Transcript Highlights:

• This requires ambulance services to pay this—I'm sorry, requires insurance companies to pay the ambulance
• So this requires ambulance services to pay this, I'm sorry, requires insurance companies to pay the ambulance
• But then I relapsed and ended up back in the hospital.
• Why don't you try going back to physical therapy?'
• She is now 11 years old and is starting to come back to us.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Financial Services held a lengthy public hearing with more than 70 people signed up to testify, focusing mainly on health insurance and health care access bills. Early testimony centered on H.1257/S.712, which would require insurance coverage for medically necessary treatment of genetic craniofacial conditions. Supporters included legislators, dentists, and medical experts who said these conditions are not cosmetic, can severely affect eating, speech, pain, and social functioning, and often create major financial hardship because insurers deny coverage. A related dental bill, H.1262/S.676, drew technical testimony from the Life Insurance Association of Massachusetts about implementation issues with the 2022 dental loss-ratio law, while the Massachusetts Dental Society supported H.1306/S.696 on transparency in dental network leasing and opposed H.1262. Representative Gentile also testified for H.4013, which would ban for-profit acute care hospitals and for-profit health insurers in Massachusetts, arguing that profit incentives undermine patient care. A major portion of the hearing was devoted to H.1261/S.799, a bill to protect patients from surprise ambulance bills. Municipal fire chiefs, Boston EMS, nonprofit ambulance providers, and the bill’s Senate sponsor said the measure would require insurers to pay ambulance providers directly and promptly, cap patient out-of-pocket costs, and reduce confusion caused by out-of-network billing. Witnesses described ambulance services as essential public health infrastructure and said current billing practices can discourage people from calling 911 or leave municipalities and nonprofits unable to recover costs. Committee members asked about unpaid debt, municipal billing burdens, and how the bill would affect rates and reimbursement. No votes were taken during the hearing. The committee also heard extensive testimony on H.1249/S.805, which would require screening for PANS/PANDAS in medical and clinical settings. Legislators, clinicians, parents, a teen with the condition, and educators described PANS/PANDAS as an infection-triggered inflammatory illness that can present as sudden psychiatric symptoms and is often misdiagnosed as a mental health disorder. Supporters said routine screening at well visits, emergency rooms, and other clinical settings would help identify children earlier, reduce unnecessary psychiatric treatment and hospitalizations, and improve outcomes. Testifiers repeatedly urged favorable action, emphasizing the personal and financial toll on families and the potential for early treatment to prevent long-term harm. The hearing concluded with continued testimony on these bills; no committee action or votes were announced.

Transcript Highlights:

• to get his trash emptied, I'm paying 10, and you're paying 15.
• He's paying 5 to get his trash emptied, I'm paying 10, and you're paying 15. And why is that?
• What happens when the first person pays $1.50? The second person pays $1.75. Bye.
• The first person pays $1.50. The second person pays $1.75.
• You're back. You're back. I am. So if I could have that opportunity. Please feel free.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Housing held a hearing on a wide range of housing bills focused on manufactured housing, condominiums, public housing, tiny homes, and protections for elderly and disabled residents. Chairs Haggerty and Cyr opened by emphasizing the importance of these housing types and the need to hear from many speakers. Testimony on manufactured housing was especially extensive and sharply divided. Supporters of bills such as H. 1475, S. 990, and H. 1513 argued that out-of-state corporate owners are buying communities, raising rents and fees, reducing services, and exploiting legal gray areas. Residents and lawmakers from affected communities like Taunton, Middleborough, Attleboro, and Oak Point described steep rent disparities, fear of displacement, and the need for stronger protections, while Representative Hawkins urged an omnibus approach and said the bill would create a local board to ensure compliance with existing law. Opponents, including the Massachusetts Manufactured Housing Association and Hometown America’s counsel, argued that current law already provides protections, that the bills would create uncertainty or unfairly restrict owners, and that H. 1475 was intended to clarify the post-Blake legal landscape. The committee also heard testimony on condominium reform through S. 980, with owners describing lack of transparency, surprise assessments, and limited accountability, and urging updates to Chapter 183A and more owner rights. Public housing bills also drew support from housing authority advocates. MassNAHRO backed S. 955, H. 1517, H. 1512, H. 1550, and H. 1551, saying housing authorities need more flexibility to preserve and expand affordable housing. Witnesses supported tax relief for replacement public housing units and streamlined procurement rules, arguing these changes would help projects move faster and make better use of capital funds. Committee members asked questions about PILOT agreements, tax treatment of new developments, and whether state and federal public housing would be treated similarly. The committee also heard from Senator Lovely and advocates for S. 1007/H. 1525, which would prevent and respond to bullying of elderly and disabled residents in housing. Supporters described the bills as a long-needed response to harassment in senior and public housing, calling for building-level plans, staff training, and AG oversight; Jerry Halberstadt said the measure should be strengthened with enforcement and tenant advocacy support. Pamela and other witnesses described severe personal impacts from bullying and management retaliation. Another major topic was S. 1474/H. 1474 on movable tiny houses as permanent dwellings and accessory dwelling units. Supporters, including Representative DeCoste, Vera Struck, Kaylee DeCrease, and Abundant Housing Massachusetts, said tiny homes are a safe, affordable, sustainable option for seniors, workers, and others facing the housing shortage, and urged the committee to legalize them and align state rules with emerging standards. They also discussed tax classification and the need for a clear building code and DMV category. Finally, H. 1476 on pet-friendly elderly housing drew support from animal welfare groups, who said the bill would restore and modernize a prior pet program, expand access across state-aided housing, limit pet deposits, and reduce pet surrender caused by housing barriers. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee primarily received testimony and questions on the bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• We had a bill back then.
• We had a bill back then.
• then we'll hear from the mayor or back then we'll hear from the mayor or back to to to yourself<
• <00:09:00.240> 2025 left um column you'll see pay 2025 left um column you'll see pay 2025
• taxes on Homestead repayment of back taxes on Homestead Property<00:31:21.440> paying<00:31:21.720

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• think I mean it's ridiculous to pay think I mean it's ridiculous to pay somebody<00:10:09.600>
• So they're giving one back.
• So they're giving one back.
• We want to put them back, right.
• okay I I'll get back I'll get back to okay I I'll get back I'll get back to you<06:04:50.558>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up a House Bill 2 amendment to remove a bail-related section that had already passed in another bill and was now considered duplicative. Members discussed the earlier change to how bail commissioners are reimbursed, concerns that the Judiciary was losing money collecting the fees, and whether the magistrate-related language would still be needed. They noted the bill had already crossed over to the Senate, that the section was obsolete, and that any remaining issue about magistrates’ five-year terms might need to be raised with the Criminal Justice Committee. Amendment 997H, deleting section one, was moved, seconded, and adopted unanimously. The committee then reviewed a package of HB 1 position transfers involving the Department of Environmental Services, Fish and Game, and the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources. Staff explained that several positions were being shuffled to correct position numbers and align permitting functions, including one Fish and Game position moving back to Fish and Game, one DEES position remaining funded after ARPA money ends, and adjustments to hours for permitting and environmental services positions. Members discussed whether the Fish and Game position had been intended to be temporary, but ultimately agreed to accept the first four Environmental Services items and the last two Natural and Cultural Resources items as a package; that motion passed unanimously. They then also accepted sections 2 through 8 of HB 1 with the related amendments and footnote language. The committee next turned to dredge-and-fill fee changes in section 11, where one member objected to a 50% fee increase for seasonal docks, arguing it could discourage permitted work and might apply to repairs that only require notification. Staff said the increase was intended to help cover the cost of additional positions in future biennia, but members decided to hold that section for more information, including how many seasonal dock repair fees are actually collected. Finally, the committee began discussing HB 215 and a proposed tipping-fee/surcharge structure to make a solid waste accounting unit self-funded, with members saying the fee could offset about $2.9 million in general fund costs and support the grant program, but no final action was taken on that item in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• I couldn't pay for a decent car. I couldn't do anything on retirement.
• And so I had to come back to work. I came back to work at twice. What I went away at twice.
• I'm still paying retirement because I'm working full time.
• Go back. I believe it's an, uh, Mr.
• pay up to 40% of their premium.

