Transcript Highlights:

• The clerk will call the name of the member voting remotely. Kozlowski, go ahead. Lee can't hear it.
• > the clerk will call the name of the the clerk will call the name of the member<00:06:37.280><c> voting
• </c> member voting member voting remotely<00:06:39.319><c> kazlowski</c><00:06:39.960><c> go</c> ahead

Transcript Highlights:

• , the remote control of a vehicle. vehicle. vehicle.
• </c> Um I believe he's remote. Um I believe he's remote.
• Please vote no on this bill, and thank you so much.
• I hope you will vote yes are we rushing?
• </c> Um so, we have two remote testifiers. Um so, we have two remote testifiers.

Committee: Senate Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Liguori voted no. Representative Lopez voted aye.
• Representative Wilmeth voted aye. Vice Chair Heap voted aye. Representative Luna-Nájera voted aye.
• Representative Weninger voted aye. Representative Wilmeth voted aye. Vice Chair Heap voted aye.
• final vote."
• How do you vote? I vote aye. Chairman Bliss, aye.

Committee: House House Health & Human Services Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several health-related bills. HB 2726 would require coverage for diagnosis and treatment of mild obstructive sleep apnea, including a tongue-muscle stimulation device. The sponsor and medical witnesses said the device is a less burdensome alternative to CPAP and could improve adherence and reduce long-term complications, while Access said it already covers medically necessary sleep apnea treatment but was neutral and concerned the bill could narrow review and limit cost-effectiveness analysis. The committee adopted the Bliss amendment and then gave HB 2726 a due-pass recommendation by an 8-4 vote. HB 2435, as amended, would create a provisional licensing pathway for internationally trained physicians who meet specified ECFMG-related criteria, with supervision, fees set by the Medical Board, and automatic conversion to a full license after four years if conditions are met. Supporters argued Arizona faces severe physician shortages, especially in rural and tribal areas, and that the bill would bring in experienced doctors while preserving oversight. Opponents, including the Arizona Medical Board, said current law already allows case-by-case licensure review and warned the bill could weaken safeguards and bypass existing scrutiny. After adopting the amendment, the committee approved HB 2435 on a due-pass recommendation. HB 2958 would require Access coverage for comprehensive dental care for pregnant women age 21 and older, with a $500,000 general fund appropriation for a pilot program. The sponsor and public health witnesses said dental care during pregnancy is linked to better maternal and infant outcomes and could reduce emergency room use and complications. The committee adopted the bill and sent it out with an 11-1 due-pass recommendation. HB 2176, which sets timelines and standards for health care institution complaint investigations and dispute resolution, also received broad support from hospitals and was approved unanimously on a 12-0 due-pass recommendation. The committee then heard HB 2447, which would bar insurers from reimbursing certified registered nurse anesthetists at a lower rate than anesthesiologists for the same service. Opponents argued the bill would interfere with private contracting, ignore differences in training and liability, and likely raise costs for the state and taxpayers; supporters said anesthesia demand has outpaced reimbursement and that parity is needed to protect access, especially in rural areas. The transcript ends during testimony on HB 2447, before any vote is taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• I vote yesterday. I am voting yesterday. I'm supporting. I vote yesterday.
• It's accessed remotely. So the tax, as far as incidence... It's accessed remotely.
• I respectfully encourage an aye vote. Thank you. Thank you very much. Mr.
• I'm humbly asking that you vote in support. Thank you very much.
• I would love to change my vote. Reyes? Aye. I would like to change my vote. Okay. Senator Choi?

