Transcript Highlights:

• variety mirrors many of the recent compacts that have come before this committee in the area of regulatory
• Just to very briefly set the table and build on exactly what you just identified, the framework here
• for these Tribal-State Gaming Compacts is set out by a federal law called the Indian Gaming Regulatory
• And if that lawsuit is successful against us, the state can ultimately forfeit any regulatory role.
• There are terms to make sure that the state recovers its regulatory costs and also revenue-sharing terms

Summary: The Assembly Governmental Organization Committee held an informational hearing on four Tribal-State Gaming Compacts and amendments negotiated between Governor Newsom and federally recognized tribes. Chair Blanca Rubio emphasized that no formal vote would be taken because the Legislature cannot amend the compacts; the ratification bills are AB 1527 and SB 864. Matthew Lee, Senior Advisor for Tribal Negotiations, explained that the compacts were negotiated under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and were structured to stay within the permissible subjects identified and clarified by the Ninth Circuit’s Chicken Ranch decision. Lee first described the Trinidad Rancheria compact, which would allow up to 1,200 gaming devices at up to three facilities and includes labor protections, minimum wage requirements, anti-harassment and anti-retaliation provisions, state regulatory cost recovery, and revenue-sharing terms for operations above 350 devices. He then discussed the Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians amendment, which extends the existing compact while the tribe and state remain in federal court, preserving the status quo and adding the state’s standard off-track wagering appendix. For the Pinoleville-Pomo Nation amendment, Lee said the compact was updated to reflect current law and more recent state compacts by removing environmental review and family law provisions, narrowing tort protections, revising revenue-sharing and impact mitigation terms, and updating financial disclosure language. For the Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation, Lee said the amendment similarly removed Chicken Ranch-related provisions, narrowed tort and facility definitions, added a commitment to bargain in good faith over any future new forms of class III gaming, and extended the compact through 2036. Sycuan Chairman Cody Martinez testified in support, noting the tribe’s long history in gaming, its employment of more than 3,000 people, and its desire to continue operating its casino resort. No opposition was voiced, and the committee took no vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:18:31.919> authority permits but lacks regulatory authority permits but lacks regulatory
• agency despite not having regulatory agency despite not having rules<00:18:39.039> that<00:18
• overlay,<00:25:14.080> that layers of regulatory overlay, that layers of regulatory overlay
• So our position is we already have the regulatory authority to do regional planning.
• DNR already has the regulatory authority to issue emergency permits.

Bills: HB1846, HB2205, HB1802, HB1571, HB2047, HB2434, HB2426, HB2361, HB2395, HB1712, HB2544, HB1619

Keywords: coastal erosion, shoreline properties, regional planning, mitigation districts, sediment management, environmental impact, public access, community financing, shoreline erosion, emergency permits, coastal management, erosion control, Hawaii Revised Statutes, HB1802, conservation banking, conservation bank, mitigation banking, compensatory mitigation, incidental take permit, incidental take license

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 1846, relating to shoreline mitigation districts. DLNR and the Office of Planning opposed the bill, arguing it would improperly shift regulatory roles between the agencies and prioritize private land interests over public trust and natural and historic resources. Supporters, including the Shoreline Preservation Coalition, Kahana Bay residents, and Hawaii Realtors, said regional planning is needed to address severe erosion, especially in Kahana, and that better coordination between state and county agencies could help move stalled projects forward. Testifiers emphasized that shoreline conditions vary by area and that science-based, region-specific solutions are needed. Members asked questions about whether existing law already allows regional planning and emergency shoreline responses. DLNR said it already has authority to process regional projects and cited an existing draft EIS for Kahana Bay that would proceed through normal permitting and public hearing channels. Supporters responded that the bill would provide a clearer regional planning framework and help communities facing urgent erosion impacts. No vote was taken on HB 1846 in the portion provided. The committee then took up HB 2205, relating to emergency erosion mitigation. DLNR opposed the bill, saying it already has authority to issue emergency permits and had recently done so quickly for a collapsed sidewalk at Queen Surf Beach, and warning that the bill’s language could weaken Act 16 by changing a prohibition on shoreline hardening to a requirement to merely minimize it. Kahana Bay representatives and other supporters argued the bill would create a limited, regulated short-term pathway for emergency shoreline solutions while long-term plans are developed, and said current permits have expired or stalled, leaving dangerous sandbags and no practical relief. Additional testimony from a private homeowner stressed that erosion is threatening homes and that private owners are often bearing the cost of protecting public shoreline access. The discussion remained focused on balancing emergency protection, public access, and long-term shoreline management, and no final action was taken in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have very limited regulatory authority. I want to express that.
• That's our only regulatory expertise is water quality. quality.
• No, we do not desire any more regulatory authority.
• I'm actually a regulatory lawyer.
• I'm a pretty sophisticated regulatory attorney.

