Transcript Highlights:

• And this has been used um 22, 23 different times since the early 70s and kind of by default, you need

Transcript Highlights:

• It's not a default, but we are relying upon them. And oftentimes, It's only their words.

Bills: HB 3772, HB 1656, HB 4504, HB 1896, HB 4420, HB 4421, HB 4076, HB 3708, HB 2806, HB 3540, HB 1586, HB 5459, HB 4553, HB 4535, HB 3811, HB 3749, HB 4255, HB 4051, HB 5098, HB 3554, HB 4539, HB 5274

Keywords: e-cigarettes, health and safety, regulations, directory, penalties, regulation, certification, compliance, manufacturers, FDA, nicotine, mental health, emergency detention, paramedic authority, mental illness, healthcare facility, public health, covenants not to compete, health care practitioners, physicians

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, the normal default rule for negligence would apply.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Unfortunately, current practice too often defaults to supervised visits, even when supervision is not

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Human Services heard a long agenda of bills focused largely on child welfare, foster care, child care, CalWORKs, mandated reporting, and public benefits. Early items included AB 890, which would ease county transfer rules for nonminor dependents in extended foster care; AB 461, which would replace punitive truancy-related penalties with supportive services for families; and AB 753, which would create an interim associate teacher pathway to help address the child care workforce shortage. Testimony on these bills emphasized barriers faced by foster youth, low-income families, and child care providers, and members expressed support for the general policy direction. The committee also heard AB 926 on foster care visitation, AB 563 on early childhood planning and reporting, AB 601 on standardized mandated reporter training, AB 1074 on CalWORKs reunification aid, AB 822 extending the Commission on the State of Hate, AB 970 creating a Los Angeles County mandated reporter pilot, AB 1161 protecting public benefits during disasters, AB 1172 allowing trained staff to administer emergency seizure medication in community care settings, and AB 363 expanding CalWORKs student supports and work-study. Witnesses generally supported these measures as ways to reduce trauma, improve reunification, modernize reporting and training, and expand access to services. County welfare and child welfare groups, advocacy organizations, and providers largely testified in support, while some bills drew concerns from county representatives about implementation or needed amendments. Several bills were voted out of committee, often unanimously and sometimes as amended, including AB 926, AB 563, AB 601, AB 1074, AB 822, AB 970, AB 1161, and AB 1172; AB 1172 was reported on call. The committee also took up consent items and later voted on subcommittee-held bills AB 461, AB 753, and AB 890, leaving them on call. At the end of the hearing, the committee heard AB 1211, which would protect CalFresh benefits from federal cuts and require a feasibility study on increasing benefits and eligibility; testimony stressed rising food insecurity and the economic importance of food assistance, but the transcript ends before a final vote on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• The worst case scenario is actually defaulting.