Committee: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review

Transcript Highlights:

• Ormsby votes aye. Gregerson votes aye. Macri? Macri votes aye. Couture. Aye. Couture votes aye.
• Connors votes aye. Penner? Penner votes aye. Schmick votes aye. Berg votes aye. Burnett.
• Cortes votes aye. Doglio. Aye. Doglio votes aye. Dye votes aye. Fitzgibbon. Aye.
• Peterson votes aye. Paulette votes aye. Rude votes nay, do not pass. Rude votes aye.
• Springer votes aye. Stonier votes aye. Street votes aye. Tye votes aye. Theringer is excused.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee held public hearings on several bills and took executive action on House Bill 2747. HB 2747 would change how Washington estimates future revenue in its four-year balanced budget outlooks by using the official revenue forecast instead of the current 4.5% growth assumption for the next two biennia. Staff described the bill as a technical change with indeterminate fiscal effects, and supporters said it would make budgeting more realistic and sustainable. The committee adopted a technical amendment and then reported the bill out of committee with a do pass recommendation by a vote of 26 ayes, 3 nays, and 2 excused. The committee also heard Second Substitute Senate Bill 6182, which would create an abortion savings program funded by a new annual assessment on health carriers offering exchange plans. Staff said the bill would generate about $10 million in fiscal year 2027 and about $2.1 million annually thereafter, with most funds going to grants for abortion care providers and some administrative costs for the Office of the Insurance Commissioner and the Department of Health. Supporters said it would stabilize access to abortion care and help low-income patients, while opponents argued it would force taxpayers and insurers to subsidize abortion and raised concerns about oversight, morality, and premium impacts. Substitute Senate Bill 6355, which would create a Washington Electric Transmission Authority to support new transmission projects and related tribal clean energy work, drew testimony from utilities, labor, clean energy advocates, counties, and landowners. Supporters said the state needs faster transmission buildout to improve reliability, support clean energy, and reduce congestion costs; opponents and county representatives raised concerns about eminent domain, loss of local tax revenue, board accountability, and the need for stronger landowner and county involvement. Staff estimated the bill would have a several-million-dollar general fund impact and noted possible indeterminate local revenue effects. The committee also received a briefing on engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 6260, which would reduce funding or eligibility for several K-12 programs, including bus depreciation, Running Start, and transition to kindergarten; public testimony was overwhelmingly opposed, with school officials, educators, community college representatives, students, and rural districts warning of reduced opportunities and harm to small and low-income districts.

Transcript Highlights:

• Not voting. Jones not voting. Laird? Aye. Laird, aye. Reyes. Aye. Reyes, aye. Three votes.
• Four votes. All right, we have four votes.
• Four votes. All right. I, Laird. Laird, aye. Reyes. Aye. Four votes. All right, that is 4-0.
• Four votes. That is 4-0. Next. Aye. Reyes. Aye. Four votes. That is four zero.
• I voted no. You voted what? No. Oh, no. Grove, no. Three to two.

Committee: Senate Rules

Transcript Highlights:

• If you could bring up Ian Cope on remote.
• Our final testifier on this bill will be Ian Cope, who is testifying remotely.
• Jeff Pack is online remotely.
• It would also push the burden of repayment onto future generations that had no opportunity to vote on
• So, as you've already heard, the agency's debt is limited up to 1.5% of A.V. without a 60% vote of the

Summary: The committee heard testimony on Second Substitute Senate Bill 5690, which would require WSDOT to improve coordination with utilities on fish barrier removal projects and utility relocations, provide advance notice when feasible, and seek to maximize federal funding for relocation costs. Staff described the bill’s background, including the federal culvert injunction and WSDOT’s fish barrier work, and noted fiscal impacts tied to grant monitoring and possible revenue changes. Senator McEwen said the bill was narrowed from a prior version to reduce fiscal concerns and cited a district example where poor coordination allegedly wasted public and ratepayer funds. Utility representatives from PUDs testified in support, emphasizing better communication, advance notice for budgeting, and access to federal funds; no opposition was presented on this bill before the public hearing was closed. The committee also heard Senate Bill 6148, which would extend the maximum term for regional transit authority bonds from 40 years to 75 years and remove eligibility for regional mobility grant funds if an RTA uses bonds longer than 40 years. Staff and committee fiscal discussion focused on how longer terms reduce annual debt service but increase total interest paid over time, with examples comparing 25-, 40-, 50-, and 75-year bonds. Supporters, including Sound Transit board members, local officials, labor, and transit advocates, argued the bill would give Sound Transit flexibility to manage inflation, preserve project schedules, and align financing with long-lived infrastructure and the federal TIFIA loan program. Opponents argued the bill would increase long-term costs, shift burdens to future generations, and is premature because Sound Transit is still revising its plan and already has substantial cash and bonding capacity. The hearing ended after questions about debt safeguards, refinancing, and how the proposed authority would interact with TIFIA loans.