Bills: HB1520, HB1525, HB1530, HB1535, HB2068, HB2091, HB2347, HB2372, HB2805, HB2815, HB2867, HB3154, HB3482, HB3483, HB3663, HB3781, HB3901, HB3915, HB4135, HB4153, HB4158, HB4329, HB4331

Keywords: Angelina and Neches River Authority, river authority, Sunset Advisory Commission, Texas Sunset Act, Special District Local Laws Code, local government, natural resources, board of directors, director training, board governance, public testimony, open meetings, public information, conflict of interest, ethics, complaint system, general manager, board president, staggered terms, removal of director

Transcript Highlights:

• IT'S MORE REGULATORY IN NATURE.
• PUBLIC FEAR IS DRIVING REGULATORY SCRUTINY.
• UNIQUE TO US AS A HEAVILY REGULATED INDUSTRY WITH REGULATORY OVERREACH AND OURSELVES AND OUR CUSTOMERS
• WE WANT TO PROMOTE THE BOUNDS OF STATE INSURANCE REGULATORY STANDARDS THAT REFLECT UNIQUE BUSINESS OF
• REGULATION AFFECTS THE UNIQUE BUSINESS MODEL AND CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING LONG-STANDING LEGAL FRAMEWORK

Transcript Highlights:

• SB 608 builds a separate channel for handing out contraception entirely outside of that framework.
• Equally important, SB 971 gives communities a recognized framework for bringing local partners together
• framework that allows us to do that.
• And I've already stated that interchangeable biosimilars have a very different regulatory pattern.
• And I've already stated that interchangeable biosimilars have a very different regulatory pattern.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There is still, even if we have a framework where stuff is easier for us..." Dr.
• So what does that framework look like? You've heard a lot of good ideas today.
• The governor listed a long list of recommendations that could be included in a regulatory framework that
• It's the lack of regulatory enforcement.
• Step up regulatory enforcement and oversight. Thank you for your time.

Summary: The House Committee on Public Health heard House Bill 5, a proposal to ban THC products outside the Texas Compassionate Use Program while allowing non-intoxicating CBD and CBG products under tighter regulation. Chair Van Deaver gave a lengthy background on the 2018 federal Farm Bill and Texas’s 2019 hemp law, arguing that the lack of guardrails allowed a large, unregulated THC market to develop. HB 5 would impose licensing fees, product registration, testing and inspection requirements, and restrictions intended to keep products away from children. Invited witnesses from law enforcement strongly supported the bill. Steve Dye of the Texas Police Chiefs Association and Brian Hawthorne of the Sheriffs’ Association of Texas argued that THC consumables are widely mislabeled, often far more potent than advertised, and linked to youth access, impaired driving, and organized crime. Both said regulation would be ineffective and would amount to legalization, while a ban would be easier for officers to enforce. They also emphasized support for the Texas Compassionate Use Program and said medical THC should remain available. Dr. Peter Stout of the Texas Association of Crime Lab Directors and Alice Amelot of Texas DPS testified as resource witnesses about forensic testing. They said current lab resources are already stretched thin, that quantitative testing for THC and related cannabinoids is expensive and time-consuming, and that a ban would simplify enforcement because labs could focus on presence/absence testing rather than concentration. Amelot said DPS labs are neutral on the bill but explained that mislabeled products and inaccurate certificates of analysis are common. Committee members asked about traffic safety, impairment, youth use, and the costs of enforcement and lab testing; witnesses repeatedly said the bill would reduce complexity for law enforcement but that any approach would still require more resources for labs.

