education, Native educators, counselors, Native studies, and restorative justice. Janet K. Bill, from the Attorney General’s Office of Native American Affairs, described her own path from tribal Head Start to Stanford, law school, tribal council, and state service, and said education, justice, and sovereignty are linked. Members asked about restorative justice, representation, and how to build pipelines into leadership and education roles. The second panel focused on solutions. Chairwoman Michelle Heredia Cordova urged a reimagined education system that is more personalized, experiential, culturally grounded, and balanced with land-based learning, while also recruiting Native teachers and creating stronger tribal partnerships. Chairman Leo Sisku said schools should educate educators, stop tokenizing Native students, and create accountability and consequences for discriminatory behavior; he also supported stronger tribal-school partnerships and more positive outreach. Chairman Fred Bean emphasized consistent engagement from tribal leaders at every level of schooling, stronger transitions from elementary to college, and programs that prepare Native youth for leadership, trades, and higher education. Chairman Shaineto of Tule River argued that schools and administrators should face consequences for violating Native students’ rights, and that Native people should not have to keep educating institutions about basic cultural respect. Committee members responded by discussing possible statewide solutions, including regional tribal boards, better enforcement of existing laws, stronger pipelines into teaching and leadership, and improved representation on boards and in state agencies. Several members raised the need to implement existing laws, fill vacant Native appointments, and consider broader protections for Native regalia and cultural expression. No formal vote was taken in the transcript, but the hearing concluded with a clear call for continued collaboration, accountability, and legislation driven by Native voices.

Transcript Highlights:

• Today, we have the doctor of the day. Dr.
• Jennifer Mayfault is a primary care physician at the University of Arizona, Phoenix.
• mentors future primary care physicians in Arizona.
• Dated this 30th day of March, 2026. Maintaining healthy ecosystems.
• Today is AFL-CIO Day in Wesley Bolin Plaza.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I've seen this in real life and in real time what CEQA abuse can do for a child care provider.
• Rosanna Carvacho Elliott here on behalf of the Early Care and Education Consortium in support.
• When we stood before that memorial just a few days ago, it underscored the urgency of this issue.
• Bring it back to the dais. Madam Vice Chair, no questions.
• Senator, I had a bill similar to this in the health care world.

Committee: Senate Human Services

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> people that take care of our buildings. people that take care of our buildings.
• </c> taking care of. taking care of.
• What I'm hearing is you don't care about water. JAC must not care about water.
• </c><03:38:53.279><c> about</c> care about we definitely care about care about we definitely care about
• JAC must not care about water. water. JAC must not care about water.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> went to K through 8 at our Christian day went to K through 8 at our Christian day school<00:04:49.080
• </c> anybody who knows me knows I don't care anybody who knows me knows I don't care for<00:11:14.720
• first day.
• first day.
• first day.

Committee: House Education Policy

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And then we should honor them and take care of them when it's time to retire if they reach that level
• And, again, on behalf of all of us here on the dais, we thank you for your service.
• And taking care of our veterans is exactly what this bill does.
• It narrowly expands access to an existing uncompensated care grant program.
• whose federal health care coverage does not include abortion services.

Committee: Senate Military and Veterans Affairs

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Kentucky Healthc Care Workforce Kentucky Healthc Care Workforce Investment<00:02:38.480><c> Fund</c><
• Uh, I remember essential health care providers that do essential health care providers that do deliver
• Um shortages in terms of health care.
• </c> of the definition of a healthc care of the definition of a healthc care credential. credential.
• Everybody have a good day. We to work. Everybody have a good day. We are.