Transcript Highlights:

• With that, we will call the vote. Call the vote. Limón? Aye. Grove? Aye. Jones? Aye. Laird? Aye.
• Call the vote. Limón? Aye. Grove? Aye. Jones? Aye. Laird? Aye. Reyes? Aye. Five to zero.
• parents, husband, son, daughter, and brother who are here with me today, and another daughter joining remotely
• I'd also like to thank the talented team at C.E. and another daughter joining remotely.
• Director Gonzalez to the full floor for a Senate vote. Thank you very much to our Vice Chair Grove.

Committee: Senate Rules

Transcript Highlights:

• Not voting. Jones not voting. Laird? Aye. Laird, aye. Reyes. Aye. Reyes, aye. Three votes.
• Four votes. All right, we have four votes.
• Four votes. All right. I, Laird. Laird, aye. Reyes. Aye. Four votes. All right, that is 4-0.
• Four votes. That is 4-0. Next. Aye. Reyes. Aye. Four votes. That is four zero.
• I voted no. You voted what? No. Oh, no. Grove, no. Three to two. All right.

Committee: Senate Rules

Summary: The Senate Rules Committee met to consider several routine items and a gubernatorial appointment. The committee approved appointments not required to appear for Gina Castro Rodriguez to the Board of State and Community Corrections, Richard Stein to the California Arts Council, and Nicholas Hardiman to the California Housing Finance Agency Board of Directors. It also approved references to bills, committee and joint committee appointments, subcommittee ratifications, and floor acknowledgments. A rule waiver request from Senators Perez and Padilla to suspend the SR 22.5 bill-introduction limit was approved on a divided vote. The committee then heard testimony from Andy Nakahata, nominee for executive director of the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (iBank). Nakahata described his background in infrastructure finance and said he would focus on stewardship, expanding awareness of iBank programs, and working with lenders, financial development corporations, and municipal advisors to reach more counties and communities. Members asked about equitable geographic access, creditworthiness standards, outreach to underserved areas, support for financially distressed hospitals, and the new California Transmission Accelerator program. Nakahata said iBank can work with public and nonprofit health care entities, that transmission financing would be a portion of larger project capital stacks, and that the bank’s role is financing rather than regulating utility tariffs or transmission costs. Public witnesses from the finance and legal sectors testified in support of Nakahata, praising his expertise and leadership. No opposition testimony was offered. The committee then voted unanimously to advance Nakahata’s nomination to the full Senate for confirmation.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> has to be recognizable and not remote has to be recognizable and not remote harm<00:17:12.079><c
• So I will be voting in favor of this.
• So I will be voting in favor of this.
• How can we vote on answered my question.
• vote a final vote it would actually be vote a final vote to<00:47:01.200><c> ways</c><00:47:01.520><

Bills: HF362 , HF2590 , HF2760 , HF3444

Committee: House Health Finance and Policy

Keywords: massage therapy, Asian bodywork therapy, massage therapist, Asian bodywork therapist, licensure, professional licensing, health occupations, Department of Health, commissioner of health, advisory council, protected title, unlicensed practice, scope of practice, consumer protection, background check, professional liability insurance, continuing education, credentialing examination, state preemption, municipal regulation

Transcript Highlights:

• Shannon Grove: Not voting. John Laird: Aye. Eloise Reyes: Aye. Three votes. All right, that is 3-0.
• Four votes. All right, we have four votes.
• Four votes. All right. I, John Laird: Aye. Eloise Reyes: Aye. Four votes. All right, that is 4-0.
• Four votes. That is 4-0. Next. Aye. Eloise Reyes: Aye. Four votes. That is 4-0.
• I voted no. You voted what? No. Oh, no. Grove, no. Three to two. All right.

