Transcript Highlights:

• And so that's why we're doing this hearing: to get the feedback.
• Thank you all for the feedback.
• Thank you all for the feedback.
• Thank you all for the feedback.
• I want an enforcement mechanism on Mexico. Permanent. I want an enforcement mechanism on Mexico.

Summary: The joint hearing of the Assembly Select Committee on California-Mexico Bi-National Affairs and the Assembly Economic Development, Growth, and Household Impact Committee focused on the USMCA and how the agreement affects California’s economy, jobs, supply chains, and competitiveness. Opening remarks emphasized California’s heavy trade dependence on Mexico and Canada, the importance of stable trade rules, and concerns that tariffs or uncertainty could harm workers, small businesses, agriculture, logistics, manufacturing, and border communities. Members said the hearing would help inform a future legislative report or resolution on California’s priorities for the agreement’s review. Academic and policy witnesses argued that the USMCA is central to North American economic integration and California’s role in it. Testimony from UC San Diego and CETYS University described California and Mexico as co-producers rather than simple trading partners, highlighting sectors such as medical devices, aerospace, semiconductors, logistics, and advanced manufacturing. Witnesses also warned that the upcoming review could involve not just trade but security and immigration issues, and they urged a stronger, longer-term agreement with more certainty, better border efficiency, and new tools such as specialized technician visas, binational certification standards, innovation zones, and a technology fund. Go-Biz and chamber representatives said USMCA provides predictability, market access, and support for small and medium-sized businesses, while also creating compliance burdens through rules of origin, labor standards, and customs procedures. They pointed to California’s trade missions, export support programs, and state-level cooperation with Mexico and Canada as ways to help firms participate in regional supply chains. Mexican government and business representatives said the agreement is largely functioning well, that Mexico’s public consultation process received nearly 800 submissions and about 2,000 chapter-specific comments, and that many stakeholders favor maintaining or extending USMCA. No formal votes were taken; the committee heard testimony and asked witnesses for follow-up information to inform its report and future recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do have a mechanism around our state statute that is where our current funding Lives and is managed
• . as this feedback could be an early warning of participation trends and a tool for improving menus.
• And I do believe that feedback is a gift, and I've certainly received a lot.
• that the evaluators give this feedback to the department.
• And so we do ask for your feedback in pushing the seated time around the state. Feedback as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• That is what this mechanism is designed to do.
• So this is a mechanism designed to get that.
• So this is a mechanism designed to get there.
• I do not have their specific feedback in house.
• What was the feedback during the committee as it relates to that?

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The new pieces will be providing some feedback.
• So we'll touch on that a little bit in the feedback as well. Little bit in the feedback as well.
• And then a little more feedback on Okay.
• That was the feedback we're hearing from the field.
• There are other funding mechanisms such as your at-risk funding, mechanisms such as your at-risk funding

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Teachers want that feedback.
• So it's also for teachers your feedback to know what do I need to improve on.
• And we have this system that has been provided a nearly immediate feedback from the beginning of the
• It requires us to develop and present the feasibility of a three-year growth mechanism for A through
• F to augment the existing year-over-year growth mechanism.

Bills: HB8

Keywords: HB 8, Texas public school accountability, school accountability, public school transparency, STAAR, state assessments, instructionally supportive assessment program, Student Success Tool, Texas Education Agency, TEA, accountability ratings, A-F ratings, through-year assessment, benchmark testing, norm-referenced assessment, college career military readiness, CCMR, local accountability plan, school district performance, campus turnaround

Transcript Highlights:

• And that feedback is going to come back immediately.
• And 116 that feedback is going to come back immediately.
• Teachers want that feedback.
• Teachers want that feedback.
• So it's also for teacher feedback to know what do I need to improve on.

