Transcript Highlights:

• We are holding our committee hearing here at the State Capitol, Room 113.
• She sent her regards and will prioritize your next hearing.
• Sorry, Madam Chair, did I hear you say on the CDFA items?
• Their first hearing was this March and a second appeal is scheduled, I believe, for May.
• That concludes our hearing for today's agenda. So the Senate Budget 724 is now adjourned.

Summary: The subcommittee heard a series of Department of Food and Agriculture budget proposals, beginning with ongoing funding and trailer bill language for the Farm to School program and related climate-smart agriculture work. CDFA described the program’s goals of linking California producers with schools, expanding access to local and nutritious food, and supporting underserved farmers through technical assistance and outreach. The LAO recommended rejecting the proposal as presented because of the state’s budget condition and suggested that some activities might instead be supported through Proposition 98. Members questioned whether the program is reaching the schools and communities with the greatest need, how grants are scored, and whether the proposal’s goals are measurable enough to justify ongoing funding. The item was held open. The committee also discussed CDFA’s climate bond expenditure plan, which would allocate remaining Proposition 4 funds to existing programs such as SWEEP, Healthy Soils, urban agriculture, fairground emergency response upgrades, and invasive species work, as well as new or developing programs including year-round certified farmers markets, mobile farmers markets, regional farm equipment sharing, and tribal food sovereignty. CDFA said the funds would be released in stages based on program readiness, with audits and performance metrics tied to each program. The LAO found the plan reasonable and consistent with bond requirements. Members asked about audit responsibility, performance tracking, and whether the bond programs should be front-loaded or spread over a longer period. A third CDFA item addressed the elimination of vacant positions under prior budget reductions. CDFA and the Department of Finance explained that the positions were selected because they had been vacant for long periods or were hard to fill, and that departments identified the positions based on their own operational knowledge. The LAO supported retaining the special-fund positions and suggested the General Fund positions be weighed on their merits. Members raised concerns about the impact on core functions such as audits, investigations, milk marketing, and grape pricing reports, and asked for follow-up on how the department determined which positions could be removed. The committee then heard a CDFA IT proposal to add funding and four positions for information technology operations; the LAO had no concerns, and members discussed cybersecurity, legacy systems, and future risks such as AI and quantum threats. The committee took public comment and then voted to approve items 9 through 13, which included CDFA dog importation certificates, livestock carcass disposal, Gambling Control Commission IT support and tribal grant funding, and an ABC district office relocation. The hearing then moved to the Department of Cannabis Control, which presented a request to strengthen enforcement against the illicit cannabis market by adding a North State field office in Redding and three non-sworn support positions. DCC said the illicit market remains far larger than the legal market, with a large backlog of cases and significant public safety and environmental concerns. Finance supported the targeted expansion, the LAO had no comment, and members asked about regional coverage, officer safety, and whether a larger, more transformational enforcement effort might be warranted in the future.

Transcript Highlights:

• But let me tell you that just to prepare for this hearing, the hundreds of hours that this staff has
• However, I believed that, given the timing of the previous hearing and the conclusion of the office's
• We're having a hearing right now, and that's on public safety.
• The transportation public hearing happened a few weeks ago at UMass Amherst.
• Because hearing 60% when it used to be 25% at least gets me to start to open my ears, right?

