Transcript Highlights:

• , robust state program in the country.
• So, for example, in the federal Superfund program and in California's own air toxics hotspots program
• And there are programs that I alluded to, like the Healthy Soils Program, like the Organic Transition
• Program.
• The people there are many farm workers.

Summary: The joint Assembly and Senate hearing examined whether California’s pesticide program is meeting its public-protection goals, with opening remarks from committee chairs emphasizing the state’s large pesticide use, the need to transition toward sustainable pest management, and ongoing oversight including a state audit of DPR and county agricultural commissioner enforcement. The hearing also referenced recent concerns in Ladera Ranch about childhood cancer cases and the need for transparent investigation and community access to information. Panel one focused on human health and the regulatory framework. Dr. Anna Maria Mora described long-running CHAMACOS research showing widespread pesticide exposure in farmworker families, links to neurodevelopmental, respiratory, liver, and cardiometabolic harms, and greater impacts on children facing social adversity. She urged biomonitoring, better linkage of exposure data to health outcomes, regulation of chemical classes and mixtures, stronger buffers around homes and schools, and more community-based research. Professor Tim Malloy explained California’s two-tier system of DPR registration and county permitting, said the state’s program is strong but falls short on cumulative exposure analysis and alternatives assessment, and argued that DPR and counties need better tools, training, and funding to implement legally required protections. Committee members asked about biomonitoring, class-based regulation, and how to make pesticide data more usable for the public. Panel two brought testimony from environmental justice and farmworker advocates, who argued that California remains behind other jurisdictions by allowing highly hazardous pesticides, including 1,3-dichloropropene and paraquat, and by relying on a funding structure tied to pesticide sales. Witnesses said DPR often moves too slowly on reevaluations, rarely assesses combined exposures, and does not adequately account for health, environmental, and social costs or conflicts of interest involving pest control advisors. They also described inconsistent county-level implementation, weak outreach, and confusion over whether DPR or county agricultural commissioners are responsible for enforcement, and urged faster phaseouts, tiered fees, stronger local protections, and clearer accountability. Panel three represented regulated entities and agricultural stakeholders, who supported the goals of safer pest management but stressed that California’s registration process must be more predictable, transparent, and timely. They said AB 2113’s staffing and timeline reforms were important, but backlog and delays still hinder access to newer, lower-risk products and can hurt both consumer and agricultural uses. Agricultural witnesses also emphasized the need to invest more in pest prevention, invasive species detection, extension support, farmer training, and practical incentives for sustainable pest management. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, with members pressing witnesses on timelines, implementation, funding, and the division of responsibility between DPR and county agencies.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's the farm workers. just the farmers. It's the farm workers.
• programs, milk distribution programs.
• Uh, and then an extra 1.2 million in funding to farm to school and early care programs as well.
• </c> programs and milk programs, milk programs and milk programs, milk distribution<00:22:38.159><c>
• programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, many groups testified in favor of this: egg groups, Minnesota milk producers, farm bureau, farm union
• <00:05:29.919><c> farm</c><00:05:30.240><c> bureau,</c><00:05:30.639><c> farm</c><00:05:30.960><c> union
• </c><00:05:31.759><c> and</c><00:05:32.080><c> uh</c> farm farm bureau, farm union and uh farm farm bureau
• </c><00:09:35.839><c> encouraging</c> launch a pilot program encouraging launch a pilot program encouraging
• Specifically, this legislation farm.

Transcript Highlights:

• is that it allows farmers to address needs that aren't matched by federal farm bill programs, such as
• NRCS's programs, for example.
• </c><01:04:36.720><c> They're</c> program? So they're independent. They're program?
• </c> farm grants. farm grants. &gt;&gt; Representative<01:05:02.880><c> Bunson.
• </c> asking about the budget for the program? asking about the budget for the program?