Bills: SJR 12, SJR 81, SCR 39, SB 22, SB 32, SB 241, SB 393, SB 414, SB 458, SB 464, SB 568, SB 583, SB 609, SB 660, SB 693, SB 731, SB 732, SB 746, SB 783, SB 785, SB 897, SB 993, SB 996, SB 1008, SB 1029, SB 1035, SB 1036, SB 1120, SB 1122, SB 1147, SB 1163, SB 1188, SB 1197, SB 1209, SB 1227, SB 1245, SB 1267, SB 1307, SB 1321, SB 1332, SB 1386, SB 1394, SB 1396, SB 1470, SB 1494, SB 1537, SB 1596, SB 1598, SB 1610, SB 1664, SB 1814, SB 1822, SB 1841, SB 1948, SB 2065, SB 2155, SB 2406, SB 2407, SJR 12, SJR 36, SJR 81, SJR 50, SJR 4, SCR 22, SCR 12, SCR 39, SB 765, SB 62, SB 666, SB 888, SB 687, SB 847, SB 1248, SB 504, SB 305, SB 296, SB 284, SB 241, SB 304, SB 1023, SB 204, SB 609, SB 670, SB 850, SB 854, SB 413, SB 1346, SB 1033, SB 1220, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 1539, SB 447, SB 1119, SB 1505, SB 1215, SB 1302, SB 583, SB 673, SB 681, SB 1172, SB 955, SB 957, SB 1120, SB 541, SB 266, SB 1415, SB 53, SB 1352, SB 785, SB 1450, SB 1502, SB 1566, SB 414, SB 1062, SB 711, SB 746, SB 1404, SB 1448, SB 507, SB 1026, SB 1349, SB 1355, SB 1433, SB 1434, SB 1596, SB 1403, SB 667, SB 1059, SB 1567, SB 310, SB 311, SB 505, SB 1209, SB 1210, SB 1470, SB 264, SB 1029, SB 1358, SB 1364, SB 1569, SB 1376, SB 1228, SB 519, SB 1350, SB 462, SB 827, SB 1585, SB 1396, SB 1484, SB 1273, SB 927, SB 1227, SB 1229, SB 1353, SB 1464, SB 1709, SB 1729, SB 1733, SB 1744, SB 1772, SB 1841, SB 1147, SB 1008, SB 2016, SB 1173, SB 1163, SB 996, SB 568, SB 1370, SB 1321, SB 1101, SB 860, SB 993, SB 693, SB 1610, SB 1537, SB 1332, SB 1307, SB 963, SB 493, SB 984, SB 619, SB 1122, SB 455, SB 522, SB 1057, SB 1239, SB 1254, SB 1255, SB 1259, SB 1341, SB 1664, SB 1877, SB 464, SB 1277, SB 32, SB 732, SB 660, SB 731, SB 921, SB 268, SB 1822, SB 1188, SB 1589, SB 397, SB 1058, SB 1036, SB 1267, SB 2112, SB 1930, SB 532, SB 1035, SB 2155, SB 508, SB 292, SB 291, SB 901, SB 1333, SB 1436, SB 1494, SB 964, SB 779, SB 1378, SB 2312, SB 1719, SB 1386, SB 287, SB 2143, SB 1245, SB 261, SB 1247, SB 1948, SB 2406, SB 2407, SB 1882, SB 1197, SB 1814, SB 618, SB 38, SB 393, SB 2065, SB 1371, SB 1394, SB 1365, SB 2243, SB 2226, SB 2039, SB 1919, SB 1895, SB 1598, SB 1493, SB 1810, SB 1791, SB 1706, SB 1644, SB 1238, SB 783, SB 458, SB 22, SB 651, SB 897, SB 1809, SB 1080, SB 745, SB 826, SB 989, SB 1320, SB 1437, SB 2320, SB 2289, SB 1171, SB 664, SB 1637, SB 2064, SB 868, SJR 40, SJR 27, SCR 38, SCR 37, SB 1079, SB 1243, SB 1504, SB 1851, SB 1879, SB 2237, SB 1257, SB 2034, SB 1522, SB 883, SB 249, SB 1318, SB 1151, SB 596, SB 1191, SB 226, SB 570, SB 870, SB 991, SB 60, SB 365, SB 1067, SB 1786, SB 326, SB 1401, SB 1592, SB 1728, SB 1265, SB 586, SB 529, SB 217, SB 209, SB 1923, SB 1559, SB 1839, SB 387, SB 1874, SB 1872, SB 1873, SB 1921, SB 1883, SB 1677, SB 95, SB 1620, SB 1838, SB 2024, SB 2429, SB 1999, SB 511, SB 2309, SB 2166, SB 871, SB 510, SB 33, SB 2420, SB 1860, SB 1541, SB 1316, SB 1314, SB 1313, SB 1426, SB 1398, SB 1869, SB 1750, SB 1871, SB 36, SB 855, SB 1233, SB 760, SB 2425, SB 2037, SB 1758, SB 1759, SB 2365, SB 1924, SB 762, SB 1271, SB 1818, SB 605, SB 1405, SB 1762, SB 1968, SB 1977, SB 2077, SB 2148, SB 2321, SB 1967, SB 1662, SB 1663, SB 2124, SB 2204

Keywords: parental rights, education, constitutional amendment, school choice, child education, tax exemption, ad valorem, tangible personal property, income production, border security, southern border, federal immigration policy, illegal immigration, cartels, transnational cartels, fentanyl, drug trafficking, human trafficking, Operation Lone Star, Texas border

Summary: The meeting primarily focused on educational reforms, particularly in special education funding. Notably, Senator Bettencourt laid out the transformative impacts of Senate Bill 568, which aims to lift a historical cap on special education funding that affected approximately 775,000 students. The discussions included plans for an intensity-based funding model that could ensure fair distribution of resources depending on individual needs, thereby enhancing educational support for diverse learning requirements. Senators acknowledged past failures in the special education framework, emphasizing the necessity of moving towards a system that is transparent and focused on delivering adequate services.