Committee: House Postsecondary Education

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Many health care mandates don't.
• And so I think, just as we talked about health care mandates and the cost of health care, that that's
• and not just health care mandates.
• And so I think just as we talked about health care mandates and the cost of health care, that that's
• and not just health care mandates. health care mandates.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met to review the history and current treatment of North Dakota health insurance mandates, with presentations from Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Dakota, Sanford Health Plan, the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS), and the Insurance Department. The discussion focused on how mandates apply differently to fully insured, self-funded, ACA, Medicaid, and PERS plans; how the state’s benchmark plan and federal essential health benefits affect coverage; and how the existing process requires cost-benefit analysis and, for certain measures, a PERS pilot period before broader application. Presenters also reviewed the long list of existing state mandates, including provider, beneficiary, and coverage requirements, and noted that many were enacted decades ago and have not been revisited despite changes in medical evidence and treatment options. Witnesses from the carriers argued that mandates should be reviewed periodically because some are outdated, can create unintended costs, and may not align with current medical guidance. Examples cited included PSA screening, off-label drug coverage, prior authorization rules, step therapy, and cost-sharing provisions for mental health and substance use treatment. They emphasized that carriers often cover services without a mandate when supported by clinical evidence, and that mandates can shift costs to employers and employees, especially in the fully insured small-group market. They also suggested possible policy improvements such as clearer mandate definitions, better transparency around cost-benefit analyses, a regular 10-year review of mandates, and more timely submission of proposals through the interim process. PERS and the Insurance Department highlighted a recurring tension over what counts as a mandate and when a measure triggers the state’s defrayal obligation under federal law. PERS described its interim committee process, the April 1 deadline for fiscal-impact proposals, and the limited pilot program used for certain measures, noting that only a few bills have gone through the full pilot process. The Insurance Department explained that it views new benefit mandates through the lens of the ACA benchmark plan and essential health benefits, distinguishing true new benefits, such as infertility coverage, from changes to existing benefits, such as telehealth or insulin cost-sharing caps. No votes were taken on policy changes; the meeting was informational, with members asking questions about costs, applicability, transparency, and whether a periodic mandate review should be established.

Transcript Highlights:

• A medical condition of a member of the member's family requires the member to provide care that prevents
• And it’s, like, really sexy in health care right now, and there’s a lot of buzz around it, and we’re
• So school meals, I hope that you all know, are so much more than just a part of the school day.
• So I want to take you back in time a little bit to my House days.
• So back in those days, it was just Delegate Price and me to get on the floor here.

Keywords: Virginia Commission to End Hunger, 976, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll come to the dais. Yes, Senator Laird. Thank you.
• Any other questions or comments from the dais?
• Good day, Chair and committee members. My name is Gabriel Tolson.
• Say none, come to the dais. Questions or comments? Senator Regine?
• Come to the dais, questions, comments, motion. Let's drill him.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Local Government heard a full agenda of bills covering port procurement, housing litigation, special district audits, cemetery district governance, county discretionary funding transparency, labor standards in density bonus projects, transit planning, and homeowner code enforcement. SB 983 would let the Port of San Diego use job order contracting for smaller repair and maintenance work; supporters said it would speed repairs and reduce costs, while opponents raised concerns about construction definitions and project labor agreement language. SB 1256 sought to limit repeated litigation against the Harmony Grove Village South housing project; supporters framed it as a response to duplicative lawsuits delaying housing, while opponents argued it could weaken wildfire and subdivision-map review. SB 992 would make permanent and expand a small special district audit flexibility, and SB 1115 would give Tulare County a narrower way to remove dysfunctional cemetery district trustees rather than taking over the district entirely. Both drew support from county and district representatives, with CSDA opposing SB 1115 but continuing talks on amendments. The committee also considered SB 1193, which would impose transparency and conflict-of-interest guardrails on Alameda County discretionary funding. The author and supporters said the bill responds to grand jury findings and would require clearer public reporting and board approval, while Alameda County argued it already has strong public processes and that the bill is overly restrictive. SB 1383 would clarify that density bonus projects cannot use incentives and concessions to waive locally adopted labor standards; labor groups supported it as protecting worker safety and wages, while housing interests were not present in opposition during the hearing. SB 1361 would prevent local governments from undermining planned transit projects to avoid SB 79 density requirements; LA Metro and labor supported it as protecting transit investment, and the Bay Area Council withdrew opposition. SB 1272, the CASH Act, would give homeowners more time to cure certain non-safety code violations tied to prior owners’ work, with counties and code enforcement groups opposing the introduced version but saying they were working on amendments. Several bills were voted out of committee, many on amended or consent motions, with some remaining on call before later final votes were recorded. SB 983, SB 992, SB 1115, SB 1193, SB 1256, SB 1383, SB 1361, and SB 1272 all ultimately received committee approval, while the consent calendar bills SB 1187 and SB 1388 were also adopted. The chair repeatedly noted ongoing negotiations on several measures, especially SB 983, SB 1193, and SB 1272, and members emphasized wildfire safety, transparency, and labor protections as key issues during debate.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll come to the dais. Yes, Senator Laird. Thank you.
• Any other questions or comments from the dais?
• Good day, Chair and committee members. My name is Gabriel Tolson.
• Say none, come to the dais. Questions or comments? Senator Regine?
• Come to the dais, questions, comments, motion. Let's drill him.