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 219, which would revise the renewable portfolio standard. Representative Bose explained that the bill would modify class one definitions, eliminate class two, reduce the utility obligation for class one thermal renewable energy certificates from 2.2% to 1.7%, and adjust alternative compliance payments for classes one, three, and four. He said the changes were intended to save ratepayers an estimated $5.7 million annually, would not materially harm the renewable portfolio standard, and would have little effect on class two because that market is already saturated. Members questioned the impact on consumers, the state budget, and the renewable energy fund; Bose said the fund had already been redirected in the state budget, and another member noted an amended fiscal note showing a $1.2 million reduction in general fund revenue. The committee also discussed the bill’s history, including that it had been added to HB 2 and later removed by the Senate, and Bose said the Senate’s eventual action was hard to predict. The committee then heard House Bill 164 on local records retention from Secretary of State David Scanlan. He said the long-standing local records manager position had never been funded, but that the need for it had grown as towns increasingly digitize records and must ensure accessibility, including ADA compliance. He described the bill as a way to provide state support and expertise to municipalities, especially smaller towns with limited resources, and said the fiscal note for hiring the position remained accurate, though broader website and storage costs could rise over time. Members asked about retrieving lost records, the cost of a public website, and whether records should remain local or be stored at the state level; Scanlan said the state would serve as a resource rather than take control of local records. Finally, the committee began work on House Bill 365, also with Secretary Scanlan, concerning proof of U.S. citizenship for indigent voters. He said the bill would help voters who may lack required documents under the new voter registration law by allowing the state to verify qualifications through federal, private, or other state databases and by providing vouchers to cover the cost of obtaining documents such as birth certificates. He compared the proposal to earlier voter ID accommodations and said the goal was to help qualified voters meet the new requirements without weakening them. Members raised questions about defining “indigent,” how out-of-state birth records would be handled, and the practicality of the verification process; Scanlan said the term would likely need further discussion and that the state would try to assist voters before election day whenever possible.

Transcript Highlights:

• That is the backbone program to support the Regional Farm to Food Bank.
• We stand in support of Senate Bill 108, a Regional Farm to Food Bank program.
• We are in support of the Farm to Food Bank program, and we would hope for your support, too.
• We stand in support of this bill because the Farm to Food Bank program provides necessary nutritional
• Farm to Food Bank program since its inception.

Bills: SB66 , SB79 , SB108

Committee: Senate Senate Conservation

Keywords: environment, cleanup, contamination, uranium mining, abandoned sites, state funding, mosquito control, public health, surveillance, prevention funds, local government grants, food security, agriculture, food bank, regional program, appropriation

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> been</c><00:02:26.800><c> critical</c> decades, this program has been critical decades, this program
• </c><00:02:50.480><c> that</c> with modifications to the program that with modifications to the program
• </c><00:03:07.680><c> from</c> annual appropriation to the program from annual appropriation to the program
• </c> expansion as an eligible use of program expansion as an eligible use of program dollars<00:03:46.080
• </c> Farm Bureau here to testify as well. Farm Bureau here to testify as well.

Committee: Senate Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• and kind of ongoing program, similar to the Clean Water Trust's other programs.
• We co-administer the SRF program with the trust.
• the DAR programs.
• in the viability and growth of her farm business.
• We have between us seven farm sites.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets

Summary: The Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets held a hearing on S. 2542, the Mass Ready Act, the Healey-Driscoll administration’s environmental bond bill. Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs Rebecca Tepper and Undersecretary Jen Sullivan described the bill as a $3 billion resilience package to protect drinking water, farms, fisheries, roads, bridges, parks, and communities from flooding, heat, drought, wildfires, and other climate impacts. They highlighted major authorizations for flood and coastal resilience, DCR infrastructure, drinking water and wastewater upgrades, PFAS remediation, open space and land protection, food security infrastructure, and a new Resilience Revolving Fund for low-cost loans to municipalities, tribes, and water districts. Committee members asked about project lifespans, flood and salt marsh permitting, wastewater and combined sewer overflow funding, parkway maintenance, land acquisition priorities, Quabbin stewardship, and how the revolving fund would be capitalized and administered. The administration said the fund would be modeled on the Clean Water Trust, use existing trust resources rather than new fees, and could later support special obligation bonds; they also said the bill would streamline certain permitting and improve flood-risk disclosure and climate-related building standards. Many witnesses urged the committee to strengthen the bill’s funding levels or add related policy provisions. Labor, contractor, and plumbing groups supported creating a water reuse and graywater recycling commission, saying it could conserve water, reduce stormwater and sewer burdens, and create skilled jobs. Boston Harbor Now asked for higher authorizations for the Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness program and resilient coast work, plus permitting reforms for nature-based and waterfront projects. The Massachusetts Rivers Alliance backed the bill but also urged inclusion of drought-management legislation, a water reuse commission, a statewide flood buyout program, and more support for community resiliency. Environmental justice advocates from Green Roots called for dedicated funding for outdoor and indoor air quality monitoring and indoor air quality improvements in schools and public housing, while conservation and tree advocates sought larger investments in urban forestry, local nurseries, and workforce training, along with clearer language to ensure municipal reforestation funds go to cities and towns. Agricultural and food system witnesses emphasized the importance of the bill’s food security and farmland provisions. The Southeastern Massachusetts Agricultural Partnership and the Mass Food System Collaborative supported the $125 million food security infrastructure grant program, saying it has funded critical facilities and equipment for farmers, fishers, processors, and food access organizations, but warned that without the bill there could be a funding gap in fiscal year 2027. They also supported farmland protection and asked for more funding for agricultural capital programs, used-equipment eligibility in grant programs, and a next-generation farmer fund. Water utility representatives said the bill still falls short of the state’s long-term drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater needs, citing EPA estimates of nearly $37 billion in needed investments over 20 years and urging dedicated recurring funding and broader eligibility for climate resilience grants. No votes were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because farm worker housing must be located, in the entire state.
• Currently, farm worker projects have a difficult time receiving even 10 points.
• of where farm workers live and work.
• AB 2205 simply brings this program back.
• A reparations program without tax exclusion is an incomplete program.

Committee: House Revenue and Taxation

Transcript Highlights:

• And then our program helps them as an incentive to get into that program.
• So we offer low-interest loan programs for a variety of farm activities, and you'll see a list there:
• So we offer low-interest loan programs for a variety of farm activities, and you'll see a list there:
• So we offer low-interest loan programs for a variety of farm activities, and you'll see a list there:
• </c> can potentially help those farms. can potentially help those farms.

Committee: House Agriculture Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• We have to save farms. And if deer farms go down, cattle farms are next.
• And if you've got cattle farms or pig farms or chicken farms or any kind of farms in your district, the
• And if you've got cattle farms or pig farms or chicken farms or any kind of farms in your district, the
• And if you've got cattle farms or pig farms or chicken farms or any kind of farms in your district, the
• And if you've got cattle farms or pig farms or chicken farms or any kind of farms in your district, the

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:32:40.960><c> Bureau</c><00:32:41.480><c> in</c> have Hawaii Farm Bureau in have Hawaii Farm
• > place from a dairy farm to a hog farm place from a dairy farm to a hog farm Brian<00:34:46.720><c>
• Most of our hog farms currently, our production commercial hog farms, are located here on Oahu.
• We don't know a certain farm; we haven't been told as far as a certain farm.
• Most of our hog farms currently, our production commercial hog farms, are located here on Oahu.

Committee: House Economic Development & Technology

Summary: The committee on Economic Development and Technology heard testimony on several measures, with most witnesses either supporting the bills or offering technical concerns and suggested amendments. On SB 338, testimony came from the Department of Taxation, Tax Foundation of Hawaii, and Surpac, and the bill later moved forward with amendments. On SB 558, testimony was largely in support from the Department of Agriculture, Ulupono Initiative, Local Food Coalition, Hawaii Food Industry Association, Hawaii Farm Bureau, and the Agribusiness Development Corporation, which described the measure as supporting rural jobs, food-system development, and use of off-grade agricultural products. ADC requested flexibility for neighbor-island siting and funding allocations, while the committee also discussed whether the bill’s language should be made more general and whether it could raise constitutional concerns about overly specific site designations. The bill was advanced with amendments and a noted appropriation allocation of $350,000. The committee also heard SB 186, which drew support from the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development, Department of Agriculture, Ulupono Initiative, Hawaii Food Industry Association, Hawaii Farm Bureau, Hawaii Public Health Institute, DED, ADC, AAHU RC&D, and the Hawaii Youth Food Council. Supporters said the measure would improve coordination among agencies on food systems, help address food security and the state’s 30% by 2030 farm-to-school goal, and create a more organized statewide food systems effort. SB 328 received support from the Department of Taxation and Hawaii Farm Bureau, with Farm Bureau describing it as a way to repurpose existing dairy infrastructure to revive hog production and support livestock and farm-to-school goals; the Tax Foundation of Hawaii opposed the measure as a potentially narrow industry incentive that could unfairly benefit a specific taxpayer and said a direct appropriation would be more transparent. SB 89 was described by Hawaii Farm Bureau as a labeling measure intended to protect the integrity of a culturally relevant local product, though the group raised concerns about wording and implementation timing. Later, SB 742 received support from the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations, the Office of Wellness and Resilience, the Executive Office on Early Learning, the University of Hawaii System, Hawaii KidsCAN, the Hawaii Workforce Funders Collaborative, and the State Commission on the Status of Women. Testifiers said the bill would improve cross-agency data sharing, support workforce and education planning, and create public-facing dashboards; the Commission on the Status of Women asked to be included in the working group or as an advisory member. In decision-making, the committee adopted amendments and advanced SB 338, SB 558, and SB 1186. For SB 1186, the chair’s recommendation added three positions, specified committee-note funding amounts for those positions and operating funds, and revised working-group membership to have co-chairs appoint five members with relevant experience and expertise.