Committee: Senate Senate Committee on Post Audit and Oversight

Summary: The committee met to review MassDOT’s failed service plaza procurement and the Inspector General’s findings. Chair Montigny opened with a broad critique of procurement culture, conflict-of-interest risks, and the need for stronger oversight, saying the committee’s role is bipartisan and investigative and that subpoenas would be used if necessary. Inspector General Jeffrey Shapiro then summarized his investigatory letter, saying MassDOT had created procedures that could have supported a fair process but did not follow them. He identified eight major problems, including inadequate conflict-of-interest disclosures, undisclosed relationships and communications with Applegreen and Suffolk Construction, violations of contact rules, inconsistent weighting of evaluation subfactors, weak documentation of scoring, unclear information-sharing with subject matter experts, live roll-call scoring that increased perceived bias, and insufficient board/committee review before approval. He recommended clearer disclosure forms, stronger training, better documentation, sealed scoring, clearer rules for internal communications, and more public board involvement. Committee members pressed the Inspector General on whether the conduct violated law, how to define and police “appearance” of conflicts, whether employees should be held accountable, and whether prior evaluators should be excluded from the new process. Shapiro said his report did not conclude that laws were violated, but that the process was seriously flawed and that accountability should be handled within agencies. He also said he would provide additional written recommendations on broader procurement standards and noted that some oversight functions may need clearer definitions and better recordkeeping across agencies and quasi-public entities. The chair and members emphasized that the problems appeared systemic rather than limited to one administration or one contract. MassDOT Interim Secretary Phil Ting and Undersecretary Jonathan Gulliver then described the new procurement approach. They said the prior process had been a failure, but that the new effort is a complete reset with no one from the prior evaluation participating. MassDOT plans to split the plazas into three geographic packages, use a design-build/public-private partnership framework, and create a P3 Commission with appointments from the governor, legislative leaders, and treasurer, plus review by the Inspector General and Attorney General. They said the new scoring will be more objective, with financial scoring set at 60% and based on a guaranteed maximum price and other mathematical measures rather than projected revenues, and that technical and financial evaluations will be separated in a double-blind process. Members signaled cautious support for the changes but continued to question whether the new structure and oversight will be enough to prevent a repeat of the earlier procurement failures.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is our Friday, March 20th, 2026 hearing in the State Capitol hearing room 325.
• So, thank you so much for hearing<00:06:23.640><c> it.</c> hearing it. hearing it.
• Thank you for hearing this bill.
• Thank you for hearing this bill.
• Thank you for hearing this bill.

Bills: SB2319 , SB2407 , SB2489 , SB2153 , SB2321 , SB2805 , SB3010 , SB2892 , SB2595 , SB2781

Committee: House Agriculture & Food Systems

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you and we can also see you.
• c> And so, what I hear And so, what I hear in<00:47:02.960><c> a</c><00:47:03.000><c> lot</c><00:47:03.240
• DLI does not have a position on this bill at this time, but we are glad to have the hearing and hear
• </c><00:50:24.720><c> and</c> but we are glad to have the hearing and but we are glad to have the hearing
• 26.320><c> and</c><00:50:26.520><c> form</c> hear from the stakeholders and form hear from the stakeholders

Committee: Senate Labor

Transcript Highlights:

• If you don't like what you hear, it's all Rep. Paul's fault.
• If you like what you hear, then it's all his credit. But I just want to, Rep.
• Some of the technology that we're hearing about improves upon that.
• Some of the technology that we're hearing about improves upon that.
• Not hearing any nays. Now, Representative Donaghy to rule. No nay votes, not hearing any nays.

Summary: The committee held a work session on autonomous vehicles, beginning with an overview from the Washington State Transportation Commission on the state’s five-year AV work group. The commission described its 2018 legislative mandate, the 35-member executive committee and seven subcommittees, and the resulting 29 recommendations and “roadmap to the future.” The presentation emphasized six policy “building blocks” for Washington: agency readiness, public outreach, equity, safety, testing and pilots, and a path to deployment. It also noted current Washington law requires AV testing companies to self-certify with the Department of Licensing, carry $5 million in liability insurance, report collisions and violations, and notify local law enforcement before testing; three companies are currently certified. State regulators from California and Arizona then outlined their AV frameworks. California described its long-running permit system for testing with and without a safety driver and for commercial deployment, its current rulemaking to expand use cases to heavy-duty trucks and passenger shuttles, and new requirements for mileage, operational assessments, and more detailed crash and incident reporting. California also said it is creating a new enforcement tool allowing citations to be issued to manufacturers for moving violations by AVs. Arizona described its executive-order-based approach, later codified by statute, which allows testing and driverless operations through self-certification, law enforcement interaction plans, quarterly meetings with companies, and reporting of crashes or near misses; Arizona also said it tracks crashes monthly and has not recorded fatalities attributed to AVs. Industry representatives from Waymo, Zoox, and the Autonomous Vehicle Industry Association argued that AVs can improve safety, accessibility, and mobility while creating jobs. They described extensive sensor systems, community outreach, first-responder engagement, and current operations in multiple cities. Waymo cited more than 127 million rider-only miles and said its data show large reductions in injury-causing and pedestrian crashes; Zoox said it operates in Las Vegas, San Francisco, and Seattle and stressed its purpose-built electric robotaxi and local jobs; AVIA said its members have driven more than 145 million autonomous miles and that 26 states now expressly authorize driverless operations. Members asked about public education, crash and fatality tracking, enforcement, weather, school zones, first-responder interactions, and labor impacts. Labor and public-safety witnesses from the Teamsters, firefighters, and driver unions opposed commercial AV deployment without stronger safeguards. They argued Washington should not be an unregulated testing ground, especially for heavy trucks and hazardous materials, and warned of job losses for drivers, taxi and rideshare workers, and related occupations. Firefighters and driver representatives raised concerns about AVs interfering with emergency scenes, blocking responders, and creating risks in dynamic roadway incidents. Committee members also asked for comparisons to human-driven vehicles, data on citations and crashes, and more information on how AVs interact with pedestrians, first responders, and workers.

