Transcript Highlights:

• And what is the reason for making that data not public, or private data?
• And what is the reason for making that data not public, or private data?
• Senator Westrom, what is the purpose of making this data not public? this data.
• </c> data would would have access to the data data would would have access to the data for<00:51:15.920
• It does not withstand the current data practices provisions for grant data.

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> for our employees regarding data for our employees regarding data protection<00:42:09.280><c> um
• </c> includes helping employees navigate data includes helping employees navigate data protection<00:
• So privacy, data security, data governance is hugely important, and one of the main things that we've
• So privacy, data security, data governance is hugely important, and one of the main things that we've
• How does that work if you get some ping of, like, potential data breach or data?

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> the Inspector General uh their data the Inspector General uh their data access<00:27:11.039><c>
• </c><00:29:40.919><c> practices</c> me like if we read the data practices me like if we read the data
• </c> apprehension they receive and share data apprehension they receive and share data um<00:38:08.280
• and what data was accessed.
• We don't have those anymore; the data didn't live in untaxed mega data centers.

Bills: HF25 , HF1 , HF428

Committee: House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law

Transcript Highlights:

• So we need hard braking data.
• I know that your DMV is looking at this, so more data, hard braking data, remote operations data, their
• But I think having the data, having them give the data to third, objective third parties to validate
• There's no data that you can't...
• The safety data is clear.

Committee: Senate Transportation

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee held an informational hearing on autonomous vehicle technology in California, focusing on safety, regulation, first responder impacts, and the state’s evolving oversight framework. The chair said the committee would hear all panels before public comment, with witnesses limited to five minutes and public commenters to one minute. The first panel featured an industry representative, a safety academic, and victims/advocates who described sharply different views of AV safety and accountability. Ariel Wolf of the Autonomous Vehicle Industry Association argued that fully autonomous vehicles are distinct from driver-assist systems, said AVs are already reducing crashes and fatalities, and urged clear, uniform standards. Dr. Missy Cummings countered that remote operations and computer-vision failures show the technology still depends on human intervention and can be unsafe, especially when remote assistance is done from abroad. Robert O’Dowd and Dylan Angulo, both tied to Tesla crash cases, described fatal and serious injuries involving Autopilot/Full Self-Driving, criticized limited transparency and data access, and called for stronger disclosure, preservation of crash data, and mandatory fixes or disabling of defective software. Committee members questioned witnesses about data comparing AVs to human drivers, the role of remote operators, liability, and whether California should create clearer standards for the human element behind AV systems. Several members and witnesses discussed the need for “guardrails,” black-box-style data access, and accountability for the remaining crash risk. The hearing then shifted to first responders and road users: a San Francisco Fire Department representative described AVs blocking fire scenes, ambulances, and apparatus access during emergencies and urged a public safety manual override; a San Jose police representative said officers need clear enforcement authority, training, and reliable ways to stop or redirect AVs; a rideshare driver described near-collisions and congestion caused by robo-taxis; and a Teamsters representative opposed proposed heavy-duty AV truck rules as too reliant on manufacturer self-certification and lacking independent validation. In the final panel, DMV and CPUC officials defended California’s regulatory structure. DMV said it has regulated AVs since 2014, has issued multiple rulemakings and permit types, and is developing a fourth package that would add reporting, enforcement tools, emergency-response requirements, and rules for heavy-duty AVs. DMV said it has revoked or suspended permits when needed, including Cruise and Pony.ai actions. CPUC said its authority covers passenger service only, requires safety plans and ongoing reporting, and continues oversight after permits are issued. No votes or formal actions were taken, as the hearing was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• Want to pursue some sort of agreement with a data center or the build-out of a data center in their community
• at risk to develop a data center or develop the plans.
• Is there a different way that data centers are done?
• Is there a different way that data centers are done?
• We know more and more data centers are going to be built.

