Transcript Highlights:

• Second, legislators must approach the regulation of personal data with the full range of human rights
• And so you can think about the general data protection regulation.
• If we're serious about reform, I think we do have to both regulate how police access data, but actually
• It wouldn't just regulate access, which is insufficient when police can just get data from apps or data
• commercial data.

Summary: The Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee held an informational hearing on California privacy in the age of mass surveillance, with members framing the issue as urgent in light of AI, data brokers, workplace monitoring, and government access to commercially collected data. Opening remarks emphasized California’s long-standing privacy tradition and concern for impacts on Latino, immigrant, LGBTQ+, and other vulnerable communities. The committee heard from experts from UC Law San Francisco, UC Berkeley, UC Irvine, UC Davis, and a worker-organizer from Amazon, followed by a journalist from 404 Media. Nicole Ozer reviewed the history of California’s constitutional right to privacy, tracing it to the 1972 ballot measure and arguing that lawmakers should use that right more fully to operationalize stronger protections against surveillance. Deirdre Mulligan described how surveillance capitalism has expanded through physical-world instrumentation, biometrics, connected devices, and AI, and argued that notice-and-consent models are inadequate because people cannot meaningfully understand or control how data is collected, inferred, shared, and used. Ari Waldman focused on disparate harms to marginalized communities, including queer people, survivors of domestic violence, and people seeking reproductive care, and called for stronger regulation, limits on data collection and sharing, and greater accountability for companies and government access to data. Josh Black testified about Amazon’s workplace surveillance, including handheld devices, time-off-task monitoring, hidden cameras, and driver-facing AI cameras, saying the system pressures workers to skip breaks, rush safety training, and discourages organizing. He said the surveillance is used to increase productivity and suppress union activity. Committee members asked about data retention, injury reporting, cash as a privacy-protective payment option, and whether workers truly consent to surveillance as a condition of employment. Jason Kebler described how police departments adopt commercial surveillance tools through pilot programs and vendor relationships, often without public debate, citing license plate readers and networked camera systems that can spread data across jurisdictions. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational and ended with discussion of the need for clearer definitions, stronger enforcement, and continued legislative action.

Transcript Highlights:

• We had to promulgate regulations.
• We had to update data systems to be able to collect that data, but we've now done that.
• month in order to have that data matched with EDD data and really finally get some of the verified..
• regulations we had to update data systems to be able to collect that data but we've now done that we've
• that we will be transferring that data over to the cradle to career data system later this month in

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I went through the data quickly because data is a funny thing in this debate.
• Are you... do you have data?
• We don't even have the data. There's a huge data gap. This is not a conclusion.
• The CCC has a lot of data around the regulated... ...market problems.
• The CCC has a lot of data around the regulated market problems and concerns, and none of those are any

