Transcript Highlights:

• Florida Partnership to End Domestic Violence grew pretty quickly.
• We also provide the domestic violence conference in partnership with DCF.
• We already had a pretty stringent victims' rights policy.
• That's largely due to legislative support and strong community partnerships.
• support and strong community partnerships.

Committee: Senate Children, Families, and Elder Affairs

Summary: The committee held a panel discussion on Florida’s domestic violence system, focusing on how state and federally funded services are coordinated, the role of the Florida Partnership to End Domestic Violence (FPEDV), the Florida Domestic Violence Collaborative, DCF, and certified domestic violence centers. Members reviewed the post-2020 restructuring after the dissolution of FCADV, the current hotline, legal services, training, and technical assistance contracts, and the Legislature’s recent work on lethality assessments under SB 1224. Panelists also described prevention, shelter, counseling, child advocacy, and legal support services, along with the statewide network of 41 certified centers serving all 67 counties. Testimony highlighted both collaboration and tension. FPEDV and Women in Distress described overlapping training and technical assistance roles, but FPEDV said its relationship with DCF has been difficult and at times obstructive, while DCF said communication and coordination are ongoing. Women in Distress and other providers emphasized the importance of direct services, the statewide hotline, injunction assistance, child welfare co-located advocates, and prevention programs. Several members asked about funding flows, certification, and whether the current structure is sufficient for rural counties; witnesses said federal FVPSA funds are formula-based, DCF contracts directly with centers, and rural programs face staffing and fundraising challenges that limit beds and services. A major portion of the discussion centered on the lethality assessment work group and implementation of the new statewide tool. FDLE explained that the work group concluded the Maryland model was copyrighted and costly to replicate exactly, so Florida adopted a statutory assessment that is not evidence-based in the same way, with training available online and 46 of about 400 law enforcement agencies having completed it so far. Senators raised concerns about multiple assessments, redacted police reports, and whether the tool will be useful without better coordination and data collection. Witnesses also discussed rising domestic violence, teen dating violence, and strangulation cases, with providers reporting increased demand, full shelters, and greater use of hotels and mobile crisis responses. No formal votes or actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• So let us be clear about what this policy will actually correct.
• That is a policy failure. So let's think about the message that we are currently sending.
• And so this bill is about choosing people over outdated policies.
• As stated by the author, California is an outlier by still having this policy.
• More importantly, policies like these put families at risk of homelessness.

Summary: The Assembly Human Services Committee heard a lengthy agenda focused largely on CalWORKs, child care access, early childhood supports, and family stability. Measures discussed included AB 1655, which would protect CalWORKs benefits for families when a child or family member is temporarily absent due to immigration detention; AB 1746, which would require counties to give CalWORKs applicants the actual child care request form and respond within 10 days; and AB 1755, which would repeal the CalWORKs 100-hour work penalty for two-parent families. Supporters across these bills emphasized reducing poverty, preventing administrative barriers, and avoiding punishments that can destabilize working families. No opposition witnesses appeared on these items. All three bills were moved forward on party-line or near-unanimous votes, with committee amendments accepted where noted. The committee also heard AB 2072, creating a state contingency fund to keep CalFresh and WIC benefits flowing during a federal shutdown, with support from the California Retailers Association and anti-poverty groups; AB 2429, which would make targeted changes to the early childhood mental health consultation model by making one screener optional and reducing required observations; AB 1969, the "It Takes a Village Act," establishing a grant program for cradle-to-career place-based partnerships; and AB 2092, giving the Department of Social Services lead authority over an early childhood integrated data system and creating an interagency governance structure. Testimony on these bills stressed the need for coordinated services, better data, and more flexible implementation. Each advanced out of committee, with AB 1969 receiving the most discussion and a split vote before later being finalized on the record. Two additional bills addressed county administration and emergency aid. AB 2278 would authorize a Contra Costa County pilot to test technology to speed IHSS eligibility and reassessments amid heavy caseloads and penalties, while AB 2567 would let counties issue emergency CalWORKs aid without first requiring applicants to apply for all other potentially available income sources. Both were presented as ways to reduce delays and help families in crisis faster. The committee also approved a consent calendar containing several other measures. At the end of the hearing, the committee returned to open votes and finalized the roll on all items before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• Limited partnerships pay an annual report fee of $500, as do limited liability partnerships.
• Mateo, legislative and policy counsel at the MMA.
• Policy is operational reality.
• This is why housing policy is economic development policy.
• This policy honestly is a win-win for everyone.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies

Summary: The committee held a hearing on Governor Healey’s economic development proposal, H.5386, the Mass Winds Act, with the governor and administration officials describing it as a follow-on to the 2024 Mass Leads Act. They said the bill is intended to help Massachusetts compete globally for capital, talent, and companies by creating a Global Mass initiative, including a proposed $50 million innovation access fund and $20 million for site development to help international firms locate or expand here. The administration also highlighted about $305 million in new bond authorizations, plus operating proposals such as lowering the LLC filing fee, expanding the small business energy tax exemption, funding internship incentives, and supporting downtown revitalization and the creative economy. Committee members and witnesses focused on several policy areas within the bill. On talent, Northeastern University supported the internship tax credit, and the Latino Empowerment Advisory Council backed a provision waiving redundant English testing for internationally trained nurses who have already demonstrated proficiency in practice. On labor mobility, the governor defended changes to the non-compete law as closing a loophole, while attorney Russell Beck opposed the revisions, arguing they would upset the 2018 compromise and could reduce employer-provided compensation. Municipal and housing witnesses supported codifying site plan review and broader zoning reforms, while others urged attention to affordable housing, tiny homes, and commercial-to-residential conversions. Local officials and municipal groups generally supported the bill’s downtown, arts, and planning provisions but asked for more detail on implementation and infrastructure, especially around energy, water, and data centers. The Massachusetts Municipal Association said the bill’s standardized site plan review and downtown investments could help communities, but stressed the need for close state-municipal partnership. The AFL-CIO asked for trigger language to preserve labor rights if federal protections weaken. The Secretary of the Commonwealth’s office opposed the LLC fee reduction, warning of significant revenue loss and possible fraud concerns. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, with the committee accepting written testimony afterward.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I just wanted to tell you that although we may not agree on all policy, I think that you are going
• Thank you, Madam Vice Chair, and I really appreciate your words and your partnership.
• Crisis services and 5150s are not just policy concepts to me. They have been my reality.
• I'm director of program and policy for Breast Cancer Prevention Partners.
• We know that policy worked.

Summary: The Senate Rules Committee established quorum and first approved several non-appearing gubernatorial appointees and procedural items on unanimous 5-0 votes, including Hampus Eitsiter to the Boating and Waterways Commission, Peter Stern to the California Horse Racing Board, Dean White to the State Mining and Geology Board, references of bills to committees, and floor acknowledgements. The committee then heard testimony on Tyler Sadwith’s appointment as Chief Deputy Director of Healthcare Programs at the Department of Health Care Services. Sadwith emphasized protecting Medi-Cal access and equity, continuing CalAIM and behavioral health transformation, and drawing on personal experience with family members needing care. Senators focused heavily on hospital financial distress, rural access, eligibility redeterminations, fraud oversight, provider reimbursement, dental access, labor and delivery closures, and the impact of federal changes; Sadwith said the department is working on expedited payments, monitoring distressed hospitals, county technical assistance, and strategies to reduce disenrollments and improve program integrity. Public commenters from county, hospital, and care organizations supported his confirmation, and the committee advanced his nomination to the full Senate on a 5-0 vote. The committee next considered Chris Thayer, PhD, for Director of the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. Thayer described OEHHA’s role as providing transparent, scientifically rigorous health assessments and supporting tools such as Prop 65, CalEnviroScreen, and risk communication. Senators pressed him on the use of models versus real-world data, fenceline monitoring, PFAS, wildfire health impacts, and whether OEHHA’s work adequately reflects lived experience and local conditions. Thayer responded that the office often must rely on the best available evidence, including animal, human, and alternative methods, while continuing to improve communication and community engagement; he also discussed EnviroScreen updates, Prop 65 warning reforms, and research gaps. Public testimony in support highlighted OEHHA’s scientific role and the importance of biomonitoring and PFAS work. The committee approved Thayer’s nomination to the full Senate on a 3-1 vote, with Senator Grove voting no and Senator Jones not voting.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have our senior policy advisor fresh from the Coordinating Board, okay?
• The other focuses on policy and best practices.
• Second, policies and procedures.
• Our board policy on academic freedom also follows this standard.
• That partnership is vital, and we're going to continue to strengthen it.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Higher Education met with a quorum, adopted its interim rules on a 6-0 vote, and heard opening remarks from members and staff introductions. The chair emphasized higher education’s role in workforce development and noted a Legislative Budget Board survey issue that was resolved after a community college initially did not respond because the survey was marked optional. The committee then focused on monitoring implementation of Senate Bill 37, which governs public higher education boards, curriculum review, faculty senates/councils, training for regents, and the ombudsman office. Testimony from Chancellor Brandon Creighton of Texas Tech, Commissioner Wynn Rosser, UNT Chancellor Michael Williams, and Ombudsman Brandon Simmons described how SB 37 is being implemented. They said boards now have stronger authority, faculty senates are advisory, and institutions are reviewing general education curricula and other programs for rigor, relevance, and workforce value. Rosser said the statewide advisory committee is reviewing the core curriculum and board training requirements are being administered, while Simmons reported the ombudsman office has received 73 complaints, opened two investigations, and expects a third, with many complaints outside its jurisdiction or harassing in nature. Members questioned witnesses about transfer credits, board training content, auditing, conflicts of interest, curriculum decisions, and whether any institutions were missing deadlines. Rosser said non-transferable credits have declined since reporting began under earlier law, and that the most common reason is courses outside degree requirements. Witnesses said they were not aware of institutions missing the SB 37 review deadlines. Senators also raised concerns about an appearance of impropriety in a Texas Tech-related matter and about whether a Dred Scott case should be taught in law school, with Creighton saying the curriculum review process did not prohibit teaching Supreme Court cases and that he would follow up. Later testimony from University of Houston, Texas State, UT, and Texas A&M system officials said their systems had updated policies, abolished prior faculty senates, created compliant advisory councils, and completed or were completing core curriculum reviews and related governance changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we did it through incredible bipartisan partnerships.
• So I really wanted to appreciate the partnership we have with the counties.
• Again, so I'm very proud and supportive of our partnerships.
• Resources, funding, and partnership are critical for us.
• Those policies have been created with good intentions.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I laid out on one of the screens there, all the partnerships that we have really commend our partnership
• State partnership is going to continue to be critical.
• So our partnership from now until the 2028 games in L.A.
• Partnerships take time to build.
• I work on policy, and so some of the policy recommendations I'd love to share is just continuing support