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and several guest and staff introductions. The chamber then took up returning messages from the House and acted on multiple bills, with votes recorded on each. Senate Bill 628 on transportation facility designations was concurred in as amended and passed 31-4 after discussion about naming roads for deceased individuals and an exception for President Trump. The House amendment to the Live Local affordable housing package, CS/CS/HB 1389, was also concurred in and passed 35-0; Senator Claudio explained it as the fourth iteration of the Live Local Act, including new provisions allowing certain affordable housing on qualifying religious property, extending some timelines, and removing accessory dwelling unit language. CS/CS/HB 1451 on utility services was concurred in and passed 30-6 after questions about phasing out surcharges and reporting requirements. The chamber also substituted CS/CS/HB 1279 for SB 7038 and adopted an education amendment package before passing the bill 36-1, while several other measures were temporarily postponed. The Senate then considered CS/CS/SB 484 on data centers and concurred in the House amendment 383-957, passing the bill 31-6. Senator Avila said the amendment strengthened ratepayer protections, required a PSC tariff filing, and directed an OPAGA study on large-scale data centers. Several senators pressed concerns about the removal of the Senate’s nondisclosure agreement prohibition, the possibility of delayed public awareness of data center projects, and whether costs could be shifted to other ratepayers; Avila responded that the amendment preserved local land-use authority and that ratepayer costs could not be borne by the general body of ratepayers. Debate reflected a split between senators who supported the bill as a needed regulatory framework and those who objected to the transparency changes and the loss of the Senate’s original NDA language. Later, the Senate took up land use and development regulations, substituting CS/CS/CS/HB 399 for SB 208. An amendment by Senator Jones to remove language affecting a Fontainebleau Hotel water park project in Miami Beach failed 17-20 after debate over local control and preemption. Senator McLean’s amendments then added a sunset date and other changes, and Senator Claudio’s amendment preserved Miami-Dade’s urban development boundary supermajority protections and related planning provisions. The chamber then began extended debate on Senator Martin’s amendment creating a process for property owners to challenge rural boundary designations and seek compensation or removal from the designation without going to court; supporters framed it as a property-rights and due-process measure, while opponents argued it would undermine local planning, impose costs on taxpayers, and weaken voter-approved rural boundaries in Orange and Seminole counties. The transcript ends amid that debate, with no final vote shown on the rural boundary amendment in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 2232 establishes the time-sensitive emergency data repository.
• House Bill 2232 establishes the time-sensitive emergency data repository.
• uses for trauma care, plus a new data set for cardiac events and another new data set for stroke events
• uses for trauma care, plus a new data set for cardiac events and another new data set for stroke events
• We only have data as of 2024, so we don't have data that would show from 2025, again, these policies

Summary: The House Health Care & Wellness Committee held public hearings on several bills. House Bill 2232 would create a Department of Health-operated time-sensitive emergency data repository covering trauma, cardiac, and stroke events, with quality improvement reporting and support for rural facilities; it drew strong support from emergency physicians, nurses, and the Department of Health, while the Washington State Hospital Association said hospitals support the goal but lack the resources to absorb the added requirements. House Bill 1812, as a proposed substitute, would bar insurers and public plans from imposing anesthesia time limits or related reimbursement caps; the sponsor and anesthesia providers said it protects patient safety and fair payment, and the Washington State Society of Anesthesiologists asked for a clarifying amendment on physical status modifiers. House Bill 2250 would limit hospital charity care to Washington residents, while preserving emergency care access; supporters from rural hospitals and the Washington State Hospital Association said the change would help border hospitals facing rising nonresident charity care, and opponents from legal aid, patient advocacy, and LGBTQ groups warned it would create barriers, chill access for immigrants and other vulnerable patients, and conflict with Washington’s safety-net values. The committee also heard House Bill 2340, which would extend existing substance-use monitoring program protections and stipend eligibility to nursing assistants under the Board of Nursing’s CARES program. The sponsor described it as a simple equity measure, and the Board of Nursing supported it, saying it would improve access and reduce stigma; members asked where the stipend funding comes from, and staff and the board said it is currently general-fund supported at about $25,000 annually. House Bill 2577 would change hospital inspection law by requiring acute care hospital inspections every 18 months rather than on average, allowing some accredited inspections to satisfy the requirement every 36 months, and clarifying fire-protection reinspection standards; the sponsor and Department of Health said it responds to a JLARC audit and provides needed clarity, while DOH said it is still working to catch up from inspection delays caused by the public health emergency. The meeting ended after public testimony on the bills was closed and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Required to post to its website all public data from officer-involved death investigations within 30
• It would go into our normal queue for complying with data practices requests.
• We have to redact them by hand because most of that data is private data in terms of other people that
• We have to redact them by hand because most of that data is private data in terms of other people that
• We have to redact them by hand because most of that data is private data in terms of other people that