Committee: Senate Local Government

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I mean, it's a quality of life in a community if people care about pets so much that if they knew that
• And it may ultimately, at the... ...you know, one every other day or something.
• I recognize that you care. I can see that in the few minutes that I've watched this.
• the silent, I'll have to speak in speaking my truth—the very good operators that have to deal with day-to-day
• crucifixion on my... ...that have to deal with day-to-day crucifixion on mom's pages over very ridiculous

Committee: Senate Senate Committee on Post Audit and Oversight

Summary: The joint Audit Committee hearing focused on implementation of Ollie’s Law, including MDAR’s progress on regulations for commercial boarding and training kennels and the new municipal reporting requirements. MDAR Director Mike Cahill said the department formed the required advisory committee, held two Zoom trainings for municipal officials, created a public information webpage, and completed draft regulations that are now under secretariat review. He reported that 269 of 351 municipalities had submitted kennel data, leaving 82 out of compliance, and said the department has been posting compliant and noncompliant municipalities online to increase transparency. Committee members pressed MDAR on the lack of a clear enforcement mechanism for municipalities that fail to report and on the delay in finalizing regulations. The chair urged the department to consider stronger sanctions and asked for a central reporting system for injury data, noting that injury reports currently go only to municipalities. Cahill said the statute does not give MDAR explicit authority to fine municipalities, though he supported a House bill that would grant that power. He also said the department could not easily add municipal penalties through regulation alone. Representatives from the Animal Rescue League of Boston and the MSPCA, including the advisory committee chair Jenny Mather, said the advisory process was thorough and aimed to balance animal safety, consumer transparency, and fairness to compliant businesses. They supported better municipal accountability, more standardized training and resources for animal control officers, and clearer reporting of injuries and kennel information to MDAR. They also raised concerns about third-party advertising platforms that may list unlicensed home-based kennels and argued that public education and enforcement should focus on bad actors rather than penalizing well-run facilities. The hearing ended without a vote or formal action, but with support expressed for the pending bill and for continued regulatory revisions.

Transcript Highlights:

• That is the standard of care. The care is legal. The care is available.
• That is the standard of care. The care is legal. The care is available.
• That is the standard of care. The care is legal. The care is available.
• That is the standard of care. The care is legal. The care is available.
• That is the standard of care. The care is legal. The care is available.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Judiciary Committee met in executive session and first took up HB 148, a bill allowing classification by biological sex in limited settings such as multiple-use bathrooms, certain sports, and involuntary commitment facilities. Supporters said it was needed to protect privacy and safety, especially for minors, and argued it was consistent with recent federal and state developments. Opponents said the bill was poorly defined, unnecessary, and could create discrimination or confusion, especially because it did not define “biological sex” in the text. The committee voted 10-8 ought to pass, and the chair said a minority report would be written. The committee then considered HB 254, a bill concerning medical aid in dying. The chair moved ought to pass and described the bill as a matter of liberty for terminally ill patients within six months of death, arguing it should not be treated as suicide. Opponents raised religious, ethical, and policy concerns, including worries about a slippery slope, misuse by vulnerable people, and the effect on death records and public health data. The committee voted 11-7 ought to pass, and the chair said a majority report would be written with a minority report by Representative Perez. Finally, the committee turned to HB 611 with Amendment 2025-0638, a replace-all amendment dealing with recoupment of costs for appointed counsel. The chair explained the amendment would restore the law to its pre-2020 form, allowing the Office of Cost Containment to seek repayment from some recipients of appointed counsel services, including those found not guilty, if they had the ability to pay. Supporters said the prior change had sharply reduced collections and that the state should not treat indigent defendants differently from people who hire private counsel. Opponents argued the policy unfairly bills innocent people and children who were entitled to counsel. The transcript cuts off during debate on the amendment, before a vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• It has been moved and seconded that the journal days 1 through 10 be approved. Any discussion?
• It all culminates on February 22nd with a clinic day at Wailuku Health Maui Clinic, where they will be
• Mahalo and welcome to your House of Representatives. seconded that journal Days 1 through 10 seconded
• that journal Days 1 through 10 be<00:15:31.040><c> approved</c><00:15:32.040><c> any</c> be approved
• at w Health Maki clinic in mu clinic day at w Health Maki clinic in mu where<00:16:31.759><c> they</

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's one of the best days on the calendar when cutoff is passed.
• and how it's going to limit really preventative care or early... ...access to health care and how it's
• going to limit really preventative care or early intervention.
• And I was speaking at the NAMI lobby day just the other day.
• Subsidies to make sure people in the state can get access to health care.

Summary: Senate and House Democratic leaders said they were pleased with progress before cutoff, highlighting work on immigration/federal-overreach protections and affordability measures. They cited bills such as restrictions on ICE activity in private spaces, employer notice requirements for ICE worksite actions, housing expansion in commercial and mixed-use zones, limits on medical debt interest, senior property tax relief, grocery-store covenant restrictions, preventive health care access, energy relief for low-income households, and the proposed millionaire’s tax, which they said would support tax credits and long-term fiscal sustainability. They also noted strong bipartisan movement on many bills and said they were now focused on processing House bills in the Senate and vice versa. Several stalled or controversial measures were discussed. Leaders said the JR bill did not advance in the House because it lacked votes, though support had grown and stakeholder engagement continued. Child welfare and controlled-substance/endangerment bills were described as still under discussion, with lawmakers saying there were differing views on the best way to protect children and that some proposals were paused for further work. The Senate-side transmission and cultural resources package also ran into procedural and timing problems, with one bill ultimately not moving after a request for a full reading delayed the plan. The governor’s comments on the millionaire’s tax and the updated revenue forecast were a major topic. Democrats said they welcomed the governor’s tax ideas, were aiming to balance meaningful tax relief with a sustainable budget, and saw the forecast as providing some breathing room and more reserve capacity, though much of the new revenue would be absorbed by caseload growth and maintenance costs. They also discussed a proposed employer assessment tied to Medicaid-funded health coverage, saying it was intended to address federal cuts and shifting costs, while acknowledging concerns from employers and nonprofits. Other items included the tort-liability/survivor claims bill, which leaders said would preserve jury trials and damages while creating a claims process, the 0.05 BAC impaired-driving bill, and a pension-related proposal to terminate and restate LEOFF Plan 1, with some related transfer ideas still unresolved.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I bless—I ask that we all have a blessed day.
• Bless that we all have a blessed day.
• And have a blessed day.
• It is been an honor to care for all.
• </c><01:07:28.960><c> They</c> gas, groceries, and child care. They gas, groceries, and child care.

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll take care of you.
• We'll take care of you.
• </c> like the last five days. like the last five days.
• They're learning day by day.
• They're learning day by day. position. They're learning day by day.