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-10, House Bill 5002, titled “An Act to Restore a Sensible Marijuana Policy,” which would repeal Massachusetts’ adult-use cannabis legalization framework. Chairs Brendan Crighton and Kate Hogan outlined the Article 48 initiative process and explained that the committee is gathering testimony for a report to the legislature. The hearing was organized into expert, proponent, opponent, and public testimony, with written testimony accepted through March 27. The first witness, Jessica Trow of MassBudget, testified in opposition to repeal and focused on cannabis-related revenue and social equity. She said legalization has generated nearly $2 billion statewide since adult-use sales began, with revenue flowing through the Marijuana Regulation Fund, the state sales tax, and local taxes and fees. She emphasized that funds support public health, the Cannabis Control Commission’s social equity work, the Cannabis Social Equity Fund, and municipal budgets, and argued that legalization has created pathways for communities harmed by prohibition. The petition’s spokesperson, Wendy Wakeman, argued in favor of repeal, saying legalization has worsened public health, safety, and quality of life, citing higher potency, addiction, youth use, impaired driving, workplace positives, and black-market concerns. Committee members questioned her about the data sources, the will of the voters, the role of paid signature gatherers, and the petition’s funding, including out-of-state and dark-money concerns. Opponents of the initiative then testified that repeal would harm a regulated industry that has created jobs, tax revenue, and social equity opportunities. Caroline Pino of STEM, Kristen Rogers of Levia, Judith Ledbetter of Project De-Stigmatized Healthcare, and Armani White of Firehouse Dispensary/EON described their businesses, community investments, and personal reliance on cannabis, and warned that repeal would push consumers back to the illicit market and undermine equity programs. In public testimony, Lucas Thayer of the Massachusetts Cannabis Reform Coalition and Jeff Rawson, a chemist and consumer protection advocate, also opposed the measure, arguing that regulated cannabis is safer than unregulated products and that repeal would damage investments and public safety. The hearing ended after the public testimony, and the committee voted to close the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• ALL MODELS CAN ANALYZE AI MODELS CAN ANALYZE DATA QUICKLY LARGE VOLUMES OF DATA QUICKLY.
• OF INSURANCE REGULATION?
• IT ON A REGULATION BASIS.
• YOUR AI SYSTEM WOULD INCLUDE ENSURING THAT YOU HAVE COMPLIANCE WITH THAT DATA PRIVACY OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS
• THE OFFICE OF INSURANCE REGULATION RECEIVES THAT DATA FROM INSURERS IN TERMS OF THE DENIALS AND IN TERMS

Transcript Highlights:

• Five, data calls.
• It repeals two data calls, as the information is no longer relevant and/or already covered in other data
• It ensures OIR is notified of data breach incidents affecting companies regulated by OIR.
• So there's a couple of different data site data collection tools that are implemented with this bill.
• , there would be a due data associated with the date, the data is due, and then a time period before

Summary: The committee heard and advanced several insurance, financial regulation, and public safety bills. The most extensive discussion centered on SB 1656, a major Office of Insurance Regulation bill covering reciprocal insurers, rate transparency, data calls, cybersecurity notification, and stronger oversight of continuing care retirement communities (CCRCs). The sponsor and OIR described the bill as aimed at transparency and preventing insolvencies, especially after recent CCRC failures. CCRC residents and industry representatives testified both in support and in opposition, with supporters emphasizing resident protection and opponents warning about liens, reserve requirements, management-company regulation, and higher costs. After debate and assurances that problematic provisions would be refined, the committee adopted a delete-all amendment and then reported the bill favorably. The committee also passed SB 1658, which creates a public records framework for the uniform mitigation verification of inspection form database while protecting policyholders’ personal information; a clarifying amendment was adopted before the bill was reported favorably. SB 1612 on financial institutions was approved after a substitute amendment restored current limits on credit union investments and kept only reimbursement, not salary, authority for certain board members and officers. SB 1740, an insurance bill intended to reduce premiums and insurer insolvency risk, was amended to prioritize rate-decrease filings and prohibit claim denials based solely on AI, then reported favorably. Two public-safety bills also moved forward. SB 1212 on firefighter health and safety would update OSHA-related protections, address toxic exposure in gear, encourage safer replacement equipment, and support best practices and mental health resources; an amendment refined terminology and added related provisions, and the bill was reported favorably. SB 1184 on residual market insurers was amended to preserve existing consumer protections and disclosure rules for excess and surplus lines and to clarify Citizens-related appointment requirements before being reported favorably. Throughout the meeting, members repeatedly noted ongoing stakeholder negotiations and intent to refine several bills further in later committee stops.