Committee: Senate Rules

Summary: The Senate Rules Committee met to consider several governor’s appointments and procedural items. The committee approved, largely on unanimous or near-unanimous votes, the appointments of Gina Castro Rodriguez to the Board of State and Community Corrections, Richard Stein to the California Arts Council, and Nicholas Hardiman to the California Housing Finance Agency Board of Directors. It also approved references to bills, committee appointments, subcommittee ratifications, joint committee appointments, and floor acknowledgments. A motion to grant rule waivers for Senators Perez and Padilla to introduce additional measures under SR 22.5 drew opposition from Senator Grove and ultimately passed on a 3-2 vote in the final tally. The committee then heard testimony on the appointment of Andy Nakahata as executive director of the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (IBank). Nakahata described his background in finance and infrastructure lending and said he would focus on expanding access to IBank programs statewide, especially in underserved and rural areas. Members questioned him about outreach equity, county-by-county loan activity, creditworthiness standards, the California Transmission Accelerator, and financing for public hospitals and other infrastructure projects. He said IBank works through financial development corporations, municipal advisors, and other partners, monitors geographic reach, and can work with applicants to adjust loan size or identify additional funding sources when projects are not fully creditworthy. Public witnesses spoke in support of Nakahata, including representatives from Siebert William Shank and O’Melveny/other public finance firms, who praised his expertise and leadership. No opposition testimony was offered. The committee voted 5-0 to move Nakahata’s appointment to the full Senate for confirmation. After completing a final roll call on the earlier agenda items, the committee adjourned its public session and announced it would move into executive session.

Transcript Highlights:

• Digital identification raises concerns about privacy, cybersecurity, voting integrity, access, and device
• states that if you have a main-location brewery, you can have one taproom attached to it, plus one remote
• This bill simply makes it so that you can have two remote taprooms.
• This bill has been... ...so that you can have two remote taprooms. This bill has been...

Committee: Senate State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• So you will see members coming and going a bit as they have other votes they have to take in other committees
• The board voted to make changes to the proposed regulations.
• Once the board votes to make additional changes, additional comment periods are opened up.
• The second is remote processing as part of the Board’s sunset review.
• Last year, Different provisions related to remote processing for retail pharmacies.

Summary: The joint Assembly and Senate business committees held a sunset review hearing on the California State Board of Pharmacy, with board leadership describing the board’s consumer-protection role and its priorities around access, enforcement, and updating pharmacy law. The board emphasized a proposed shift toward a standard-of-care model for pharmacists, arguing it would reduce rigid protocol requirements and improve access to services such as HIV PrEP/PEP, contraception, and naloxone. Board representatives also discussed pharmacy deserts, possible fee waivers for pharmacies in underserved areas, concerns about payer practices contributing to closures, continuing education audits, and a request to restore more flexibility in licensure decisions and probationary monitoring for applicants with certain criminal histories. A major focus of the hearing was the board’s ongoing compounding regulations, especially the treatment of sterile versus nonsterile compounding and substances such as glutathione and methylcobalamin. The board said the proposal was not a ban on those substances and described the rulemaking as grounded in federal law, USP standards, and public comment, noting the process had gone through multiple modified texts and hearings. Testimony from stakeholders was sharply divided: pharmacists, veterinarians, firefighters, naturopathic doctors, and patient advocates warned the rules were restricting access to compounded medications and harming patients and first responders, while the California Medical Association, psychiatric physicians, and PhRMA raised concerns that the board’s proposals could expand pharmacist authority beyond training, affect physician practice, or create safety risks. Other public comments addressed pharmacy technician ratios, remote processing, flavoring medications, hospital-specific regulation, budget and enforcement transparency, and whether the board should add members with community compounding or pharmacy technician expertise. Committee members also asked about the board’s oversight priorities and the rationale for its standard-of-care proposal. Board staff explained that consumer protection includes education, licensing, policy, and enforcement, with the highest-priority enforcement cases being those posing imminent public harm. After public testimony concluded, the chairs thanked participants and adjourned the sunset review hearing, announcing an immediate transition to the joint informational hearing on the Department of Cannabis Control.

Transcript Highlights:

• And further, if anyone listening or watching remotely has comments, you may email those comments to Ms
• Item 29 clarifies what constitutes over-voting.
• Item 35 extends the period of time for conducting in-person voting in nursing homes from the last day
• of early voting to four days prior to election day, providing more time for this process.
• And again, I want to reiterate that if you're watching remotely, you can submit comments to Ms.

