Transcript Highlights:

• and census block groups, and census block groups into census blocks, and every one of those units of
• Thank you. subdivides tracts into census blocks and census blocks or census block groups and census block
• As to counties, tracts, block groups, and blocks, those are all nested within each other so that blocks
• make up block groups, block groups make up tracts, and tracts make up counties.
• groups and then to blocks.

Summary: The Select Committee on Congressional Redistricting held its first meeting, established a quorum, and opened with remarks from the chair outlining the committee’s purpose and scope. The chair said the committee will focus only on congressional redistricting, will not take public comment at this introductory meeting, and may consider whether to propose a new congressional map ahead of the 2026 session. He emphasized that the work would rely on the 2020 census data, the current congressional map, and the House’s map-drawing software, and he stressed transparency, record retention, and compliance with constitutional prohibitions on drawing districts to favor or disfavor a party or incumbent. House outside counsel Andy Bartos then gave an educational presentation on redistricting basics and legal standards. He distinguished reapportionment from redistricting, explained that Florida was apportioned 28 congressional seats after the 2020 census, and reviewed the one-person, one-vote rule, noting that congressional districts must be drawn with near-exact population equality. He also described census geography and how counties, tracts, block groups, and blocks are used to build districts, and explained that congressional redistricting follows the ordinary legislative process rather than the special process used for state legislative districts. Bartos also covered contiguity, explaining that districts must be one connected piece and that mere point-touching is not enough, while bodies of water within a district do not necessarily break contiguity. No questions were asked after the presentation, no votes were taken, and no public testimony was heard. The meeting ended after the chair thanked attendees and said the committee would meet again the following week.

Transcript Highlights:

• Supervisor James Gore, as we call him, there's block captains, and he was like the block chief.
• One of the key facts programs that we did as block captains is we developed a group rebuild program.
• Another key factor in the block captain program was these group rebuilds.
• In terms of the Block Captain program or community engagement efforts, you know, In terms of the Block
• We don't have block captains.

Summary: The hearing focused on lessons from the 2017 Tubbs Fire and how Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, and local partners have changed wildfire prevention, recovery, and rebuilding practices since then. Assemblymembers emphasized that the region has become a model for the state, with a shift from suppression to prevention, and panelists described improvements in defensible space, home hardening, vegetation management, alerting, and community coordination. The discussion also highlighted the continuing importance of sharing Sonoma County’s experience with other wildfire-impacted communities across California and beyond. Fire officials and local leaders described specific prevention measures now in place, including Santa Rosa’s vegetation management ordinance, ignition-free/Zone Zero requirements in rebuilding, restrictions on certain mulches, removal of dead and dying trees near roads and defensible space zones, and expanded prescribed burning authority. They also stressed the importance of community organization through block captains, Firewise/COPE-style networks, and the Mark West Area Community Fund. Speakers said these networks helped residents navigate recovery, avoid fraud and bad contractors, coordinate with local agencies, and support neighbors, but they argued that such efforts need more formal structure and stable funding. Water and permitting officials discussed how the fires changed their work. Santa Rosa Water described new regional coordination, generator and backup power upgrades, emergency training, and lessons learned about wildfire-related contamination in water systems, including the need to restore pressure, flush, and test quickly after a fire. Permit Sonoma said rebuilding was balanced by streamlining permits while still requiring safer, more resilient construction, and noted that reduced fees and one-stop permitting helped speed recovery. United Policyholders described helping residents maximize insurance proceeds, organize information, and avoid scams, while warning that insurance availability and affordability remain major barriers and that insurers are increasingly rewarding risk-reduction measures. Across the panels, the main policy requests were for faster and more flexible grant processes, more stable long-term funding for prevention and community programs, stronger support for home hardening and defensible space, better training and tools for local governments and legislative staff, and continued attention to insurance and utility-related resilience. No formal votes or actions were taken in the transcript excerpt; the hearing was informational and ended with a transition toward public comment and further discussion of remaining statewide wildfire policy needs.