Summary: The committee took up House File 1354, which was moved with a DE1 amendment. The amendment was adopted without opposition. The bill, as explained by the author and BCA Superintendent Drew Evans, would narrow the BCA’s website-posting requirement for officer-involved death investigations so that the agency must post the video of the incident showing the events leading up to, during, and shortly after the incident, rather than all body-camera footage. Other materials would still be available through normal data requests, and the change was described as intended to reduce the burden of redacting and posting large amounts of extraneous video while preserving transparency. Evans said the BCA supports public access and transparency but is struggling to meet the current 30-day posting deadline because of the volume of video and the time required to redact private information. He noted that the BCA has nine full-time staff working on data practices requests and that the Senate amendment clarifies what must be posted while preserving Chapter 13 and the Minnesota Data Practices Act. A public testifier, Rich Newmeister, thanked the bill authors and said the amendment helps ensure data remains available to the public and supports transparency following George Floyd’s death. Members offered supportive comments, including appreciation for the BCA’s cooperation and willingness to work on the issue. No opposition was recorded. The committee then approved the motion to re-refer House File 1354, as amended, to the Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• back, that we can track exactly what we're... ...in the state of Florida that we're getting good data
• We update them every five years, taking into account new data that comes in.
• And if we don't, then we'll continue to collect water quality data.
• But then you had to figure out, like, all right, whose data source is that?
• It's all different data sets and everything from different entities.

Committee: Senate Environment and Natural Resources

Summary: The Committee on Environment and Natural Resources convened with a quorum present, heard opening remarks from Chair Rodriguez and member introductions, and discussed broad priorities including water quality, climate change, budget oversight, and accountability for environmental investments. Members emphasized concerns about nutrient pollution, springs, Lake Okeechobee, the Everglades, and the need for better data and measurable results. The committee then received a presentation from DEP Deputy Secretary Adam Blaylock on the state’s water quality restoration framework. He explained how water quality standards, total maximum daily loads (TMDLs), Basin Management Action Plans (BMAPs), and reasonable assurance plans work together to address impaired waters, and noted that BMAPs are updated every five years with annual reviews in between. He also described recent statutory changes requiring five-year milestones, restrictions on new septic systems in certain areas, and public-facing data tools to track projects and water quality trends. Members questioned whether BMAPs are producing enough improvement and whether the five-year update cycle is too slow. Blaylock said results can take years because of project lag and environmental variability, but that the department can adjust plans if data show they are not working. He also highlighted $2.9 billion in statewide water quality funding since 2019, nearly 1,100 funded projects, and a $1.1 billion water quality improvement grant program that now covers impaired waters beyond BMAP areas. The committee discussed agricultural projects, DEP and FDACS funding roles, and a new dashboard and centralized monitoring platform under development. No formal votes or other actions were taken, and the meeting ended with adjournment moved by the vice chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• But we do have the data. Mariners do have the data at each grade level.
• And NDAA data.
• Okay, the NDA Plus data. I've Okay, the NDA Plus data.
• We do have one year of data. Soon we will have two years of data.
• But that data would be filtered. You could filter like your own district data and school data.

