Transcript Highlights:

• And so I would make that request.
• </c><01:28:21.080><c> it</c> as as they as needed if they request it as as they as needed if they request
• </c> experience in my teams that that budget experience in my teams that that budget range<01:44:47.560
• Those cost analyses are made by the Legislative Budget Assistant, and I'm sure the Legislative Budget
• sure the legislative budget assistant is sure the legislative budget assistant is very<01:54:58.000><

Committee: Senate Energy and Natural Resources

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There is a substitute request we received from the patron that's before you. Mr.
• The Senate included funding for this in their budget, and it can be handled in that matter.
• Included funding for this in their budget, and it can be handled in that matter.

Committee: House Appropriations

Keywords: House Committee Room 1200, General Assembly Building, 976, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Per the analysis, any cost to the IG is minor and absorbable within the IG's budget.
• Regardless of the intent, requests at this scale require significant time. To complete.
• Municipalities are seeing large-scale requests that require substantial staff time.
• This reflects a broader trend toward more expansive and complicated requests.
• This reflects a broader trend toward more expansive and complicated requests.

Summary: The Assembly Appropriations Committee met on April 22, 2026, with a quorum present and first took up a large consent calendar. It moved a set of bills to the Assembly Floor consent calendar by unanimous vote, including AB 1773, 1785, 1828, 1873, 1918, 2001, 2085, 2173, 2412, 2536, 2644, and 2781, and separately approved another group of unanimous bills not eligible for floor consent, including AB 1544, 1555, 1614, 1621, 1637, 1704, 1816, 1933, 2529, 2559, 2663, and 2731. The committee then heard several individual bills, with each author describing the measure and witnesses generally testifying in support; no organized opposition was recorded on the bills discussed. Among the measures heard, AB 2393 would create fixed statutory damages for certain false imprisonment and arrest claims, while exempting peace officers, custodial officers, and public entities. AB 1697 would delay implementation of a recently enacted prohibition on employment contracts that require workers to repay employer debts if they leave a job, and AB 2534 would extend Domestic Violence Prevention Act restraining order protections to attempted forced marriages and survivors of forced marriages. AB 1608 would strengthen the High-Speed Rail Inspector General’s office by adding staffing and contracting authority, requiring public reports, and allowing limited temporary confidentiality for sensitive information; the bill drew questions from members about transparency and whether information could be withheld, but the author and Inspector General said the measure would increase accountability and only allow narrow, time-limited confidentiality. The committee also approved AB 1916, which would allow American Sign Language interpreters to participate in the same collective bargaining process as other certified court interpreters, and AB 1803, which would require anti-hate speech training as part of workplace harassment prevention training for employers with five or more employees. AB 1821 would change Public Records Act response timelines from calendar days to business days, with local government sponsors arguing it would better reflect actual processing time for broad and complex requests without reducing access. AB 1919 would establish election procedures to let voters decide the future of Santa Cruz Metro service funding after a one-time grant expires. Each of these bills was moved forward on due pass votes, with some members not voting on certain measures. The committee then approved a long suspense file, and the remaining suspense bills were deemed approved without further discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• So how do we make sure that we last longer than our five-year period and our budget?
• In our budget request this year, we have about $40 million in bicycle and pedestrian projects and plan
• </c><01:21:28.320><c> request</c><01:21:28.840><c> this</c> Derek um in our uh budget request this Derek
• um in our uh budget request this year<01:21:29.239><c> we</c><01:21:29.400><c> have</c><01:21:29.600
• </c> funding and then two is to give budget funding and then two is to give budget authority<01:30:25.800

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, all in a budget-neutral manner for this next budget term.
• Uh we also include a budget neutral way.
• </c><01:46:47.679><c> passed</c> come from the earlier uh budgets passed come from the earlier uh budgets
• </c> this legislature and into the budget this legislature and into the budget bill<01:47:16.880><c>
• hard hard um budget cuts at our<01:47:22.880><c> schools.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• So for those reasons, we're requesting a no vote today. Thank you.
• We also just passed in this latest budget significant reforms that would also help developers.
• At the appropriate moment, I would request an aye vote.
• At the appropriate moment, I would request an aye vote. Great. Thank you.
• You know, and I've certainly fought on the Senate side and the budget.

