Transcript Highlights:

• When we refile that, I mean, that'll be part of the package, so if they open up the hearing, uh, I assume
• "Right, so the amended felony charge would not trigger a new hearing; only the new one does.
• "Right, so see, the amended felony charge would not trigger a new hearing; only the new one does.
• So in other words, you would want the hearing to have the—to relitigate the other one that has been,
• </c> remember during those ethics hearings remember during those ethics hearings part<00:25:42.919><c

Transcript Highlights:

• But we're, I hear the frustrations from people, and I experience it myself.
• Next up we'll hear from Kelly Olive, who is a parent. And after... And after Ms.
• Olive, we will hear from Yasmina Halim. Ms. Olive, you're recognized. Thank you.
• The newborn hearing screening program works the exact same way.
• I don't think you need to hear them again.

Summary: The subcommittee held its first meeting of the 2025-2026 term, took attendance, confirmed a quorum, and heard introductory remarks from members and staff. Chair Anderson outlined the subcommittee’s jurisdiction over access and affordability issues, including health facility regulation, insurance, Medicaid, CHIP, and state employee health coverage. The main agenda item was an update on implementation of HB 391, which created a family home health aide program for medically fragile children. Representative Tramont, the bill sponsor, explained that the law was intended to let trained family caregivers be paid through Medicaid to care for their children, reduce reliance on private duty nursing, and relieve families. He and several members expressed frustration that implementation had taken nearly two years and that families still faced barriers. Deputy Secretary Brian Meyer of AHCA and Bridget Royce of DCF said the program was implemented October 1, 2024, with billing available, but no home health agencies had yet launched the required 80-hour training program and no claims had been paid. They described the program’s requirements, including agency employment, background screening, training, a $25-per-hour Medicaid rate paid to the agency, and an annual assessment report. A major issue discussed was that income earned by family caregivers counts toward Medicaid eligibility and could cause families to lose coverage. AHCA and DCF outlined two possible fixes that would require CMS approval: disregarding the income for eligibility purposes or treating the child as a family of one. Members and public witnesses strongly urged changes to avoid forcing families to choose between income and coverage. Several providers said they had begun preparing training programs, but asked for clearer approval processes and more patient-specific training requirements. The committee then heard extensive public testimony from parents and caregivers of medically fragile children, who described the financial, emotional, and logistical strain of caring for children with severe disabilities and argued that the bill should be expanded to include Florida KidCare families and others in the coverage gap. They also raised concerns about the eight-hour-per-day limit, low pay, and the need for simpler rules and direct support. Home health providers and associations supported the concept but asked for modifications, including more targeted training and clearer implementation guidance. The meeting then shifted to a second agenda item on the Andrew John Anderson Rapid Whole Genome Sequencing Program, which was funded in the 2023 budget. Deputy Secretary Meyer said the program has been implemented since January 1, 2024, but utilization has been lower than expected, with only about 60 claims paid and many denials occurring through managed care. Public testimony from a lab, a hospital, and a pediatric rare disease expert said the program is clinically valuable and cost-saving, but managed care billing barriers, prior authorization issues, and DRG-related denials are limiting access; they urged direct billing to Medicaid and possible expansion to all newborns.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'd like to welcome you to the Permanent Commission on the Status of Persons with Disabilities hearing
• and Supports and Health Equity Subcommittee launched its first year with a powerful informational hearing
• I won't comment until we hear all of everybody's input, but very meaningful. Thank you for that.
• I won't comment until we hear all of everybody's input, but very meaningful. Thank you for that.
• We had called it a community hearing and resource fair in the work that we've done, and I have to tell