Committee: Joint Special Education Funding Committee

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the March 4, 2026 minutes, and received a lengthy Department of Public Instruction presentation from Stanley Schauer Jr. on North Dakota student performance data in math and ELA, with comparisons between students with disabilities and students without disabilities. Schauer explained the assessment systems used, the 1% alternate assessment cap for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities, the absence of 2019-20 data due to the pandemic, and how state standards are set by North Dakota educators. Members asked about cohort trends, the role of alternate assessments, grade-level patterns, and whether the state should focus more on reducing the novice category than on moving students from approaching to proficient. Schauer also discussed the new NDA Plus assessment, the state’s planned growth model, and the possibility of future breakdowns by disability category or by schools using science-of-math approaches. Special education educators testified that students with disabilities continued to receive services during COVID because of FAPE obligations, which likely helped limit learning loss, and emphasized that IEP teams focus on individual growth rather than only proficiency buckets. Committee members then shifted to special education funding and possible funding models. Brandon Bombach of Grand Forks Public Schools presented on the state aid formula, focusing on the special education weighting factor and arguing that the current formula does not adequately respond to growing student needs because it counts enrollment but does not adjust when the number of students with IEPs rises. He used examples to show that a district can have the same enrollment and receive the same weighting even if the number of students needing services increases. Members discussed whether the formula should be tied more closely to actual need and accountability, and the chair indicated that the committee would continue gathering data and ideas for a later meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• I've provided you with a handout that has some of the data, preliminary data from our 2024-25 year, and
• The data that I reported today was from C-BEDS. This is California Department of Education data.
• So I am not sure of the state of our data on that at this month.
• Someone's collecting the data, but it's not you collecting the data, and you're not getting the full
• What are we, what have you been able to gather from that data?

Summary: The committee heard an informational discussion on California’s educator pipeline and shortages, with testimony from the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the Commission on Teacher Credentialing, the Learning Policy Institute, CSU educator preparation leaders, and CTA. Witnesses said state investments of more than $2.1 billion have helped rebuild teacher supply, with credential issuance and preparation enrollment rebounding after COVID, but demand remains high because of turnover, early-career attrition, and persistent vacancies. Panelists emphasized that shortages are especially acute in special education, bilingual education, STEM, and in high-need schools and regions, and that underprepared teachers, substitutes, and emergency permits remain heavily used. Several speakers stressed that retention, working conditions, compensation, and stable funding are as important as recruitment. Members focused on whether current data systems are sufficient to measure need and track where teachers end up working. The Commission said it can monitor assignments for credential alignment, but does not have full employment data to determine whether grant recipients or credentialed teachers are actually deployed in the shortage areas for which they were trained. The chair asked for better regional and subject-area data, and the committee discussed the risk that layoffs and budget instability could undermine teacher pipeline investments. CSU representatives urged stronger support for student-teacher stipends, better coordination with districts, more capacity for special education preparation, and more stable CSU funding to expand educator preparation. CTA testified that school climate, class size, health benefits, and administrative support are essential to retaining teachers. The committee then moved to budget proposals. For the Golden State Teacher Grant Program, Finance proposed a $14.4 million reappropriation for 2026-27, and the Student Aid Commission supported continued funding, saying the program has influenced candidates’ decisions to enter teaching and work in priority schools. For educator residencies, Finance proposed $250 million one-time Proposition 98 funding through 2029-30; the LAO said it could be adopted if aligned with legislative priorities, and CTC said the program has strong uptake and supports retention. For the computer science supplementary authorization grant, Finance proposed increasing awards from $2,500 to $6,000 and reducing the match requirement, but the LAO recommended rejecting the change because only about one-fifth of the original funding has been used. The committee also discussed registered apprenticeship pathways, rural access, and whether federal Title II, Title III, or IDEA funds could support bilingual and special education teacher preparation. Several items were held open for further information and follow-up.