Transcript Highlights:

• We constantly hear the property rights mantra.
• I'm sorry, I didn't hear the last part.
• So again, I want to thank the committee for hearing this.
• So again, I want to thank the committee for hearing this.
• And to hear stories like Mr.

Committee: House House Appropriations Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee first took up a discussion-only strike-everything amendment to HB 2211, which would make it unprofessional conduct for certain health care providers to submit offers in independent dispute resolution above 300% of Medicare or the qualified payment amount. The chair said he was not ready to move the bill because more stakeholder meetings were needed. Testimony split between insurers, who said a small number of providers were abusing the No Surprises Act and driving up costs, and provider representatives, who argued the proposal would improperly cap rates, relied on opaque insurer-set QPAs, and could threaten licensure in a billing dispute. No vote was taken on HB 2211. The committee then considered HB 4028 on accessory dwelling units. The bill would remove the 1,000-square-foot cap, change setback rules, bar municipalities from requiring an administrative use permit and certain elevation criteria, and extend the deadline for cities to adopt ADU regulations. The sponsor argued it would give homeowners more flexibility and help address housing affordability, while cities, neighborhood groups, and residents warned it would allow oversized ADUs, reduce local control, create density and safety concerns, and invite investor-driven development. After extensive debate, the committee voted 8-9 with one present, and HB 4028 failed. Next, the committee heard HB 2620, as amended, which appropriates $300,000 annually for five years from the General Fund to the Department of Veterans’ Services for grants to emergency shelters. An amendment removed age and non-congregate-setting conditions for eligibility. The sponsor and a shelter provider said the funding would help shelters better serve homeless veterans and connect them to services. The committee adopted the amendment and then passed HB 2620 on a 17-0 vote with one member not voting. The committee then considered HB 2960, as amended, which creates a veterans specialty court grant program and a dedicated fund to support local veterans treatment courts. An amendment shifted administration of the fund to the Office of the Courts and allowed support for expansion of existing programs. The sponsor, a Lake Havasu judge, and a veteran graduate testified that veterans courts reduce recidivism and save lives by linking veterans to treatment and support. The bill was still being taken up when the transcript ended, with testimony continuing from supporters including a veterans shelter founder.

Transcript Highlights:

• The House Capital Investment Committee hearing for February 19th is called to order.
• Signs and placards are not permitted in the hearing room.
• </c> for re-entry if you leave the hearing for re-entry if you leave the hearing room.<00:01:21.200><
• Our goal is to from the hearing room.
• Any discussion hearing? None. Those in favor say I. I. Those opposed say nay.

Committee: House Capital Investment

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you so much for hearing me out.
• And we do hear concerns about some virtual programs.
• I hear you. I hear you. And my inbox is smoking.
• Whether you're in my district or you're out of my district, I hear you.
• And what I keep hearing, Mr.

