Transcript Highlights:

• First of all, that any financial burden that data centers impose on the system be covered by the data
• Better data, more data, would allow the state to plan responsibly for the rapid expansion of data centers
• from large data centers.
• of data center facilities.
• Data centers aren't just about AI.

Summary: The committee hearing covered a long agenda of energy, utility, and data-center bills, with members hearing extensive testimony on affordability, ratepayer protections, wildfire liability, and grid planning. Several measures were presented by Assembly Member Irwin and others, including AB 2182 on industrial energy efficiency incentives, AB 2396 on allowing community choice aggregators to develop transmission projects, AB 2589 on returning federal tax savings to ratepayers, AB 2508 on shifting public purpose program costs off utility bills, AB 1577 on data center reporting, and AB 2383 on large energy-use facility rate design. The chair noted the hearing began without a quorum and later proceeded once quorum was established for the data-center and AB 2383 votes. AB 2182 and AB 2589 were discussed but not acted on during the portion shown, while AB 2396 drew substantial debate over wildfire liability, financing, and whether CCAs should be allowed to own transmission lines. AB 2508 generated the most divided policy discussion, with supporters arguing that public purpose programs and energy efficiency costs should not be borne by ratepayers and should instead be funded through the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund or other public sources. Opponents warned that moving those programs to GGRF would threaten funding stability, undermine cost-effective efficiency programs, and jeopardize important safety-net and wildfire-related spending; wildfire survivor advocates asked for amendments to ensure victims are paid first before any reallocation. Committee members raised concerns about whether GGRF is an appropriate and stable funding source, and several said they could not support the bill as drafted. AB 1577, requiring data centers to report energy, water, and noise information, passed on a 10-1 vote after supporters said the bill would help local and state planners manage rapid load growth, while opponents argued it was burdensome, duplicative, and could expose proprietary or security-sensitive information. AB 2383, which would direct the CPUC to create a new rate structure for large energy-use facilities and require long-term contracts to prevent cost shifts and stranded assets, also drew strong support and opposition. The Little Hoover Commission and NRDC backed the bill as a way to protect ratepayers from data-center-related costs, while CCAs, the Chamber of Commerce, manufacturers, and petroleum interests objected to the bill’s scope and to CPUC oversight, especially as it could affect CCAs and other large users beyond data centers. After discussion about preserving local authority and avoiding stranded costs, the committee approved AB 2383 on a 13-0 vote and left the roll open for absent members. The hearing then moved to AB 1774, a wildfire accountability bill by Assembly Member Berman, which was introduced with testimony from fire survivors and consumer advocates emphasizing the need to verify that utility wildfire mitigation spending is actually performed before ratepayers are charged.

Transcript Highlights:

• First of all, that any financial burden that data centers impose on the system be covered by the data
• Better data, more data, would allow the state to plan responsibly for the rapid expansion of data centers
• from large data centers.
• of data center facilities.
• Data centers aren't just about AI.

Committee: House Utilities and Energy

Transcript Highlights:

• the broad data set.
• </c> data analytics across the broad data data analytics across the broad data set.<00:36:15.359><c>
• those who hold the data.
• those who hold the data.
• those who hold the data.

Bills: HF3901 , HF962 , HF4428 , HF4478 , HF1775

Committee: House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law

Transcript Highlights:

• Most other states have much closer to real-time data, if not real-time data available, so we can track
• Some data questions that are worth thinking about: we need to get timelier data.
• you report your achievement data.
• you report your achievement data.
• Attendance data the same as you report your achievement data.

Committee: House Education Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:03:43.599><c> of</c><00:03:43.840><c> their</c> So data seem nearly 100% of their So data seem
• > received</c><00:04:06.640><c> more</c> Since 2006, data seems received more Since 2006, data seems
• </c> uh directly or specifically for data uh directly or specifically for data seam.<00:04:32.720><c>
• </c> dealing with data scene management. dealing with data scene management.
• </c> continuing research as part of data continuing research as part of data scene.