Bills: HB8

Keywords: HB 8, Texas public school accountability, school accountability, public school transparency, STAAR, state assessments, instructionally supportive assessment program, Student Success Tool, Texas Education Agency, TEA, accountability ratings, A-F ratings, through-year assessment, benchmark testing, norm-referenced assessment, college career military readiness, CCMR, local accountability plan, school district performance, campus turnaround

Summary: The House Committee on Public Education met to hear House Bill 8, which would replace STAAR with a new assessment and accountability system beginning in the 2027-28 school year. The chair described the bill as reducing testing time, limiting benchmark tests, adding beginning-, middle-, and end-of-year assessments, requiring faster score turnaround, involving Texas teachers in test development, and tightening accountability timelines and transparency rules. Members also discussed provisions on A-F ratings, cut scores, CCMR, local accountability plans, and TEA reporting requirements. Committee members and invited witnesses split sharply on the bill’s approach. Supporters, including the chair, TEA Commissioner Mike Morath, and Ed Trust’s Nicholas Munyon Penny, argued the bill would reduce high-stakes pressure, provide quicker and more actionable data, limit over-testing, and better align assessments to Texas standards while preserving criterion-referenced accountability. They said the new system would help teachers and parents intervene sooner and would improve transparency, including parent access to student responses and automatic rescoring in some writing cases. Opponents, including Rep. Hinojosa and student witness Ella Moran, argued the bill still increases testing and replaces one high-stakes test with multiple TEA-created tests. Moran testified that STAAR creates anxiety, disrupts instruction, and does not reflect real learning, while Hinojosa said the House had previously passed a better bill based on a nationally norm-referenced model and criticized the new proposal as a concession to the Senate. Questions also focused on AI scoring of writing, rescoring rates, and whether the bill’s new accountability rules would be reliable and fair. The committee did not take a final vote during the portion provided, but the chair said a vote on HB 8 would be called after public testimony later in the day.

Transcript Highlights:

• There is a mechanism for you to present all of that information and make a case.
• And there is a mechanism. What I was going to ask about.
• Do you agree that there's not exceptions and there's not a mechanism within here?
• But it appears there is a mechanism, but again, the mechanism is unknown.
• I appreciate the feedback that I've received.

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 399 by Senator Bass, which would create the Louisiana Higher Education Research Security Council to review and potentially block certain gifts, contracts, academic partnerships, and research partnerships involving foreign adversary sources. Bass said the bill is intended to protect university research, intellectual property, and students from foreign influence, and would also require public disclosure of certain foreign-linked arrangements and a plan to eliminate foreign-adversary-linked software. Supporters from State Armor argued Louisiana universities have been vulnerable to Chinese Communist Party influence and intellectual property theft. Representatives from Tulane University and Lenovo raised concerns that the bill could create duplicative review, delay research, raise costs, and sweep in legitimate private or multinational entities; a proposed amendment to exempt entities operating under a CFIUS national security agreement failed 4-8. After debate, the committee moved SB 399 favorably. The committee then considered Senate Bill 310 by Senator Cloud, presented by Representative Carlson, which would require public school and college health centers to display information about pregnancy resources available in Louisiana. Supporters from Louisiana Right to Life said the bill would help connect pregnant students with existing state and private assistance programs, while the ACLU submitted a red card in opposition without speaking. The bill was moved favorably without objection. The committee also advanced House Resolution 171 by Representative Turner, which calls for a study of the workforce-oriented TOPS Tech and M.J. Foster programs, with business and workforce groups supporting the study as a way to measure outcomes and return on investment; it was moved favorably. Next, the committee took up House Bill 1084 by Representative Turner, a tuition autonomy bill for public post-secondary institutions. An amendment was adopted to add a conceptual framework for tuition-setting considerations, but the bill would still remove the existing 10% over two years cap and allow institutions to set tuition more freely. Turner argued universities need more flexibility because state funding has declined and campuses face deferred maintenance and operating pressures. Several members, especially Representative Carlson, warned that higher tuition could reduce access and that the bill did not address broader structural problems in higher education. Despite those concerns, HB 1084 was moved favorably by an 8-3 vote. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 351 by Senator Jackson Andrews, which would let families apply for child care assistance through CCAP once pregnancy is known, rather than waiting until after birth, to help move them up the waiting list. An amendment was adopted to have BESE, rather than the department, handle rulemaking and to allow the House and Senate education committees to approve the implementation process. The bill was then discussed as a way to help parents return to work sooner, and the hearing continued with questions from members.