Bills: HB2 , SB204 , SB241 , HB34

Committee: House House Education

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 253, as substituted, which would create a framework for full-time virtual/distance learning programs in New Mexico. Sponsors and agency witnesses said the bill is intended to preserve virtual options while adding approval, reporting, and compliance requirements, including definitions for distance learning programs, annual reporting, renewal every three to five years, and a pause on new programs while existing ones are grandfathered for a period. They also said the bill addresses budget concerns by limiting enrollment growth units and excluding distance-learning students from certain funding calculations, including rural population units, to prevent unexpected losses in the state equalization guarantee. Public testimony was sharply divided. Supporters included district superintendents and education officials who said the bill is needed to protect school funding, improve accountability, and gather basic data that the state currently lacks. Opponents included parents, students, teachers, charter-school representatives, and business and advocacy voices who argued virtual education has been lifesaving for medically fragile, bullied, rural, neurodivergent, and working students, and that the bill’s caps, geographic limits, and approval authority would reduce school choice and could eliminate some programs. Several witnesses stressed that virtual charter schools such as Pecos Cyber Academy and New Mexico Connections would not be affected, while others said the bill still reaches too broadly. Committee members raised extensive questions about the 10% enrollment cap, the adjacent-district requirement, the denial-and-appeal process, the treatment of charter schools versus district programs, and the effect on rural or small districts. Witnesses explained that the bill is meant to be temporary, with an interim study in 2026 to develop longer-term policy, but some members said they remained concerned about overreach and unintended consequences. No final vote or action on the bill was shown in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• We called and we have a public hearing.
• </c><00:23:42.559><c> on</c><00:23:42.799><c> Monday</c> our budget hearings on Monday our budget hearings
• Chairman, every year we hear from DHR at budgetary hearings about how they are understaffed, and, you
• Chairman, every year we hear from DHR at budgetary hearings about how they are understaffed, and, you
• Chairman, every year we hear from DHR at budgetary hearings about how they are understaffed, and, you

Bills: SB61 , SB8 , SB58 , SB60 , SB167 , SB61 , SB8 , SB58 , SB60 , SB167

Committee: Senate Finance and Taxation General Fund

Keywords: school psychologist, school psychology, interstate compact, licensure compact, license reciprocity, portable license, equivalent license, professional licensing, psychology board, school mental health, student services, educational services, interstate practice, reciprocal licensing, background check, continuing education, workforce shortage, military spouse, active duty military, compact commission

Transcript Highlights:

• Every case goes to the board, so the board hears every single case.
• Most veterinary boards don't hear all their cases.
• We can all hear you, but people that are online can't.
• We can all hear you, but people that are online can't.
• We really had to hear from Spencer everything. Mr.

Summary: The Joint Natural Resources and House Natural Resources, Energy and Water Committees of Reference heard the Arizona Auditor General’s sunset review of the Arizona State Veterinary Medical Examining Board. The audit found the board generally met some licensing requirements, but it did not timely investigate and resolve 49 of 159 complaints in fiscal year 2024, and it did not fully comply with conflict-of-interest disclosure and filing requirements. The Auditor General also identified weaknesses in continuing-education verification and other sunset-factor areas, and the board agreed to implement all 21 recommendations. Board staff said complaint volume has risen sharply since the pandemic, that the board’s process is slower because every case goes through an investigative committee and then the full board, and that it has already corrected some conflict-of-interest issues and is adding tools to improve continuing-education audits. The committee then heard testimony from the board’s executive director and from the Arizona Veterinary Medical Association. The executive director emphasized the board’s public-protection mission, described the shortage of veterinarians and veterinary technicians, and said the board is working to improve efficiency through a new e-licensing system and staff training. Members asked about the shortage of large-animal veterinarians, complaint backlogs, and whether the board could do more to recruit rural practitioners; the board said it lacks direct recruiting authority but supports multiple licensure pathways and loan-assistance efforts. The veterinary association supported the board’s oversight and said it is also working on rural and large-animal workforce issues through partnerships and advocacy. The committee then voted to recommend continuing the board for eight years, until July 1, 2034. The committee next took up the Arizona State Land Department, beginning with the Auditor General’s presentation on the department’s sunset review and prior special audit. The audit found the department had not updated its required five-year disposition plan since 2011, had sold more than 48,000 acres without an active plan, had allowed agricultural rental rates to go unchanged since 2006 despite market increases, and had not consistently inspected mineral-related leases or properly managed reclamation bonds. The Auditor General said these issues created risks of lost revenue, reduced transparency, and public-safety hazards, and recommended 18 corrective actions in the main review plus 34 additional recommendations on other issues; the department agreed to most recommendations but declined to adopt a written policy for commissioner-initiated land sales. Commissioner Robin Sahid said the department is working through audit recommendations, has created a rules team, improved its customer portal, and is pursuing new policies on water use, transportation-basin leases, and disposition planning. Members questioned the department about agricultural leases, groundwater valuation, the Fondomonte leases and reimbursement for improvements, the canceled Coyotes land auction, backlog and processing times, and the use of consultants and administrative funds. The commissioner said the department had over 2,000 applications in queue when she arrived, that it has made progress reducing the backlog, and that it is conducting stakeholder outreach on water-efficiency standards and lease addenda. No final vote on the land department continuation was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• No, we can hear... we can see your words. ...on the screen, but we can't hear you.
• Okay, they can hear each other, but they can't...
• Madam Chair, members of the committee, thank you for hearing our concerns.
• We hear a lot about liability costs in this committee, in particular.
• Who was listening on the webcast couldn't hear the folks once we could hear them.