Transcript Highlights:

• data, we can't understand the effects of regulation and regulatory trends.
• So I set out to solve that data problem, fix the data gap, if you will.
• That led me to my first conclusion, which is there's a lot of regulations, and it's hard to make data
• So again, when I started out in this area, there simply wasn't data about how much regulation...
• Again, when I started out in this area, there simply wasn't data about how much regulation there is in

Keywords: 965, house, all

Summary: The Special Committee on Regulatory Reform met as a study hearing with a quorum present but no plans to take votes. Chair Mark Wright opened by noting a draft resolution on regulatory reform and introducing Patrick McLaughlin of the Hoover Institution and Pacific Legal Foundation, who was invited to discuss his research on state regulatory accumulation and reform. McLaughlin described his method of measuring regulation through counts of binding terms like “shall” and “must,” and said Louisiana ranks among the most regulated states, with about 183,000 restrictions and faster-than-average growth in its regulatory stock. He argued that regulatory accumulation slows GDP growth, raises consumer prices, and disproportionately burdens small businesses and low-income households. McLaughlin pointed to reform models in British Columbia, Idaho, and Virginia, saying those states reduced regulations through centralized oversight, periodic review, simplified benefit-cost analysis, transparency tools, and AI-assisted comparison of rules across states. He said Virginia’s regulatory management office helped cut requirements and guidance, reduce licensing delays, and lower homebuilding costs, while similar reforms in Louisiana could produce significant economic gains. Committee members asked about the reliability of the research, the distinction between necessary and duplicative rules, the role of federal mandates, and how AI could help identify outdated or “gold-plated” regulations. McLaughlin said AI should assist human reviewers, not replace them, and emphasized that agencies need a process for reviewing old rules, not just issuing new ones. Members also discussed Louisiana’s own reform efforts, including LaDOGE, permit streamlining, and prior legislation creating public hearings and committee review of regulations. Chair Wright said he had filed a broader bill this session and was working with the administration on next steps. Representative Walters requested supporting data and examples from other states, and other members asked for practical comparisons, including how regulations affect housing, occupational licensing, and small businesses. The hearing ended without any votes or formal action.

Transcript Highlights:

• It facilitates interagency data sharing and supports an enterprise approach to data through shared data
• As the regulated market continues to grow, the amount of transaction data generated by the industry continues
• And within our regulated industry, we just fined Assured Labs $310,000 not long ago for data manipulation
• And within our regulated industry, we just find assured labs $310,000 not long ago because for data manipulation
• Regulate the heck out of us. We can compete if you do your job as regulators.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Ways and Means held a public FY27 budget hearing at Barnstable Town Hall, with opening remarks emphasizing the Cape and Islands’ seasonal infrastructure, housing, transportation, workforce, and digital needs. The hearing began with testimony from the Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development, which outlined the Healey-Driscoll administration’s budget priorities for job training, apprenticeship, youth employment, reentry programs, and unemployment insurance modernization. The secretary highlighted proposed funding for the Workforce Competitiveness Trust Fund, Career Technical Initiative, YouthWorks, reentry workforce development, and services for young adults with disabilities, along with a proposal to streamline youth work permits. Members also discussed the unemployment trust fund, the COVID assessment on employers, rising unemployment, and the need to improve DUA customer service and claims processing. Committee members asked about job seeker barriers such as child care, housing, transportation, and out-migration of young workers, as well as how to keep Cape Cod graduates and seasonal workers in the region. The administration said its strategy is to pair training with broader affordability investments and to expose students to career pathways earlier, including through middle school, early childhood STEM, YouthWorks, pre-apprenticeships, and Building Pathways. Senators and representatives also raised concerns about regional funding disparities, especially for Hampshire Franklin MassHire, and the administration said it is reviewing MassHire funding and service equity through a policy committee and statewide workforce board. On unemployment assistance, officials reported major improvements in wait times and claims processing, but said they are still working through backlogs and staffing challenges while maintaining program integrity. The committee then heard testimony from the Executive Office of Economic Development. The secretary described House 2 as a fiscally restrained budget with no new taxes or fees, while preserving core programs and using the Mass Leads Act tools to support competitiveness. EOED’s proposal included funding for the Community One Stop for Growth, rural economic development, social enterprise operating grants, regional economic development organizations, the Workforce Investment Trust Fund, Community Workforce Partnerships, Pathmaker, advanced manufacturing training, life sciences, innovation vouchers, AI initiatives, small business assistance, and tourism and live theater support. The Office of Consumer Affairs and Business Regulation also testified on its FY27 request, focusing on consumer protection, licensing, banking, insurance, and public safety regulation. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we do have some minimal data around that.
• Improved reporting and data collection will create an opportunity to develop more accurate data and,
• At AAA, we thrive on data. Our policies are built on the foundation of the data we collect.
• We set a speed limit, and we also set device regulations.
• It goes too far on regulating mopeds and not far enough on regulating Class 3 e-bikes.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Transportation held a hybrid hearing on the governor’s Ride Safe Act, S. 3077, and related micromobility bills. Chairs and administration officials described the bill as a statewide, speed-based framework for e-bikes, scooters, mopeds, and similar devices, intended to replace outdated device categories with clearer rules for age limits, helmets, equipment, operating locations, registration, insurance for higher-speed devices, and restrictions on tampering. They also emphasized improved crash-data collection, a working group for future updates, and battery safety standards such as UL certification to reduce fire risk. Committee members asked about enforcement, shared-use paths, commuter rail accommodations, battery storage, and how the bill would apply to other vehicles like quads; the administration said some issues would need further study or follow-up. Testimony from advocates, municipal officials, and commission members was mixed but generally supportive of clearer statewide rules. Transportation and safety advocates backed the speed-based tier system but urged additional measures, including a default speed limit on shared-use paths, automated enforcement, and more funding for Complete Streets and Shared Streets programs. Bike shop and police representatives said current laws are confusing for riders and law enforcement and that better definitions and data reporting are needed. Several speakers stressed that enforcement and education will be critical, and that local patchwork rules are difficult to apply consistently. Medical testimony strongly supported tighter protections for young riders. Pediatric emergency and trauma doctors described a sharp rise in serious injuries and deaths involving e-bikes and scooters, including severe pediatric cases, and urged amendments adding a minimum age for faster devices and a universal helmet requirement. They argued that the force and weight of these devices make crashes more dangerous than conventional bicycles and pointed to past Massachusetts safety laws as evidence that age and equipment restrictions can reduce injuries. Some public testimony opposed the bill as written, especially from moped commuters who argued that gas-powered mopeds are being treated differently from comparable electric devices and should be included in the framework. They called for clearer rules on bike-lane access, insurance, parking, and statewide standards for mopeds as vulnerable road users. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee heard testimony and questions only.

Transcript Highlights:

• The highest-performing data center markets demonstrate that reasonable regulation produces win-win outcomes
• local regulations.
• The highest-performing data center markets demonstrate that reasonable regulation produces win-win outcomes
• local regulations.
• The highest-performing data center markets demonstrate that reasonable regulation produces win-win outcomes

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• because they're the only ones that can meet those regulations with a fleet of lawyers... ...regulation
• because they're the only ones that can meet those regulations with a fleet of lawyers.
• how heterogeneous all the data is, it's dispersed.
• data centers.
• We understand that there’s significant growing demand for data centers.

Summary: The House Artificial Intelligence and Innovation Committee heard a presentation from Steven Garrison of the Cicero Institute on how Arizona state government could use AI to improve service delivery, reduce costs, and streamline procurement. He argued AI should be treated as software, with agencies proactively identifying use cases, tracking outcomes, and avoiding unnecessary agency-level regulation or new bureaucratic structures. Members questioned him about workforce impacts, privacy, agency involvement, and the balance between innovation and guardrails; he said AI would likely augment workers in the short term and create new jobs over time, while legislative oversight should focus on specific harms and gaps in law rather than broad agency rules. The committee then considered HB 2592, which directs the Arizona Department of Administration to require budget units to identify AI opportunities, reduce administrative duties, streamline procurement, and establish AI governance, while also sending emergency or temporary AI rules to the legislature for approval. An amendment added reporting requirements to the governor, legislative leaders, and Secretary of State on efficiency measures and barriers encountered. After limited testimony, including support from Jeannie Magdua of Conservative Ladies of America, the committee adopted the amendment and passed the bill as amended on a 4-2 vote, with one member absent. The final bill, HB 2452, would add data centers and small modular reactors to county comprehensive planning considerations and adjust county planning requirements for land use and energy-related development. Supporters, including Russell Smolden of the Arizona Municipal Power Users Association and Dave Morris of Americans for Prosperity Arizona, said the bill would improve long-term planning for data centers, energy infrastructure, and emerging technologies. The County Supervisors Association opposed it, arguing it improperly singled out specific uses, blurred comprehensive planning with zoning, and reduced local control. The committee passed HB 2452 on a 4-3 vote and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• I went through the data quickly because data is a funny thing in this debate.
• Are you, do you have data?
• We don't even have the data. There's a huge data gap. This is not a conclusion.
• So the public health narrative does not match the data. What does match the data is this.
• The CCC has a lot of data around the regulated market problems and concerns, and none of those are any