Transcript Highlights:

• Although we collect data to monitor, and we have some data from the Health Policy Institute for the American
• You have in this slide deck a data book. I am not going to go into this data book.
• In this slide deck, a data book, I am not going to go into this data book. Feel free to read it.
• We will have that data.
• So, about the process for volunteers, that's under data, and caregivers, that's under data integration

Summary: The Care Management Meeting opened with a DSS update on the PCMH program. Staff reported the program remained steady at 124 practices, 553 sites, and 2,548 providers, with some month-to-month fluctuation driven by practice consolidation, retirements, and a few practices leaving the program because NCQA requirements were burdensome. Members asked about declining provider and site counts, member attribution trends, and whether PCMH practices overlap with behavioral health homes; DSS said attribution changes are largely due to members becoming ineligible, moving, or getting other insurance, and that PCMH and behavioral health homes are separate programs that coordinate informally. The committee also discussed why some smaller practices leave the program and whether the requirements could be made easier to support retention. The committee then resumed a detailed presentation on the Husky Dental program. The presenter described the dental benefit’s history, the importance of preventive oral health, workforce and consolidation pressures in dentistry, and the lack of interoperability between dental and medical records. Network data showed year-over-year declines in enrolled dental practitioners and service locations, with access gaps concentrated in rural and eastern parts of the state. Appointment availability surveys showed average waits of 38 days for adults and 23 days for children, but much longer waits at FQHCs than private fee-for-service practices. The presenter said Connecticut remains above the national median on CMS pediatric dental quality measures, though sealant rates remain a concern, and noted that preventive care is associated with lower per-member costs. Members raised concerns about provider participation, large practices dropping Medicaid, mobile dental care, and whether the public directory accurately reflects which dentists are actually accepting new patients. The presenter said the plan uses secret-shopper calls, tracks appointment availability, and has begun using place-of-service coding to better identify school-based dental care. She also noted a new MOU with 20 Head Start programs to share data and provide oral health literacy and navigation support. The final major topic was implementation planning for HR1. DSS said CMS guidance was expected in early June and proposed using upcoming meetings to cover medical frailty, communication strategy, and data integration/ex parte verification. Committee members urged the department to create a dashboard to track disenrollments and other impacts of HR1, to build a process for complaints and problem resolution, and to think through cost-sharing, caregiver verification, exemptions, and notices. Members also asked about using existing eligibility structures such as the working-disabled program as a model. The committee agreed to move the next meeting to June 10 by Zoom, with the agenda to be circulated in advance and any PCMH Plus quality data shared if available.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've had data that's come since then.
• We didn't get a lot of data.
• So we are starting to get data again. But even now, the data production is behind.
• So we are starting to get data again. But even now, the data production is behind.
• Do we have that kind of data? Yeah, that data definitely exists.

Committee: House Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• it to other data that exists.
• Team, we get to pull all of the crash data.
• or can give us data on risky behavior.
• But you're right, the data has to be documented.
• Condition data, pavement condition data—the recommended projects for I-40 alone represent about $400

Transcript Highlights:

• , we will not make for more accurate data, but simply less data.”
• The witness said superintendents are given their data, but what is published is statewide data and data
• , while what is published is statewide data and data by regional public health network.
• I am not a data expert.
• as the calendar year data.

Summary: The committee first noted that House Bill 398, concerning Holocaust and genocide studies, and House Bill 131 had already been handled previously and were off the schedule. It then took up House Bill 740, which would require the Department of Education to maintain permanent records for closed charter schools. After brief discussion about overlap with another charter-school bill that already addressed closure and records, Representative Freeman moved to table the bill. The committee voted 16-0 to table/ITL the bill, and it was placed on the consent calendar. The main discussion centered on House Bill 557, which would require additional information on school budget ballots, including average cost per pupil, enrollment history, and teacher-to-administrator ratios. Members raised concerns that the bill was duplicative of existing law, overly detailed, costly to towns, and potentially electioneering or cumbersome on ballots. Supporters argued it would improve transparency and help voters who do not attend deliberative sessions or use online resources. The committee did not vote on the bill during the discussion; instead, members moved into caucus and later indicated they would hold the bill until Monday for further review. Later, the committee turned to House Bill 699 on special education definitions and considered Amendment 0606H. The sponsor explained the amendment was developed with the Department of Education after hearing testimony and was intended to align state definitions with federal law and incorporate recommendations from a prior audit, including changing “functionally blind pupils” to “students with visual impairments.” Some members supported the changes as responsive to the hearing and audit, while others objected that the amendment was still confusing, had not fully addressed stakeholder concerns, and should wait for a more comprehensive special education audit. The discussion also referenced House Bill 754 and another amendment, but the transcript ends before final action on HB 699 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• There is data available.
• We then collected data in our inaugural year last... 24, we then collected data in our inaugural year
• And on a final note, data matters.
• So start with the data.
• any state-specific data.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Racial Equity, Civil Rights, and Inclusion