Transcript Highlights:

• framework and procedures as water districts under Chapter 13 of the Texas Water Code, which governs
• utility agency as a receiver for utilities or for entities that have abandoned service, violated regulatory
• However, no review requirement exists for groundwater rights, creating a regulatory gap that could lead
• House Bill 4530 strengthens the framework for the dedication and management of water rights in the Texas
• We're going to close the regulatory gap, strengthen conservation, protect regional water planning, and

Bills: HB4530, HB4931, HB5559, HB5560

Keywords: water rights, Texas Water Trust, water bank, environmental conservation, water quality, instream flows, aquifer, water injection, Edwards Aquifer, environmental regulation, groundwater, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, water conservation, drought, utility regulation, water use restrictions, Public Utility Commission, civil penalties, drought contingency, environmental protection

Summary: The Committee on Natural Resources met with a quorum present and first took up several pending bills for reconsideration and committee substitute adoption. House Bill 2692, relating to codification and clarification of local laws concerning the San Antonio River Authority, was reported favorably to the full House and sent to the Committee on Local and Consent Calendars by an 11-0 vote. House Bills 1407, 1520, 1535, 2970, 4153, 291, 3663, and 3915 were also reconsidered or laid out as pending business, with committee substitutes adopted where needed and each bill reported favorably, generally by unanimous vote, to the full House and then to Calendars or Calendars/Calendars-related referral as applicable. The committee then heard House Bill 4530, which would expand the Texas Water Trust framework to include groundwater rights, require Texas Water Development Board review and approval of groundwater dedications, and notify local groundwater districts when groundwater rights are placed in the trust. The bill’s author and witnesses from the Environmental Defense Fund, The Nature Conservancy, and Chispa Texas supported the measure as a conservation tool and a way to create a clear process for voluntary donations; a Texas Water Development Board witness testified neutrally. The bill was left pending. House Bill 4931, relating to an aquifer storage and recovery project in Medina County, drew support from the author, the Medina County judge, and a regional water alliance witness, who described severe stress on the Edwards Aquifer, low levels at Medina Lake, and the need for a local water-supply tool. The bill was left pending. House Bill 5559, which would clarify enforcement of drought contingency plans for investor-owned water utilities and involve the PUC in model plan development, received support from groundwater district representatives but also concerns from water company and utility witnesses about enforcement authority, approval procedures, and potential conflicts with existing obligations to provide continuous service; the committee substitute was withdrawn and the bill was left pending. House Bill 5560, which would raise the maximum civil penalty for certain groundwater conservation district enforcement actions from $10,000 to $25,000 per violation, prompted debate over whether current law is already sufficient; supporters said the higher cap would better deter overpumping, while opponents argued existing penalties are already severe. That bill was also left pending, and the committee adjourned subject to call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• Let's do the Regulatory Affairs Committee amendment, please. Mr.
• Let's do the Regulatory Affairs Committee amendment, please. Mr.
• Clerk will read the Regulatory Affairs Committee amendment. Mr.
• They are a moral and spiritual framework.
• Regulatory affairs and government efficiency. HB 2143, PSP 21.43.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The Senate convened, approved the journal, received House messages and first-read a large number of bills, then moved through several Committee of the Whole calendars. On Calendar 2, SB 1419 on solar energy inspection contractors was amended with a Carroll floor amendment and passed; a Sundareshan amendment aimed at requiring utilities to shield residential ratepayers from costs tied to large loads such as data centers was debated at length, but failed on a 12-15 division. SB 1498 (Department of Public Safety appropriation) and SB 1502 (unlawful flight/reckless endangerment) also received do-pass recommendations. The Committee of the Whole report was adopted, and the Senate later rejected an attempt to add the failed data-center amendment to the report by a 13-14 vote. On Calendar 3, the Senate advanced SB 1165 (insurance cost sharing for breast exams), SB 1206 (storm-related insurance claims), SB 1212 (health insurance reimbursement rates for vaccines), SB 1215 (firefighters’ occupational disease/workers’ compensation), SB 1290 and SB 1291 (agricultural property notices/classification), and SB 1347 (fertility preservation coverage), with committee amendments adopted on most of them. A Warner substitute floor amendment to SB 1347 was adopted to address insurer concerns by allowing prior authorization with a 72-hour processing requirement and clarifying storage-cost responsibility. The Senate also retained SB 1503 on the calendar. On Calendar 1 and the additional calendars, the Senate advanced SB 1013 (public employees merit hiring), SB 1108 (cash transactions and rounding, with an emergency clause added), SB 1178 (naturopathic physicians), SB 1186 (document retention/proposals/donations), SB 1286 (veterinary visits and prescriptions), SB 1366 (commercial buildings and telecommunications), SB 1431 (municipal design prohibitions), SB 1671 (gaming/racing/boxing conflict-of-interest continuation), SB 1004 (ESA students’ interscholastic activities), SB 1116 (AHCCCS access/claims review/behavioral health), SB 1162 (health care institution licensing complaints), SB 1179 (group home monitoring), SB 1475 (school district governing boards/eligibility), SB 1821 (DCS training and child placement), and SCR 1012. Several floor amendments were debated and adopted or rejected, including a Kavanaugh emergency-clause amendment to SB 1108, a failed Sears amendment to SB 1178 on prescription drug price gouging, a failed Sundareshan transparency amendment to SB 1186, a failed Kavanaugh amendment to SB 1286 on veterinary prescriptions, a Gowan amendment to SB 1366, a Payne amendment to SB 1077, a Carroll amendment to SB 1479, a Petersen amendment to SB 1566, and an Angius amendment to SB 1018 expanding the definition of foreign law to include certain harmful practices. The Senate adopted the Committee of the Whole reports and properly assigned the bills after each calendar.