Summary: The State Board of Election Supervisors met on February 5, 2026, with a quorum present and approved the minutes from the March 11, 2025 meeting. Chair Nancy Landry explained that the board was reviewing proposed technical and administrative changes for the Department of State’s 2026 elections omnibus bill, which would later go to the House and Senate Governmental Affairs Committees for public hearing. No public comment cards were submitted, and the board reiterated that comments could also be emailed to the acting secretary. First Assistant Secretary of State Catherine Newsom and Deputy Commissioner Lainey Boyd presented items 1 through 39, with item 7 removed before consideration and item 37 later removed after board discussion. The proposals covered a wide range of election-administration topics, including registrar salary payment timing, restrictions on ROV employees running for office, clarifying party affiliation for voters who select “unaffiliated,” technical updates for voter registration transfers and precinct changes, protections for pre-registrants’ personal information, removal from protected voter lists, absentee ballot procedures, nomination petition certification, notice requirements when a candidate dies, watcher deadlines, over-voting, ballot curing, nursing home voting timing, procurement authority for voting equipment, and deadlines for contesting constitutional amendments and election irregularities. Several items were explained as cleanup or consistency changes to align the election code with current practice and prior omnibus revisions. Board members asked multiple clarifying questions, especially about the meaning of “unaffiliated,” the timing language for pre-registrants, what counts as actual notice of a candidate’s death, and whether proposed rules would follow the APA. The most substantive disagreement involved item 37, which would have allowed the Secretary of State to bring an election contest based on irregularities reported by an election official; after discussion, the board agreed to remove that item from the omnibus recommendations. Members also discussed item 38, which would create a cause of action and deadline for contesting the calling of a constitutional amendment, and item 39, which clarifies that election contests cannot be filed before election day. The board then approved the remaining provisions—items 1 through 6, 8 through 36, and 38 and 39—and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• The chief clerk will now call the members who will be voting remotely. Jones, present.
• </c> The chief clerk will now call the members who will be voting remotely. Jones, present.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I believe Todd is with us remote.
• And I believe Todd is with us remote.
• Charlie and Caitlin are remote? Oh, perfect. Caitlin.
• In order to preserve these salmon, I implore the committee to vote yes on 2421. Thank you.
• All right then, our last panel looks like all remote.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on three main bills. House Bill 2284 on reducing litter would remove a scheduled increase in plastic bag thickness, preserve the existing penalty on thicker bags, and create a litter solutions task force to use existing data and recommend further actions. Supporters from business, retail, agriculture, food industry, and the Department of Ecology said the bill takes a data-driven approach and could help reduce litter without imposing a full bag ban, while Ecology noted it already has a statewide litter study underway and raised cost and membership concerns. Opponents and other commenters generally favored the bill’s direction but emphasized the need for more study and careful implementation. No vote was taken. House Bill 1652 would require certain ocean-going vessels in Washington waters to use fuel with no more than 0.1% sulfur, with recordkeeping, Ecology oversight, penalties, and a substitute clarifying vessel coverage and exemptions. The prime sponsor and environmental and public health advocates said the bill would reduce air and water pollution from scrubbers and protect the Salish Sea, orcas, salmon, and nearby communities. Ports, shipping interests, and industry groups raised concerns that the bill could effectively discourage scrubbers, create burdens for irregular callers and cargo traffic, and affect port competitiveness, while some said the bill should be narrowed or further stakeholdered. The hearing also included discussion of a proposed substitute and possible impacts on vessels and port operations. House Bill 2367 would end special coal-related exemptions by limiting the cap-and-invest exemption to pre-2026 emissions, removing limits on additional greenhouse gas regulation for the coal plant, and repealing coal sales and use tax exemptions. Supporters said the bill would align state law with the planned closure of the Centralia coal plant, reinforce Washington’s climate policies, and remove outdated carve-outs. Business and petroleum representatives warned that if the plant were brought back into the cap-and-invest program, the allowance market could be affected and Ecology might need flexibility to adjust the program. The committee heard extensive testimony on all three bills but took no recorded votes or final action in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• I would encourage a yes vote. Thank you so much.
• with that, we’re going to move to public hearings, starting with Judge Biviano, who is joining us remotely
• We’re now going to hear from James McMahon, and after he’s done, we’ll go to remote testimony and hear
• I urge a no vote. Thank you. Thank you so much.
• We're going to go to Andres, who's on, who's remote. And on deck, please come to the front.