Summary: The Joint Committee on Racial Equity, Civil Rights, and Inclusion held a hearing on the impact of federal policy on the racial wealth gap in Massachusetts, with no bills heard. Chairs Bud Williams and Miranda opened by framing the issue as a structural, long-standing disparity affecting Black and brown communities, citing major gaps in wealth, income, housing, and opportunity. Members noted this was the fourth hearing in a series on federal impacts on racial equity, and public written testimony was invited by the posted deadline. Administration witnesses Secretary Lauren Jones, Secretary Kiami Mahania, and Assistant Secretary Juan Vega described how labor, health, and economic development policy intersect with wealth-building. Jones pointed to higher unemployment, wage gaps, and underemployment among Black and Latino workers, and highlighted ESOL, workforce training, MassHire, and skills-based hiring efforts. Mahania argued poverty drives poor health, linking medical debt, Medicaid instability, maternal health, and chronic disease to wealth loss, and said federal changes could worsen both health and wealth gaps. Vega focused on entrepreneurship and procurement, citing disparities in business ownership and revenue, and described state efforts such as small business technical assistance, founder pipelines, place-based grants, and the Business Front Door; members also pressed him on microbusiness definitions, supplier diversity, and whether state programs were reaching firms that had received prior grants. Nicole O’Bean of the Black Economic Council of Massachusetts testified that Black-owned businesses face a hostile environment due to tariffs, DEI rollbacks, immigration enforcement, capital barriers, and federal funding cuts that reduce contracts from education, health care, and nonprofit sectors. She emphasized that certification alone is not enough and called for stronger inclusive procurement outcomes, better data, and more support for microbusinesses. Dr. Melissa Colon and Dr. Fabian Torres-Dal of the Mauricio Gaston Institute testified on Latino wealth gaps, especially low homeownership, high rent burden, limited access to credit, and occupational segregation; they said structural racism, wage gaps, and education inequities are central drivers and urged housing, labor, and education reforms. Committee members repeatedly linked the hearing’s themes to redlining, medical debt, single-parent households, financial literacy, and the need for legislation and state programs to close the gap, but no votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• Want to pursue some sort of agreement with a data center or the build-out of a data center in their community
• to develop a data center or develop the plans.
• Is there a different way that data centers are done?
• Is there a different way that data centers are done?
• Is there a different way that data centers are done?