Summary: The committee heard several housing bills, with the longest discussion focused on SB 79, which would allow more housing near high-capacity transit stops and on transit agency-owned land. The author and supporters argued it would address California’s housing shortage, reduce vehicle miles traveled, and strengthen transit systems by putting more residents near rail and rapid transit. Supporters included housing advocates, local officials, environmental groups, and transit-oriented development organizations. Opponents, including many cities, the League of California Cities, and some tenant and legal advocacy groups, raised concerns about affordability requirements, displacement, demolition protections, local control, and the bill’s interaction with existing local planning efforts. The committee discussed amendments to strengthen anti-displacement protections, minimum density, affordability standards, and a local flexibility alternative, and SB 79 was moved out on a due-pass-as-amended vote of 8-1, with one member not voting. The committee then took up SB 21, which would amend the Housing Crisis Act to allow limited unit reductions when converting deed-restricted SRO buildings into larger, more livable affordable units with private bathrooms, kitchens, and supportive services. The author and nonprofit housing providers said many SRO buildings are financially unsustainable and that the bill would preserve deeply affordable housing while improving conditions for residents. There was no organized opposition testimony at the hearing, though one business property group registered opposition. Members expressed support for the preservation-focused approach, and SB 21 was approved on an 8-0 vote and sent to the Assembly Committee on Local Government. Next, SB 92 was heard, a measure to close a density bonus loophole by limiting how much additional commercial floor area a project can receive and preventing the law from being used to justify very large nonresidential projects with only minimal affordable housing. The author cited a San Diego project as an example of the problem, and the City of San Diego supported the bill as a reasonable fix. Several labor and housing groups also supported it, while no formal opposition witnesses testified. The committee accepted amendments, members praised the effort to curb abuse while preserving feasibility, and SB 92 passed on a 7-0 vote. Finally, the committee began hearing SB 522, which would extend just-cause eviction protections to units rebuilt after disaster if they had previously been covered by the Tenant Protection Act. The author and the Los Angeles City Attorney said the bill would help preserve rental housing in disaster-affected communities, especially after the Pacific Palisades fires, and would not create new rent control. Opponents, including apartment, realtor, and property owner groups, argued it would add burdens to rebuilding and could discourage reconstruction. Members raised questions about whether existing law already protects returning tenants and whether the bill was necessary, and the hearing continued into committee discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• It clarifies on the reporting that the results are included, but not the testing, as per request of the
• As per request of the courts. Okay, excellent.
• And as was mentioned, I appreciate the comments that have been made that this was in the budget last
• year, and we are simply making some improvements to what we did last year. ...in the budget last year
• And as was mentioned, I appreciate the comments that have been made that this was in the budget last

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• These draft amendments ensure long-term allowance budgets beyond 2030 support achieving the state's 2045
• For evaluating existing offset protocols and developing new protocols, CARB has requested additional
• And so I've heard some requests to have oil put in this carbon adjustment, cap adjustment factor.
• And so under that approach, you're removing an allowance from the subsequent year's allowance budget
• As allowance budgets decline, price volatility likely increases.