Transcript Highlights:

• Supervisor James Gore, as we call him, there's block captains, and he was like the block chief.
• One of the key facts, programs that we did as block captain is we developed a group rebuild program.
• Another key factor in the block captain program was these group rebuilds.
• We don’t have block captains. So I’m the block captain for 140 homes on 12,000 acres.
• We don't have block captains. So I'm the block captain for 140 homes on 12,000 acres.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The hearing focused on lessons from the 2017 Tubbs Fire and how Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, and state partners have changed wildfire prevention, recovery, and rebuilding practices since then. Opening remarks emphasized that catastrophic wildfire is now a statewide issue, that California has shifted more toward prevention and resilience, and that Sonoma County’s recovery has become a model for other communities. Panelists included fire, water, permitting, community recovery, and insurance experts, who described how local experience has informed broader policy discussions. Santa Rosa fire and city officials described major changes in prevention and preparedness, including stronger public education, a vegetation management ordinance, an ignition-free/Zone Zero approach, and more detailed community wildfire protection planning. They said these efforts helped reduce damage in later fires, such as the Glass Fire, and noted ongoing challenges with prescribed burning, smoke management, grant delays, and maintaining vegetation treatments over time. Santa Rosa Water described improvements in regional coordination, backup power, generator redesign, and wildfire contamination response protocols after the city became the first utility to identify wildfire-related contamination in its water system. Community recovery leaders stressed the importance of block captain networks, neighborhood organization, and trusted local information in helping residents rebuild and avoid fraud. They argued for more formal support, training, and funding for block captain programs, as well as better long-term financing for local mitigation work and utility upgrades. Permit Sonoma officials said the county tried to balance speed and safety in rebuilding by streamlining permits, reducing fees, and helping residents rebuild to stronger standards, though they noted the loss of a major BRIC grant has slowed home-hardening outreach. Insurance advocate Amy Bach said wildfire risk reduction is increasingly influencing insurer behavior, with some companies offering discounts or more favorable treatment for Firewise communities and homes meeting wildfire-prepared standards. She urged continued funding for mitigation grants, better disclosure when insurers use aerial imagery to non-renew policies, and caution against removing wildfire coverage from standard homeowners policies. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken in the hearing; it was an informational discussion intended to gather testimony and policy recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Block Boundary Suggestion Project is an opportunity for every city or town to review their block
• This is how we would identify which blocks to research first. Here's our block ID.
• A lot of them were based on group quarters, you know, missed group quarters facilities.
• A lot of them were based on group quarters, you know, missed group quarters facilities.
• to have the block. ...you have to have the blocks before you can really do the comparison.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on the Census held a hearing on September 22, 2025 focused on preparations for the 2030 census, with an emphasis on Massachusetts’ role in building a complete address list and improving local participation in census-related address review programs. Chair Brownsberger and witnesses from the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s office, the UMass Donahue Institute, Watertown, and MassGIS described the importance of accurate address data for congressional apportionment, federal funding, and state and local planning. They also discussed the first major upcoming step, the Block Boundary Suggestion Project, and the later Local Update of Census Addresses (LUCA) process, both of which rely on municipalities reviewing and correcting census geography and address files. John Rosenberry of the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s office said outreach to cities and towns is beginning now, with a likely December start for the block boundary process based on the 2020 cycle. He stressed that local officials, clerks, building inspectors, housing authorities, and GIS staff should be engaged early, especially to capture new development and conversions created under the state’s housing policies. Susan Strait of UMass Donahue explained that LUCA allows local governments to compare their address lists with the Census Bureau’s master address file, and that Massachusetts had very high participation in 2020; she cited examples where local review added hidden or newly built housing units and noted that Boston later corrected a group-quarters undercount of about 6,000 students through a post-census review program. In response to questions, she clarified that those corrections affected annual estimates and funding formulas, but not the 2020 apportionment count. Watertown City Manager George Proakis described how local address review is complicated by accessory dwelling units, single-family to two-family conversions, and large multifamily projects, and urged continued state support for local governments doing this work. Dan Marrier of MassGIS then outlined the Massachusetts Master Address Database, explaining that it combines multiple sources, including E911, assessor, voter, and municipal data, to create a standardized residential address repository used for census preparation and other state functions. He said the database has helped improve census accuracy, including by updating more than one million Census Bureau address-point locations before 2020, and noted that local municipalities remain the final authority on addresses even as MassGIS standardizes and reconciles variants across the Commonwealth.

Transcript Highlights:

• Canani Espinoza with the Roe Law Group on behalf of Nevada Hand.
• Kanani Espinoza, with the Rood Law Group, here on behalf of Nevada Hand in support of Senate Bill 132
• Thank you, Chair and members of the committee, Canani Espinoza, with the Road Law Group here on behalf
• Health groups oppose this bill. The American Heart Association has spoken out against it.
• Health groups oppose this bill. The American Heart Association has spoken out against it.