Transcript Highlights:

• We can't raise their pay because of recapture and our deficit budget.
• raise be added back into this bill.
• But we need to bring that allotment back, if we can, please.
• We can provide a dedicated teacher pay raise, but maybe do...
• Pay raises.

Bills: HB2

Keywords: public education, teacher compensation, certification, funding, school finance, educator rights, education funding, charter schools, staff compensation, state aid, retention allotment, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you members for getting back with us.
• Should we pay for credentialing?
• Part of it is pay.
• I think he said average teacher pay.
• Many districts pay more than that, many districts still pay. at that minimum. And it just depends.

Keywords: infrastructure, water supply, flood mitigation, Texas Water Fund, community projects, funding allocations

Summary: During this committee meeting, the focus was on discussing critical infrastructure funding, especially related to water supply and flood mitigation projects. Chairwoman Stepney and the Water Development Board presented extensive details regarding the Texas Water Fund, which included $1 billion appropriated to assist various financial programs and tackle pressing water and wastewater issues. Additionally, funding allocations aimed at compromising the state's flood risk and improving water conservation were hotly debated, emphasizing collaboration among committee members and the necessity of addressing community needs in such projects.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because when you pay lots of money for it, invest lots of money into it to fix it back up to where it
• How was he supposed to pay the $1,500 back to the towing yard at $12 an hour while he was trying to raise
• How was he supposed to pay the $1,500 back to the towing yard at $12 an hour while he was trying to raise
• How was he supposed to pay the $1,500 back to the towing yard at $12 an hour while he was trying to raise
• Well, you know, I used to be a public defender, and some people would rather pay off their fine by, back

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Transportation Committee opened with an announcement correcting the public hearing list: House Bill 209 was mistakenly listed as a continued hearing, but the chair said that hearing had already been closed and would not be reopened. The committee then moved to House Bill 305, which would allow municipalities to install and use speed and red-light cameras for traffic enforcement. The prime sponsor, Rep. Jones, said the bill was intended as a tool to address police staffing shortages and erratic driving, and emphasized that municipalities would pay the costs, work with DOT and the Department of Safety, and retain full control without using third-party vendors. He said the bill was meant to target speeding, red-light violations, and similar conduct, with enforcement handled locally and subject to state and federal law. Committee members raised questions about how citations would work, who would be held responsible in multi-driver or rental-car situations, whether due process would be affected, and whether cameras could identify the driver rather than just the vehicle. The sponsor and supporting witness Edward H. of Keene said municipalities would determine procedures, that an officer would still have to review and issue any summons, and that the bill was meant to be a limited enforcement tool rather than a catch-all. Edward H. also described the bill as adding guardrails such as a needs analysis, coordination with DOT, annual reporting, and public records of detections and fines. The Department of Transportation testified neutrally, saying it had no position on the bill and noting that current state systems include speed feedback signs, bridge security cameras, toll cameras that capture plates only, and traffic-signal detection cameras that do not record video. No vote was taken. The committee then held a brief hearing on House Bill 368, which would prohibit smoking tobacco products or e-cigarettes in a motor vehicle when a child under 16 is present and impose a $100 secondary fine. Rep. Miller introduced the bill in the sponsor’s absence, and there was no public testimony for or against it. The chair closed the hearing. Finally, the committee opened House Bill 390, which would add retired fire apparatus to the antique vehicle exemption so old fire trucks can be registered and used in parades without being stripped of their equipment. Rep. Parson explained that a strict reading of current law had led DMV to reject some antique fire engine registrations, and said the bill would fix that while preserving the ban on commercial use and on impersonating emergency vehicles. Members asked about the relationship to existing laws on emergency-vehicle impersonation, and the sponsor said the bill would not affect those laws. The hearing remained open as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• All right, everybody, we are back at it. Show the bill rolled over We are back at it.
• Who pays the bills when the money runs out? Because someone always pays the bill.
• I've kind of gone back and forth. I've listened at the debate and... Back and forth.
• Welcome back, former colleague. Senator Joe Bruzzo is here. Welcome back, Senator Brousso.
• Remember this, too: kindness never comes back empty. Never comes back empty.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, we'll finish up 737 first and then go back.
• <00:37:35.920> to 737 okay seeing none we'll go back to 737 okay seeing none we'll go back
• > feet<00:45:43.800> meeting able to get back on their feet meeting able to get back on
• <00:46:45.839> to their purpose time can we go back to their purpose time can we go back to
• pay they they<00:47:31.559> do<00:47:31.760> pay<00:47:31.960> taxes<00:47:32.920