Transcript Highlights:

• That schools will implement certain local revenue generation mechanisms to double their budget.
• My colleagues will walk us through a couple of case studies that illustrate the mechanics and effects
• Together, the mechanisms cannot exceed 15 mills.
• and how we responded to that feedback.
• We'll go through a listening process to take that feedback and to develop those assessments.

Transcript Highlights:

• and found out about it days later. ...obtaining feedback and found out about it days later.
• But that was also promised when the action plan was created and the feedback was given.
• Other states have decided not to codify those and have developed them through other mechanisms.
• Is it through another mechanism? What would be the process for how long those folks serve?
• Is it through another mechanism? What would be the process for how long those folks serve?

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Joint Resolution 1, which would amend the New Mexico Constitution to remove language requiring school elections to be held at different times from partisan elections. The sponsor and the Secretary of State’s office said the change would let school bond and mill levy questions appear on general election ballots, reduce the number of costly special elections, increase turnout, and address an outdated discriminatory provision dating to 1910. Testimony from the New Mexico School Board Association and school superintendents supported the resolution for its potential cost savings and faster access to local and state capital outlay funding. A committee member asked for clarification that school board member elections would remain on the regular local election cycle and nonpartisan. There was no opposition, and the committee approved the resolution on a due pass motion. The committee then heard House Memorial 30, which asks the Legislative Education Study Committee to study public education governance and convene a broad working group to review roles, responsibilities, statutes, and long-term planning across the education system. The sponsor and LESC staff said the memorial is intended to improve coherence, support long-term goals, and consider governance structures that could better align education policy across administrations, including lessons from the Martinez-Yazzie response and models from other states. Supporters from charter schools, Kids Can, the school board association, superintendents, and Teach Plus backed the study as a way to improve coordination and student outcomes. Several committee members raised concerns about who would be included in the process, emphasizing the need for meaningful participation by families, plaintiffs in the Martinez-Yazzie case, tribal leaders, and students with disabilities, as well as clear notice and access for working families. Members also asked about guardrails, accountability, and whether a future statewide education commission could dilute local or tribal voices. LESC staff said the memorial would allow the committee to define the study’s structure, composition, metrics, and potential recommendations, including whether any commission should be created by statute or another mechanism. There was no opposition, and the committee passed House Memorial 30 on a do pass motion.

Transcript Highlights:

• work gave me deep experience in the financial modeling, credit analysis, and the capital market mechanics
• We've had robust feedback from stakeholders, and I would encourage you to support the bill.
• That was feedback that was given by both EVIT and the districts.
• The districts have given a lot of feedback. Now they want more information.
• I listen to a lot of feedback, actually, from school districts down here.

Bills: HB2093, HB2370, HB2376, HB2380, HB2381, HB2383, HB2423, HB2481, HB2621, HB2895, HB4005, HB4043, HB4109

Keywords: mental health, school curriculum, education policy, instruction requirements, statute repeal, charter schools, education, weapons detection, public safety, school administration, school districts, real estate transactions, school property, bond issuance, land use approval, capital improvements, school governance, board meetings, education funding, parental notification

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:34:02.920><c> on</c> outreach, and provided feedback on outreach, and provided feedback on proposed
• </c><00:37:26.640><c> that</c> Um we gathered additional feedback that Um we gathered additional feedback
• So, mechanical and equipment defects are one of the causes of rail incidents here in Minnesota.
• We average approximately three mechanical defect incidents here in Minnesota annually.
• We average approximately three mechanical defect incidents here in Minnesota annually.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• that is preventative against bots, and if it did get kind of overridden by either any sort of AI mechanism
• We welcome that feedback. Yeah, and maybe you can answer it in the follow-up.
• States, right, but they're not considered to have been in the United States because of the legal mechanism
• and operational some like smaller technical, mechanical and operational amendments to the bill.
• So it actually does address a significant bit of feedback that we've gotten from a broad and diverse

