Transcript Highlights:

• and in sections 314 to 323 of Title 11 of the California Code of Regulations.
• 12, 2024, and January 1, 2025, depending on the regulation.
• We welcome thoughtful regulation.
• But regulation must reflect operational reality.
• But regulation must reflect operational reality.

Committee: House Privacy and Consumer Protection

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In other words, if we regulate this, and what do you regulate? You regulate things that are legal.
• He says we will regulate it. That you are limited to your purchases.
• The only way you can regulate it...
• You cannot regulate 8,000 stores. Law enforcement knows that. So you can't regulate it.
• He said regulation. His words were very careful. Deal with the regulation.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:03:50.040><c> THC</c> Senate Bill 223 simply regulates THC Senate Bill 223 simply regulates THC
• We are going to, if we're going to regulate these sorts of products as we regulate alcohol, then those
• Um, FDA, TTB, all these agencies that regulate the alcohol industry need to be aligned on regulations
• Um, FDA, TTB, all these agencies that regulate the alcohol industry need to be aligned on regulations
• </c> request to be regulated by the FDA. request to be regulated by the FDA.

Committee: Senate Licensing & Occupations

Keywords: The livestream event for this meeting cut off shortly after the meeting began. This is the complete copy pulled from back ups., 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's regulating the sale, only the sale.
• It's to regulate the sale, make sure that we have one standard definition.
• I'm not going to speak to all the federal regulations.
• But... ...in this or in the federal regulations.
• I'm not going to speak to all the federal regulations.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Summary: The Commerce Committee reconvened and continued its hearing on House Bill 2085, a measure to establish statewide preemption over the sale of tobacco, vape, and nicotine products. Supporters, including representatives of vape stores, grocers, convenience stores, and petroleum marketers, argued the bill would prevent a patchwork of local ordinances, protect small businesses, and create consistent statewide rules for retailers. Several supporters said federal Tobacco 21 rules already control underage sales, and that local bans or flavor restrictions would hurt businesses and push sales to neighboring jurisdictions. Opponents, including the Missouri Public Health Association and the Springfield-Greene County Health Department, said local tobacco regulation has helped prevent youth smoking and that the bill could invite litigation over existing ordinances and limit future public health regulation. Committee members repeatedly questioned whether the bill would affect zoning authority or local decisions about where vape shops can locate, especially near schools and child care facilities. The sponsor, Representative Keithley, said the bill was intended to preempt only state standards on the sale and retail regulation of tobacco products, not local zoning, and emphasized that local governments would remain free to regulate zoning. Much of the hearing focused on the bill’s language, especially whether it required a 21-and-over purchase age or merely allowed local jurisdictions that already use 21 to keep doing so. The sponsor explained that the bill was designed to preserve local 21 ordinances without forcing all localities to change from 18 to 21, while still setting statewide standards for sale-related rules. An informational witness from MOST Policy Initiative described health risks of vaping, including nicotine addiction and youth appeal from flavored products, and noted that Missouri does not currently impose a special tax on vapor products. The committee took no vote and adjourned after concluding testimony on HB 2085.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> promagated any regulation. promagated any regulation. &gt;&gt; Okay. &gt;&gt; Okay.
• </c> cabinet to do regulations on topics. cabinet to do regulations on topics.
• </c><00:33:56.799><c> because</c> have to promagate regulations because have to promagate regulations
• Skip to number two: it says go regulate, and the things that you're told to go regulate include many
• The board of alcohol and regulation.

Committee: Senate Licensing & Occupations

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I guess I'm saying as a regulator, you must maybe come across this in other departments.
• For example, legal state-regulated sports betting is only about four years old in Arizona.
• We are using this process here... ...continue to be a national leader in gaming regulation.
• Strong regulation is what makes these revenues sustainable and reliable.
• And that's part of the suitability review in the gaming world that we all do as regulators.