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So to start, we'll go way back to 1963.
• Again, if you're making the member pay more out of pocket on the back end for using the service, that
• If plan design does not change on the back end, if we don't touch deductibles, co-pays, that is the increase
• And as you can see in this, back in 2022, when we did it, the top concern was more competitive pay.
• To pay for the increase, the member would pay an increased contribution amount.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And, uh, the pay, the pay increase you referenced, I think I heard 10%.
• , then the industry pays us and it goes back in for appropriated receipts to keep that cycle going if
• They want to go back to work, there's, you know, they, they can't pay their bills because they're not
• Back into balance so that the GR agencies are actually paying the same amount per hour of service, uh
• Uh, number one, our pay, what we're able to pay in the, in the, in the public sector.

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, okay, we'll Okay, we'll move on and come back.
• So based on his income, he has to pay the deductible.
• So while there's a match coming back, while there's money coming back, if I were a town, I would argue
• So while there's a match coming back, while there's money coming back, if I were a town, I would argue
• it come back to the school system or to the city or town budget?

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Health Care Financing held a public hearing focused on two broad sets of issues: home- and community-based care, and school-based Medicaid reimbursement. In the morning session, legislators and advocates testified on bills affecting children and disabled enrollees, including proposals to clarify rate-setting for home health and home care services (H. 767/S. 870), allow family members and spouses to be paid caregivers under MassHealth (H. 1394/S. 886 and related bills), extend MassHealth coverage for applied behavior analysis and other therapies beyond age 21 for adults with autism and developmental disabilities (H. 1351/S. 871), and protect medically fragile children by improving access to continuous skilled nursing. In the later portion of the hearing, testimony shifted to a bill to improve MassHealth reimbursement for schools (S. 862), with speakers describing the school mental health crisis and the need to reinvest Medicaid funds directly into school health services. Witnesses on the home care rate-setting bill said current reimbursement methods are opaque and outdated, contributing to workforce shortages, unfilled shifts, long waitlists, and patients remaining in hospitals longer than necessary. Home care providers and trade groups argued the bill would not set rates directly but would require more transparent methodology and fuller consideration of real costs such as wages, benefits, taxes, training, and technology. On caregiver bills, many family members and provider organizations described the financial and emotional strain of caring for disabled or medically fragile relatives, especially when parents, spouses, or guardians are barred from being paid caregivers. They argued the bills would recognize existing unpaid care, help families remain at home, and reduce reliance on more expensive institutional care. Advocates for adult ABA coverage said services remain medically necessary after age 21 and that ending coverage at that age creates an inequitable “cliff” for MassHealth members compared with those with private insurance. For the PACE/community care bill, elder law attorneys and PACE advocates said current MassHealth income rules force some older adults with modestly higher incomes to spend down to $542 per month, making community living unrealistic and pushing people toward nursing homes. They supported changing the eligibility structure to a premium-based approach that would allow more people to remain in the community. On the school Medicaid bill, advocates said schools are providing effective, preventive mental health care, but reimbursement currently flows to municipalities rather than directly back to school health budgets, limiting districts’ ability to hire and retain staff. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee heard testimony and several witnesses requested favorable reports on the bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• What's triggering the pay-go?
• And the answer we got back was no.
• The Economic Development Department had just gotten off of back-to-back record-breaking job creation
• Investments on the back end.
• The back room.