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and several member introductions, then moved to House messages and special order business. The chamber concurred in amendments and passed Senate Bill 628 on transportation facility designations, CS/CS/HB 1389 on the Live Local affordable housing package, and CS/CS/HB 1451 on utility services. The utility bill’s House amendment shortened the phase-out of certain surcharges tied to bond covenants and advanced reporting deadlines for municipal utilities. The Senate also passed CS/CS/HB 1279, the education bill, after substituting it for SB 7038 and adopting an amendment that combined agreed-upon provisions on student health and safety, early learning, math, virtual instruction, career and technical education, school choice, university accountability, tuition protections, and financial aid. Several other bills were temporarily postponed, including SB 7036, SB 208, SB 1260, and SB 7034. A major portion of the meeting focused on CS/CS/HB 484, the data centers bill. Senators discussed the House amendment’s changes to ratepayer protections, the removal of the Senate’s nondisclosure-agreement prohibition, the 12-month confidentiality period, and a required OPAGA study. Supporters emphasized stronger language preventing data center costs from being shifted to residential and commercial ratepayers, while opponents raised concerns about transparency, local notice, and the possibility that communities could be kept unaware of projects for up to a year. After debate, the Senate concurred in the House amendment and passed the bill. The chamber then took up CS/CS/HB 399 on land use and development regulations, where debate centered on a proposed Fontainebleau Hotel water park project in Miami Beach and a series of amendments. One amendment to remove the project-specific language failed, while other amendments were adopted, including a sunset provision and a change related to compost facility permitting. A broader amendment dealing with Miami-Dade’s urban development boundary was also adopted, preserving the existing supermajority threshold for changes. The most contentious proposal was an amendment by Senator Martin creating a process for property owners to challenge rural boundary designations and seek compensation or removal from the designation without going to court; senators debated property rights, local planning, and the impact on Orange and Seminole counties, and the discussion included sharp exchanges before the transcript ended during debate on that amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• only had three months of data.
• In addition to charge-level data, we also have data on the individual. I'm sorry.
• In addition to the charge-level data, we also have data on the individual.
• The pending felony count data.
• They have to match up the data.

Committee: Senate Human Services

Summary: The Senate Human Services Committee held a work session focused first on the impacts of H.R. 1 on Medicaid and SNAP, especially for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, older adults, and low-income families. DSHS Assistant Secretary B. Rector explained Washington’s Medicaid structure for developmental disabilities and long-term care, noting that most community-based services are optional under federal Medicaid rules and could be vulnerable if state budgets tighten. He described several H.R. 1 changes, including possible cost sharing, a lower home equity limit, work requirements affecting the ACA expansion population, immigration-related eligibility losses, and a future new waiver opportunity. He said Washington could see about 2,700 people lose Medicaid eligibility due to immigration status and that most people with DD or long-term care needs would likely qualify for work requirement exemptions, but he warned that reduced federal dollars could put home and community-based services at risk. Advocates and providers described the practical effects of Medicaid cuts on crisis services, supported living, and family stability. Dr. Eric Bolter said Washington has only a small continuum of services for people with IDD and severe behavioral needs, and that lower ABA reimbursement and other Medicaid reductions could shrink already limited outpatient, residential, and inpatient options, leading to more hospital stays and out-of-state placements. Scott Leavengood said supported living is already underfunded, with high turnover and staffing shortages, and warned that past cuts led to longer waitlists and fewer people served. Stacey Dimm of The Arc of Washington argued that HCBS is the main service system for most people with developmental disabilities and that cuts would push people into more restrictive and expensive institutional care. She also emphasized that many families already lack access to paid services and that workforce, housing, and family support shortages make the system fragile. The committee then shifted to SNAP and food assistance. DSHS Assistant Secretary Carla Reyes outlined H.R. 1 changes to SNAP, including expanded work requirements, reduced exemptions, tighter immigration eligibility, elimination of the SNAP education program, higher state administrative costs, and a new state share of benefit costs tied to error rates. She said about 129,000 Washington residents could be at risk under the new work rules, roughly 30,000 legal immigrants could move to the state-funded food program, and the state could face hundreds of millions in new costs. Anti-hunger advocates and food bank leaders said the changes would increase hunger and administrative burden while reducing benefits, and they stressed that food banks cannot replace SNAP. A SNAP recipient, Amy Rourke, testified that even with extensive civic involvement she barely meets the proposed work-hour threshold and said the rules would punish parents, caregivers, and people facing transportation or child care barriers. She urged the state to count caregiving, advocacy, and community service as qualifying work and to build more flexible pathways for compliance. In the second half of the meeting, the committee turned to juvenile rehabilitation caseload forecasting and court data. Caseload Forecast Council staff presented the current JR forecast, saying caseloads had declined for years, rebounded after COVID, and are now projected to remain mostly flat through the current biennium before rising modestly over the longer term. Members asked about the distinction between regular JR and adult-sentenced youth, and staff explained that longer lengths of stay in the adult-sentenced population reflect policy choices made in prior legislation. Andrew Peterson of the Administrative Office of the Courts described data-sharing efforts intended to help JR forecast admissions, including quarterly counts of pending felony cases and youth criminal history information. He said the courts began sharing some data in 2022 and 2024, but staffing limits interrupted the effort, and JR recently asked to resume and expand the information flow to support weekly forecasting and better planning for facility capacity.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm here to present SB 978, the Data Center Community Accountability Act.
• Data centers are facilities that house and operate large-scale computer systems for data storage, as
• The Data Center Coalition is a national trade association serving as the voice of the data center industry
• of data center capacity.
• the latest government spending data suggests that the data center industry's total state and local tax