Bills: AB568, SB90, SB133, SB147, SB229, SB233, SB240, SB245, SB280, SB378, SB393, SB417, SB434, SB494, SB495, AB62, SB104, SB119, SB132, SB193, SB262, SB422, SB431, SB435, SB468, SB503

Keywords: higher education, Nevada System of Higher Education, operational expenses, instructional expenses, public funding, education funding, teacher grants, classroom supplies, instructional support, specialized personnel, civics education, Nevada Center for Civic Engagement, funding, youth programs, civic involvement, Southern Nevada, Clark County, Las Vegas Valley, regional planning, economic resiliency

Transcript Highlights:

• I got two different groups. First group, the guests of Senator Gudger.
• uh different groups.
• First group, the uh different groups.
• back up with their block.
• block five.

Keywords: 920, all

Summary: The Alabama Senate convened with prayer, the pledge, and a quorum present, then quickly handled routine motions to excuse absent senators, dispense with the prior journal, and allow bills and committee reports throughout the day. The chamber first took up House amendments to Senate Bill 19 on insurance, including a changed start date and a bill name honoring David McHanie and Roy Johnson. On a long roll, the Senate concurred 22-0 with one abstention. Senator Singleton then used personal privilege to present a Black History observance highlighting Nat King Cole, Louis Armstrong, Benjamin O. Davis Sr., and Mahalia Jackson. Committee reports followed, with the Senate confirming Brandy Williams to the Alabama Fire College and Personnel Standards and Education Commission and Lynn Brewer to the Alabama Board of Heating, Air Conditioning, and Refrigeration Contractors. Senator Singleton spoke at length in support of the trades-related confirmation, emphasizing the importance of skilled labor, contractor oversight, and workforce training, while also discussing the need to support such professions and the role of boards in protecting consumers. The Senate also received favorable reports from Judiciary, Education Policy, Fiscal Responsibility and Economic Development, Tourism, and Local Legislation on a range of bills, many with amendments or substitutes, and placed them on the next day’s calendar. In motions and resolutions, Senator Elliott recommitted Senate Bill 310 to local legislation and introduced Senate Joint Resolution 50 honoring Coach Tim Carter, which was sent to rules. The Senate adopted Senate Joint Resolution 51 mourning Junior Harold Sorrells and several House resolutions from the Rules Committee, including recognitions for the Alabama State Games, Mack McCutcheon’s retirement, the Black pioneers of Macon County, Alicia Cannon, Joseph William Jones Jr., and Louis Vuitton the Pitbull Day. The chamber also recognized several school leaders in the gallery and then moved into local bills, beginning with Senate Bill 266, a proposed constitutional amendment regarding Covington County, for which a bill reading was requested using the previous roll.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do we know what this group... Thank you.
• Madam Chair, Representative Block, a lot there.
• Thank you, Representative Block. It is confusing.
• Madam Chair, Representative Block, yes.
• Representative Block.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• water<00:01:43.920> community a group select water community a group select water community
• and I think we'll take these in blocks and I think we'll take these in blocks but<00:02:45.920><
• consideration of that block. consideration of that block.
• agreements and amendments in one block? agreements and amendments in one block?
• consideration of that entire block. consideration of that entire block.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• James is going to talk to you about, you know, blocks... ...blocks and voting districts and really, you
• Reaching out to community groups, we worked in the past with MIRA and some of the other groups that we
• know are kind of umbrella groups that work with it, some of the social groups, boys and girls clubs,
• you can, and in a sense it might be easy to communicate with a group like that, then would be a group
• We were able to adjust the group quarters, the 7,000 people in the group quarters, but we still have