Committee: Senate Joint Legislative Committee on Climate Change Policies

Summary: The committee heard an overview of CARB’s proposed amendments to California’s Cap-and-Invest program, implemented under AB 1207 and SB 840 after last year’s reauthorization through 2045. CARB said the draft rule changes are intended to support affordability, market certainty, and the state’s 2030 and 2045 climate targets, while also addressing offsets, utility allowance transfers, leakage protections for industry, and post-2030 allowance budgets. Members emphasized the importance of completing the rulemaking on schedule this spring so the changes can take effect by September 1, 2026. A major focus was how allowances are allocated among electric utilities, natural gas utilities, industry, and the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. CARB explained that the proposal transfers natural gas utility allowances to electric utilities over time to support electrification and ratepayer protection, while maintaining free allowances for industry to reduce leakage risk and preserve in-state manufacturing and refining. Several members and panelists questioned whether the proposed utility changes could raise rates, whether the transition from gas to electric credits should happen faster, and whether the industrial allocation changes reduce climate credit and GGRF revenues more than necessary. CARB and panelists said they were open to additional data and comments, and noted that the proposal is still in public comment. The committee also discussed carbon capture, carbon removal, and refining. Members asked CARB to ensure that CCUS and CDR are clearly recognized as viable compliance pathways and to keep SB 905 rulemaking on track. On refining, members raised concerns about imported gasoline, leakage, and the need for better data on the carbon intensity of imported fuels; CARB said cap-and-invest applies to fuel suppliers at the rack, while life-cycle accounting issues are handled more through the Low Carbon Fuel Standard and related modeling. CARB said it is continuing technical work on those data tools. In the second panel, the LAO, IEMAC, EDF, and SCAPA representatives generally agreed that the program faces real tradeoffs between affordability, ambition, and leakage protection. The LAO and IEMAC stressed that the Legislature should scrutinize how CARB divides the allowance “pie,” since more free allocations to utilities or industry mean less revenue for GGRF. EDF argued the program could be somewhat more ambitious in the near term without harming affordability, while SCAPA said the proposal would reduce allowances for publicly owned utilities and could undermine early decarbonization investments and ratepayer benefits. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• If an independent investigation team takes charge at the OII's request, the OII may require the team
• An updated fiscal note has been requested and not yet received, and that concludes my remarks.
• I am here today to ask for your support of this piece of agency request legislation.
• But once completed, those with redactions are available for public document request.
• Some people had issues with the request of county clerks for a paper processing fee increase.

Summary: The committee began by waiving the five-day notice rule for engrossed substitute House Bill 2095 so it could be heard that day. It then took public testimony on House Bill 2248, a technical cleanup bill affecting Secretary of State corporate and nonprofit filings, trademarks, foreign entities, and apostille procedures. The prime sponsor said the bill makes no policy changes or fee increases, while the Secretary of State’s office supported it as a clarification measure. One testifier raised concerns about multiple LLCs and transparency in manufactured home communities, asking for stronger oversight and verification. The committee then heard engrossed substitute House Bill 2508, which expands the Office of Independent Investigations’ jurisdiction over deadly-force and related non-deadly-force incidents, broadens notification and records access requirements, and exempts certain records from disclosure. The sponsor and OII testified in support, emphasizing that the bill clarifies authority and procedures; members asked about how far back investigations could go, and staff confirmed there was no time limit for deadly-force cases under the bill. The committee also heard Substitute House Bill 2203, creating the offense of reckless interference with emergency operations for driving around closures on hazardous roadways. The sponsor described it as a response to flood and disaster rescues, and fire chiefs supported it as a safety and accountability measure. Defense attorneys opposed it as unnecessary and disproportionate, warning of criminal penalties, license suspensions, restitution, and fiscal costs for conduct they viewed as more appropriately handled civilly. Next, Second Substitute House Bill 1909 proposed a Court Unification Task Force to study inefficiencies and inequities in Washington’s fragmented court system; the sponsor and a legal aid attorney supported it as an access-to-justice reform, while the committee noted a large number of signed-in opponents. Finally, engrossed substitute House Bill 2095 would create a rebuttable presumption of negligence for drivers who injure or kill vulnerable road users in designated areas, along with education requirements and damages provisions. Supporters, including a widow, bicycling advocates, and a bike commuter, said it would improve accountability and help injured people who cannot easily prove fault; opponents from cities, trucking, and defense groups argued it would expand litigation, create liability and fee-shifting problems, and go beyond existing negligence law. After public hearings, the committee moved into executive session and advanced several bills. Substitute House Bill 2158 received a do pass recommendation. Substitute House Bill 2239, concerning family burial grounds on private property, was amended to increase a setback from public rights-of-way and easements and then received a do pass recommendation as amended. Substitute House Bill 2178 on court rules and procedures also received a do pass recommendation. House Bill 2543 on county clerk fees was advanced despite concerns about fee increases. Engrossed Substitute House Bill 2165 on false identification as a peace officer was amended to clarify intent and then passed out of committee. The committee also adopted an amendment to Engrossed Substitute House Bill 2320 on firearm manufacturing, including a change allowing certain digital code and manufacturing activity for repair purposes, and discussed another amendment removing some possession prohibitions for personal use.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're an entire budget for the state.
• I look at kind of some of at the budget.
• It's in your budget as SBIR.
• You'll see it in our regular budget and in our exception budget.
• You'll see it in our regular budget and in our exception budget.