Summary: The subcommittee met without a quorum and did not approve minutes, but heard testimony on budget line items for Data Seam and Teach for America. Andrew McNeel of Kentucky Free and representatives from the Commonwealth Policy Center argued that both programs rely heavily on recurring taxpayer support and should be re-evaluated. McNeel cited a 2020 Office of Policy and Audit examination of Data Seam, saying the program had received more than $30 million in state support since 2006, including $3.5 million in the current budget, and that the audit raised concerns about administrative overhead, alleged threats to districts, and the use of line-item language to justify sole-source contracting. He recommended suspending Data Seam funding this biennium, directing a new special audit, and requiring reimbursement of audit costs. The witnesses also urged the committee to withhold funding for Teach for America, saying the organization’s materials and history showed a commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion that they opposed. They pointed to past statements, leadership titles, and program language as evidence that DEI concepts remained embedded in the organization, and suggested any funding should be redirected directly to school districts instead. Mike Harmon and Richard Nelson echoed those concerns, while also saying long-running programs should be periodically reviewed for efficiency. Teach for America Appalachia representatives then testified in support of the program. Executive director C.D. Morton described the organization as a teacher-preparation and leadership-development program serving rural eastern Kentucky, saying it had recruited and supported more than 325 teachers since 2011, with about 30 current core members in several counties and roughly 2,800 students impacted daily. He said the program helps fill hard-to-staff vacancies, that about 80% of teachers stay for a third year, and that many alumni remain in education. In response to questions from Representative Bojanowski about retention and cost, Morton said more than 60% of alumni are still in education, but he could not give a precise classroom-teacher retention number beyond the program’s broader alumni data.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> upon demographic data on this slide. upon demographic data on this slide.
• </c> that that's data that MDE has. that that's data that MDE has.
• </c> as the the other data provided shows. as the the other data provided shows.
• Again, it's self-reported data. qualify. Again, it's self-reported data.
• </c> data or any um buildout of that data. data or any um buildout of that data.

Transcript Highlights:

• They need welfare data unique to their municipality rather than county-level data alone.
• The state can only see us as numbers and as data points.
• The data is already being collected.
• So the data is already being collected.
• You know, we push every day in this body for data collection...

Committee: House Government Efficiency

Summary: The Committee on Government Efficiency held a public hearing on House Bill 1817, which would require the Department of Social Services to publish monthly public-assistance data at the municipal level for places with populations of 1,000 or more. The sponsor said the bill was intended to give local nonprofits, churches, and community leaders better information to target aid, measure whether their efforts are reducing dependency, and identify underserved areas, while avoiding identification of individuals in very small communities. Supporters echoed the transparency and planning benefits, saying the data could help nonprofits allocate resources, spot gaps, and coordinate more effectively. Several members questioned whether the bill was necessary, whether the data was already available through public records or existing reports, and whether it would create busy work or divert staff time. Others raised concerns about the 1,000-person threshold as arbitrary, the possibility of discouraging assistance applications, and whether the bill would really improve outcomes or reduce fraud. The sponsor responded that the data is already being collected, that the software had already been funded, and that the bill would simply make the information publicly available in a more useful format. Testimony in opposition was not presented, and the public hearing on HB 1817 was then closed. The committee then moved into executive session and took up House Bill 1641. A House Committee Substitute was offered and adopted after brief discussion. The substitute bill was then voted do pass by a roll call vote of 12 ayes, 1 no, and 4 present. Representative Burton stated a present vote was appropriate because of concerns with some language in the bill, while other members supported the measure’s intent.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:03:29.400><c> and</c> used against us it's based on data and used against us it's based on data
• </c> experience Community air quality data experience Community air quality data often<00:07:41.240><
• and enforcement efforts. used as a challenge to um to the data used as a challenge to um to the data
• the data Collections and tests limiting the data Collections and tests that<00:09:06.000><c> may</c>
• </c> emissions data that was quality data emissions data that was quality data they've<00:24:22.559><

Summary: The Natural Resources Committee met with prayer and the Pledge, approved the prior minutes, and recognized visiting guests, including representatives from Nucor Steel and students from Eastern Kentucky University. The main business was House Bill 137, which would require air-pollution enforcement actions by the Energy and Environment Cabinet and Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control District to rely on EPA-approved monitoring methods or scientifically defensible, quality-assured data. The sponsor and industry supporters argued the bill would ensure reliable evidence and protect manufacturers from enforcement based on questionable data. Opponents, including the Kentucky Resources Council, the West Jefferson County Community Task Force, and a former cabinet employee, argued the bill would conflict with the Clean Air Act’s allowance for “any credible evidence,” could exclude community air-monitoring data and citizen complaints, and might weaken enforcement by limiting the use of lower-cost sensors, photos, video, and other nontraditional evidence. Committee members questioned how credible evidence and the Daubert standard would apply, and supporters and opponents debated whether the bill would simply set evidentiary rules or improperly narrow enforcement authority. One member also raised concerns that the bill’s title and scope could be read as affecting the broader air program. House Bill 137 was ultimately approved favorably by roll call vote, with Senator Webb’s aye vote later clarified for the record. The committee then took up House Bill 346, as amended by a subcommittee. The bill was described as helping about 708 companies and carving out emergency generators used for safety purposes in distilleries, with support from the Kentucky Chamber. The subcommittee amendment was adopted, and the bill passed the committee favorably by roll call vote. The meeting ended with an attempted adjournment and a brief record correction on the vote for House Bill 137.