Bills: H5005

Keywords: environment, water conservation, natural resources, public funding, environmental justice, 1212, all

Transcript Highlights:

• As it pertains to the lawsuit and the DIR regulations, we did ultimately sue over the DIR final regulations
• Our data and the research literature speak to both.
• Our data and the research literature speak to both.
• This is data.
• And those new data elements don't fit with our existing data collection system, and therefore the state's

Summary: The Assembly Labor and Employment Committee heard several bills focused on labor standards, worker safety, and public transparency. SB 954 by Senator Blakespear would revise last year’s CEQA exemption for advanced manufacturing by adding worker protections such as prevailing wage, a skilled and trained workforce, high-road employment standards, and environmental guardrails. Supporters from labor, environmental justice, and conservation groups said the bill restores promised safeguards after SB 131, while business groups argued the added requirements would undermine the exemption and discourage investment. The committee voted 5-0 to do pass and re-refer SB 954 to Appropriations, leaving the roll open for absent members. The committee then considered SB 966 by Senator Gonzalez, which would codify refinery worker participation and safety protections adopted in 2017 after the 2012 Chevron Richmond fire. Supporters, including United Steelworkers and a former refinery worker, said the bill would preserve workers’ ability to report hazards, select representatives, and stop unsafe work, preventing future disasters. The Western States Petroleum Association opposed the bill, arguing it could be preempted by federal labor law and would add regulatory uncertainty. The committee passed SB 966 3-0 and re-referred it to Appropriations, with the roll left open. Next, SB 1203 by Senator Smallwood-Cuevas sought to modernize private security guard training, expand de-escalation instruction, strengthen accountability, and create a clearer professional pathway for the industry. The author and many security workers testified that guards are often first responders in volatile situations and need more practical training and better standards; opponents from industry and business groups warned the bill would raise costs, worsen staffing shortages, and create implementation problems, especially around third-party training and a new wage order. The committee voted 4-1 to do pass and re-refer SB 1203 to Public Safety, with one no vote and the roll left open. The committee also heard SB 1284 by Senator Smallwood-Cuevas, a transparency bill requiring DHCS to publish the names of large employers with workers enrolled in Medi-Cal and the estimated taxpayer cost. Supporters said the measure would show how low wages and unaffordable coverage shift health costs to the public, while opponents argued Medi-Cal enrollment depends on many factors and that naming employers would be misleading and amount to public shaming. After discussion, the committee voted 4-2 to do pass and re-refer SB 1284 to Appropriations, leaving the roll open. The transcript then began discussion of SB 1054 by Senator Cabaldon, which would improve workforce data collection and sharing to better evaluate job-training pathways, but the excerpt cuts off before testimony or action on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> telling government to regulate telling government to regulate something,<00:18:30.960><c> you</c
• </c> job, and workers should know what data job, and workers should know what data is<00:20:02.960><c
• ,</c> for employees to access their own data, for employees to access their own data, as<00:25:39.480
• </c> collected data. collected data.
• and data surveillance.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• then sell that data.
• So you're the driving data that, I don't know. So you're the driving data that is being collected.
• This driving data is not regulated under the FCRA because it's not being collected for that purpose.
• For the data that the insurance companies collect, we would be regulated by the FCRA.
• You said your data regulation process already dictates who can, like, if you can use, how that data can