Committee: Joint Appropriations

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh part of<00:08:33.120><c> the</c><00:08:33.279><c> budget</c><00:08:33.519><c> request</c><00:08:33.839
• request that we've put in of the budget request that we've put in for<00:08:34.640><c> this</c><00:08
• Um but for a why they've requested this.
• That was a request of the is correct.
• </c> requested by industry or anyone else. requested by industry or anyone else.

Committee: House Banking & Insurance

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00 Call to Order and Roll Call 00:29 Discussion SB 153 01:25 Vote SB 153 10:35 Discussion SB 118 11:36 Vote SB 118 12:48 Discussion HB 380 13:40 Vote HB 380 40:12, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, in closing, my sincere request, my urgent request, my respectful request to this committee, both
• We have over a hundred requests for housing stability services each month that are new, and at least
• Funding for the program was included in the FY25 and FY26 state budgets at $2.5 million each year.
• We appreciate the Legislature's continued investment in access to counsel through the budget.
• That means families can budget.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Housing

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Housing held a hybrid hearing on a broad slate of landlord-tenant and home rule bills, with most testimony focused on rent stabilization, tenant opportunity to purchase (TOPA), tenant fees, access to counsel, algorithmic rent fixing, and tenant protections in subsidized housing. Chairs Cyr and Haggerty outlined the hearing procedures and noted that written testimony could also be submitted. Several members and invited speakers emphasized that the committee was hearing from both local officials and residents affected by housing instability, especially in Somerville and other communities facing high rents and displacement. Supporters of rent stabilization and local-option rent control argued that Massachusetts needs tools to prevent displacement while new housing is built. Senator Eldridge, Senator Jalen, Somerville officials, tenant organizers, and residents described steep rent increases, no-fault evictions, and the loss of naturally occurring affordable housing. Somerville’s home rule petition was described as allowing annual increases tied to CPI plus 2%, capped at 5%, with exemptions for owner-occupied two- and three-family homes and a 15-year exemption for new construction. TOPA supporters said it would let tenants or their designees buy buildings before speculative buyers, preserving affordable housing stock; opponents, including small landlords and property managers, argued rent control would reduce supply, discourage investment, and that TOPA could delay sales and harm properties. The committee also heard testimony on bills to curb junk fees and regulate tenant charges, including limits on late fees, lease renewal fees, payment portal fees, attorney’s fees, and other add-on charges. Advocates said these fees can add hundreds of dollars a month and disproportionately harm low-income renters and renters of color. Another major topic was algorithmic rent fixing: Senator Moore and Representative Sabadoza said landlords should not use software such as RealPage to coordinate pricing, citing federal antitrust actions and arguing that competition is essential to lowering rents. Additional testimony supported a statewide right to counsel in eviction cases, with legal services providers saying representation dramatically improves outcomes and can save the state money, and a bill to create an office of tenant protections to better enforce sanitary code violations. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Across our great state, Lord, we need a major miracle to get the budget done quickly and our legislators
• With respect to the budget, as it is abundantly clear to all of you, we will not complete the 2026-27
• state budget by the end of this week.
• And you can count on a co-sponsor request coming in right now.
• But they make me sign that budget form every year in that darn room.