Committee: Senate Finance

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Who's Who's Anybody care about Okay.
• Don't you care about this bill? right? Don't you care about this bill? Yeah.<00:58:24.000><c> Okay.
• On Wednesday, I got on one day.
• I will take care of that. Okay.
• They didn’t care.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee took up HB 164, dealing with homeowners and certain service agreements tied to residential real estate. Much of the discussion focused on whether the bill should be framed as prohibiting “service agreements” or more specifically as banning “future right to listing” agreements, and whether the bill should mirror Maine’s newer law. Mike Padmore of AARP New Hampshire presented suggested edits, including clarifying that the agreements are unenforceable, striking a provision at Roman 6C, and adding language making clear that registry of deeds staff are not liable when they record documents they are statutorily required to file. Bob Quinn of the New Hampshire Association of Realtors said the bill and Maine’s law reach the same result, but he preferred simpler wording and argued the bill should not include a two-year time limit because legitimate listing agreements should not create liens at all. Members and witnesses debated whether the bill should simply make the practice illegal outright, whether the Consumer Protection Act is the right enforcement vehicle, and whether the lien-removal process should be modeled on the recent undischarged mortgage bill. A consumer protection official said the bureau supports the statute and explained that under RSA 358-A, consumers could seek damages and equitable relief to strike a lien, while also noting that the bureau often uses the Consumer Protection Act as an enforcement tool. The committee also discussed narrowing the bill to residential real estate, with the sponsor and witnesses saying the problem has been seen in residential transactions and that commercial property was not the focus. The testimony described the underlying problem as companies, often national rather than New Hampshire-based, using long-term or future listing agreements to impose liens or penalties on homeowners, sometimes in connection with estate transfers or home sales. Witnesses said legitimate real estate listings do not normally place liens on houses, but these arrangements can include hidden or unclear penalties, including a reported 3% charge on home value. No vote was taken in the excerpt, but the committee appeared to be working through possible amendments and whether to adopt Maine-style language or a simpler New Hampshire-specific approach.

Transcript Highlights:

• They don't care what happened in California. They don't care what happened.
• to day.
• to day.
• Some are living as As the World Turns, one day at a time. They really don't care.
• You've heard the numbers all day. My colleagues have told you all day.

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D, later substituted with House Bill 1D, both establishing Florida’s congressional districts. The sponsor, Senator Gates, explained that the Governor had transmitted a proposed redistricting plan on short notice and argued that mid-decade congressional redistricting is legally permissible, citing population growth and the Governor’s view that race-based provisions in the Fair Districts Amendment are unconstitutional. He repeatedly said the Legislature was not being asked to prove the Governor’s legal theory, only to consider the proposal, and noted that no amendments were offered. A lengthy question-and-answer period followed, with senators raising concerns about the rushed process, lack of statewide public hearings, and the map’s effects on minority communities, compactness, communities of interest, and partisan fairness. Senators questioned whether the map cracked Latino and Black communities, whether partisan data was used, whether the Governor’s office had outside consultants, and whether the plan complied with the Florida Constitution, the Fair Districts Amendment, and the Voting Rights Act. Gates generally deferred on legal conclusions, said the Governor’s representatives had testified the map was race-neutral and used political data only as one factor, and emphasized that any constitutional challenge would be for the courts. After a motion to temporarily postpone failed by a recorded vote of 12 yeas to 23 nays, the Senate continued debate. Senators Rouson, Bernard, and others spoke in opposition, arguing the proposal was rushed, partisan, and harmful to communities of interest and minority voting power. Gates maintained that the Governor had a constitutional prerogative to propose the map and that the Legislature could accept, reject, or amend it. The House companion bill was then substituted for the Senate bill, read a third time, and the chamber moved into final debate on the congressional redistricting plan.

Transcript Highlights:

• ONE OR TWO DAYS NOTICE ON A MAJOR CHANGE IN STATE PARKS.
• AT THE SAME TIME OVER 100 ACRES ARE BEING DEVELOPED EVERY DAY.
• SAYS WE CARE ABOUT THE FUTURE AND I'M HERE BECAUSE I REALLY DO BELIEVE THAT.
• I CARE DEEPLY AND HAVE FAITH AM NOT ALONE.
• TAKING CARE OF OUR PEOPLE.

Keywords: 999, senate, all