Transcript Highlights:

• pressures and issues but it doesn't expand on anything that has to do with the state regulatory policy
• What we're going to talk about today is set up those issues and the framework of the analysis.
• And this regulatory team today works on reviewing port and terminal compliance plans, issuing tie and
• And this regulatory team today works on reviewing port and terminal compliance plans, issuing tie and
• So these are your state policy goals in statute, and they continue to serve as a framework for the WTP

Summary: The committee first heard a presentation from WSDOT on balancing uncertainty in capital program estimates and cash flow management. WSDOT explained the differences between design-bid-build and design-build delivery, its tiered risk-assessment process by project size, and how it uses base estimates, inflation, and risk modeling to set budgets. Staff said design-bid-build estimates are generally accurate within about 1% across the program, while design-build projects carry much wider uncertainty and are better communicated as ranges; they cited a P85 budget approach and noted that large, complex projects can be affected by market competition and long procurement timelines. Members asked about the Columbia River Bridge cost growth and about value engineering, and WSDOT said it uses value engineering but has limited scope to cut costs because of project requirements and policy mandates. Troy Swing also discussed cash flow, noting that a few large projects can significantly affect biennial funding needs, and said a risk pool would not reduce overall program risk but could help manage timing if paired with appropriation and cash-flow controls. The committee then received the final presentation in the WSDOT Project Delivery and Innovative Practices study from HKA Global. The consultant said WSDOT’s estimating practices are generally robust and recommended improving transparency by presenting budget authorizations as ranges or estimate classes, better tracking estimate growth over time, and adjusting advertisement timing to avoid competing lettings. The report also discussed surety bonding, suggesting the legislature consider restoring authority for reduced bonding on select large design-build projects or using phased bonding and alternative securities. On indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contracting, the consultant said current job order contract rules are restrictive and recommended legislative changes to make such tools more usable, especially for smaller tasks and to help use unspent funds more flexibly. The committee also heard a follow-up presentation on transit-oriented development policy recommendations tied to HB 1491. The Urban Institute’s Yona Freemark said Washington has been a national leader on TOD but that housing construction, especially in the Puget Sound, has slowed sharply since 2022. He said rising construction costs, high financing costs, and local tax and rent conditions are making many TOD projects infeasible, and recommended that the state fill infrastructure funding gaps around stations, revisit MFTE affordability requirements, consider minimum rather than average density requirements near transit, and create a statewide system to track TOD outcomes such as affordability, gentrification, and transit access. Members questioned the study’s developer interviews, the role of rent control and crime, property tax assumptions, and parking needs; the presenter said the study included five private developers, that rent control was not part of the study scope, and that parking was included in the model assumptions. Finally, the committee began a presentation on regulating emissions from ocean-going vessels at berth. Staff and consultants described California-style at-berth rules, which require shore power or equivalent emissions controls so ships can shut off diesel auxiliary engines while docked. The study is examining vessel traffic, emissions reductions, implementation costs, labor and operational needs, and possible effects on port competitiveness and cargo diversion. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• It basically creates that framework, but it doesn't go as far as um creating a system to compensate the
• that cost and we have no regulatory that cost and we have no regulatory authority<01:11:47.199><
• <01:12:13.120> So,<01:12:13.600> producers<01:12:14.000> that framework for
• So, producers that framework for that.
• ,<01:12:22.400> but It basically creates that framework, but It basically creates that framework