Summary: The Permanent Commission on the Status of Persons with Disabilities met virtually to review and gather feedback on its annual report covering July 2024 through June 2025. The chair summarized the report’s main themes: five public meetings on employment data, benefit cliffs, developmental services priorities, health care, civil rights, and workforce stability; active work by the Disability Employment, Workforce Support, and new Long-Term Services and Supports/Health Equity subcommittees; and the second annual National Disability Employment Awareness Month celebration with more than 300 participants. Commissioners praised the report and suggested improvements, including shortening it with an appendix, adding charts/graphs, including dates and raw data alongside percentages, and producing a more visual slide deck or presentation version after submission. Commissioners also discussed the need for clearer outcome-focused goals and strategic planning, especially given limited staff capacity. The chair responded that the annual report is a statutory requirement and that a separate strategic planning effort is underway through the executive board. She said the team would continue refining the report, incorporate feedback, and prepare both a text version and a more visual hard-copy version with photos and alternative text. The report was described as due to appointing authorities by October 30, and the commission planned to continue collaborating on presentation materials. Before adjourning, members briefly discussed the 2025 Paul Spooner Generational Leadership Summit, which was described as successful but still in need of funding for future years. The chair also previewed the commission’s first community event on November 4, a hybrid community listening session and resource fair, with about 170 registered participants and roughly 35 in-person organizations. The meeting ended with a motion and second to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• Please note that, in order to facilitate the goal of conducting a hearing, and as we proceed with witness
• ensure that everyone understands that we have rules to maintain order and run a fair and efficient hearing
• We're hearing a single item today. This is Senate Bill 73.
• Families are hearing federal calls to send immigration enforcement to polling places.
• Families are hearing federal calls to send immigration enforcement to polling places.

Summary: The Assembly Standing Committee on Public Safety heard one item, Senate Bill 73 by Senator Cervantes, and took up committee and Elections Committee amendments. The bill was described as strengthening protections against interference in elections by extending restrictions to military personnel at polling places, protecting the chain of custody of voted ballots, and limiting law enforcement access to voting machines and voter rosters without a court order. The chair explained that the committee amendments would remove certain criminal penalties for peace officers, restore a uniform requirement for some polling-place personnel, and clarify the effect of objections by the Secretary of State or Attorney General. The author and supporters, including API Force and CHIRLA, argued the bill was needed to respond to threats of intimidation and election interference, citing concerns about armed personnel at polling places and the Riverside County sheriff’s seizure of ballots. Supporters said the measure would protect voters, especially immigrant communities and in-person voters, and preserve confidence in election administration. Opposition from the California State Sheriffs’ Association and CALA argued the bill was vague, could hinder lawful criminal investigations, and improperly restrict law enforcement and federal election oversight. After closing remarks, the committee voted to pass SB 73 as amended to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. The vote was 6-1, with one member not voting. The chair and another member recommended an aye, while one member voted no.

Transcript Highlights:

• We now move out of executive session into open session, and we will hear House Bill 2512.
• Thank you, Chair and committee, for hearing my bill today. I'm Representative Tricia Burns.
• the things that's unprecedented, I'm trying to make it very clear to the legislature and anybody who hears
• Like, people who are, I mean, I used to have clients who would tell me they were hearing things in the
• Last year with mental health, I couldn’t get a hearing. It didn’t. Okay.

Committee: House Legislative Review

Summary: The committee met in executive session first and approved several measures. House Bill 2516 was voted do pass by a 6-yes, 1-present roll call. House Joint Resolution 171 was amended, rolled into a new House committee substitute, and then voted do pass by a 7-0 roll call. House Bill 3090 was also amended to remove three sections, rolled into a new House committee substitute, and then passed unanimously, 7-0. The committee then returned to open session to hear House Bill 2512, sponsored by Representative Tricia Burns. The bill would replace the current “imminent danger” standard with “predictable harm,” create a “qualified petitioner” process, and expand court involvement in ordering treatment, including long-acting antipsychotic injections for certain patients with severe mental illness. Burns argued the bill is meant to help families and police intervene earlier in cases involving schizophrenia, bipolar disorder with psychotic features, and similar conditions, and said current law leaves families with too few tools and too little communication from providers. Members asked about how the bill differs from current 96-hour psychiatric holds, how “predictable harm” would work in practice, and whether the proposal raises constitutional concerns. Burns said the bill is intended to allow earlier intervention based on documented patterns of behavior and to provide due process through the courts. In opposition, Lisa Pennett of Armour Vine raised concerns about court-ordered treatment against a patient’s will, unclear standards for incapacity, immunity provisions, funding penalties for noncompliant clinics, and criminal penalties for interference. The hearing on House Bill 2512 concluded without a vote, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Next, we'll take a staff report on 2223 and hear from Elena. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• Next, we'll hear a staff report on 2238. Elena, thank you. Thank you.
• Apparently we can still vote the bill, even though the public hearing was on the striker.
• Yeah, there's room 214 upstairs and hearing room 2 across the hall, and if folks can stay here, if they
• You guys will stay here, and we'll go to hearing room 2. Hang on a second. Thank you very much.