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held a hearing on census preparation, focusing first on testimony from U.S. Census Bureau staff James Whitehorn and Andrea Grace Johnson. They described the Bureau’s decade-long geographic and redistricting programs, including the Boundary and Annexation Survey, School District Review Program, Participant Statistical Area Program, and Local Update of Census Addresses (LUCA), along with the Block Boundary Suggestion Project and voting district collection. They emphasized that Massachusetts has been a strong partner in these efforts and explained how the Bureau is using updated street data, building footprints, machine learning, and change detection to improve address lists and track new housing. Whitehorn also reviewed the 2030 redistricting data program, the legal basis for it under PL 94-171, the role of state nonpartisan liaisons, and the expected timeline for data delivery. He noted that OMB’s revised race and ethnicity standards will merge those questions into one and add a Middle Eastern/North African category. Committee members asked about the new standards, state contacts, and how boundary updates are submitted, and the witnesses said they would provide the slide deck and contact information. Wendy Underhill and Helen Brewer of NCSL then testified about why census preparation matters for states, stressing its impact on data, federal funding, and political representation. They outlined optional steps states can take before 2030, including staying in touch with Census Bureau staff, identifying state and local personnel involved in census work, supporting local participation in Bureau programs, and creating complete count committees or commissions. They cited Massachusetts’s prior complete count committee and grantmaking efforts as an example and said such efforts can improve self-response and overall accuracy. They also noted that state legislatures can act as conveners and trusted messengers, and they discussed broader issues such as privacy protections, differential privacy, budget uncertainty, and the possibility of future litigation or a citizenship question. Secretary of State William Galvin then gave extended remarks on Massachusetts’s 2020 census experience and the need to prepare early for 2030. He said the state faced major challenges in 2020 from the pandemic, litigation, and rhetoric about citizenship, and that Massachusetts relied heavily on local records, university data, and community outreach to document residents, especially students and non-native-born populations. He argued that the state should strengthen local recordkeeping now through LUCA, annual resident lists, assessors’ and zoning records, and other local data sources, and he urged support for a proposed $500,000 appropriation for census-related grants and technical assistance. Galvin said better preparation is needed because housing patterns, population shifts, and local administrative capacity have changed since 2020, and he emphasized that the goal is to improve the completeness of the records the Census Bureau will use in 2030.

Transcript Highlights:

• group.
• It's blocks throughout the country.
• So if a PES enumerator goes and walks the block and finds additional units... ...in that block, that's
• They do add those units within their sampled blocks, which is the block sample that's fixed.
• Potential hard-to-count groups. And these groups are defined through research by the U.S.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on the Census met on December 8 at 9:32 a.m. to examine the dynamics that drive census undercounts and overcounts, with testimony first from Joseph Salvo and then from Susan Strait of the UMass Donahue Institute. Salvo explained the Census Bureau’s two main evaluation tools: demographic analysis, which uses vital records, migration estimates, and Medicare data to produce a national benchmark, and the post-enumeration survey (PES), which compares a separate sample-based count to the census. He said the 2020 census showed a small national net undercount, but larger age- and race-based disparities, including the highest undercount among children ages 0 to 4, higher undercounts for men, substantial undercounts for Black, Hispanic, and American Indian/Alaska Native populations, and overcounts among some older and college-age groups. He also described how self-response, non-response follow-up, administrative records, proxy responses, and imputation affected data quality, arguing that proxies and imputation were especially weak and that outreach remains critical for 2030. Committee members asked Salvo to clarify the methods and error bands, the role of international migration estimates, and how the PES differs from the census address list and LUCA. He explained that PES is based on a separate sample of blocks and can add units within sampled blocks, but it does not measure units missed entirely from the original address list; LUCA matters because it improves that list before enumeration. He also discussed age heaping, duplicate responses among older adults, and why group quarters and COVID-related disruptions complicated the 2020 count. Senator Driscoll briefly interrupted to describe Randolph’s successful appeal of its 2020 count after an undercount in disability care homes, and Salvo noted that the post-census group quarters review helped correct some missed facilities. Susan Strait then focused on Massachusetts-specific results. She said Massachusetts’ 2020 count was strong overall, with population growth above the national average and a PES-based finding that the state was overcounted by 2.24 percent, though she emphasized that this did not mean all areas were accurately counted. Using demographic analysis, she said Massachusetts had an estimated 4.15 percent undercount of children ages 0 to 4, with the largest county-level undercounts in Hampden, Suffolk, and Essex, and she linked higher child undercounts to lower educational attainment and female-headed households. Strait also reviewed operational metrics showing that Massachusetts had relatively strong internet self-response, but that non-response follow-up relied heavily on household interviews, administrative records, proxies, and imputation in different counties. She highlighted higher proxy use in college-heavy counties such as Hampshire and Suffolk, and said counties with more minority residents were more likely to have population-count-only cases and other indicators of harder-to-count populations. The hearing ended with discussion of how these findings could inform outreach and census planning for 2030.