Transcript Highlights:

• Basically, data is the gold.
• integrity of that data, and it is essential that we protect that data.
• We threaten the integrity of that data, and it is essential that we protect that data from abuse.
• I want to emphasize the data itself is not critical; there's nothing special about the data.
• The data itself is not critical, it's not, there's nothing special about the data.

Committee: Senate Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection

Summary: The committee convened for its first hearing, took roll, and heard several privacy- and AI-related bills. SB 1106 by Senator Cabaldon would shorten the Delete Act data broker deletion deadline from 45 days to 30 days; it drew support from a technology and democracy group, no opposition testimony, and was moved out on a due pass to Appropriations vote. SB 923 by Senator Becker would expand the CCPA deletion right to cover all personal information held by a business and require online-only businesses to offer a web form or similar method for privacy requests; supporters included the California Privacy Protection Agency and privacy advocates, while business groups raised concerns about scope, compliance, and the email/web-form requirement. The bill passed 6-0 to Appropriations, with some members noting they were laying off or wanted further amendments. The committee also heard SB 1142, the Digital Dignity Act, which would regulate digital replicas and deepfakes on large online platforms, including takedown and revocation procedures and penalties. Supporters said it would protect Californians from fraud, harassment, and nonconsensual synthetic likeness use; opponents, including the Motion Picture Association, CCIA, TechNet, and others, raised First Amendment, due process, Section 230, and overbreadth concerns, especially around deceased persons and the 48-hour takedown process. Members said they supported the bill but wanted further work before Judiciary, and it passed 6-0 as amended to Judiciary. The committee also adopted its rules without objection. Later, SB 867 by Senator Padilla would impose a four-year moratorium on the sale and manufacture of AI chatbot-powered toys for children, citing research showing unsafe, sexually explicit, or privacy-invasive behavior; child advocacy and consumer groups supported it, while retailers and civil justice groups sought narrower definitions and liability protections. It passed 7-0 to Appropriations. SB 1247 would give child influencers, once adults, a right to request deletion or modification of images and likenesses used in monetized social media content; it drew no support testimony but was opposed by a civil justice group over the creation of a new private right of action, and it passed 7-0 to Judiciary. SB 930, the consent-calendar item, was approved 7-0. The committee then heard SB 1114, which would restrict sharing of state-collected data related to LGBTQ Californians absent an enforceable order, with supporters arguing it would protect sensitive data from misuse by federal agencies and preserve trust in state programs. It passed 6-0 to Appropriations. SB 1159 would let local governments treat AI bots and agents differently from people for Brown Act, public records, and related civic participation laws, in response to AI-generated comment floods; supporters from environmental, local government, and nonprofit groups said it was needed to preserve human participation, while opponents argued the bill should focus on fraud rather than AI and warned about overreach. The bill passed 9-0 to Appropriations. Finally, SB 1050 would require disclosures when synthetic performers are used in advertisements; labor and consumer advocates supported it as a truth-in-advertising measure, while media and industry groups objected that it was overbroad and should be narrowed to misleading ads and aligned with existing law. Members signaled support for the bill’s goal but also raised concerns about scope and consistency with current false-advertising rules.

Transcript Highlights:

• I've provided you with a handout that has some of the data, preliminary data from our 24-5 year, and
• The data that I reported today was from C-Beds. This is California Department of Education data.
• So I am not sure the state of our data on that at this moment.
• Someone's collecting the data, but it's not you collecting the data, and you're not getting the full
• What are we, what have you been able to gather from that data?

Transcript Highlights:

• , a new searchable spreadsheet, and new data dictionary.
• or a data indice or a dictionary or a purchase requires production of existing data or existing Excel
• But my background, I represent myself, but I have a long history and background in data processing, data
• And not only that, but you have to physically deal with the data.
• have to go get the data anyway. today, right?