Committee: House Legislative Health & Human Services Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• But hear me, members, integrity doesn't have to come at the expense of an act of, of, of, But hear me
• No hearings.
• after public hearing after public hearing about what they thought we ought to do to after public hearing
• , after public hearing.
• Do you hear me? Because no one has done more for access to health care than this woman.

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a series of member introductions recognizing interns, pages, volunteers, and the retirement of Pastor Gary Austin from the sergeant’s office. Leadership also announced that budget talks with the House were continuing and that senators would not need to plan on being in next week, suggesting progress toward a budget framework. After routine floor business, the chamber took up a major third-reading measure on citizen initiatives and several education bills, followed later by returning messages from the House on health and school-safety measures. The most extensive debate centered on the citizen initiative bill, which sponsors said was intended to protect the constitutional amendment process from fraud and abuse based on election-crime investigations and a large state report on petition fraud. Supporters argued the bill would add reasonable guardrails, prevent misuse of public funds, and preserve integrity while still allowing grassroots participation. Opponents from both parties argued it would make citizen-led amendments much harder by adding costs, deadlines, criminal penalties, and administrative burdens that would chill participation and favor wealthy or corporate interests. After lengthy debate, the Senate voted 28-10 to pass the bill. The chamber then passed several education measures with little or no opposition, including bills tied to Bright Futures, dual enrollment, Florida ABLE, teacher preparation, and other education policy updates, all by 38-0. Later, the Senate concurred in House amendments on a stem cell therapy bill, an EKG requirement for student athletes, and a cardiac emergency bill, each passing 37-0. The House also sent back a school safety bill with amendments affecting child care facility partnerships with law enforcement, temporary door locks during active assailant incidents, supervision windows, and funding for panic alarm systems; the transcript ends as that bill is being explained.

Transcript Highlights:

• The public hearing aspect of it's sort of opening up, but at the same time, you're also going to have
• We must acknowledge what those impacts are, and you're hearing those from the testimony.
• Yeah, I'll restate it if you didn't hear it.
• Yeah, I'll restate it if you didn't hear it.
• If you want to come on up, if you hear your next so we can get through. Go ahead. Thank you, Mr.