Transcript Highlights:

• I've been facilitating in the New Mexico Geothermal Working Group.
• Representative Block, whenever you’re ready. Hello, everybody.
• Thank you, Representative Block.
• Thank you, Representative Block. That was more recent than I.
• And Representative Block, last year, this bill failed.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Continuing with the block, we come next to Senate Bill 673.
• Next up in the block, Senate Bill 815...
• Those three are out of the block. House Joint Resolution 210 is out of the block.
• House Joint Resolution 210 is out of the block. House Resolution 195 is out of the block.
• House Resolution 206 and 210 are out of the block. House Resolution 235 is out of the block.

Keywords: March 09, 2026 - Regular Session, 976, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 447 is by the day, therefore out of the block.
• This substitute adds two stakeholder groups to the maternal health work group created by HB 1353, so
• This substitute adds two stakeholder groups to the maternal health work group created by HB 1353, so
• The memorial resolutions be adopted in block.
• Therefore, the two bills remaining in the block.

Keywords: March 11, 2026 - Regular Session, 976, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• **Madam Chair** and **Senator Block**, thanks for that question.
• **Madam Chair** and **Senator Block**, so if your business is offering coverage in the small group market
• **Madam Chair** and **Senator Block**, so this is that trigger.
• I also understand though that **Senator Block** likes numbers and...
• That's actually a different view from **Senator Block** (member_14069).

Transcript Highlights:

• Block, no. Senator Charley, Senator Gallegos, no, ma'am.
• Are there any questions on the bill, Senator Block?
• I think, Senator Block, I think that's correct.
• Senator Block, thank you, Madam Chair.
• It's asking for a working group.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Block.
• Oh, Representative Block, an explanation.
• Representative Block and then Representative Lujan.
• Representative Block. Yes. Madam Vice Chair. Madam Chair.
• Members, Representative Block. Madam Chair, I move a do pass.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's 11.7 block grant since the 80s.
• five block grant. five block grant.
• maternal and child health title 5 block maternal and child health title 5 block grant. grant. grant
• We looked at peer state group.
• , advocates, families, provider groups, advocates, families, provider groups, case<00:16:04.079><

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and first heard brief presentations on Kentucky’s 2025 Preventive Health and Health Services Block Grant and Title V Maternal and Child Health Block Grant. Department for Public Health staff explained that the preventive health block grant provides about $2.3 million annually and supports programs such as accreditation and performance improvement, local health department grants, community health workers, prescription assistance, asthma and COPD programs, workforce development, and a sexual assault programs set-aside. They said the Title V block grant provides about $11.7 million, with 35% directed to children and youth with special health care needs and 65% to maternal and child health populations, largely through local health departments and a five-year needs assessment process. After no questions, a motion was made and seconded to approve both block grants. The roll call vote passed 19-0, and the two block grants were approved. The committee then approved the minutes from the prior meeting. The next item was a discussion of the child waiver created in House Bill 6. Committee members raised concerns that the proposed 1915(c) waiver did not match the legislature’s intent, which they said was to move children from the Michelle P. waiver to free slots for adults. Cabinet officials from DCBS, behavioral health, and Medicaid described the proposed “Community Health for Improved Lives and Development” waiver as a targeted home- and community-based program for children under 21 with severe behavioral health or developmental needs, including those stepping down from inpatient or residential care or at risk of out-of-home placement. They said the waiver is designed for about 100 slots, uses a standardized needs-based assessment, and includes case management, community living supports, home modifications, respite, supervised residential care, and clinical therapeutic services. Officials said the public comment period ended July 15, responses are being compiled for August submission to CMS, and the waiver is part of the broader Families First initiative.

Transcript Highlights:

• And Senator Scott, Block, and Hickey. So we have the J Block, Senator Jay Block.
• The caucus, the Block caucus. The advisory members will be senators.
• And Johnson As well as block our block. Chatfield, supposed to be a joke.
• Jay Block. Boon and pinto.
• We've got a work group to dwindle down their interim committees.

Transcript Highlights:

• OK, um, All right, so I see um Representative block, senator block. Um, who else over there?
• Uh, Madam Chair, Senator Block, we're not planning to drop anything.
• Uh, Madam Chair, Senator Block, no, it was a competitive.
• Gotta watch the block caucus.
• Um, Madam Chair and Senator Block, that's a great question.

Transcript Highlights:

• So Senator Block, and then I'll go to Representative Kate.
• And what are those groups you're dealing with?
• What is the group?
• Thank you, Senator Block.
• Madam Chair, Senator Block, the, the.