Bills: HB 111 , HB1545 , HB2145 , HB2467 , HB2520 , HB4136 , HB4181 , HB4214 , HB4218 , HB4219 , HB4359 , HB4437 , HB4822 , HB111

Committee: House Delivery of Government Efficiency

Transcript Highlights:

• or didn't have the have the claims data or didn't have the claims<00:12:08.800><c> data</c><00:12:09.120
• </c><00:30:57.799><c> is</c> our data is our data is our<00:30:58.760><c> work</c><00:30:58.919><c> is
• </c> that's something that you have data that's something that you have data pardon<00:42:27.920><c>
• The reason I asked is it appears on the data on this that it’s almost 20 years old data, and I’m just
• ><c> and</c> that it's almost 20 years old data and that it's almost 20 years old data and I'm<00:53:

Committee: House Commerce Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• And that is what the data shows.
• And that is what the data shows.
• And again, it's really important not to conflate the data on sex work and the data on trafficking.
• Our data collection is substandard. and if you look in here on page Assembly Member Lackey said the data
• And so what can the data tell us?

Committee: House Public Safety

Summary: The Assembly Standing Committee on Public Safety held an informational hearing in Pomona on sex work-related crimes and efforts to combat human trafficking. Opening remarks framed the hearing around the repeal of the old loitering law in SB 357 and the recent enactment of AB 379, which will again make loitering with intent to purchase commercial sex a misdemeanor starting January 1, 2026. Members said the goal was to better understand the sex work industry, trafficking, law enforcement practices, and survivor support, with a focus on prevention and accountability. The first panel featured a DOJ representative, a USC law professor, and an ACLU attorney. DOJ presented arrest and conviction data for the repealed loitering statute and said the data did not distinguish clearly between buyers and sellers. USC researchers said anti-trafficking raids and stings often lacked transparency, disproportionately harmed marginalized groups, and frequently failed to identify traffickers or connect survivors to services. The ACLU argued that loitering laws have historically been used to police people of color and that criminalizing sex work or purchase of sex can worsen harm, increase racial disparities, and create immigration consequences. Committee members asked about better data collection, racial disparities, and whether the new law would help communities; responses emphasized public health approaches, housing, job training, and trauma-informed services. The second panel included DOJ, Pomona Police Chief Mike Ellis, and survivor advocate Jess Torres. DOJ described regional human trafficking teams, task forces, prosecutions, and survivor services. Chief Ellis said the repeal of the loitering law reduced officers’ ability to intervene early, contributed to visible open-air prostitution near schools and businesses, and made it harder to rescue juveniles; he supported AB 379 and related local efforts. Torres, speaking as a survivor, argued that survivor voices are often excluded, that many youth in the sex trade are boys or LGBTQ youth, and that criminalization and street enforcement can retraumatize people and push the problem out of sight rather than solve it. She urged prevention, unmet-needs services, and survivor inclusion in policymaking. In the final panel, a Riverside County prosecutor said AB 63 would restore a useful enforcement tool with safeguards and could help officers make earlier contact with potential victims, while stressing the need for training and oversight. A public defender argued that arresting trafficked people reinforces traffickers’ control, creates lifelong barriers, and undermines cooperation, pointing to a Pomona diversion program as evidence that treatment and wraparound services can work. No formal votes were taken during the hearing; the committee used the session for testimony, questions, and discussion of competing approaches to trafficking enforcement and survivor support.

Transcript Highlights:

• So you’re using data—the underlying basis of the data you’re using to craft 28 new maps is based on data
• So I used the 2020 census data exclusively. I did not overlay any other data over the map itself.
• That data as a guide when I really had to balance everything based on the 2020 census data.
• Which data are you referring to?
• That they used partisan data.

Committee: Senate Rules

Summary: The Committee on Rules met with a quorum and heard a Governor’s Office presentation on a proposed congressional reapportionment map. The governor’s counsel argued that mid-cycle congressional redistricting is legally permissible, that race should not be considered at all in drawing districts, and that the Florida Fair Districts provisions are inconsistent with federal equal protection law and should be treated as non-severable. The presentation also discussed the pending U.S. Supreme Court case Louisiana v. Callais and the Florida Supreme Court’s Black Voters Matter decision as part of the legal rationale for the map. Jason Parada, who said he drew the map alone, described the map as based on 2020 census block data, with county-level population estimates used only as a guide to identify faster-growing areas. He said the plan keeps 48 counties and 382 municipalities whole, has compactness scores similar to the current benchmark map, and uses traditional geographic and political boundaries such as roads, railways, county lines, and municipal lines. He walked through regional changes, emphasizing a race-neutral redesign that significantly altered South Florida, including changes to districts in Palm Beach, Broward, Miami-Dade, and the Everglades, while leaving several northern districts largely unchanged. Members questioned the witnesses extensively about the legal theory, the use of partisan data, the role of race, population growth, and the timing and review of the map. The witnesses said partisan data was considered along with other traditional redistricting criteria, but race was not used. They also said they could not speak to who else reviewed the map beyond EOG staff and counsel. Several senators raised concerns about the map’s compactness, county and city splits, the apparent partisan effects, and the fact that the map was released shortly before the special session. No vote or final action on the map was taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:05:25.240><c> such</c> had lots of interest in more data such had lots of interest in more data
• and more timely data.
• laws protecting students' data.
• </c> left you'll see the beat School data left you'll see the beat School data showing<00:21:37.400><
• Support staff are engaging in data-based decision-making, triangulating attendance data with behavior