Summary: The committee first took up SB 1134, which would extend and clarify the use of qualified private providers and computer-based tools in the building permit and inspection process for residential solar energy systems. The sponsor said the bill is intended to reduce long delays in solar permitting and make the process faster and cheaper; Senator Pizzo questioned whether the problem was limited to specific local governments, and a late-filed amendment clarifying the word “application” was adopted. After brief testimony from an industry representative supporting the measure, the committee reported the bill favorably, with Senator Pizzo voting no. Next, the committee considered SB 784, dealing with issuance of addresses and parcel identification numbers for plats and new development. The bill sets a 14-day timeframe, and an amendment was adopted that would allow use of a private provider if the deadline is missed and would bar fee collection if the local government fails to act within five business days. County representatives said they wanted to keep working on the bill and raised concerns about the private-provider language and the short deadlines, while several senators discussed whether the process should be handled earlier on the front end. The committee then reported the bill favorably. The committee also passed SB 1738 on transportation concurrency, which would let counties that previously opted out of concurrency opt back in by maintaining current levels of service. SB 1080, a local government land regulation bill, was described as a measure to speed development approvals by setting stricter timelines, limiting repeated information requests, and imposing penalties for noncompliance; local-government testimony opposed it as a loss of local control, while builders supported it. After debate, SB 1080 was reported favorably. SB 1260, which clarifies county constitutional officer budget procedures and creates an appeal process for clerks and supervisors of elections similar to sheriffs, was also reported favorably after members discussed possible adjustments to avoid burdening county budget negotiations. Finally, the committee took up SB 420, as amended by a strike-all, which would prohibit counties and municipalities from adopting or funding DEI-related ordinances, policies, programs, offices, or contracts, and would expose officials to misfeasance/malfeasance claims and local governments to lawsuits. The sponsor said the amendment removed retroactive language, delayed the effective date, and added definitions and contract-certification requirements, but many senators and public speakers argued the bill was overbroad, vague, and would chill local efforts such as Black History Month, women-owned business programs, minority contracting, and community outreach. Supporters said it would ensure merit-based government action and consistency with state standards. The amendment was adopted, but the bill drew extensive opposition testimony and debate over its scope and potential conflict with federal and state law.

Transcript Highlights:

• deadline week for all our bills, so you'll be seeing members coming in as well later in between their hearings
• deadline week for all our bills, so you'll be seeing members coming in as well later in between their hearings
• According to some of the criticism that you may hear, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs faced financial
• c><00:05:21.680><c> of</c><00:05:21.800><c> wi</c> According to some of the criticism that you may hear
• </c> you've given us this morning uh to hear you've given us this morning uh to hear this<00:49:00.440

Committee: Senate Hawaiian Affairs

Summary: The joint hearing focused on Senate Bill 4, which would transfer stewardship of Mauna ʻAla from the Department of Land and Natural Resources to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. Committee chairs opened the meeting with housekeeping and noted the hearing was live-streamed, with a two-minute limit for testimony. Director Don Chang of the Board of Land and Natural Resources said DLNR had been working with OHA and had agreed to transfer certain lands subject to due diligence, including Kahana Valley and a parcel in Waimānalo, but urged the committee to finalize those mutually agreed parcels before taking on something new. He also described the current arrangement at Mauna ʻAla as a collaborative one involving the state and the royal trusts, with the state handling routine maintenance and the trusts contributing to larger repairs and improvements on a project-by-project basis rather than through direct annual appropriations. Testimony was mixed. Supporters argued that OHA is better positioned to steward the site because of its cultural mission, Native Hawaiian governance, and ability to protect sacred places with greater cultural competency and accountability. Several speakers emphasized that Mauna ʻAla is not a state park and should be cared for by those with direct cultural ties and experience, and some cited OHA’s recent financial reforms and partnerships as reasons for confidence. Others, including representatives of the Daughters and Sons of the Hawaiian Warriors Makakoa, opposed the bill, citing concerns about OHA’s past financial management, transparency, and the need for more public information and testimony before any transfer. One testifier also argued the land transfer itself was unlawful and rooted in the history of the overthrow and annexation. Members and testifiers also discussed the historical role of the royal trusts and family caretakers at Mauna ʻAla, with one descendant describing a long family stewardship and supporting OHA only if amended language preserved checks and balances and protected iwi and burial grounds. Another speaker said the family recognized James Mayo as kahu of Mauna ʻAla and supported the bill because prior DLNR efforts had not sufficiently protected traditional and customary rights. The hearing ended after public testimony and committee questions, with no vote or final action taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• You may hear us refer to that as me-to's, if you're new around here.
• You may hear us refer to that as me-to's, if you're new around here.
• You'll hear from them very shortly to make as much information as...
• Hearing none, we'll come back to the author. You can close. I vote.
• All right, that concludes all the bills on hearing today. The hearing today.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• And you can stay discovery to hear the motion to dismiss, correct?
• Has this language been assigned to a committee and had a hearing?
• Has your amendment this session had a hearing?
• So has it had a hearing? Lady, has it had a hearing this month?
• It hasn't had a hearing. It's not a standalone bill.