Summary: The House convened with prayer, a moment of silence for former Lee County Judge John Carlin, the Pledge of Allegiance, and recognition of FSU Police Officer Cody Popple for stopping the April campus shooter. The Speaker then outlined the final week of session, noting the House had passed 253 House bills and 149 Senate bills to date, but that the 2026-27 budget would not be completed this week. The chamber also adopted the Rules and Ethics Committee’s special order report for the day. The House took up several Senate bills on special order, largely technical or open-government measures, and passed them with little or no opposition. These included SB 100, SB 104, and SB 102 on the Florida Statutes and revisor’s changes; SB 7006, SB 7014, SB 7002, SB 7012, SB 7024, SB 7016, SB 7026, SB 7008, SB 7000, and SB 7004, which extended or preserved various public-records and meeting exemptions for matters such as Public Service Commission proprietary information, social media investigations, military affairs, highway safety records, cybersecurity, emergency shelter contact information, conviction integrity units, and trade secrets. Most passed overwhelmingly, though SB 7006 drew 99-8, SB 7022 on public records for exam integrity passed 101-8 after questions about testing materials and scoring rubrics, and SB 7026 on trade secrets passed 106-3. The most substantive floor debate centered on SB 7040, which recreates the emergency preparedness and response trust fund in the Executive Office of the Governor. Rep. Eskamani offered an amendment to let the fund expire, arguing the money had become a “slush fund” and had been used for the Everglades detention facility rather than emergencies; several members supported her on fiscal and separation-of-powers grounds, while others said the fund is needed for rapid disaster response. The House rejected Eskamani’s amendment and then adopted a Griffiths strike-all amendment adding accountability measures, including spending limits, quarterly reporting, asset tracking, and a sunset/review provision. SB 7040 then passed 82-25. The chamber also passed CS/CS SB 302 on coastal resiliency, CS/CS SB 984 on firefighter cancer benefits, CS SB 474 on military affairs, and SB 488 on Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, which prompted extended questions about vehicle registration requirements, license plate frames, and foreign passport/I-94 documentation; the bill was still under amendment and debate when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Lord, we need a major miracle to get the budget done quickly and our legislators can return home soon
• With respect to the budget, as it is abundantly clear to all of you, we will not complete the 2026-27
• state budget by the end of this week.
• And you can count on a co-sponsor request coming in right now. President Hunschofsky.
• But they make me sign that budget form every year in that darn room.

Keywords: 998, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It does not get funded from the state budget.
• power; acquire, own, and operate generation and transmission assets; and conduct studies and issue requests
• for information and requests for proposals for energy procurement.
• Conduct studies and issue requests for information and requests for proposals for energy procurement.
• I'm only printing anything by specific request. Yes.