Bills: HB2104 , HB2223 , HB2348 , HB2554 , HB2619

Committee: Senate Agriculture & Natural Resources

Keywords: aviation, wildland fires, funding, disaster relief, emergency response, irrigation, district director, contracts, beneficial interests, agriculture, timber sales, land sales, process efficiency, legislation, department language, tribal rights, fishing rights, salmon management, state-tribal agreements, natural resources

Transcript Highlights:

• four, House Bill 2563, is the bill that relates to notices sent by the Office of Administrative Hearings
• As we started taking testimony from people in our rural areas, we keep hearing an hour-and-a-half drive
• And these are some of the things that we continue to hear.
• And these are some of the things that we continue to hear.
• And these are some of the things that we continue to hear.

Bills: HB2188 , HB2218 , HB2524 , HB2563

Committee: House Labor & Workplace Standards

Keywords: transparency, industrial insurance, insurance rate increases, financial disclosure, regulatory oversight, workers' compensation, medical care, healthcare access, employee rights, insurance coverage, security, regulation, employment standards, security guards, industry board, unemployment, electronic notices, compensation, digital communication, order processing

Transcript Highlights:

• House Appropriations Committee will come to order for the purpose of a public hearing.
• So that will conclude the public testimony and the public hearing on House Bill 2251.
• So that will conclude the public testimony and the public hearing on House Bill 2254.
• So that will conclude the public testimony and the public hearing on House Bill 2254.
• So that will conclude the public testimony and the public hearing on House Bill 2385.

Summary: The House Appropriations Committee held public hearings on three bills. House Bill 2251, sponsored by Rep. Fitzgibbon, would reorganize Climate Commitment Act revenue accounts by repealing several existing accounts and creating new operating and capital accounts, changing how auction proceeds are distributed when revenues are above or below a set threshold, broadening some tribal and overburdened-community spending language, adding electric vehicles and certain housing uses, capping Ecology administrative costs, and moving some reporting from annual to every two years. Supporters said the bill would simplify a confusing account structure and improve predictability, while opponents criticized the reduced reporting frequency and said it could weaken accountability. No vote was taken. House Bill 2254 would adjust the funding model for the Partnership Access Line and related behavioral health consultation programs by allowing the cost of the third-party administrator to be included in the carrier assessment rather than paid from general funds. Committee staff said this would produce general fund savings, and testimony from HCA, UW Medicine, Seattle Children’s, and others supported the bill as a technical fix that would stabilize the programs and potentially free up funds to restore service levels. No vote was taken. House Bill 2385 would extend deadlines and the expiration date for the Medicaid Access Program created last session, after federal HR1 restrictions prevented implementation of the original program and provider assessment. The bill would push out CMS submission deadlines, update the rate-setting reference year, and extend the act’s sunset date. The sponsor and the Washington State Medical Association supported the bill as necessary to preserve the option of pursuing the program later. The committee took no action and adjourned after the hearings.

Transcript Highlights:

• Register in advance using any of the iPad kiosks located just outside the hearing room.
• Again, we will be hearing the bills listed on today's agenda. The bill is HB1691.
• Hearing none, the bill is left pending. Thank you. The Chair lays out HB 5008 and recognizes...
• The action chair hears none and the bill is left pending.
• The Chair hears none. The bill is left pending. The Chair lays out HB 2652.

Bills: HB1654 , HB1691 , HB2545 , HB2652 , HB3799 , HB4144 , HB5008

Committee: House S/C on Workforce

Transcript Highlights:

• When we return, we will resume laying out bills and hearing from witnesses.
• and/or submit written testimony must register using the kiosk system outside the hearing room by 2 p.m
• As you noted, members are scattered this morning in different. hearings, and I'm in Business and Commerce
• Hearing none, public testimony is now closed. Let's process and try to get it back.
• Hearing none, public testimony is closed.

Bills: SB530 , SB757 , SB769 , SB1085 , SB1241 , SB1242 , SB1409 , SB1878 , SB2138 , SB2314 , SB2231 , SB2361 , SB2431 , SJR59

Committees: Senate Education , Senate Education K-16

Transcript Highlights:

• And so we want you to. to hear from them, because it's a completely different story.
• That act by itself is a discriminatory act, that we hear this whole thing about DEI.
• I want you to hear this. It doesn't matter what your political affiliation is.
• And today, February 27th, as the Senate prepares itself to hear in committee the expansion of ban...
• And I'm going to share it with my colleagues, because they need to hear this.