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And so within that regulatory framework, the statutory framework, um, our folks are pretty libertarian
• And so within that regulatory framework,<01:03:43.039> the<01:03:43.280> statutory<01:03
• :43.839> framework,<01:03:44.960> um framework, the statutory framework, um framework,
• adopted a regulatory and statutory framework<01:04:02.559> for<01:04:03.039> skill<01:
• 04:03.359> games<01:04:03.680> regulation framework for skill games regulation framework

Bills: SF0044, SF0046

Keywords: gambling, lotteries, raffles, social relationships, charitable gaming, gaming, liquor establishments, skill based amusement games, regulations, age restrictions, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm sure that will be a departmental regulatory perspective. Okay.
• you're expressing seem to be at the more granular level of the rules and regulations and statutory framework
• Because I'm saying they should be in an exemption, but I do understand there's a regulatory framework
• We're not—I don't know. ...regulatory framework that would be implemented that would have something to

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• to regulatory framework and structure to regulatory framework and structure to regulate<01:47
• We have in Hawaii, and so developing a regulatory framework for something like this is going to cost
• Creating a regulatory framework without proper preparation risks inefficiency and long-term failure.
• Creating a regulatory framework without proper preparation risks inefficiency and long-term failure.
• <02:20:08.840> framework<02:20:09.359> without<02:20:09.680> proper regulatory framework