Transcript Highlights:

• , which I think is really important, as well as farm worker labor and industries inspection programs.
• And now we'll turn to programming.
• And now we'll turn to programming.
• farm workers.
• So that's 2% of farm worker complaints were filed by farm workers.

Summary: The committee met on July 15, 2026, but began without a quorum, so it could not adopt the previous minutes. Chair Jerry Pollett welcomed new member Senator Victoria Hunt and introduced new JLARC staff. The committee then heard a preliminary JLARC performance audit of DCYF’s Juvenile Rehabilitation programs. Auditors said overcrowding, staffing shortages, weak training, unreliable risk assessments, and uneven program access combine to create unsafe conditions and limit rehabilitation. They reported that about 74% of youth are in two large secure facilities, incidents rise as population rises, 47% of frontline staff leave within a year, current assessments are not valid for the population, and program offerings are tied more to facility location than individual need. JLARC made eight recommendations, including one to the legislature to address crowding and seven to DCYF on retention, training, incident procedures, validated assessments, program alignment, individualized programming, and better data. DCYF Secretary Ross Hunter agreed overcrowding is a major problem, said the agency would respond in detail later, and noted the department needs legislative help on staffing, pay, education, and program funding. Senators and representatives asked about JR-25, training adequacy, assessment validation, contraband, education access, and possible retaliation concerns, and JLARC staff and DCYF answered that the issues are interrelated and that a fuller agency response would come later. The committee next heard JLARC’s preliminary audit of Labor and Industries’ enforcement of farm worker labor laws. JLARC concluded that L&I generally meets timelines for health and safety inspections but not for wage-and-hour or retaliation complaints, largely because complaint volume exceeds staff capacity and delays occur before assignment to investigators. Auditors said recent agency changes and 2026 legislation may help, including added staff, screening processes, workload reorganization, the ability to prioritize complaints, a later start date for the 60-day wage complaint clock, and authority to expand some investigations to similarly affected workers. JLARC recommended that L&I report back in December 2026 and December 2027 on backlog reduction and implementation of the new law. L&I’s deputy policy director said the agency appreciates the report, is hiring additional investigators, and expects the new laws to substantially change how wage complaints are handled. Members asked for clarification on what counts as a wage complaint, the share of farm worker complaints, and how the new authority will work. JLARC then provided an update on the Department of Health’s strategic management plan for hospital data reporting, inspections, and complaints. Staff summarized prior recommendations and noted that House Bill 2577 clarified hospital inspection timing. DOH officials described a detailed plan with measurable milestones for improving inspection compliance, verifying accreditation standards, expanding complaint forms into more languages, addressing language-access barriers, and seeking long-term funding for adverse event reporting and financial data reporting. DOH said acute care inspection compliance had risen from 28% to 61% and projected further increases through 2028, while also working on staffing, a new licensing system, and public reporting tools. Committee members praised the specificity of the plan but raised concerns about the long timeline for language access and whether hospitals should do more outreach as part of their community health assessments. After lunch, the committee began the 2026 tax preference performance reviews preliminary report. JLARC staff introduced the first three reviews, starting with the Main Street tax credit and program. Auditors said the preference appears to have met the legislature’s broad goal of increasing Main Street communities and businesses overall, though results vary by community. They reported that Main Street communities grew from 9 in 2005 to 40 in 2025, business counts in those communities rose overall, and donations and tax credits have remained high, with many local businesses donating to support their own downtowns. The committee then moved into the rest of the tax preference review presentation, with additional reports to follow later in the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• how farm is I know how it changed in the how farm is I know how it changed in the how farm is I know
• Is there a program set aside for when they're not program set aside for when they're not program set
• Tennessee Farm Bureau. Connie calling Tennessee Farm Bureau. Connie calling Tennessee Farm Bureau.
• Tennessee Farm Tennessee Farm Bureau Tennessee Farm Bureau Tennessee Farm Bureau will then administer
• with Farm Bureau, with the Tennessee Farm Bureau.