Summary: The committee heard several bills focused on workplace technology, labor protections, and data center oversight. SB 947, the No Robo Bosses Act of 2026, would require human review before automated systems are used in discipline, termination, or deactivation decisions and would ban predictive behavior analysis in the workplace. Labor groups, worker advocates, and privacy organizations supported the bill, arguing AI can be biased and should not make life-changing employment decisions without human judgment. Business groups opposed it, saying it was broader than prior versions, could interfere with workplace safety tools, and should not include a private right of action or cover independent contractors. After discussion about due process and accountability, the bill passed the committee 3-1 and was sent to the Senate Committee on Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection. SB 978, the Data Center Community Accountability Act, would require data centers to pay upfront for new transmission or distribution infrastructure, create a separate rate structure so costs are not shifted to other ratepayers, and include skilled-and-trained labor standards for construction. Supporters said the bill would protect ratepayers, create good construction jobs, and encourage zero-carbon energy development. Opponents, including the Data Center Coalition and Silicon Valley Leadership Group, argued the CPUC already has ongoing proceedings on these issues and warned the bill could single out one industry and discourage investment. The committee members emphasized labor standards and community concerns, and the bill passed 3-0 to the Senate Committee on Appropriations. SB 951, the California Worker Technological Displacement Act, would expand WARN-style notice requirements for layoffs caused by AI or automation, require reporting to workers, local government, and EDD, and give displaced workers first consideration for other openings. Supporters said the bill responds to rapid AI-driven layoffs and would provide needed transparency and data. Opponents said the definitions were too broad, the notice requirements too burdensome, and the bill conflicted with existing WARN law; they also objected to the private right of action and inclusion of independent contractors. The committee discussed amendments clarifying that an employee may still be discharged for reasonable and substantiated cause during the notice period. The bill passed 3-1 to the Senate Committee on Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection. The committee also approved SB 1032, which would create a licensing and regulatory framework for temporary staffing agencies, and SB 1046, which would direct Cal/OSHA to develop standards to protect lifeguards and park rangers from transboundary pollution in the Tijuana River Valley. SB 1032 drew support from labor and enforcement advocates who said it would help stop staffing fraud, while staffing firms argued the bill was vague and could burden legitimate small businesses; it passed 3-1 to the Senate Committee on Judiciary. SB 1046 was supported by park workers and community groups describing health impacts from pollution and passed 4-0 to the Senate Committee on Appropriations. The committee also took up a consent item, which passed 4-0, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• As such, critical early childhood data often lives within only one state agency's data system.
• And while this bill establishes a data system, it is important to note that the goal is not the data
• Since California has separate systems housing these data, in order to have a robust data set, linkages
• In order to have a robust data set, linkages need to be made between disparate data systems that collect
• and define data differently.

Committee: House Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• It just says that ratepayers cannot subsidize data centers.
• It just says that ratepayers cannot subsidize data centers.
• It just says that ratepayers cannot subsidize data centers.
• All of this uh subsidize data centers.
• </c><00:23:51.039><c> So</c> impacts of these data centers. So impacts of these data centers.

Committee: House Economic Development & Workforce Investment