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think that's why in my testimony I talked about how some of this is also the regulatory environment
• I think that's why in my testimony I talked about some of this is also the regulatory environment, how
• public housing authorities and the portfolio, the history, governance structure, regulatory framework
• Ben has outlined a lot of the regulatory issues that we face.
• It's all made it, you know, extremely tough before we even get to the regulatory issues to develop.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Housing opened its second hearing of the session with remarks from Chairs Haggerty and Cyr emphasizing that the hearing was a broad look at Massachusetts’ housing crisis rather than a single bill. They highlighted topics including zoning, permitting, rental assistance, public housing, homelessness prevention, and housing production. The first witness, Housing and Livable Communities Secretary Augustus, reviewed implementation of the Affordable Homes Act and the state’s new housing plan, citing a 1.6% vacancy rate, a projected need for 222,000 new homes over 10 years, and ongoing efforts such as ADUs by right, fair housing enforcement, eviction record sealing, seasonal communities planning, and new funding for affordable housing, public housing, and the Momentum Fund. He also discussed infrastructure support for municipalities, technical assistance for ADUs, and concerns about possible federal funding cuts. Committee members questioned the secretary about ADU financing and technical assistance, the likely unit yield from the Affordable Homes Act, infrastructure barriers in suburban and rural communities, public housing waitlist management, supportive housing, and federal budget risks. MassNAHRO then testified that public housing authorities are facing rising operating and capital costs, a statewide waitlist nearing 300,000, and uncertainty over federal Section 8 and HUD funding. Witnesses described recent state support for operating subsidies, capital improvements, vacancy turnover teams, and resident service coordinators, while warning that proposed federal cuts could sharply affect voucher issuance and agency operations. CDAC’s executive director Roger Herzog described the agency’s role as a quasi-public source of early-stage financing and technical assistance for nonprofit housing developers, noting its loan capital, supportive housing bond programs, home modification loans, and preservation work under Chapter 40T. He said CDAC has helped produce or preserve more than 55,000 units and stressed the importance of patient capital and preservation tools. CHAPA CEO Rachel Heller urged the committee to focus on production, preservation, planning, and political will, supporting goals for affordability, supportive housing, and homeownership, and endorsing policy changes such as YIGBY, clearer site plan review rules, stronger fair housing funding, and more support for vouchers and public housing. MassHousing then outlined its financing role, including mortgage lending, down payment assistance, the Community Climate Bank, and the Momentum Fund, while noting that permitting delays, capital gaps, and possible federal changes could affect production. Members also asked about transparency, prevailing wage compliance, and a recent internal restructuring related to diversity and business engagement.

Transcript Highlights:

• Abbott [member_1596], who will be sponsoring our department package to really help with a policy framework
• This enables us to set up a foundational framework to work with other state agencies like the Department
• Our low regulatory environment and our low tax burden is very attractive for a lot of companies.
• It's because we have a very low-burden regulatory environment, and we have a very low tax burden, and
• We will have a policy framework as part of our package just to get the initial foundation set up, and

Summary: The Transportation and Economic Development Budget Subcommittee heard an overview from FDOT Secretary Jared Perdue on the state’s transportation work program, with emphasis on the Moving Florida Forward initiative, major roadway projects, workforce needs, seaports, airports, spaceport infrastructure, and the role of MPOs/TPOs in planning. He said the $4 billion general revenue investment in Moving Florida Forward has been leveraged into a roughly $7 billion-plus program, with 20 projects underway and about 70% of the initiative expected to be under construction by year’s end. He highlighted I-4 as the centerpiece, describing a new procurement approach, phased delivery, and added lanes intended to provide congestion relief during construction. He also discussed a projected 38% growth in transportation workforce needs and proposed a Florida Transportation Academy and a research institute to support training and innovation. Tiffany King of the Florida Airports Council said Florida’s 128 public-use airports have about $5.7 billion in unfunded projects through 2029, and stressed that airport priorities include not only terminals and passenger capacity but also safety, security, gates, and environmental work. Michael Rubin of the Florida Ports Council said Florida’s 16 deepwater seaports now have a $195.9 billion economic impact, support about 1.2 million jobs, and generate $7.4 billion in state and local taxes; he noted that ports still have about $4 billion in project needs, including dredging and intermodal connections. Jeff Sheffield of the North Florida TPO described the value of regional, community-based planning and said his four-county TPO has helped align local priorities with FDOT funding. Members asked about whether the state is planning for advanced air mobility and “flying cars,” whether Moving Florida Forward bypassed MPOs, how long major projects take, cost escalation, regionalization of MPOs, port governance, airport governance, and the contractor qualification system. FDOT and the witnesses said the state is working on policy and planning for advanced air mobility, that Moving Florida Forward did not bypass MPOs because the projects were already locally prioritized, and that the main delay is funding rather than the planning process. They said long-range plans are updated regularly and can be amended when priorities change, and that regional MPO structures can improve coordination. The committee took no formal vote; the meeting concluded after questions and comments, including discussion of workforce training opportunities for incarcerated individuals and a motion to adjourn by the ranking member.