Summary: House and Senate Democratic leaders held a media availability focused on the late-session agenda, including the House policy cutoff, a supplemental budget, and the House Finance Committee hearing on the proposed “millionaire’s tax”/income tax measure. They said several Senate bills had moved or were moving quickly, including a face mask bill, an abortion medication access bill, a mobile devices in schools bill, a driver privacy/personal safety data protections bill, and a West Coast Health Collaborative bill. They also said the supplemental budget would emphasize food, shelter, health care, continuity of government, and other core services. A major topic was allegations of fraudulent or bot-generated remote sign-ins on the millionaire’s tax hearings. Leaders said remote testimony and sign-ins have broadened public participation, but misuse of the system is a problem that will be reviewed over the interim. They said the goal is to preserve easy public access while improving accuracy, and that the sign-in numbers should be treated cautiously because the system is informational rather than equivalent to voting. They also said there had been no direct contact with state Supreme Court justices about the tax bill. The leaders defended the need for the income tax proposal by arguing that state spending growth reflects inflation, population growth, the McCleary school-funding changes, and major investments in child care, higher education, Medicaid dental care, IT systems, and special education. They said the Legislature is trying to balance the tax code and that they do not support taxing incomes below $1 million, though they would not rule out future legislative changes decades from now. On tort claims against the state, they said Senator Dhingra’s arbitration bill has advanced the discussion but is unlikely to move further this session, and that broader liability reductions may require constitutional changes or prevention-focused investments. They also discussed long-term care workforce pressures, saying Washington is better positioned than many states but still faces an aging-population challenge. On the millionaire’s tax process, they said the House Finance Committee is expected to increase tax reductions in the bill, with leaders aiming to resolve differences with the Senate without going to conference if possible.

Transcript Highlights:

• This includes survey results from another educator feedback.
• What is the feedback on it?
• not to see some of these other entities here and getting some of this feedback.
• and hearing your all's feedback online.
• your all's feedback online.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So we're giving that feedback, but in an empathetic way.
• Feedback as well.
• found it more useful than than others next slide iterated, where we actually gave them more feedback
• Defense mechanisms against it.
• Tying into funding mechanisms helps a little bit because everybody's incentivized to do this.

Summary: The hearing focused on how artificial intelligence is being used across California’s life sciences sector, from digital health and medical devices to cancer research, drug discovery, and biosecurity. The chairs emphasized California’s economic leadership in biotechnology and the need to balance innovation with privacy, consumer protection, and equitable access. Members also raised concerns about whether the state can preserve its research and manufacturing ecosystem, and about the role of public infrastructure such as CalCompute, open-source tools, and state procurement in supporting innovation. The first panel featured representatives from UCSF, the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. They described AI applications in remote blood pressure monitoring, wearable and sensor-based health data, cancer drug discovery, learning from every patient, clinical trial matching, and public health surveillance. Witnesses stressed that AI can speed discovery and improve care, but only if data can move across systems, models are validated, and privacy safeguards are strong. They also warned that innovation could be hollowed out if compute, data access, and translational funding are not supported in California. Committee members asked about HIPAA and CMIA protections, interoperability with Epic, validation of AI tools, FDA regulation, and whether proprietary models limit independent evaluation. Witnesses said consumer sensor data often falls outside HIPAA, that FHIR and other interoperability standards already exist, and that open-source layers could sit on top of existing EHR systems. They also discussed the need for ongoing post-market monitoring, human oversight, and faster regulatory pathways, especially for AI-enabled diagnostics and personalized therapies. The second panel highlighted company use cases. Pangea Data described AI systems that identify care gaps in chronic, rare, and oncology conditions and argued for better reimbursement frameworks so rural and smaller providers can adopt them. Dexcom explained how it uses AI in its continuous glucose monitoring products, with strong FDA-backed verification, validation, cybersecurity controls, and guardrails to prevent unsafe advice. Lilly Ventures discussed AI in drug discovery and the need to modernize development pipelines, while Twist Bioscience was introduced as another company working on AI-driven life science innovation.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:09:31.600><c> from</c><00:09:31.839><c> our</c> MDE received immediate feedback from our MDE
• received immediate feedback from our school<00:09:32.320><c> nutrition</c><00:09:32.800><c> program</
• So, if the funding mechanism is flawed and outdated, let’s fix the funding mechanism.
• So, if the funding mechanism is have.
• Don't create another funding mechanism.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• So nothing but positive feedback.
• We get some feedback from them. They play a very valuable part of that process.
• We get some feedback from them.
• This is under primary production, under that primary depletion mechanism.
• Those are kind of the way we grouped their comments and their feedback.