Bills: SB 1 , HB 500 , SB 1 , HB 1400 , HB 1094 , HB 365 , HB 1109 , HB 647 , HB 500

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, since 1969, I've lived on our family farm. It's a century family farm in Minnesota since 1902.
• Their emergency services are farm.
• </c> tax relief and transferring the farm tax relief and transferring the farm versus<00:14:06.880><c
• </c> farming legacy. farming legacy.
• </c> from my side trying to hold the farm from my side trying to hold the farm together<00:16:10.480>

Committee: Senate Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• that's really like a farm to food bank program—$4.6 million into the state of New Mexico—and our food
• Farm to Food Banks is a new program we really want to offer to you all in the coming months.
• We also have the Farm to Food Bank Program, where we could actually take our beef and pork and put it
• This was prior to the conservation districts and to NRCS and the Farm Bill programs, and this is up by
• This is unlike the other Farm Bill programs where each state just gets a piece.

Committee: House Federal Funding Stabilization Subcommittee

Transcript Highlights:

• So it shoved the price downward out on the farm.
• So it shoved the price downward out on the farm.
• And you're talking about this voluntary program.
• Like I tell us that that program is working. Yes, sir.
• He says, well, we better buy a farm then.

Committee: House Corrections and Public Institutions

Summary: The committee first took up executive action on Senate Bill 890. Members explained that the House committee substitute combined provisions from related bills, changed the title to accommodate an amendment, and restored language that had been unintentionally repealed in section 217.550. The amendment was adopted, the substitute was adopted, and the House Committee Substitute for SB 890 was voted do pass by a roll call of 11 ayes and 1 no. The committee then heard Senate Bill 945 from Senator Carla May, which would raise the civil filing surcharge in the city of St. Louis from $15 to up to $20 to support the law library and related court services. Senator May and a representative of the Law Library Association of St. Louis testified that the surcharge had not been raised since 1996, that costs had increased, and that the increase would help maintain legal research resources and public access. Questions focused on whether the amount was sufficient and what other funding sources existed; there was no opposition testimony. Finally, the committee heard House Concurrent Resolution 29, which urges Congress to restore mandatory country-of-origin labeling for beef and pork. The sponsor and supporters argued that consumers should know where meat comes from, that independent cattle producers are harmed by consolidation in the packing industry, and that voluntary labeling is inadequate. Opponents from the Missouri Farm Bureau, Missouri Chamber of Commerce, and Missouri Pork Association argued that mandatory labeling adds regulatory burden, is not supported by consumer purchasing data, and should remain voluntary. The hearing included extensive testimony from cattle producers and consumers, but no vote on HCR 29 was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, what is a farm?
• </c><00:07:48.160><c> I</c> farm? And then you look at the left. I farm?
• It’s a very small farm.
• So my farm, it’s only 305 acres, but every farm up the road from me are still original family farms.
• The next farm, large dairy. But dairy. The next farm, large dairy.