Committee: House House Commerce Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee met as the House Commerce Committee of Reference to hear sunset reviews and a performance audit covering the Department of Gaming, the Racing Commission, the Boxing and MMA Commission, the Barbering and Cosmetology Board, and the Arizona Sports and Tourism Authority. The Auditor General reported that the Department of Gaming and the two commissions generally met some statutory duties, but identified major issues: the department had not consistently reviewed independent audit reports for event wagering and fantasy sports operators, had disclosure and conflict-of-interest compliance gaps, lacked comprehensive complaint-handling processes, and was late distributing some compact trust fund payments to tribes. The Racing Commission needed better public records procedures, and the Boxing and MMA Commission had licensing and fee-setting issues. The department and commissions said they agreed with the findings and were implementing recommendations, with the department noting it had already begun look-back reviews, updated guidance, and additional staffing. Members also discussed consumer protection, illegal gambling, prediction markets, and whether out-of-state enforcement actions should affect Arizona licenses; the department said it would evaluate such matters case by case and generally wait for final adjudication or final regulatory action before acting. The committee then voted to recommend continuation of the Department of Gaming for two years until July 1, 2028, the Racing Commission for six years until July 1, 2032, and the Boxing and MMA Commission for six years until July 1, 2032. The Department of Gaming motion passed 7-4, the Racing Commission motion passed 10-1, and the Boxing and MMA Commission motion passed unanimously. The committee next heard the Barbering and Cosmetology Board audit. The Auditor General said the board timely processed many applications and complaints and had adopted curriculum rules, but it failed to enforce disciplinary guidelines consistently, sometimes issuing different sanctions for similar violations without documenting why it deviated from policy. The audit also found problems with reciprocity education requirements, application review quality control, inspections, open meeting and public records compliance, conflict-of-interest processes, fee-setting, and statutory clarity on scope of practice and training requirements. The board said it agreed with the findings, had already updated disciplinary parameters and documentation policies, and was working on the remaining recommendations and possible legislation. The committee then voted to continue the board for six years until July 1, 2032, and the motion passed unanimously. At the end of the meeting, the committee began hearing the Arizona Sports and Tourism Authority performance audit, but the transcript provided cuts off before that presentation was completed or any action was taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• I guess I'm saying as a regulator, you must maybe come across this in other departments.
• Regulation. Gaming, also known as gambling, has certainly changed in the last 30 years.
• Continue to be a national leader in gaming regulation.
• Strong regulation is what makes these revenues sustainable and reliable.
• So... ...of a regulator, most likely they have an appeal process, right?

Committee: House Commerce

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And we're also going to ask the Transportation Cabinet to update some of the regulations according to
• And we're also going to ask the Transportation Cabinet to update some of the regulations according to
• Most of them are adjustments to comply with the federal regulation.
• Is there anything in these regulations you want to explain? Like I said, there's five of them.
• </c> Department of Vehicle regulation Department of Vehicle regulation it<00:21:29.400><c> it</c><00:

Keywords: Roll Call 00:13 Approval of Minutes 00:44 SB 99 Discussion 03:30 SB 99 Vote 12:45 Administrative Regs 17:56, 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the minutes, and heard a personal privilege statement praising Transportation Cabinet staff for helping a constituent obtain a Kentucky Uniform ID in time to board a cruise. The chair also recognized special guests and noted a page for the day. The main bill taken up was Senate Bill 99, with a committee substitute adopted before discussion. Senate Bill 99, sponsored by Senator Douglas, would strengthen Kentucky’s distracted-driving laws by prohibiting the use of personal communication devices to write, send, or read texts while operating a motor vehicle, with exceptions for emergency or public safety use and certain reporting or medical situations. The committee substitute clarified that GPS use remains allowed, including for younger drivers, and the bill also bars anyone under 18 from using a device in any manner while driving, sets a $100 fine with no points, and imposes a 90-day license revocation for minors. Supportive testimony and comments emphasized pedestrian and roadway safety, the dangers of distracted driving, and the bill’s alignment with existing CDL-related restrictions. After discussion, the committee voted on Senate Bill 99 by roll call and reported it favorably with the committee substitute attached. Members explaining their votes said the measure would save lives, reflected practices already used in trucking and bus operations, and was a reasonable enforcement approach similar to prior seat belt laws. The committee then received an informational update on five Transportation Cabinet administrative regulations, which were described as updates for federal compliance, signage standards, truck weight-limit renumbering, an OHV pilot program extension, and expanded electronic review of title applications; no substantive objections were raised. The meeting concluded with discussion of adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm going to use the term rent regulation as a broader umbrella.
• I'm going to use the term rent regulation as a broader umbrella.
• in measuring and assessing impacts of rent regulation.
• In L.A., tenants in regulated units paid 26 to 31 percent less.
• In L.A., tenants in regulated units paid 26 to 31 percent less.