Committee: Senate Education Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• So there's the data that's missing, the data that we have.
• recent data available.
• I try to get the data. It's just sometimes hard to get the data.
• So here, I think you know this data, right? The capacity data.
• I want the data. I want the data.

Summary: The commission on correctional consolidation and collaboration heard testimony focused on how Massachusetts uses custody levels, staffing, programming, and medical release tools, with Prisoners’ Legal Services arguing that the system is overusing expensive high-security settings and underusing step-down options. Dave Rainey said the incarcerated population has dropped substantially over the last several years, but spending and staffing have not fallen in proportion. He argued that DOC overclassifies people into medium and maximum security, relies too heavily on behavioral assessment units that function like segregation, and keeps people in restrictive settings such as Souza-Baranowski and Shattuck Hospital longer than necessary. He also said medical parole is underused and that many people with serious chronic illness or advanced age pose little public-safety risk and should be released through existing legal pathways. Sheriffs and other commission members pushed back on some of those points, emphasizing that staffing needs are driven by the acuity of the current population, that corrections is not overstaffed, and that classification decisions involve serious public-safety judgments. They also stressed that some high-cost medical placements are necessary because people remain under sentence and require care, and that furloughs and other release tools can create security risks if contraband or substance use is involved. The discussion also covered the role of county sheriffs versus DOC in reentry, with several members saying county systems tend to do more day-to-day step-down and release planning, while DOC has more difficulty moving people through lower-security settings before release. Ben Foreman of MassINC offered a more systemwide, data-focused perspective, praising the state’s transparency and arguing that Massachusetts has made major progress in reducing incarceration and increasing public safety. He said the state still has an opportunity to improve by right-sizing facilities, investing in community-based mental health treatment, and using the commission to better understand the capital and operating costs of the current system. In response to questions, he said he was aware of DOC studies on programs like furlough but had not reviewed recent ones, and he noted that total-control facilities like Souza-Baranowski have long been criticized in the research literature for poor outcomes. Nora Wassel of the Women and Incarceration Project then testified that the commission should issue an interim report and scrutinize the planned new women’s prison, which she said is not justified by current population trends or available data. She argued that women are overclassified under DOC’s own tools, that reentry beds and minimum-security placements are underused, and that the system may be failing to account for women’s distinct medical and reentry needs. The meeting ended with continued discussion of reentry, furloughs, day reporting, and whether consolidation should mean fewer facilities, better step-down pathways, or both.

Transcript Highlights:

• They haven't been acquiring these other giant companies or the data um the data uh um companies.
• </c> uh with the data. uh with the data. &gt;&gt; Thank<00:01:01.440><c> you.
• c><00:04:17.359><c> um</c> companies or the data um the data uh um companies or the data um the data
• </c> depending on who they are or what data depending on who they are or what data they<00:13:56.160>
• data.

Transcript Highlights:

• data leakage can occur if you're using some of these tools and your data state is not well managed.
• healthcare data—is it the patient's healthcare data, or is it the person holding the data?
• So the the data the clarification.
• a data that data could be requested via a data practices<00:20:41.760><c> request</c><00:20:42.960><
• that is our it is not Microsoft's data that is our data data data &gt;&gt; okay<00:20:49.200><c> thank

Transcript Highlights:

• If you have any data, please. Thank you for the question. I would like to allow Ms.
• For two years, law enforcement agencies have been collecting data.
• who are unable to draw conclusions with only two years of data.
• We do need at least another two years of data in order to make sure...
• So my question is that the data that we have right now for two years.

Bills: SB60 , SB85 , SB323

Committee: Assembly Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• and whether or not we want to permit the sharing or the training of models on our data.
• So AI is being able to use, turn this data, think of lots of silos of information and data.
• AI is being able to go through all of that and turn data into actionable insights.
• So it's able to talk to these different services and bring that data together.
• AI was able to analyze large volumes of this data, the imagery and geospatial data, to provide timely

Committee: House Technology, Economic Development, & Veterans