Summary: The joint informational hearing of the Select Committee on Electric Vehicles and Charging Infrastructure focused on California’s EV market, charging infrastructure, and the effects of recent federal actions on state clean-transportation programs. The chair emphasized California’s progress on EV adoption and charging reliability, but also noted ongoing problems with affordability, charger access, interoperability, and the need to support light-duty, heavy-duty, and fleet electrification. She also highlighted interest in inductive charging, bidirectional charging, and the transition to NACS, and said the hearing would help shape future legislative action. State agency witnesses from Go-Biz, CARB, and the California Energy Commission described their roles in market development, emissions regulation, incentives, and charging deployment. Go-Biz outlined its ZEV market strategy, equity action plan, and permitting streamlining work, while CARB detailed federal challenges to its clean vehicle rules, the need to defend waiver authority in court, and the importance of incentives and regulatory stability. The CEC discussed charger reliability rules, statewide inventory and planning, funding for public and multifamily charging, and efforts to expand fast charging and improve access in charging deserts. All three agencies stressed that federal rollbacks and the expiration of federal tax credits make state policies and funding more important. Testimony from industry, local government, and advocacy groups largely supported continued state investment. Cal ETC urged a continuous Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund appropriation, more support for multifamily charging, and managed charging programs. The American EV Jobs Alliance proposed a state “conquest” incentive for new and used EV buyers and argued that multifamily charging is the biggest untapped market. Los Angeles County and LADWP described large-scale fleet and charger deployments, public housing and multifamily projects, and the need for sustained funding, agency coordination, and utility/grid interconnection support. The Union of Concerned Scientists recommended prioritizing Clean Cars for All, using fees on non-CARBOB gasoline to fund cleaner vehicle replacement, and expanding authority for bidirectional EV deployment. Members and witnesses also discussed Level 1 versus Level 2 charging for multifamily housing and other use cases. The chair noted that Level 2 is essential for many drivers but asked whether Level 1 could be a cheaper, faster option in some settings. Witnesses agreed that Level 1 can work in certain contexts, especially airports or some multifamily installations, but emphasized that consumer confidence, overnight range, dealer education, and reliable access to charging remain central to broader EV adoption. No formal votes or actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Then article six comes from the DEED policy bill.
• Then article six comes from the DEED policy bill.
• </c> um the walkthrough of the policy um the walkthrough of the policy provisions<00:15:36.160><c> and
• </c><00:23:57.840><c> Emerge</c> Partnership 400,000 one time. Emerge Partnership 400,000 one time.
• </c> 250,000 M American Partnership 250,000 M American Partnership 600,000<00:24:41.679><c> Boulder</