Transcript Highlights:

• HP 3837 establishes a comprehensive AV regulatory framework for Level 4 and Level 5 autonomous vehicles
• Number 1, the bill creates a new regulatory board within the DMV specific to autonomous vehicles so that
• Other states have established frameworks authorizing AVs.
• framework for automated motor vehicles in Texas, by establishing a uniform statewide standard for their
• We think that this bill is the right vehicle to further that framework and for that reasons, uh, we do

Transcript Highlights:

• AB 2705 seeks to establish a uniform framework in the excess proceeds claim process to ensure consumers
• Yet California colleges lack a uniform leave-of-absence framework.
• or community land trusts, special flood hazard areas, and regulatory floodways.
• framework does not provide... ...failing to deliver on this promise in part because the existing regulatory
• framework does not provide the Department of Cannabis Control adequate authority.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly met on May 7, 2026, after an initial delay due to lack of quorum, then proceeded through a long House of Origin deadline session focused mainly on floor votes for dozens of bills. The day opened with prayer, a moment of silence for victims of a hate-motivated shooting at an Islamic Center in San Diego, and a warning to visitors about disrupting proceedings. Leadership repeatedly urged members to be on time and at their desks as the chamber worked through a large daily file. The bills considered covered a wide range of topics, including artificial intelligence, community college trustee compensation, transit camera enforcement and privacy, taxation and excess proceeds claims, HOA rules, hepatitis C treatment access, child care planning, greenhouse energy standards, consumer lending, housing and homelessness, pet spay/neuter access, local financing for workforce housing, student financial aid, DUI penalties, senior housing, foster youth, behavioral health licensing, transit stop data, disaster response for child welfare, elections notices, safe surrender for infants, college enrollment and leave policies, insurance regulation, fair funding, school safety, environmental labeling, cash rounding, park passes through libraries, grocery access, pregnancy protections in education, swatting, domestic violence protective orders, farmworker housing, juvenile justice, cervical cancer screening, Medi-Cal transitions, disability certification, and home protection products. Most authors described their bills as cleanup measures, consumer protections, access expansions, or targeted fixes to existing law. Testimony from authors and supporters emphasized access, safety, affordability, and administrative simplification, while a few bills drew policy concerns or opposition, especially AB 1751 on townhome development and labor standards. That bill prompted extended debate over wages, prevailing wage, and stakeholder engagement, but it ultimately passed. Other notable discussion included AB 1628 to extend California’s safe surrender window for infants, AB 1902 on juvenile detention extension hearings, and AB 1925 on permanent disability certification, each framed as addressing difficult real-world gaps in current systems. The chamber took many roll-call votes, with most measures passing overwhelmingly and several by unanimous or near-unanimous margins. A few bills were temporarily passed, retained on file, or moved to the inactive file, and AB 1534 required the call to be lifted and then passed on a 54-8 vote. Overall, the session was dominated by floor action on the daily file rather than committee reports or gubernatorial messages, and the Assembly advanced a large number of bills on a deadline day.

Transcript Highlights:

• This memorial recognizes that produced water, when treated under a rigorous science-based framework,
• This memorial recognized that produce water when treated under a rigorous science-based framework can
• Together, these measures create a thoughtful and responsible framework.
• Together, these measures create a thoughtful and responsible framework that reflects our New Mexico values
• If we reject the opportunity to create a clear, transparent, and science-based regulatory framework for

Bills: HM45, HB276, HB300

Keywords: Taos County, Questa, produced water, treated produced water, water reuse, water quality control commission, freshwater conservation, rural communities, acequias, Indian nations, tribes, pueblos, water rights, industrial water use, data centers, artificial intelligence, AI, quantum computing, economic development, renewable energy

Transcript Highlights:

• An evaluation of the child care service framework, the strengths, opportunities.
• And I'm not trying to accuse the department of anything, but often in regulatory, it is about...
• And I'm not trying to accuse the department of anything, but often in regulatory, it is about yes and
• And this will be the more regulatory side and the interface with child care providers.
• especially because, as Senator Hogan mentioned, this is like a first in what they hope is a potential framework

Bills: HB1220

Keywords: accelerated degree, high-demand occupations, education reform, North Dakota, licensing, 908, all