Summary: The committee began with introductions and then heard Senate Bill 5865, which would repeal statutory garnishment answer forms and require use of Washington Pattern Forms Committee forms instead. Staff, the prime sponsor, and judges’ association witnesses said the bill is a technical fix that would make garnishment calculations more accurate and efficient without changing substantive law. A collectors’ association witness said the current statutory form can be used if needed until new forms are available and raised concerns about the timeliness of pattern form updates, but was open to working on language. The public hearing on SB 5865 was then closed. The committee next heard Senate Bill 5880, which would allow blood and breath toxicology results to be admissible if tested by an ISO/IEC 17025-certified or accredited forensic lab. The sponsor and supporters, including the Seattle city attorney and traffic safety experts, described severe backlogs at the state toxicology lab, with some DUI blood results taking many months or longer and cases expiring before charges can be filed. Counties, prosecutors, sheriffs, and defense representatives generally agreed the backlog is a serious problem, but several warned the bill could shift costs to local governments, create uneven access to private testing, and raise due process concerns unless discovery cooperation is required. The committee then closed the hearing on SB 5880. Senate Bill 5912 would reinstate the indigent defense task force to study Washington’s public defense system and report recommendations by 2028. Supporters from counties, cities, public defense offices, and tribal interests said the statewide shortage of defense attorneys and rising costs are straining local budgets and delaying access to counsel, especially in rural and eastern Washington. Some witnesses urged the bill be amended to add more stakeholder representation, including clients and practitioners, and cautioned that the task force should not delay immediate action on funding and caseload standards. The hearing on SB 5912 was then closed. The committee also heard Senate Bill 5837, a broad update to guardianship, conservatorship, and protective arrangement procedures. The bill would lower the minimum age for a proposed guardian from 21 to 18, expand notice options, clarify appointment of counsel, and streamline service and hearing procedures. Testimony was largely supportive, especially from kinship caregivers, legal aid, and estate-law practitioners who said the bill would reduce costly publication requirements and improve access to justice, though some witnesses requested amendments on notice, waiver language, emergency procedures, and counsel provisions. The committee reported 40 pro and 70 con sign-ins on the bill, then moved on. Finally, the committee began hearing Senate Bill 5855, which would prohibit law enforcement officers, including federal agents, from wearing facial coverings during public interactions except in limited circumstances such as undercover work, SWAT operations, or health and safety needs. The sponsor and supporters said the bill is intended to increase transparency, accountability, and trust, especially for immigrant and marginalized communities, while opponents argued it could endanger officers, conflict with federal authority, and is tied to ongoing litigation over similar California legislation. Testimony was sharply divided, with some witnesses emphasizing public fear and trauma from masked officers and others arguing the bill would make officers more vulnerable and create constitutional problems. The hearing continued with additional public testimony after the excerpt ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've tried to alleviate some of those costs by allowing for remote appearances.
• So, yes, we are doing a lot of remote proceedings still.
• I would estimate probably about 50% to 60% of hearings are still remote. 70% of hearings are still remote
• times people of a certain age don't want to be remote.
• The rest of our people live in relatively remote rural areas.

Committee: House House Appropriations & Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• First, a notary must identify the remotely located individual.
• First, a notary must identify the remotely located individual.
• First, the notary must identify the remotely located individual.
• So the piece of paper can now be remotely electronically notarized.
• So the piece of paper can now be remotely electronically notarized.