Bills: H5008

Committee: Joint Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions

Keywords: rent control, housing stability, tenants rights, affordability crisis, consumer protection, 1212, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> do regulations pursuant to the statute. do regulations pursuant to the statute.
• Uh, they are still cur- promulgate the same regulations promulgate the same regulations essentially<00
• Uh, that being said, there is an existing regulation in place.
• Uh, that being said, there is an existing regulation in place.
• Uh, that being said, there is an existing regulation in place.

Committee: House Licensing, Occupations, & Administrative Regulations

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• She understands that financial regulators play an important role.
• So our financial regulators must be held to a very high standard.
• Finally, to promote accountability, regulators must be transparent, both in superintendents and regulators
• , and it intends to drive more tailored regulation.
• We've had increase in regulations.

Committee: Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee

Keywords: legislation, housing affordability, financial regulation, public testimony, accountability, oversight

Summary: The meeting involved significant discussions around key legislative proposals, primarily focusing on various bills such as HB2 and SB5. The committee examined the implications of these bills on issues like housing affordability and financial regulation. Notable members engaged in debates, providing differing perspectives on the potential economic impacts of the proposed bills. The meeting witnessed public testimony, which included a call for accountability in government actions and oversight of current financial policies. Members echoed concerns about following through on commitments to address critical issues affecting everyday Americans.

Transcript Highlights:

• I enjoy having clean water. And I enjoy having lights in my house.
• And I enjoy having lights in my water.
• That's less ground water that we put up.
• ,</c><01:32:56.239><c> new</c> new new power lines, new water, new new new power lines, new water, new
• </c> money to put uh new sewer and water money to put uh new sewer and water facilities<01:33:01.360>

Keywords: This meeting was split into two parts due to a technical issue. This is the complete meeting pulled from backups. Meeting Start: 00:00:00 Roll Call: 00:00:01 24RS HB198: “Angela’s Law”: 00:01:22 KRS Chapter 202C: 00:11:50 Eminent Domain: 00:54:35, 958, all

Summary: The committee first approved the June 10, 2025 minutes, then took up House Bill 198, Angela’s Law, sponsored by Representative Samara Heavrin. The bill would add a new aggravating circumstance in death-penalty cases when an offender abuses the corpse of a kidnapping or murder victim by engaging in deviate sexual intercourse, sexual intercourse, or sexual contact. Representative Heavrin and the victim’s parents described the underlying case and argued the current law does not adequately account for postmortem sexual abuse, leaving the offender parole-eligible despite the family’s view that the conduct warranted harsher punishment. Several members expressed sympathy and support, and one member suggested the proposal should be drafted carefully so it would apply broadly enough to cover co-conspirators or multiple offenders. No vote on the bill was taken in the portion provided. The committee then heard an informational presentation on KRS Chapter 202C from Judge Lisa Payne Jones and Shauna Mitchell of the Kentucky Judicial Commission on Mental Health. They explained that Chapter 202C, enacted in 2021 to close a gap in the civil-commitment statutes, applies to respondents found incompetent to stand trial who are charged with qualifying serious offenses such as capital offenses, certain Class A and Class B felonies causing death or serious injury, rape in the first degree, or sodomy in the first degree. The process begins with a Commonwealth’s petition, followed by a prompt evidentiary hearing, appointment of a guardian ad litem, and then a commitment hearing if the offense is proven. The presenters outlined the procedural standards and recent statutory changes. At the evidentiary hearing, the Commonwealth must prove the charged offense by a preponderance of the evidence before a judge, with the respondent able to present defenses; if the Commonwealth fails, the respondent must be released. If the case proceeds, the commitment hearing requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt of at least one involuntary-commitment criterion, and the hearing may be before a jury if requested. They noted that a 2024 amendment changed the commitment criteria from requiring all four factors to only one, and added language about recent criminal behavior and prior involuntary hospitalizations under Chapters 202A or 202B. If commitment is ordered, the respondent is placed in a designated forensic psychiatric facility, currently KCPC.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman, Kentucky administrative regulations contain more than 122,000 restrictions.
• Kentucky is the 23rd most regulated state in the country.
• Everyone feels the impacts of regulation on their daily lives.
• </c><00:13:06.320><c> Mr</c> uh Institute costly regulations Mr uh Institute costly regulations Mr chairman
• </c><00:14:16.839><c> would</c><00:14:17.079><c> be</c> about the regulations would be about the regulations