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and approved the House Journal by a 125-0 roll call vote. Members then spent a large portion of the morning recognizing special guests, interns, students, and constituents, including school groups, interns, a Savannah Bananas player, and several birthday and personal privilege announcements. On legislation, the House agreed to conference on Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 1421. The chamber then took up Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 1000, a bipartisan measure to reauthorize the Missouri Tourism Supplemental Revenue Fund and continue support for the Division of Tourism and Missouri Film Office. Supporters from both parties emphasized tourism’s economic importance statewide; the bill passed 136-6. The House next debated House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 1020, an omnibus Department of Revenue bill covering fee office contracting, vehicle registration penalties, Real ID document retention, and other DOR changes. The body adopted an amendment lowering late registration penalties, making document retention opt-in, and restoring a five-year plate option, followed by a second amendment removing cosmetic damage as a basis for rejecting rebuilt-vehicle inspections. The bill then passed 130-10. Later, the House began debate on a combined judiciary/civil legislation bill involving insurance assignment-of-benefits restrictions, anti-SLAPP protections, workers’ compensation and court administration changes, and expungement-related funding; members adopted a title change and several amendments, including one to make attorney-fee awards more even in anti-SLAPP motions, while also debating a proposed St. Louis police legal expense fund amendment and whether it had been properly vetted.

Transcript Highlights:

• And when I don't hear a lot of this movement in the hearings, the four hours of hearings that we had
• So do everybody hear that? Went 335. Okay. So do everybody hear that?
• Okay, did everybody hear that? I know the chairman wasn't on the microphone, but did you hear it?
• I am constantly hearing this.
• It seems I'm hearing from every county, really.

Committee: House Conference Committee on Budget

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll be a little louder today, so I beg you hear me. Mr.
• Directly after this, we will have a hearing of Crime and Public Safety in Hearing Room 6.
• Directly after this, we will have a hearing of Crime and Public Safety in Hearing Room 6.
• Thank you. directly after this we will have a hearing of crime and public safety in hearing room six.
• Hearing room one. Lady from Carol. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we can now begin to establish our quorum and begin our hearing.
• Today's hearing is focused on labor and public employment issues and discussion.
• I'm glad to hear that.
• Okay, I didn't hear you very well. There you go. Hello. Thank you. I didn't hear you very well.
• We have concluded the agenda for today's hearing.