Summary: The Insurance Committee held public hearings on House Bill 3328 and House Bill 2324. HB 3328, sponsored by Rep. Castile, is a broad homeowners insurance package that would redirect insurance dedicated fund money into a Missouri Stronger Homes Fund, create a Missouri Disaster Mediation Act for disaster-related claims, update public adjuster regulation, strengthen fraud provisions, add consumer notices, and establish roof-hardening grant programs. The sponsor and the Department of Commerce and Insurance said the bill is still being revised in a committee substitute, especially on public adjuster language and fortified roof standards. Committee members asked about the dedicated fund, mediation benchmarks, the role of public adjusters, and how the program would affect disaster recovery in places like St. Louis. Testimony on HB 3328 was mixed. The Department of Commerce and Insurance and several insurance industry groups supported the bill’s consumer protections, mitigation funding, mediation process, fraud language, and assignment-of-benefits ban, but said the public adjuster fee cap would likely be removed and that the bill needs technical changes for mutual insurers and roofing standards. Public adjusters testified in opposition to the cap as written, saying their fees are typically 10-15% and are disclosed in contracts, and that they were working with the sponsor on revisions. A shingle manufacturer also opposed the fortified roof language as drafted because some of its products may not fit the current standard. The committee then closed the hearing on HB 3328. The committee next heard HB 2324, sponsored by Rep. Lucas, which would restrict the sharing or sale of vehicle driving data and was described by the sponsor as a privacy bill aimed at stopping companies like OnStar from selling driving data to insurers. Opponents from the Missouri Insurance Coalition and NAMIC said the bill would not actually target OnStar, but would instead interfere with voluntary telematics-based discount programs used by insurers, potentially raising premiums and creating administrative burdens. They also noted existing federal and state rules already govern insurer data use and that the bill could create a mismatch between risk and pricing. The hearing on HB 2324 was then closed, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do have some minimal data around that.
• Improved reporting and data collection will create an opportunity to develop more accurate data and,
• At AAA, we thrive on data. Our policies are built on the foundation of the data we collect.
• We set a speed limit, and we also set device regulations.
• It goes too far on regulating mopeds and not far enough on regulating Class 3 e-bikes.

Summary: The Joint Committee on Transportation held a hearing on the governor’s Ride Safe Act (S 3077), a micromobility bill based on recommendations from last year’s Special Commission on Micromobility. Administration witnesses from MassDOT and the MBTA said the bill is needed because current laws are outdated and inconsistent, and they emphasized a new speed-based framework that would classify devices by maximum speed rather than by device name. They said the bill would set statewide rules, clarify enforcement, require safety equipment and age limits, restrict unsafe modifications, improve crash-data collection, and create a working group to address future issues such as registration, licensure, insurance, and emerging technologies. Committee members asked about crash reporting, battery safety, enforcement on shared-use paths, commuter rail access, and how the bill would apply to off-road vehicles. Several witnesses and legislators supported the bill’s general approach but raised concerns about whether the speed tiers should be tied more directly to actual operating speed on paths, whether higher-speed devices should be registered, and how police would distinguish between similar-looking devices. Representative and commission witnesses also urged more funding for Complete Streets and Shared Streets and Spaces, and some suggested adding default speed limits on shared-use paths and automated enforcement tools. Public testimony was mixed. Pediatric emergency physicians strongly supported the bill but urged amendments for a minimum age to operate powered devices and a universal helmet requirement, citing rising severe injuries and deaths among children. A police chief and other safety advocates backed clearer rules and better data collection, while some moped riders objected that the bill would treat low-speed gas mopeds too harshly and should better account for mopeds as vulnerable road users. UL Standards and AAA supported the bill’s safety and clarity goals, with UL recommending tighter language on battery certification and equivalent standards. No vote was taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• We had to promulgate regulations.
• We had to update data systems to be able to collect that data, but we've now done that.
• month in order to have that data matched with EDD data and really finally get some of the verified..
• regulations we had to update data systems to be able to collect that data but we've now done that we've
• that we will be transferring that data over to the cradle to career data system later this month in