Summary: The Workforce Development Committee reconvened to discuss House Bill 1119, which would create a child care advisory committee and authorize a Legislative Council program evaluation of child care services. Senator Hogan explained that the bill is intended to review child care licensing rules, child care assistance, and related laws and policies, while also giving child care providers a stronger voice in the rulemaking process. He described the proposal as a new model for legislative program evaluation and noted that leadership had been briefed and was supportive. Committee members raised concerns about the bill’s wording, scope, and structure. Senator Larson questioned the title and several sections, and multiple members suggested making the response language less directive and more collaborative, including changing “shall” to “may” in the section requiring a written response from the Department of Health and Human Services. Members also discussed limiting the advisory committee to the interim, clarifying that the evaluation would focus on child care services rather than broader early childhood programs, and adjusting language about enacted legislation to sound more neutral. The committee also discussed fiscal impact, with Hogan saying the evaluation would be done by Legislative Council staff and that any costs would likely be limited to meetings and existing DHS rulemaking activities. Members compared the proposal to other oversight models, including audit-style reviews and a possible DOGE process, and Hogan emphasized that the bill is meant to evaluate why child care issues keep recurring and why some laws are not fully implemented. No vote was taken; the committee agreed to continue refining the bill and planned to meet again the following Thursday.

Transcript Highlights:

• framework that imposes as little costs as possible.
• framework.
• framework.
• It is part of the Trump administration's 2025 regulatory agenda.
• This did make the Trump administration's regulatory agenda for 2025.

Summary: The meeting focused on the use of biosolids on farm and ranch land, with testimony from Oklahoma State University experts, a conservation official, and an engineering representative about the benefits, risks, and regulatory implications. Dr. Lusk described OSU’s long history of soil fertility research and said biosolids can provide nutrients and organic matter, but also may carry contaminants such as PFAS, heavy metals, pharmaceuticals, microplastics, and pathogens. He emphasized that many questions remain unanswered, especially about contaminant uptake into soil, crops, livestock, and humans, and said existing EPA and Oklahoma DEQ regulations address some treatment and application standards but may not fully cover PFAS. Dr. Arnell expanded on nutrient management, explaining that biosolids can function similarly to manure as a fertilizer source, especially for nitrogen and phosphorus, but should be tested, incorporated into soil, and applied under permit conditions to reduce runoff and other losses. He said PFAS testing methods are not yet standardized and that more research is needed to determine sampling protocols, movement in soil, and long-term effects. Committee members asked whether farmers and ranchers should be notified of risks, whether PFAS is currently tested, how many counties use biosolids, and what research would be needed for a dissertation-level study. The witnesses generally agreed that landowners should be informed of known risks and uncertainties, but said the science is still developing. Dr. Arnell said a unified testing method is needed before reliable PFAS monitoring can be done, and suggested that a multi-year study would be required to understand soil movement, crop uptake, and livestock impacts. Greg Scott of the Oklahoma Conservation Commission framed the issue as a waste-management problem, noting that human waste streams contain contaminants and that soil type affects how pollutants move; he said sandy soils pose greater movement risks than clay soils and that current best practice is incorporation, careful timing, and avoiding steep or sensitive sites. He also said PFAS are widespread and not naturally occurring in the way some other compounds are, and that liability and cleanup costs are major concerns. Mary Elizabeth Mock of Garver Engineering focused on the practical and financial consequences of a possible moratorium on land application, saying most of Oklahoma’s biosolids are currently land applied and would otherwise have to go to landfills. She warned that many landfills are nearing capacity, tipping fees could rise sharply, and cities such as Tulsa and Norman could face large increases in disposal costs, which would ultimately be borne by ratepayers and taxpayers. She also said septic system maintenance costs could rise if land application options shrink, potentially leading to deferred maintenance and system failures. Mock urged a tiered, data-driven approach to PFAS regulation and said advanced treatment technologies may help in the future, but they are still emerging and expensive. No votes were taken; the session consisted of presentations and member questions.