Keywords: education, curriculum, HB178, diverse history, equity, testimony, higher education crisis, representation

Summary: The meeting was characterized by impactful discussions focused primarily on education and the representation of diverse histories in Texas's curriculum. Notably, Representative Christina Morales advocated for HB178, a bill aimed at ensuring that all Texas high school students have access to Mexican-American and African-American studies as part of their graduation requirements, moving from elective-only status. This bill garnered support from both sides of the aisle, highlighting a cooperative effort to improve educational equity in Texas. Several representatives shared personal stories reflecting on the importance of inclusive education, showcasing the bill's far-reaching implications for students' sense of identity and history.

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you hear me? Is it working? There we go, we're going to go ahead and get started.
• We are going to have a public hearing on this, and we will be voting on this today because the initial
• party that actually called the public hearing—I think y'all have worked through the issues they potentially
• Yeah, I didn't know there was going to be a public hearing, so that's good to know.
• All right, and finally on the calendar, HB33, which was scheduled for a public hearing, we are carrying

Bills: HB37 , HB187 , HB177 , SB63 , HB82 , SB48 , HB33 , HB37 , HB33

Committee: House Ways and Means General Fund

Keywords: judicial compensation, salary increase, court system, Alabama legislation, judges, HB187, court fees, docket fee, sheriff's fund, sheriff's office, jail operations, law enforcement, county sheriff, court filing fees, Alabama Code 12-19-312, solicitor's fund, clerk's fund, forensic services trust fund, budget flexibility, public safety

Transcript Highlights:

• I've been hearing from stakeholders on the actual true costs.
• I'm glad to hear it.
• Currently, the Trump administration is not allowing bond hearings for people.
• I hear you.
• So if you train people for a bond hearing and then bond hearings are no longer a thing, and habeas is

Summary: The committee heard an extensive Department of Social Services presentation on child care budget issues, including the Governor’s proposed 2026-27 budget, federal CCDF changes, Prop. 64 revenue adjustments, and a one-time $11.5 million disaster-related infrastructure grant for licensed child care facilities affected by 2025 declared disasters. DSS said federal formula updates and lower Prop. 64 revenues would reduce funding and could result in about 4,176 CCTR slots being reduced, but the department said it was working to avoid impacts to currently enrolled children. The LAO supported aligning general child care funding with lower revenues and asked for more detail on the disaster grant. Members pressed DSS and Finance on why reductions were not being backfilled and why so many awarded slots remain uncontracted or unused; DSS said delays are largely due to providers building new infrastructure, licensing, staffing, and enrollment challenges, and that some unspent funds revert to the General Fund. The committee also discussed whether some contract dollars should be shifted to vouchers and whether more flexibility should be allowed for infrastructure and expansion costs. A second panel focused on the state’s commitment to expand child care and on rate reform. DSS reported that nearly 125,000 new slots have been awarded since 2021-22, but speakers from Stanislaus County Office of Education, Parent Voices California, and the California Budget and Policy Center argued that unmet need remains large and that the system still leaves many families without access. Stanislaus County described a large local shortage of infant and toddler care and said reimbursement disparities between child care programs and state preschool create disincentives for providers. Parent Voices gave testimony about the burdens and instability families face when trying to access care, especially for survivors and low-income parents, and called for a universal, publicly funded system. The Budget Center said only about 16% of eligible children were enrolled in 2024, urged expansion across the mixed delivery system rather than concentrating investment in TK, and called for faster rate reform and new revenue. LAO estimated that bringing certain CCTR adjustment factors up to CSPP levels would cost $88 million to $131 million ongoing. Members and witnesses discussed the single rate structure, automation needs, and the need for deadlines and a ramp-up plan; DSS said the goal is to eliminate disparities, but that policy decisions are still needed before automation can proceed. The committee then reviewed several trailer bill proposals. DSS outlined a 2026-27 COLA proposal that would apply a 2.41% increase through cost-of-care-plus payments, though the department said it had inadvertently excluded CalWORKs Child Care and the Emergency Child Care Bridge Program and would revise the proposal; LAO recommended making the COLA methodology uniform across programs. DSS also proposed replacing the market rate survey with the federally approved alternative methodology on a triennial schedule, limiting temporary absences in family child care homes to 20% of monthly hours, defining excessive unexplained absences as more than 30 days in a year, and aligning family fee deductions with new federal requirements so providers receive the full voucher value. Members generally supported the temporary absence change and asked about implementation timing for the family fee deduction, with DSS saying it was in contact with Riverside County. The committee also heard a brief update on the Early Childhood Policy Council reappropriation, which would extend unused funds through June 30, 2028 because prior costs came in higher than expected.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are going to first um hear morning.
• We got three chairs there. everybody can hear. everybody can hear.
• We can't hear you. Can you turn your mic on? We can't hear you. Maybe he can't hear us.
• [clears throat] Nick, can you hear us? Because we cannot hear you.
• They report to the electors of their county. he hears this case and now he's part of he hears this case