Committee: Senate Jobs and Economic Development

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm Policy Director at Coleman Advocates for Children and Youth in San Francisco.
• My name is Clara Medina, Senior Manager of Policy and Partnerships at Californians for Justice, a statewide
• They're the result of policy choices.
• The result of policy choices.
• I'm the policy and program manager for Milpa.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:08:56.040><c> a</c> the definition of a partnership a the definition of a partnership a policy
• </c><00:09:19.440><c> maybe</c> partnership policy that he bought maybe partnership policy that he bought
• Senator Abeler then confirmed that if you are not a partnership policy, you are not in the partnership
• Senator Abeler confirmed that if you are not a partnership policy, you are not in the partnership club
• If you're not a<00:20:26.160><c> partnership</c><00:20:26.680><c> policy,</c> a partnership policy, a

Committees: Senate Health and Human Services , Senate Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• It created this partnership.
• also set forth certain expectations for the partnership and the partnership entities.
• So in order to start this work, the partnership and the five entities that make up the partnership began
• So in order to start this work, the partnership and the five entities that make up the partnership began
• on the the partnership entities on the partnership<00:15:46.959><c> uh</c><00:15:47.120><c> entity</

Committee: House Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• Prevention is essential, and in many ways, it can be easier to conceptualize through policy.
• Are we looking at specific partnerships? How are those partnerships going? Yes.
• And that partnership has been really beautiful this year.
• Policies like this contribute to a negative school climate and should be eliminated.
• Policies like this contribute to a negative school climate and should be eliminated.

Summary: The Select Committee on Youth Mental Health and Treatment Access held its third hearing to review the state of youth mental health, progress under the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative (CYBHI), and remaining implementation and funding challenges. The chair emphasized that schools are often the main point where education, health care, and social services intersect for students, and that the committee’s goal is to ensure public investments translate into better access and outcomes. The hearing featured testimony from researchers, a youth advocate, state officials, and local practitioners. PPIC researcher Shalini Mostala reported that teen mental health remains a serious concern, with high rates of chronic sadness, hopelessness, and suicidal thoughts, though recent California data show some improvement since the pandemic. She noted persistent disparities by gender, race, and rural status, and said school-based health centers, wellness centers, and community schools are associated with lower suicidal thoughts. Youth advocate Ella Cruz, speaking for NAMI California, described her own mental health struggles and argued that youth voice, peer-to-peer support, and reducing stigma are essential; she also said technology and AI cannot replace trusted adults or trained professionals. Committee members asked about phone use, stigma, cultural barriers, and how to make supports more accessible and relatable to students. Dr. Sohill Sood of the California Health and Human Services Agency said statewide survey data show declining stigma, increased counseling use, and lower suicide ideation among students, and he highlighted CYBHI’s certified wellness coaches, digital tools, awareness campaigns, and the first-in-the-nation fee schedule that allows schools and colleges to bill health plans for behavioral health services. He said the program is growing quickly, with more than 230,000 claims and over $11 million in new revenue to date, while acknowledging that billing systems and coordination are still being built. Trina Frazier of Fresno County described a multi-tiered system of care supported by CYBHI, CalAIM, and other grants, serving thousands of students through school-based services, wellness centers, and mobile therapy units; she said ongoing funding and flexibility are critical. Rachel Kroberniski of El Segundo High School’s James Morehouse Project described a long-running wellness center and peer mentorship model that supports students in multiple languages, and said peer programs help students feel seen, connected, and more willing to seek help. Members broadly praised the flexibility, collaboration, and peer-based approaches described by the witnesses. Questions focused on sustaining funding after one-time grants expire, improving coordination among schools, counties, and providers, expanding the fee schedule to higher education, and ensuring continuity of care for students after high school. Officials said county offices of education, DHCS, and other partners are using communities of practice and technical assistance to spread best practices, and that CYBHI services can follow some young adults through age 25, with additional supports through community-based programs and digital platforms.

Transcript Highlights:

• importance of a two-way partnership with the United States.
• Pushing back on the CCP and then strengthening our partnerships and allies.
• What do you think our policy should be in dealing with Mr. Putin?
• What do you think our national policy should be regarding Mr.
• So certainly there will be policy disagreements.