Summary: The meeting focused on finalizing recommendations from the Delaware Nuclear Energy Task Force, with most of the discussion centered on how the state should organize itself to evaluate and potentially pursue nuclear power. Public commenters strongly supported nuclear energy, emphasizing energy reliability, economic competitiveness, data center demand, and the need for Delaware to act quickly. Several speakers argued that Delaware is falling behind neighboring states and should not delay if it wants to attract developers and preserve access to federal tax incentives. Members then worked through revisions to the recommendations, especially the section on state actions moving forward. There was broad agreement that Delaware needs a clearly empowered leadership structure, but disagreement over the best form: a cabinet-level energy agency, an expanded existing agency such as DENREC, a dedicated coordinator, an expanded Sustainable Energy Utility, or a separate quasi-independent authority. Some members favored a nimble, one-off entity with bonding and financing authority; others cautioned against creating a new body outside state government and stressed the need for coordination with existing agencies, public oversight, and cost discipline. The group also discussed adding responsibilities such as site identification, public engagement, coordination with PJM and federal agencies, and financing tools, while removing or folding in items that seemed duplicative or too broad. The committee also revised earlier modules to broaden the focus from small modular reactors to nuclear power more generally, while keeping the task force’s original SMR work in view. Members agreed to keep recommendations on state and local regulatory readiness, financial mechanisms, permitting coordination, and public engagement, and to add a recommendation for Delaware to participate as an observer in the Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative through NASEO and NARUC. The committee approved the revised Module Four recommendations by vote, with one abstention from Tom Noyes. Minutes from the prior meeting were also approved with minor corrections.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is requesting certain state agencies to participate in a workshop about insect identification, ecology
• It's a scary thing to come up for a committee and talk about, ask for requests from a group like us,
• Martinez and Senator Compos, I would appreciate that if I could have that before we do hear the budget
• Why, I just did the math, it looked like we're overfunding 100% of the request by about...
• The math, it looked like we're overfunding 100% of the request, but about $35 million. Why is that?

Bills: SB154 , SB187 , SB193 , SM3

Committee: Senate Senate Conservation

Keywords: insurance, wildfire, flood damage, natural disasters, property coverage, water projects, appropriation, New Mexico, finance authority, infrastructure, New Mexico Finance Authority, funding, SB193, acequia, community ditch, irrigation works construction fund, water infrastructure, ditch infrastructure, irrigation, New Mexico water law

Transcript Highlights:

• At the request of the sponsor, we're going to temporarily postpone Senate Bill 1438 by Senator Graal.
• It requires the platform to remove the images within 24 to 48 hours after receiving a valid request and
• When a victim of this sort of non-consensual image identifies and submits a written request, or the person
• that they've provided as their signatory provides a written request, they have to identify where on
• With our appropriation staff and criminal justice in order to get that, hopefully, into the budget.