Bills: SF0069 , SF0070 , SF0016 , HB0078 , HJ0002 , HB0085 , HB0086

Committee: House Agriculture, State and Public Lands & Water Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> much appreciate his help at the hearing much appreciate his help at the hearing for<00:03:04.400
• Happy to hear that.
• Do I hear a motion for 179?
• We have a hearing.
• Do I hear a second?

Summary: The Solid Waste Subcommittee met to discuss proposed amendments to HB 171 and HB 215. For HB 171, Representative Gerna outlined technical changes to a landfill moratorium bill: DES would be allowed to accept applications only to review them for completeness, a notwithstanding clause would override automatic approval timing rules, the word “fully” would be removed, and an unnecessary reference to perennial water bodies would be deleted. Members raised concern about whether applications deemed complete during the moratorium would still have to comply with later changes in law or rule. Director Mike Whap of DES said applicants would likely need to amend applications if policy changes occurred, and suggested the bill could explicitly state that later changes apply to pending applications. The subcommittee generally supported the revised language and agreed the amended bill could go directly to executive session, though one member said the underlying legislation was ill-advised but preferred the amended version over the original. The committee then turned to HB 215, which would create a two-stage landfill siting review centered on a “net public benefit” determination before full technical review. Representative Gerna explained that the amendment would define net public benefit, require an independent third-party assessment paid for by the applicant, and set up a process for selecting the contractor from a list submitted by the applicant, with DES and the host community involved and the commissioner choosing if no agreement is reached within 60 days. Members asked how “host community” would be defined; DES said it would generally mean the municipal governing body, though that body could appoint others. The amendment also broadened the factors considered in both harms and benefits, including human health, property values, tourism, recreation, wildlife, local economic benefits, and infrastructure improvements. The discussion also added a provision directing DES to consult with the Department of Transportation, the Department of Business and Economic Affairs, and the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources as needed when reviewing the third-party assessment. Director Whap said interdepartmental consultation is normal and that DES would likely adopt rules to guide the process. Members questioned whether the new framework would be too vague or burdensome for applicants, but Whap said it would not be designed to stack the deck against applicants and that the process should provide clearer, more balanced criteria. No votes were taken during the meeting, and the subcommittee appeared to continue refining the amendment language before further action.

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, if you can hear me, clap once. If you can hear me, clap twice.
• I think hearing each other and really hearing<03:19:50.280><c> each</c><03:19:50.480><c> other's</c><
• ><04:30:18.720><c> people</c> And so when I hear people And so when I hear people say<04:30:21.000><c
• We hear the words slippery slope often. We hear the words slippery slope often.
• </c><05:33:40.840><c> I</c> And so, yeah, I hear the stories. I And so, yeah, I hear the stories.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, Senator Scott. >> I hear that.
• >> I hear that.
• And I think that's why we hear<01:02:04.400><c> a</c><01:02:04.440><c> lot</c> hear a lot hear a lot
• Good to hear.
• Good to<02:03:52.000><c> hear.</c> to hear. to hear.

Committee: Joint Education

Transcript Highlights:

• Let's hear what the Department of Energy has to say first, then we'll hear from the PUC.
• </c><01:02:06.680><c> is</c> a rehearing now if the re-hearing is a rehearing now if the re-hearing is
• </c> the Pu or when we're in these hearings the Pu or when we're in these hearings to<01:41:09.440><c
• Hearing no objections, so be it.
• Hearing no objection, so ordered.

Committee: House Science, Technology and Energy

Transcript Highlights:

• Seeing and hearing no further debate... Thank you, Assembly Member Carrillo.
• We will also hear from our Paiute relatives, Eastern Paiute people, and all of our...
• Seeing and hearing no further debate. Thank you. Assembly Member Pacheco.
• Seeing and hearing none, the clerk will read the second day consent calendar.
• Seeing and hearing no further business, I am ready to entertain a motion to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to test my hearing.
• Let's hear from Peggy next. Peggy needs on me, so Peggy, we can't hear you yet.
• And next, let's hear from Peggy.
• I hear you. Thank you. James.
• I'm hearing that also needs to be generalized to nuclear broadly.

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