Summary: The Civil Rights and Judiciary Committee heard House Bill 2158, which updates Washington’s electronic notarization laws to reflect 2021 changes to the Uniform Law Commission’s notarial act model. Staff explained that the bill would allow remote notarization of tangible paper documents, authorize remote administration of oaths or affirmations to remotely located individuals, and clarify how a notary can acknowledge a signature on a tangible record sent in from a remote signer. Representative Abel, the sponsor, said the measure would improve access, especially in rural areas where notaries may be far away. Testimony from the Uniform Law Commission supported the bill as a modest update that adds flexibility while maintaining consumer protections. A committee member raised concerns about fraud and manipulated video, and the witness responded that the bill includes safeguards such as required recordings, identity verification, and retention of audiovisual records. The committee then heard House Bill 2178, an Administrative Office of the Courts request bill making several mostly technical changes to align statutes with court rules and current practice. Staff described changes to civil infraction filing and response deadlines, payment plans for infractions, the dollar threshold for aggregated malicious mischief damage, a two-year extension for courts of limited jurisdiction to implement electronic protection-order filing, and repeal of an outdated statutory grant-distribution provision. Representative Tye noted concern specifically about the extension in Section 6 and said she was still seeking an explanation for why the deadline should move from 2026 to 2028. AOC witness Jay Lee Schultz said the extension is needed to align with the rollout of the state’s new case management system and to support statewide electronic protection-order tracking. Elizabeth Hendren of the Sexual Violence Law Center testified in opposition to Section 6, saying the delay would further postpone reforms intended to improve access to protection orders, judicial access to related orders, and survivor notifications. She argued that the legislature had already given the courts five years to implement the changes and asked for more transparency about funding, barriers, and why additional time is needed. After hearing the testimony, the committee concluded its business for the day and also took time to introduce members and staff.

Transcript Highlights:

• Travis Moore is joining us remotely. All right, Travis, we can see and hear you. Go ahead.
• Chairman, just want to let you know that Representative Hawkins is now joining us also remotely.
• The finance committee overwhelmingly voted in favor of this article.
• We are moving on to Alan Schaefer remotely. Yes, I'm here. Good morning. Can you hear me?
• I guess Patty is here with us remote. Apologies. Good morning. Good morning. One second, Patty.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure

Summary: The Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure heard testimony on a wide range of bills involving consumer protection, auto regulation, alcohol licenses, and professional licensure. A major focus was legislation to require a one-hour domestic violence awareness training for salon and cosmetology licensees (H.323/S.200), supported by District Attorney Marion Ryan, law enforcement, and a salon industry witness who described the program’s value in identifying and helping victims. The committee also heard strong support from the Attorney General’s office for auto consumer protection legislation (S.228/H.379) that would expand used-car warranty protections, extend the Lemon Law return period to seven days after receipt of the vehicle, raise the mileage cap to 200,000 miles, and increase dealer surety bonds to $50,000. Independent dealers opposed those changes, arguing they would burden small businesses and that dealer education, not expanded liability, was the better solution. The committee also took testimony on bills related to vehicle financial products and repair information. A trade association supported GAP waiver legislation (H.4188/S.281), saying it would create clear consumer protections and standard disclosures. On right-to-repair and heavy-duty vehicle service information (S.266), engine and truck manufacturers supported an exemption for commercial vehicles, while others argued that releasing service data to the general public could create safety, cybersecurity, and emissions risks. The committee then heard extensive testimony on auto dealer franchise and warranty reimbursement legislation (S.201/H.406), with dealer groups supporting changes to warranty labor reimbursement and manufacturer groups opposing them as costly and unnecessary. Manufacturers from GM, Volvo, Toyota, Hyundai, Mazda, and others said their current time-study and appeals processes already compensate dealers fairly and that the bill would raise costs for consumers. In addition, the committee heard testimony on H.333, which would move auto damage appraiser licensing from the Division of Insurance to the Division of Occupational Licensure. Collision repair advocates supported the change, saying the current board structure leads to repeated dismissals of complaints and lacks accountability, while emphasizing that the bill is intended to protect consumers and ensure proper repair reimbursement. The hearing also included testimony in support of a local alcohol license petition for Westwood and a separate local alcohol measure for a town grant license. At the end of the hearing, the chairs announced that all docketed bills had been heard, noted that a joint poll would be held on H.4184, and the committee voted to adjourn by voice vote.