Summary: The joint Sunset Review Oversight Hearing focused on the Bureau for Private Post-Secondary Education (BPPE) and its reauthorization, with committee chairs and members emphasizing the Bureau’s role in protecting students, overseeing private postsecondary schools, and responding to a changing federal higher education landscape. BPPE and the Department of Consumer Affairs reported that the Bureau has modernized data systems, improved enforcement, increased citations and inspections, reduced pending complaints, and is now meeting its statutory inspection mandate. They also said the Bureau faces a structural budget deficit and has reduced costs through staffing cuts, streamlined inspections, and shifting some student-relief functions to the Student Tuition Recovery Fund (STRF).

Transcript Highlights:

• But this is the data team.
• And part of the concern for the protection of that data is if somebody is getting into... ...data is
• I have a question on the data inventory.
• do the data cataloging that we need to do.
• So the Department of Business, Professional Regulation, licenses and regulates over 1.6 million businesses

Summary: The subcommittee met to review agency travel, budget reduction exercises, and member reports from agency meetings. Early discussion focused on the Department of Management Services (DMS), where members questioned the cost of travel for four out-of-state data/cyber staff and the secretary’s absence. DMS defended the hires as highly specialized enterprise cybersecurity and data personnel, said the positions were lawfully paid and posted, and explained that the staff work on statewide data cataloging and cyber risk reduction rather than agency-by-agency systems. Members also raised concerns about fleet inventory discrepancies and requested follow-up information on hiring, travel, and data inventory timelines. The chair said she would consider travel guardrails and possible reductions, and noted that DMS, the Lottery, and the Florida Commission on Human Relations did not meet the requested reduction target, while the Public Employee Relations Commission did not submit reductions. The committee then heard from the Florida Lottery about the secretary’s trip to Paris for the World Lottery Convention. Lottery staff said the trip was reimbursed through the multi-state lottery organization and was intended to share best practices and improve operations, though members questioned the value of the travel and requested reimbursement records and the trip agenda. The subcommittee also reviewed agency reduction exercises from several agencies. The Department of Revenue exceeded its target and was praised for frugality; DFS, the Florida Gaming Control Commission, the Office of Financial Regulation, the Office of Insurance Regulation, the Public Service Commission, the Division of Administrative Hearings, and the Department of Business and Professional Regulation each described how they met or approached their reduction goals, often through vacancies, reversions, or expense cuts. OIR warned that further reductions could hurt insurance regulation capacity, while OFR and PSC said their reductions were based on historical reversions and lower post-COVID travel or vacancy levels. Members then reported back on agency meetings. DMS members raised fleet tracking, real property audits, salary studies, and health plan savings ideas, and asked for follow-up on the Florida PALM project, cybersecurity grants, and state IT modernization. DFS members said the agency was efficient and that its Palm-related work and insurance consumer programs were important. Lottery members emphasized the agency’s revenue generation for education and its low administrative overhead. Gaming Control members highlighted storage costs for seized gaming equipment and suggested technology-based alternatives. PERC members said a union-related law had doubled their workload and asked for more staffing and possible AI assistance. OIR members stressed the need for a Tampa satellite office and more resources to recruit and retain specialized staff. The chair closed by saying the committee would continue reviewing travel, staffing, and reductions with an eye toward taxpayer value and transparency.