Committee: Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm here with the California Partnership for the Future of Learning.
• Laura Beebe with the Partnership for Children and Youth.
• California Partnership for the Future of Learning.
• I'm a policy and advocacy director with an intermediary in L.A.
• I'm a policy and advocacy director with an intermediary in L.A.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard the Governor’s proposals for universal school meals, the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), and community schools. On universal meals, the Department of Education supported continued funding for the Universal School Meals Program and a fourth round of Kitchen Infrastructure and Training Grants, citing meal-count growth, improved meal service, and the need to offset federal uncertainty, inflation, and reduced direct certification tied to immigration-related policy changes. The LAO recommended rejecting another kitchen grant round, arguing prior rounds are still being spent and the state has not clearly defined unmet need. Members also raised concerns about the state’s ability to backfill federal meal funding and about how federal requirements affect programs like Summer EBT/SUN Bucks. Public commenters largely supported school meals and kitchen investments, with some urging support for plant-based milk options and continued infrastructure funding. For ELOP, the Department of Finance proposed $4.7 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding, including $62.4 million to set a minimum Tier 2 rate of $1,800 per pupil. The LAO recommended going further and fully fixing the Tier 2 rate, saying rate uncertainty complicates district planning. CDE supported the proposal and said the program has improved attendance and academic outcomes, while noting new CalPADS reporting will provide more data soon. Senators discussed whether ELOP should remain a standalone program or be folded into LCFF, and whether the state should require stronger outcome reporting. Public testimony generally backed stabilizing Tier 2 funding, but some speakers urged more support for older youth and more timely, user-friendly reporting. On community schools, the administration proposed $1 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding to expand the model to thousands more schools and to support existing grantees, along with stronger technical assistance, statewide alignment, and an accreditation/self-certification framework. The LAO recommended continuing the current one-time grant approach instead of creating a new ongoing categorical program, warning about reduced flexibility, administrative burden, and the state’s capacity to support a much larger cohort. CDE supported the ongoing investment but asked for additional county office and technical assistance funding. Senators and public commenters were broadly supportive of community schools, emphasizing improved attendance, graduation, and student engagement, while also debating accountability, accreditation, and whether non-classroom-based charter schools should be eligible. Public testimony strongly favored ongoing funding and highlighted community schools’ role in mental health, family engagement, and wraparound supports.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm here with the California Partnership for the Future of Learning.
• Laura Beebe with the Partnership for Children and Youth.
• Good morning, Laura Beebe with the partnership for children and youth.
• I'm a policy and advocacy director with an intermediary in L.A.
• I'm a policy and advocacy director with an intermediary in L.A.

Transcript Highlights:

• Nicholas Johnson, Director of Public Policy at Lyft. Good morning.
• I'm Director of Public Policy for Lyft.
• I am the policy and research lead for the 24-hour London team.
• And we look forward to continuing our partnership with you all.
• And we look forward to continuing our partnership with you all.

Transcript Highlights:

• But this is an institutional inertia problem, and so it's a policy issue.
• This is policy. This is 100% policy right now.
• It's a policy question. I know I gotta get off here soon.
• It's a very important partnership.
• I'm Ashley Overhouse, the Water Policy Advisor at Defenders of Wildlife.