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:25 Attendance Roll Call: 00:31 HJR 15 (Rep. Baker): 01:15 HB 462 (Sen. Nemes for Rep. Dietz): 09:01 HB 6 (Rep. Williams): 10:18 HB 73 (Rep. Johnson): 15:21 Adjournment: 18:48, 958, all

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on State and Local Government first considered HJR 15, a resolution to return a Ten Commandments monument to the new state Capitol grounds. Representative Shane Baker described the monument’s history, its removal to storage in the 1980s, and a prior 2000 effort that was blocked by the courts. He argued recent Supreme Court decisions, including Van Orden and Kennedy, support a history-and-tradition approach and said the resolution would direct the Historic Properties Advisory Commission to retrieve and reinstall the monument in Monument Park. Senator Herron raised concerns about religious neutrality and whether other faiths would also be represented at the Capitol. Baker and Chair Petrie responded that the resolution was limited to restoring a specific historical monument and did not bar future proposals for other displays. Senator Armstrong voted no, saying the legal landscape remained uncertain and the state could face costly litigation. The committee approved HJR 15 on an 8-1 vote. The committee then took up House Bill 6, which would limit administrative agencies from issuing regulations with an economic impact of more than $500,000 over two years, with exceptions for imminent public health or safety threats, protection of federal or state funds, and compliance with certain court orders. Representative Wade Williams said the bill would rein in costly agency rulemaking and cited LRC data showing only about a dozen regulations in 2024 would have met the threshold, with roughly six after closer review. Senator Chambers Armstrong expressed concern that the bill could tie the government’s hands in emergencies, but the bill passed 8-1. Finally, the committee considered House Bill 73, which had a committee substitute. Representatives Johnson and Tipton explained that one part would add We Lead CS to the list of educational service providers allowed to administer their own retirement program participation, and the other would require the Teachers’ Retirement System actuary to provide additional information on each employer’s share of unfunded liability. The committee approved HB 73 unanimously, 10-0, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> that and they review all regulations that and they review all regulations that<00:30:47.559><c>
• regulations were no less stringent than regulations were no less stringent than the<00:52:12.040><c>
• </c><01:05:53.400><c> and</c> only go up in terms of regulations and only go up in terms of regulations
• </c><01:05:56.119><c> on</c> so localities are adding regulations on so localities are adding regulations
• </c> program which is uh you know we regulate program which is uh you know we regulate wetlands<01:42

Committee: Senate Executive Departments and Administration

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's not necessarily a regulation.
• It's not necessarily a regulation.
• the lender versus... ...you regulate the lender versus making a lot of requirements or regulations around
• In terms of regulating the lender versus regulating the user, I, from my perspective, I will always lean
• towards regulating the lender.

Summary: The Consumer Protection and Business Committee held a work session on buy now, pay later (BNPL) transactions, focusing on how the products work, how they are used in Washington, and whether existing state law adequately protects consumers. Department of Financial Institutions staff described BNPL as short-term, usually no-interest installment financing offered at checkout, often with automatic payments, late fees, and varying credit-reporting practices. Members asked how BNPL compares with payday lending and earned wage access, whether it is effectively a loan or credit product, and whether Washington law already covers it. DFI explained that some BNPL structures may fall into a legal gray area under the Retail Installment Sales of Goods and Services Act because pay-in-four products may not meet the statute’s “more than four installments” language, while other structures may be covered; they also noted the Attorney General can enforce the act. DFI and committee members discussed consumer risks such as overextension, automatic debits, and lack of standardized disclosures, and DFI said it would follow up with additional data on defaults and related issues. Molly Gallagher of the Poverty Action Network and Nadine Chabrier of the Center for Responsible Lending argued that BNPL can help consumers but also poses significant risks, especially for lower-income consumers and consumers of color who already carry debt or use other alternative financial products. They said BNPL use has grown rapidly, often involves multiple simultaneous loans across providers, and can lead to overdrafts, late fees, and difficulty tracking obligations because payments are spread across different schedules. They emphasized concerns about weak disclosures, limited dispute protections, automatic payment structures, credit reporting inconsistencies, consumer overextension, and data privacy/dark-pattern marketing. They also described federal retrenchment, including the CFPB’s withdrawal of an interpretive rule that would have treated BNPL like a digital credit card, and pointed to state responses in places like New York, California, and Maryland. Committee members signaled interest in possible Washington legislation and stronger state oversight. Retail and business witnesses offered a more favorable view of BNPL as a cash-flow and sales tool. A Washington Retail Association representative described BNPL as an evolution of layaway and credit-card-style installment purchasing, noting that merchants receive payment up front minus fees while consumers get goods or services immediately and repay over time. A representative from a business using deferred-payment financing said the tool helps customers obtain equipment and helps the business manage inventory and cash flow, while NFIB said small businesses also use BNPL to bridge expenses and avoid higher-interest credit card debt. Members asked about merchant fees, consumer education, and whether BNPL is being used for impulse purchases or essential expenses like rent, car repairs, medical care, and travel. The chair concluded by saying the committee intends to pursue regulatory language and continue working with stakeholders, while also hearing from retailers to avoid eliminating legitimate financing tools.