Transcript Highlights:

• I support public health by regulating the synthetic stuff under reasonable regulations.
• But we need to express caution and look at the data.
• But we need to express caution and look at the data.
• Different regulations on kratom.
• You know, I'm sure because it's not regulated, Sales data or something, you know, I'm sure because it's

Summary: The Kratom Working Group met to hear public testimony and expert presentations on whether North Dakota should prohibit or regulate kratom and 7-OH products. Early testimony split sharply between speakers who described natural kratom as a helpful, lower-risk alternative for chronic pain, opioid withdrawal, PTSD, and recovery, and speakers who urged prohibition because of dependence, overdose risk, and the growth of concentrated or synthetic 7-OH products sold in gas stations, smoke shops, and online. Several witnesses, including consumers and shop owners, argued that banning kratom would push people to more dangerous drugs or unregulated internet sources, while public health and medical witnesses said the marketplace is confusing and inadequately controlled. A number of witnesses, including representatives of the North Dakota Public Health Association, the state crime lab, and addiction-treatment and pediatric clinicians, emphasized risks from adulterated or concentrated products, lack of labeling and age restrictions, contamination concerns, and harms to adolescents, pregnant patients, and newborns. The crime lab described recent cases involving mitragynine, 7-OH, and pseudoindoxyl, and said products purchased in a smoke shop were inaccurately labeled. A Sanford pediatric hospitalist testified that kratom exposure in pregnancy can cause severe neonatal withdrawal and that adolescents are using the product. By contrast, American Kratom Association representatives and other advocates argued that natural leaf kratom should be distinguished from synthetic 7-OH, that deaths usually involve other substances, and that a regulatory framework with testing, labeling, age limits, and product registration would better protect consumers than a blanket ban. No formal bill was debated or voted on in this transcript. The working group heard testimony, asked questions, and took no final action before breaking for lunch and later resuming with additional presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Data reporting is a big component of our evolution here in regulations.
• And I'm just curious, when do those regulations, the regulations in your proposed column go into effect
• First of all, the proposed regulations. We just actually ended a the proposed regulations.
• How do they get their hands on the data? What does that data tell them? Can you interpret it?
• And we can see that in the data.

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thirty percent of the world's data is health care data. A lot of data.
• So when we're training our models on commercial data and Medicare data and not on Medi-Cal data, then
• And I think that, at least my view, is that the point of regulating access to data is a very difficult
• the tool and I think that at least my view is that the the point of regulating access to data is a very
• something with data, patient data that we already have.

Summary: The joint informational hearing of the Assembly Health and Privacy Committees focused on generative AI in health care, with opening remarks emphasizing both its potential to improve care and its risks around privacy, bias, liability, workforce impacts, and unequal access. Chair Bauer-Kahan and Chair Bonta framed the discussion around how California can encourage beneficial innovation while protecting patients, especially given the sensitivity of health data and the possibility that AI could worsen existing disparities if not carefully governed. The first panel featured representatives from Cedars-Sinai, Kaiser Permanente, Penguin AI, and Google, who described current uses of AI such as ambient clinical scribes, nursing documentation tools, imaging triage, maternal-fetal risk prediction, and administrative automation. Speakers said these tools can reduce clinician burden, improve patient experience, speed treatment, and in some cases improve outcomes, including a reported mortality benefit from a Kaiser predictive model and faster thrombectomy times at Cedars-Sinai. Members raised concerns about accuracy with accents and multilingual visits, whether predictive tools could reinforce bias or lead to more interventions such as C-sections, and how to ensure a human remains in the loop for important decisions. The second panel, including representatives from the California Health Care Foundation, UC Berkeley, and Stanford, focused on policy and governance challenges. Testimony highlighted examples of AI supporting homelessness outreach and community health work, but also warned that biased algorithms can encode inequities, especially when trained on data that reflect under-treatment of Black, rural, or low-income patients. Witnesses urged clearer standards for trustworthy AI, stronger monitoring and governance structures, better data access for accountability, and attention to the safety net’s limited resources. Several speakers argued that states should require health systems to have AI governance processes, clarify liability between developers and deployers, and regulate downstream uses of AI while preserving access to data for lifesaving research and oversight.