Summary: The committee met to receive updates from the Tax Commissioner’s office on property tax relief programs and related compliance work. Commissioner Brian Croshys reviewed the Homestead Property Tax Credit, Disabled Veteran Credit, and Primary Residence Credit, noting that the Homestead program expanded significantly after HB 1158, that some households are “adjusting out” of eligibility as incomes rise, and that the committee may want to consider indexing income thresholds. Members asked for additional data on bracket breakdowns, possible costs of eliminating income limits for seniors, and how many households are zeroed out by the combined programs. Croshys also discussed the simpler administration of the disabled veteran credit, the growth in participation, and the heavy workload and auditing safeguards built into the new primary residence credit system. He said the department found no material compliance findings and that the program is designed to be digital-first, with county auditors and the Tax Commissioner’s office both involved in review and notification. The committee recessed for lunch and later reconvened, with the chair noting that more detailed PRC information would likely be available at a September meeting. Shelly Myers then presented the statewide property tax increase, or “zero growth,” report and the 2025 statistical report. She explained how county auditors report levy and valuation data, how increases and decreases are counted, and which jurisdictions showed the largest percentage changes in countywide, citywide, school district, and park district levies. In the statistical report, she summarized recent trends in assessed values: agricultural values remained relatively flat, while residential, commercial, and centrally assessed property values increased over the past five years. She also reviewed statewide tax levies by property class and clarified that centrally assessed growth figures were annual averages. Members discussed how shifts in land use and annexation can make it appear that tax burdens are moving from ag to residential/commercial property. Myers then summarized the interim study on the 3% levy limitation under HB 1176, saying most counties complied without budget changes, while some used hiring freezes, deferred purchases, or reserve funds; 23% of counties had to reduce levies, and the affected funds were mainly general, road and bridge, and weed control. She said 12 counties reported zero new growth in the data and that 35 counties reported not using all of their cap. The committee also received an oil tax presentation from Croshys on the stripper well extraction tax exemption. He outlined the number of active stripper wells, the production and revenue implications of the exemption, and projections for future biennia under different tax scenarios. He said the exemption represents substantial savings to operators but also corresponds to production tax revenue that would otherwise be collected, and he emphasized that future outcomes depend on oil prices, well counts, and technology such as CO2 enhanced oil recovery. Nathan Anderson of the Department of Mineral Resources briefly answered a question about why Red River wells have a different production threshold than Bakken wells, explaining it was tied to completion costs and lateral length. The committee then heard from Charlie Gorecki of the EERC, who presented an analysis of typical Bakken well decline curves and argued that most oil is produced before a well reaches stripper status, but that keeping wells open and investing in refracturing or other interventions can recover additional production. No votes were taken during this portion of the meeting; the main actions were receiving reports, asking for follow-up data, and scheduling further discussion for a later meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• The immediate feedback basically was, what about everybody else? Very reasonable.
• </c> that um we've received feedback that um we've received feedback throughout<01:03:26.200><c> the<
• </c><01:03:51.400><c> and</c> and so we are exploring mechanisms and and so we are exploring mechanisms
• We do have a mechanism to be able to recoup, so we know we do have a backup.
• </c> be cuz we need a risk transfer mechanism be cuz we need a risk transfer mechanism this<01:50:22.520

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• and is currently part of a large-scale modernization effort, but also our internal processes and feedback
• And why hasn't the agency produced the public and tribal feedback?
• Madam Chair, I'm afraid I'm not familiar with the public feedback portion.
• And why hasn't the agency produced the public and tribal feedback?
• Madam Chair, I'm afraid I'm not familiar with the public feedback portion.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So that's the feedback that we got.
• So that’s the feedback that we got.
• So that’s the feedback that we got.
• </c> lot of meetings had a lot of feedback lot of meetings had a lot of feedback back<00:09:11.279><c
• But with this, there's a mechanism to identify and a structure for discipline.