Transcript Highlights:

• And if it is, it will be regulated under these insurance product standards.
• And if it is, it will be regulated under these insurance product standards.
• And if it is, it will be regulated under these insurance product standards.
• And if it is, it will be regulated under these insurance product standards.
• </c> the regulations set forth in this bill. the regulations set forth in this bill.

Bills: HB300 , HB40 , SB19 , HB283 , HB179 , HB296 , HB300 , HB40 , SB19 , HB283 , HB179 , HB296

Committee: House Insurance

Keywords: HB300, Choctaw County, probate court, probate judge, recording fee, filing fee, deed tax, mortgage tax, deeds, mortgages, property records, recordation, county local act, local legislation, technology upgrades, digitalization of records, recordkeeping, county treasury, special fund, court administration

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm going to use the term rent regulation as a broader umbrella.
• I'm going to use the term rent regulation as a broader umbrella.
• in measuring and assessing impacts of rent regulation.
• In L.A., tenants in regulated units paid 26 to 31 percent less.
• In L.A., tenants in regulated units paid 26 to 31 percent less.

Bills: H5008

Committee: Joint Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions

Keywords: rent control, housing stability, tenants rights, affordability crisis, consumer protection

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-21, House Bill 508, an act to protect tenants by limiting rent increases. The chair explained the ballot process under Article 48 and outlined the hearing structure. The first witness, a Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies researcher, described Massachusetts’ worsening rental affordability, explained how rent regulation policies are typically designed, and reviewed research suggesting rent regulation can slow rent growth and improve tenant stability, while also noting concerns about reduced supply, quality, and implementation details. She compared the proposal to other state and local rent-stabilization laws and said the measure would cap increases at the lower of CPI or 5%, exempt certain housing types, and apply to new tenants as well as current tenants because it would not allow vacancy decontrol. Supporters of the petition argued that rent stabilization is needed to address displacement and immediate affordability pressures while broader housing production continues. The proponent from Homes for All Massachusetts said the policy is a grassroots response to corporate rent hikes and cited examples of tenants facing steep increases. A tenant from Arlington described a long dispute after a building was purchased by an investment firm and rents were raised sharply, saying the experience showed how rent increases can function as eviction. A union leader said high rents are forcing workers out of the communities they serve, and two experts testified that rent stabilization can reduce displacement and provide broad, immediate benefits. Committee members asked about the proposal’s exemptions, the 10-year new-construction carveout, vacancy decontrol, and whether the policy could discourage development; supporters said the bill targets large landlords, preserves room for small owners, and should be viewed as a complement to new housing production. Opponents, including small property owners, a chamber of commerce representative, a union official, and a landlord, argued the measure would hurt small landlords, reduce investment, and slow housing production. They said operating costs such as taxes, insurance, and maintenance rise faster than the proposed cap, and warned that capping rents would lower property values and tax revenues. Several opponents emphasized that many housing providers are not large corporations but local “mom-and-pop” owners, and one said the proposal would discourage pension funds and other investors from financing new projects. Committee members pressed opponents on what alternatives they would support for affordability, and opponents pointed to increased housing production and other housing policies instead of rent control. No vote or final action was taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Had licensing and regulation.
• People don't know what entity regulates these bodies.
• None of the regulatory authorities regulate these bodies.
• Because we’re already under regulation. What regulation?
• As far as rules, we would definitely have to mirror this in regulations.