Transcript Highlights:

• So instead of paying out $100, we'd be paying out $80, so to speak.
• c><00:12:13.920> set out $100, we'd be paying out, if you set out $100, we'd be paying out, if
• They still pay the interest, they don't pay the penalty, and we get our tax revenue."
• pay for the pay estimated people who pay for the pay that<00:32:19.519> use<00:32:19.760> that
• They still pay the the amnesty.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Fiscal Committee met on December 19, with Senators Long and Lang serving as replacements. The committee approved the November 21 minutes and adopted the consent calendar after removing two Department of Health and Human Services items for separate discussion. It then took up an HHS request involving nursing facility rates, where Nathan White explained that $2.2 million would be transferred from a long-term care Medicaid eligibility contract to the nursing facilities budget. He said the funds would offset an otherwise projected 3.9% average rate decrease and bring the overall average change to zero for the next six months, with rates reset again in July under state law. Members asked about the budget adjustment factor, bed counts, and whether additional funds could raise rates further; White said the factor is statutory, capped at 28.76%, and that more money would lower the factor and increase rates. The committee also corrected a date in the request from February 1, 2025 to February 1, 2026, and approved the item. The committee next approved another HHS item related to rural health transformation grants. Members confirmed the request covered the full amount applied for this biennium, and asked about the technology component. HHS said the grant is not solely about AI, but about broader technology improvements such as electronic medical records, back-end systems, and tools to improve access and sustainability in underserved areas. The committee approved that item as well. The Judicial Council then requested funds for contract attorneys providing indigent defense on a fixed-fee basis. The council said current funds had already been exhausted and that the new appropriation would be used immediately. Members questioned the size of the request and the number of people awaiting counsel; the council reported about 150 incarcerated people and about 300 non-incarcerated people waiting for counsel, more than in recent years. It attributed the increase to competition for attorneys, public defender offices closing intake in some locations because of caseload limits, and broader case and court-system changes. One member raised constitutional concerns about delays in counsel for incarcerated defendants. The committee ultimately amended the request downward to $1 million, approved it, and then approved a motion to place several annual financial reports on file and release them to the public when available. The committee also discussed dashboard reporting from HHS, asking for more detail on community mental health center caseloads and budget-reduction information, and HHS agreed to provide more useful monthly detail.

Transcript Highlights:

• um we're paying back um funds where um we're paying back um funds<00:09:25.000> to<00:09:25.240
• One of the things the state did back in the around the 2010 time frame was we used to pay for the Medicare
• One of the things the state did back in the around the 2010 time frame was we used to pay for the Medicare
• One of the things the state did back in the around the 2010 time frame was we used to pay for the Medicare
• So a portion takes care of paying for the attorney, and the rest of it goes back.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a work session on the Department of Business and Economic Affairs budget, with testimony from Chase Hegman and Kathy Frederickson. Early discussion focused on staffing and vacancies, including a senior planner position tied to FEMA requirements, a program assistant funded by federal ORID dollars, a program specialist being considered for reclassification, two Housing Champions positions to be funded in the next biennium, and temporary welcome center positions. Members also reviewed the commissioner’s office, indirect cost recoveries tied to federal program administration, and the structure and staffing of rest areas and welcome centers, including the Turnpike-funded locations and seasonal staffing patterns. Members then moved through economic development and federal grant-related accounts. Hegman explained that a large share of the agency’s funding is federal, with some programs requiring state match, including the Apex Accelerator, which supports government contracting assistance for businesses. He described Apex as a small team that helps businesses with DOD and other contracting opportunities through webinars, matchmaking, and one-on-one support. The Office of Workforce Opportunity was described as largely federally funded through Commerce-related workforce programs and subrecipients, with some general fund support for agency-wide needs. The Northern Borders Regional Commission dues and capacity grant were also discussed, with officials explaining the state’s required contribution and the federal funds used to administer the program. A major point of discussion was the proposed reduction to the Small Business Development Center, which officials said provides one-on-one technical assistance to new and small businesses and has a strong return on investment. Members questioned the cut, the federal funding sources, and whether there was a waiting list for services; officials said they would provide more detail on matching requirements and funding. The committee also reviewed travel and tourism accounts, including the joint promotional grant program and tourism advertising funds, both of which are proposed to increase. Officials said the tourism marketing formula is based on a percentage of meals and rooms tax revenue and argued that the spending generates significant visitor spending and tax revenue, citing an outside ROI study and examples of advertising in test markets. No votes were taken during the work session.