Keywords: Reuploaded to restore full meeting 00:00 – Meeting Start 00:37 – Attendance Roll Call 02:20 -Discussion on SB 69 18:10- Roll Call Vote, 958, all

Summary: The Senate Agriculture Committee met to reconsider a committee substitute for a bill dealing with equine dental care and the regulation of non-veterinarian dental practitioners. The chair reopened the bill after prior testimony, and members focused on how the bill would set standards for training, testing, insurance, continuing education, and a registry for practitioners. Discussion also centered on whether the measure would affect veterinary practice or create a precedent for other animal care areas; supporters said it was meant to preserve access and affordability for horse owners, especially in rural areas where veterinarians are scarce or unavailable for routine work. A major topic was the bill’s grandfathering or “legacy candidate” provision. Senators asked how existing practitioners would qualify, whether they would need to apply, and what documentation would be required. Committee witnesses, including a Kentucky Veterinary Medical Association representative and the Board of Veterinary Examiners executive director, said the board could set licensing terms by regulation, including an application process, background/history checks, and letters of recommendation from licensed veterinarians. They also said the process would include an application window to allow current practitioners time to comply. Several members explained their votes in favor, while noting lingering concerns they wanted addressed on the floor. Supporters emphasized that the bill was the product of years of work, surveys, stakeholder meetings, and multiple drafts, and that it was intended to legitimize existing practitioners while protecting animal welfare. The committee substitute was approved, the bill passed the committee unanimously, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• And do appreciate your feedback.
• So your feedback was critical. So, my member, Ortega, please. First, thank you.
• I don't have any feedback to provide to you.
• The mechanism by which this board is financed is also a point of concern.
• The mechanism in which this board is financed is also a point of concern.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 56, which would require social media platforms to display a warning label about potential mental health harms from prolonged use, with amendments shortening the initial warning and allowing immediate access to the platform. The author and supporters, including a parent who lost a daughter to suicide and a therapist, argued that social media contributes to teen anxiety, self-harm, and other harms and that families need clearer public health information. Opponents from tech and civil liberties groups argued the bill would be ineffective, burdensome, and likely unconstitutional, saying it would create warning fatigue and should be replaced by more targeted tools and digital literacy measures. Several members discussed emergency access concerns, language access, and whether the warning should be more actionable; the bill was moved on a 9-0 vote to the Judiciary Committee. The committee then took up AB 358, which would amend CalECPA to allow law enforcement, with the victim’s consent, to inspect certain abandoned tracking or surveillance devices found in a victim’s home, vehicle, or personal property without first obtaining a warrant. The author and a San Diego prosecutor said the bill is narrowly tailored to devices used solely for spying and is intended to help stalking and domestic violence survivors act quickly before evidence is lost. Opponents from EFF and the ACLU warned the bill would weaken warrant protections, create a loophole around CalECPA, and reduce transparency and accountability. Members debated Fourth Amendment issues, abandonment, and the practical need for rapid access; the bill passed the committee on a 9-0 vote to Appropriations. The committee also heard AB 1137, which builds on last year’s CSAM reporting law by allowing any user to report child sexual abuse material, requiring clearer reporting mechanisms, adding human review in some cases, and mandating third-party audits and public reporting. Supporters, including survivor advocates and a parent of a child victim, said the bill would reduce the burden on survivors and improve removal of abusive content. Tech industry opponents said they support the goal but objected to the human-review mandate, public audit disclosures, and enforcement provisions, arguing they could create security risks and compliance burdens. Members generally supported the bill’s intent but raised questions about audit frequency and human review; the bill was moved on call with seven votes at the time of the transcript.