Bills: HF3718

Committee: House Agriculture Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• , federally defined as covered farm vehicles.
• from the owner's ranch or farm.
• Retrofitting these farm vehicles can be extremely costly for folks.
• Retrofitting these farm vehicles can be extremely costly for folks.
• They administer all of the department's air programs, so like the Gateway Vehicle Inspection Program,

Committee: House Agriculture, Food Production and Outdoor Resources

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 913 in executive session and voted it “do pass” by a roll call of 16 ayes and 3 noes. After that, the committee opened a public hearing on Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 1033, sponsored by Senator Jason Bean. The bill would exempt certain older farm vehicles used in local farming operations from emissions inspection requirements, and it would also ease permitting requirements for cotton gins by removing the need for air dispersion modeling in certain construction permit applications. The bill also incorporated language from Senate Bill 953 related to funding the air pollution control program. Supporters included the Missouri Cotton Producers, Missouri Farm Bureau, Infra, the Missouri Mining Association, the Missouri Concrete Association, the American Council of Engineering Companies, Missouri Forest Products, the Missouri Cattlemen’s Association, the Missouri Soybean Association, Associated Industries of Missouri, and the Missouri Corn Growers Association. Testimony emphasized reduced regulatory burdens, lower retrofit and permitting costs, improved competitiveness for Missouri cotton gins, and the need for a stable funding source for the air pollution control program. Several witnesses said the program was expected to become insolvent in fiscal year 2028 and that the bill’s funding mechanism would help sustain it. Committee questions focused on the scope of the cotton gin provisions, the number of farmers affected, and how the new funding stream would work. Department of Natural Resources staff testified informationally that the air program would become insolvent in FY 2028 and said they would follow up on details. No one testified in opposition, and the hearing on Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 1033 was concluded without further action.

Transcript Highlights:

• farm worker pay.
• If your intent is to help farm...
• If your intent is to help farm workers, and I believe my colleague from Sacramento wants to help farm
• I rise to present Assembly Bill 2660, which codifies the CalBridge program and the Enlace program.
• AB 2321 will create a pilot program in Alameda and Santa Clara counties. will create a pilot program

Summary: The Assembly convened, established a quorum, and proceeded through a large House of Origin floor file, with the Speaker repeatedly urging members to be at their desks and keep support bills brief. Early actions included dispensing with the journal, re-referring AB 2285 to the Banking and Finance Committee, and then taking up dozens of third-reading items, with many bills passed by voice or recorded vote and others passed temporarily or retained on file. The floor debated and passed a wide range of measures on land use, housing, labor, public safety, health care, utilities, taxation, and consumer protection. Among the bills approved were measures on land surveyor review (AB 1933), nurse midwife access for pregnant and postpartum patients (AB 1696), historic-district transit zoning flexibility (AB 2415), EV charging infrastructure fees and timelines (AB 1820), foreclosure bidding protections (AB 1957), tribal cannabis commerce (AB 2506), outdoor advertising permitting (AB 2024), commercial building permit timelines and third-party plan checkers (AB 2418), DUI penalties (AB 1685 and AB 1687), utility rate transparency (AB 1715), CalWORKs work-penalty changes (AB 1755), dynamic electricity rates (AB 1787), interior designer licensure (AB 1796), compost labeling and contamination rules (AB 1812), modular housing standardization (AB 1815), small claims limits for businesses (AB 1827), Native American Day as a paid state holiday (AB 1841), hospital staffing and maternity access bills (AB 1868 and AB 1882), protective orders tied to release dates (AB 1889), and a series of public health, missing persons, and teacher credentialing measures later in the file. Several high-profile bills drew extended debate. AB 2624, expanding Safe at Home privacy protections to immigrant service providers, prompted sharp disagreement over free speech and alleged limits on online posting, but supporters said it protected workers facing threats and doxing; it ultimately passed 49-19. AB 2023, creating a framework for regulating AI chatbots used by children, was framed as a child-safety measure after testimony about chatbot-related harms and suicide risks, and passed 58-8. Other notable votes included AB 2208 on Medi-Cal protections against federal cuts, AB 2299 on CalFresh/SNAP losses, AB 2115 apologizing to California Native peoples for historic state harms, and AB 2311 on public hospital physician employment; the transcript ends as the Assembly continues working through the remaining file.

Transcript Highlights:

• program.
• . shelves uh and the farm to food shelf shelves uh and the farm to food shelf program.<00:23:56.559><
• Uh that's what these small program.
• </c><00:37:39.359><c> organizations</c> the farm organizations the farm organizations uh<00:37:41.839
• </c> purchase because of the SFIA program. purchase because of the SFIA program.