Transcript Highlights:

• And you can also jump off. there, take a bus back.
• They weren't allowed to pay.
• We're paying 80 percent of state employees.
• Well, I think they Were paying 100 percent.
• Who's paying for the judge's insurance? The judges pay for their own.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think we're going to go back to that as time moves on.
• to talk about that some more, and we are still paying for it because we're paying that capitated rate
• And of course, there's paying the dispensing fee, which I very much think we should be paying and they
• We are paying for the drugs at market price instead.
• We would be paying them at the dispensing rate, and we could also presumably pay them at the acquisition

Transcript Highlights:

• Another 23 counties pay less than $1 above the minimum wage, 24 more counties pay less than $2 above
• penalties to the state than pay IHSS providers.
• And it keeps us holding back. We can't even buy eggs. We can't pay high rent.
• We can't pay high rent.
• AB 374 would ensure that they can receive a pay stub at every pay period and see how many hours they

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Public Employment and Retirement met for its first hearing of the session, adopted committee rules, and heard several labor-related bills. The chair reviewed hearing procedures, including limits on testimony and expectations for orderly conduct. Members then took up measures affecting public employee bargaining, contracting, confidentiality, school employee benefits, pay stub information, and state correctional health staffing. AB 672 would require public employers to notify PERB when filing court actions involving statutes PERB administers and allow PERB to intervene; it drew support from SEIU, AFSCME, school employees, labor groups, and no opposition, and was passed out of committee. AB 283 would move IHSS bargaining from the county to the state level; providers and recipients testified about low wages, long delays in bargaining, and care access concerns, while counties and public authorities raised cost, scope, and implementation issues. The bill passed 7-0 after members discussed family care worker concerns and the author said he would continue working on the issue. AB 339 would require local governments to give unions 120 days’ notice before contracting out bargaining-unit work. Labor supporters said the bill would make existing meet-and-confer rights meaningful and protect jobs, while counties, cities, special districts, chambers of commerce, and staffing groups argued it would burden local agencies and interfere with existing MMBA procedures. The committee also heard AB 340, which would make communications between employees and union representatives confidential for PERB purposes; supporters said it codified existing case law, while school administrators, special districts, counties, and business groups warned it could hinder investigations. AB 378 would extend the classified school employees summer assistance program to JPA employees, and AB 374 would require more detailed pay stubs for classified school employees; both had labor support and some education-sector opposition over implementation and cost concerns, and both advanced. AB 393 would require cost analyses before contracting out physician work at CDCR and the Department of State Hospitals; supporters argued the state was overpaying contractors amid high vacancy rates, and the bill also advanced. At the end of the hearing, the committee recorded final votes showing AB 283, AB 340, AB 374, AB 378, AB 393, and AB 672 all passing out of committee, while AB 339 remained on hold with a 4-0 vote and some members not voting.

Transcript Highlights:

• They're going to pay the price again.
• So again, our people are paying the price of our inability to bring back fiscal sanity in this state.
• Even the suggestion that we slash programs on the backs of immigrants who, let's be clear, pay taxes,
• It borrows off the backs of our students.
• As the governor has stated, we pay over $80 billion in federal taxes that we don't get back.

Summary: The Assembly convened after a quorum call and proceeded to floor business, with the main item being SB 101, the state budget bill. Before debate on the bill, Assembly Member Sanchez offered amendments to redirect funding toward Proposition 36 implementation, wildfire prevention, Medi-Cal provider reimbursement, developmental services, and other priorities; the majority moved to lay those amendments on the table, and the motion passed 43-18. The chamber then took up SB 101 as the budget bill for immediate effect. Debate on the budget was extensive and sharply divided. Supporters, including Assembly Member Gabriel and several committee chairs, described the budget as a difficult but responsible compromise that protects Medi-Cal, IHSS, child care, housing, wildfire prevention, and other safety-net programs while responding to a projected deficit and federal uncertainty. Opponents criticized the budget as fiscally unsound and argued it relied on accounting gimmicks, did not adequately fund Proposition 36 or wildfire prevention, and continued spending on high-speed rail and Medi-Cal coverage for undocumented immigrants. Several members also raised concerns about gas taxes, provider reimbursement, probation funding, and the impact on vulnerable Californians. After debate, the Assembly voted on SB 101 and passed it 57-19. The measure was sent immediately to the Senate. The body then announced upcoming session schedules, with no floor or check-in sessions on June 14 and 15, and a floor session set for June 16 at 1 p.m., before adjourning.