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on flood risk and flood management in California, with opening remarks emphasizing that flooding is a statewide and growing threat due to climate change, including the possibility of extreme losses in a worst-case event. Members noted recent flooding in places such as San Diego, the Tulare Basin, and Pajaro, and framed the hearing as a way to better understand prevention, response, and how to capture excess water for later use. Jeffrey Mount of PPIC gave the main overview, describing California’s high flood exposure, the different flood types the state faces, and the mix of structural and non-structural tools used to manage them. He stressed that levees, dams, bypasses, land-use planning, flood insurance, and emergency response all matter, but that risk is rising because current standards are based on past hydrology rather than future climate conditions. He also warned that flood management is underfunded, that the National Flood Insurance Program is weak, and that federal support is increasingly uncertain. Members asked about groundwater recharge, permitting, NOAA and federal cuts, and which communities are most at risk; Mount said recharge can help but does not eliminate flood risk, and that small Central Valley communities and heavily developed floodplains are especially concerning. State officials Laura Hollander of the Department of Water Resources and Jane Dolan of the Central Valley Flood Protection Board described the state’s role in forecasting, emergency response, grants, planning, and the Central Valley Flood Protection Plan. They highlighted aging infrastructure, the need for better coordination, and the state’s special liability in the Central Valley after the Paterno decision. Dolan reviewed the history of major floods and said the plan calls for about $1 billion per year over 30 years to meet current needs, while Hollander said the state works with local and federal partners on preparedness, response, and subventions projects. Both emphasized that floodplain planning, regional coordination, and faster permitting are important, but that more consistent funding is needed. A later panel from local flood agencies and districts reinforced those points, arguing that the state’s annual flood funding is below identified needs and that a proposed statewide flood and dam safety bond was reduced substantially in the broader climate bond package. Witnesses urged more routine maintenance funding, support for regional flood planning, and continued federal-state-local partnerships to reduce risk and maintain eligibility for federal assistance. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the informational hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• welcome to Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 1 on Health, covering the state's investments and fiscal policies
• In partnership with the Psychiatric Technician Program Directors across the state, we have worked to
• This is being released in what we're calling a policy statement—a policy manual—because we want it all
• Starting in 2026, we also become responsible for the Innovation Partnership Fund.
• I do have questions on the partnership fund and similar lines to the last issue.

Transcript Highlights:

• We welcome continued partnership with this committee and others as well as our ongoing partnership with
• We welcome continued partnership with this committee and others as well as our ongoing partnership with
• We welcome continued partnership with this committee and others as well as our ongoing partnership with
• We welcome continued partnership with this committee and others as well as our ongoing partnership with
• c><00:14:32.959><c> this</c> welcome continued partnership with this welcome continued partnership with

Transcript Highlights:

• This measure has unanimous bipartisan support by both policy committees.
• I'm a certified city planner and a policy manager at California YIMBY.
• So it's not a magnitude issue, but it is sort of a policy question about that.
• I'm supportive of the bill; the policy is the right policy, but in the Appropriations Committee, I just
• David Nye, with the California Community Action Partnership Association, in support.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Housing met without a quorum at first and operated as a subcommittee, then later established a quorum and took up several housing-related bills. Early presentations included AB 2390, a cleanup bill on housing streamlining and project modifications, which was described as clarifying that minor and subsequent modifications are reviewed under the standards in effect when the original application was filed; there was no opposition, and the bill was moved on a due pass motion but held on call for absent members. AB 1890, which would increase state matching support for Napa County farmworker housing centers from $250,000 to $500,000 annually and extend the program through 2036, drew strong support from Napa County officials, the Farm Bureau, hospitals, and vintners, and was also moved to Appropriations and held on call. AB 956, an ADU bill allowing more flexibility in how accessory dwelling units are built and clarifying application of ADU law in common interest developments, drew support from housing advocates and opposition from the League of California Cities over density, infrastructure, and local control concerns; the committee discussed amendments to avoid triggering density bonus law, then passed the bill as amended to Local Government, with some members expressing reservations or abstaining. The consent calendar, including AB 739, AB 2162, AB 2320, and AB 2692, was also acted on and held on call for absent members. Later, the committee heard AB 939, which would remove a 180-day resale restriction for certain income-restricted ownership units when a nonprofit affordable housing organization is ready to buy and sell them to qualified low-income buyers. Supporters, including Habitat for Humanity and California YIMBY, said the bill would reduce vacancy, carrying costs, and delays in getting affordable homes to buyers; the California Association of Realtors opposed unless amended, arguing the bill could limit buyer choice, codify first-right-of-refusal provisions, and reduce wealth-building opportunities. Members questioned those concerns, and the author said amendments were being worked on; the bill was moved to Appropriations and held on call. AB 1165, the California Housing Justice Act, would require state housing agencies to develop a fiscal analysis and long-term financial plan for ending homelessness and addressing housing affordability; it received broad support from supportive housing, civil rights, and homelessness organizations, with no opposition filed, and was moved to Appropriations and held on call. AB 1184, an HOA transparency bill requiring more notice and access around litigation and recordings, was moved to Judiciary after discussion about whether it duplicated existing HOA law and whether the proposed amendments were too broad. AB 2035, a narrowly tailored bill for Laguna Woods Village to lower the vote threshold needed to petition a court to amend outdated CC&Rs, was supported as a one-time fix and moved to Judiciary. Finally, AB 1573, pulled from consent, would add survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and human trafficking to housing element target populations; supporters said these groups are overrepresented among people experiencing housing instability and should be explicitly included in local housing planning.