Summary: The Committee on Commerce and Tourism took up several measures, beginning with SB 1666, which would adopt Florida’s version of UCC Article 12 to address commercial transactions involving digital assets such as cryptocurrency, smart contracts, blockchain, and NFTs. The committee adopted a technical amendment and then reported the bill favorably. It also approved CS/SB 480, a proposal to create affordable health coverage options for farmers and ranchers through a nonprofit agricultural organization model; the bill drew significant questions about preexisting conditions, ACA coverage, costs, and whether the plans would function like insurance, but it was ultimately reported favorably despite opposition from some members and outside groups. The committee then unanimously advanced CS/SB 1172, which expands business development incentives for veterans and military spouses, including procurement preferences, fee waivers, tax exemptions, and an entrepreneurship program; an amendment added military-spouse hiring preferences and protections for private employers that adopt them voluntarily. The committee also approved CS/SB 1400, a bill aimed at non-consensual AI-generated sexual deepfakes. The measure requires covered platforms to provide a removal process, post clear notice of that process, and remove identified content within 24 to 48 hours, with liability under the Florida Unfair Trade and Deceptive Practices Act for noncompliance; an amendment carved out internet service providers from liability. Members raised concerns about repeat uploads and the meaning of “reasonable efforts,” but the bill was reported favorably. The committee then adopted SM 1488, a memorial urging Congress to create a sovereign wealth fund, despite testimony opposing it as unnecessary and constitutionally questionable. It also passed SB 1252, which would create a centralized statewide system for sharing pawn and secondhand dealer data among law enforcement agencies; the sponsor said the first step would be a $250,000 feasibility study, and the bill was reported favorably. Finally, the committee considered SB 922, which revises Florida’s restrictive covenant laws by creating a streamlined process for certain non-compete and garden leave agreements involving employees with access to sensitive information and higher wages. The bill drew extensive debate over worker mobility, global scope, and whether it would strengthen employer leverage too much; after a technical amendment, it was reported favorably. The last major item was SB 1776, a Florida Whistleblowers Act revision that adds a notice-to-cure requirement, narrows retaliation and employer definitions, and limits claims where another statutory remedy exists. Members and public speakers raised concerns that it could make whistleblower claims harder to bring and give employers time to destroy evidence, but the bill was amended and then reported favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• We also have with us Assemblymember Sharon Quirk-Silva, chair of the Assembly Budget Subcommittee Five
• Less than a year later, the Legislature passed a budget trailer bill which integrated the medical cannabis
• to amend grant provisions, but it took 160 days to respond to the requests from L.A.
• What are some of those barriers in terms of getting the requests to amend the grants?
• Well, I know we will be hearing from you again through our Committee on Budget Sub 5.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on the Department of Cannabis Control’s report on the condition and health of California’s cannabis industry. Department staff reviewed the evolution of state cannabis law, the creation of the current regulatory framework, licensing and compliance efforts, and enforcement against illicit cannabis and hemp-derived intoxicating cannabinoids. The department said the licensed market has grown in production and retail units sold, while active licenses and retail sales value have declined, and that the illicit market remains a major competitive factor. The department also highlighted consumer education efforts, product testing and recalls, and coordination through the state enforcement task force and other agencies. The department’s economist said the data show continued growth in licensed production and a rising share of consumption through the licensed market, but falling wholesale and retail prices have reduced overall industry value. He identified major headwinds as taxes and fees, illicit-market competition, local prohibitions that limit retail access, regulatory costs, and broader business pressures, while noting opportunities in product innovation and possible hemp-market changes. Committee members pressed the department on enforcement, public health concerns, equity ownership and employment, delays in grant administration, pesticide testing, and whether the legal market is truly viable for small businesses and farmers. Several members argued that stronger enforcement and lower costs are needed, while one member raised concerns about cannabis-related health harms and said the hearing focused too narrowly on supply-side issues. Public commenters from industry groups and advocacy organizations largely echoed concerns about high taxes, regulatory burdens, limited retail access, and the size of the illicit market. Many urged the Legislature not to let the excise tax rise from 15% to 19% and called for tax relief, compliance reform, more enforcement, and broader retail access. Some speakers said the report was too optimistic and did not reflect business failures, debt, and closures, while others emphasized the need to protect small farmers, address wildfire insurance, and support equity businesses. No votes or formal actions were taken; the hearing was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• Article 4, Part 2, Section 9, Constitution of Arizona, I am directed by the House of Representatives to request
• Senator Werner: I move that the Senate accede to the request of the House of Representatives, 57th Legislature
• Those are budget bills. Reports of standing committees.

Summary: The Senate received a House message requesting consent to adjourn the 57th Legislature’s second regular session after completing business on April 29, 2026, until Tuesday, May 5, 2026. Senator Werner moved to accede to the request, and the motion passed by voice vote. The chamber also noted that several House messages and standing committee reports would be entered into the journal without being read, and that budget bills were being placed under introduction and first reading. Committee and caucus announcements were made for Monday, May 4: the Rules Committee will meet at 9:30 a.m. in Caucus Room 1, the Democratic Caucus at 9:45 a.m. in the Democratic Caucus Room, and the Republican Caucus at 9:45 a.m. in Caucus Room 1. No substantive debate on legislation occurred in this portion of the session. Finally, Senator Warner moved to adjourn the Senate until Monday, May 4, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. The motion was adopted by voice vote, and the Senate adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• present SB 954, which provides thoughtful improvements to the CEQA exemptions passed through the Budget
• Last year, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 131 through the budget process, which created over a dozen
• And I voted on the budget with the understanding that we would come back and fix some of these issues
• So because no amendments have been taken, I respectfully request a no vote. Thank you.
• With that, we respectfully request your aye vote. Secretary, please call the roll.

Committee: House Labor and Employment

Keywords: 988, house, all