Summary: The subcommittee heard a series of budget and trailer bill presentations focused on labor and public employment programs. The first item covered EDD Next modernization, where EDD described progress on customer service improvements, fraud prevention, language access, and the Integrated Claims Management System. The LAO urged stronger legislative oversight as the project enters its most difficult phase, and members questioned the revised schedule, total cost, change orders, stress testing, SB 1090 implementation, and how race and ethnicity data will be protected. EDD said the overall project cost remains about $1.2 billion, that the work is being phased with disability insurance and paid family leave first, and that fraud has been greatly reduced since pandemic-era programs ended. Members also asked for follow-up information on SB 590 outreach and equity impacts. The committee then reviewed the California Workforce Development Board’s request to reduce staffing as one-time grant workloads wind down, along with trailer bill language to streamline reporting requirements. The board and Department of Finance said the staffing reductions reflect the end of surge funding and that the proposal would consolidate roughly 10 to 12 reports into one annual report, with additional reporting only if new funds are appropriated for certain programs. Senator Durazo questioned the policy direction of reducing workforce staffing, while the administration said the positions were tied to temporary grant programs and that current staffing is sufficient for ongoing duties. Members also asked about the board’s role in AI-related workforce planning and the rationale for using state funds for the High Road Construction Careers Program. A major portion of the hearing focused on the Subsequent Injury Benefits Trust Fund reforms and related staffing request at DIR. The administration and LAO described rapid growth in applications, backlog, and liabilities, saying the program’s eligibility has expanded beyond its original intent and that liabilities could reach about $30 billion by 2030 without reform. The trailer bill would tighten eligibility, apply the changes to open cases, and use the QME process and contemporaneous evidence to document preexisting disabilities. Members raised concerns about fairness to pending claimants, evaluator capacity, and the relationship to other SIBTF legislation, while the LAO said the proposal largely aligns with its prior recommendations. DIR also presented a request to eliminate vacant positions under a statewide vacancy sweep, which drew criticism from members who argued the cuts could weaken enforcement and backlog reduction efforts; the committee asked DIR to return with more detail on impacts and on its use of temporary-help authority. The final items addressed a request for additional Cal/OSHA investigative staff and a trailer bill to make permanent the revised Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board petition timeline. DIR said the BOI staffing would help investigate fatalities and serious injuries more quickly, while members emphasized the importance of family contact and timely investigations. For the WCAB item, the chair explained that the 2024 change to Labor Code section 5909, which starts the 60-day decision clock when a case is transmitted rather than when a petition is filed, has reduced pending cases and should be made permanent; the remaining backlog was reported at 460 cases, down from 637 before the change.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we can now begin to establish our quorum and begin our hearing.
• Today's hearing is focused on labor and public employment issues and discussion.
• I'm glad to hear that.
• Okay, I didn't hear you very good. There you go. Hello. Thank you. I didn't hear you very good.
• We have concluded the agenda for today's hearing.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Corrections, Public Safety, Judiciary, Labor, and Transportation heard presentations on labor and public employment issues from the Employment Development Department (EDD), the California Workforce Development Board (CWDB), and the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR). The committee first focused on EDD Next modernization, where EDD described progress on online claims, call center upgrades, language access, fraud prevention, and the Integrated Claims Management System (ICMS). The Legislative Analyst’s Office urged closer legislative oversight, especially as the project moves into the most difficult phase. Senators asked about the revised timeline, total cost, fraud reduction, stress testing, transparency around change orders, and the decision to phase in disability insurance and paid family leave before unemployment insurance. EDD said the overall project cost remained about $1.2 billion, that it had no major cost overruns, and that it had saved more than $20 million by shifting some shared customer portal work into ICMS. The subcommittee then considered CWDB’s request for additional operational resources and trailer bill language to streamline reporting. CWDB and the Department of Finance said staffing had been expanded during the pandemic-era surge in grant funding and should now be reduced as one-time grant programs wind down. Senators questioned the proposed staffing reduction, arguing that workforce development needs remain strong and that the board’s policy role still requires adequate capacity. The committee also discussed a proposal to consolidate multiple annual and interim reports into a single biennial report, with LAO supporting the streamlining. Members asked about reporting for specific programs and the cost savings from reducing duplicative evaluations. A major portion of the hearing addressed DIR’s proposed reforms to the Subsequent Injury Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF) and related workload funding. DIR and LAO described rapid growth in applications, a large and growing backlog, and sharply rising liabilities and employer assessments. The administration’s trailer bill would tighten eligibility, apply reforms to open cases, and use contemporaneous evidence and QME reports to document preexisting disabilities. LAO said the proposal largely matched its prior recommendations and would help return the program to its original intent. Senators raised concerns about fairness to pending claimants, the effect on workers with undocumented preexisting conditions, and whether the QME system could absorb the added workload. The committee also heard DIR’s request to eliminate vacant positions under a statewide vacancy sweep, with members objecting that some vacancies reflect unmet enforcement and safety needs rather than excess capacity. The hearing continued with DIR proposals for additional Cal/OSHA investigative staff, permanent changes to Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board petition deadlines, and apprenticeship-related funding increases. DIR sought 14 permanent positions for its Bureau of Investigation to handle serious workplace fatalities and injuries, and members emphasized the importance of timely investigations and family communication. The WCAB requested making permanent a 2024 change that starts the 60-day reconsideration clock when a case is transmitted rather than when the petition is filed; the board said this had reduced the number of cases awaiting decisions from 637 to 460. Finally, DIR proposed increasing apprenticeship training grants from $3 million to $20 million annually using the Apprenticeship Training Contribution Fund, citing an $80 million fund balance and workforce demand tied to rebuilding and infrastructure needs, and then began discussion of a separate request to expand pre-apprenticeship programs.