Committee: House Health and Welfare

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 611 by Rep. Freeman, which would require pregnancy-related service centers that provide health care services to be licensed or, as amended, to clearly disclose that they are not a licensed medical facility regulated by the Louisiana Department of Health. Rep. Freeman and supporting witnesses argued the bill was prompted by a legislative auditor report and concerns that some centers provide ultrasounds, STI testing, pregnancy tests, and related services without clear medical oversight. The Louisiana State Board of Medical Examiners’ executive director testified that interpreting ultrasounds and performing certain tests can constitute the practice of medicine, while opponents argued the centers already operate under medical directors and that the disclosure requirement was unconstitutional under the NIFLA case. The committee adopted an amendment, but after debate on the amended bill, a motion to report favorably failed on a roll call vote, and the bill was voluntarily deferred. The committee then heard House Bill 902 by Rep. Marcelle, which directs the Louisiana Department of Health to develop trauma-informed training. Supporters said the bill grew out of a task force on student behavior, mental health, and discipline, and that educators need a more consistent, evidence-based trauma-informed curriculum than what is currently available online. Some members raised concerns about cost and whether the bill would mandate new school obligations, while a witness from the Louisiana Baptist Convention opposed the measure as mission creep and argued trauma-informed care is too specialized for general teacher training. Other members supported the bill as a way to help educators identify and respond to children facing trauma. The bill was amended with technical changes and then discussed further, but the transcript ends before a final vote on HB 902 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• . regulations. regulations.
• </c> similar or similarly regulated similar or similarly regulated businesses<00:21:15.440><c> rely</
• And I am well regulated greenhouse.
• Prohibition isn't a form of regulation. It's an abdication of regulation.
• If we're going to zero regulation.

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There is a follow-up bill coming that will regulate the hemp retailers.
• So we need to regulate. So I agree. It's how we regulate.
• So to the second concern, setting a threshold, we can do that by regulation.
• They don't want to go into that regulation. They also want age-gating.
• The responsible kratom community has been pushing for regulations for years.

Bills: HB305 , HB395 , HB341

Committee: Senate Health & Social Services

Keywords: hemp, marijuana, THC regulations, cannabis products, adult-use industry, public health, youth protection, child support, reunification, Department of Services for Children, family court, liability

Summary: The committee met in late June with Senators Hansen, Buckson, Siegfried, Townsend, and Huxable present, and first approved the meeting minutes by voice vote. The opening bill, HB 341, would limit DFS from filing child support in foster care cases unless doing so would not hinder reunification; Children’s Department staff said the department has already decided to stop filing in all such cases, with an estimated fiscal impact of about $140,000 annually. Public testimony from the League of Women Voters supported the bill as a compassionate measure to help families reunite. The committee then heard HB 446/related anaphylaxis legislation for colleges and universities, which would allow institutions to stock and use intranasal epinephrine alongside auto-injectors and update training and reporting requirements. The Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America supported the measure, emphasizing the need for needle-free options and faster treatment of anaphylaxis. The committee also took up HS1 for HB 356 on PFAS, which would ban firefighting foam containing PFAS beginning in 2028, require disclosure if PPE contains PFAS, and address recalls; DNREC and the fire service supported it, saying most departments have already transitioned away from PFAS foam. A major portion of the meeting focused on HB 305, a diabetes wellness pilot program that would use continuous glucose monitoring, app-based care coordination, lab testing, and DHIN data analysis to shift care toward prevention and remission. Sponsor Senator Siegfried described the bill as a response to Delaware’s high diabetes costs and prevalence, and the Medical Society of Delaware supported it as a proactive model. The committee also discussed HB 395, which would regulate intoxicating hemp-derived products and synthetic cannabinoids by classifying products over a THC threshold as marijuana and creating penalties for unlicensed sales; the Office of the Marijuana Commissioner supported the bill, while hemp industry representatives and Senator Hoffner warned it could harm legitimate hemp retailers and access to hemp products. The final item, HS1 for HB 332, would ban sales and marketing of kratom products to those under 21 and direct the state to study testing and regulation of kratom and synthetic variants. Supporters, including the Delaware Healthcare Association and several recovery advocates, said age-gating is a reasonable first step and that synthetic products are the main concern; opponents and some senators argued the bill should go further and fully ban kratom or better distinguish synthetic products from natural leaf kratom. No formal roll-call votes were taken on the substantive bills during the transcript, and the meeting adjourned after public comment.