Transcript Highlights:

• They default to what the law is in the state of Texas, which I think, again, is fair. So, but I do.

Bills: HB 1239, HB1990, HB1748, HB1749, HB2578, HB2986, HB1970, HB3163, HB2733, HB1922, HB 113, HB 1088, HB1938, HB3004, HB2637, HB2960, HB113

Keywords: public health, access to healthcare, insurance reforms, medical expenses, healthcare providers, mental health, protective custody, preliminary examination, detention period, emergency circumstances, emergency detention, legal framework, detention, healthcare, liability, landowners, nonagricultural land, trespassing, public safety, interpreters

Transcript Highlights:

• Property-based businesses, especially small property owners, could face defaults on loans and be forced

Summary: The committee heard several public safety-related bills. AB 383 by Assembly Member Davies would expand and clarify firearm restrictions tied to juvenile adjudications, allow certain minor firearm possession for hunting or training with guardian approval, and authorize warrants in some domestic violence-related firearm surrender situations. Supporters, including a district attorney representative, argued it would close gaps in existing law and improve public safety; opponents said it would over-criminalize youth and disproportionately affect marginalized communities. The bill passed as amended to Appropriations. AB 400 by Assembly Member Pacheco would require law enforcement K-9 units to meet statewide POST standards covering training, use of force, and handler skills. Supporters said the bill would create consistency, accountability, and safer deployments; opponents argued the standards were inadequate and would legitimize harmful canine practices. After debate over whether the bill expanded canine use or simply standardized it, the committee approved AB 400 and sent it to Appropriations. AB 380 by Assembly Member Gonzalez would extend price-gouging protections during emergencies, including for hotels, food, essential goods and services, and commercial property, and would remove the 12-month lease limit loophole for rent gouging. Supporters said the bill responds to wildfire-related exploitation and provides clarity for disaster victims; business and landlord groups warned it could amount to commercial rent control and create uncertainty for future emergencies. The author said he would continue working on amendments, and the bill passed as amended to Appropriations. AB 358 by Assembly Member Alvarez would create a narrow exception to Cal-ECPA so law enforcement could inspect tracking or surveillance devices found in a person’s home, vehicle, or property with the finder’s consent. Supporters said the change would help stalking and domestic violence victims preserve evidence quickly; privacy advocates argued warrants and existing emergency exceptions already cover these situations. The chair proposed narrowing the language to “tracking or surveillance device,” and the bill was held on call after an initial roll with only three votes in favor. The transcript also began AB 247, which would raise pay for incarcerated hand crew firefighters, with testimony from formerly incarcerated firefighters in support, but the discussion was not completed in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, we're happy to say during the life of that program, we've never had a default in the history of the

Transcript Highlights:

• We've never had a default in the history of the program. We serve only public entities.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• it's<02:14:38.800> more<02:14:38.960> of<02:14:39.119> a<02:14:39.280> default
• <02:14:40.639> to where you know it's more of a default to where you know it's more of a default
• 02:16:37.599> the<02:16:37.760> language<02:16:39.120> the<02:16:39.439> defaults
• you have all the language the defaults you have all the language the defaults towards<02:16:41.040

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That's within our general public funds titles, and that just governs all enterprise funds kind of as a default
• That's within our general public funds titles, and that just governs all enterprise funds kind of as a default
• kind<00:14:49.600> of<00:14:49.680> as<00:14:49.839> a<00:14:50.079> default
• enterprise funds kind of as a default enterprise funds kind of as a default for<00:14:50.639>

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• mean, I heard from some folks afterward that they just simply don't understand insurance and will default
• mean, I heard from some folks afterward that they just simply don't understand insurance and will default
• I heard from some folks afterward that they just simply don't understand insurance and will default against
• The amendment removed that, thus making it the default effectiveness date, which is why we don't see
• The amendment removed that, thus making it the default effectiveness date, which is why we don't see

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, we still have paper as the default.
• So, we still have paper as the default.
• So, we still have paper as the default.<00:42:23.920> It<00:42:24.160> doesn't<00:42:24.400
• > change<00:42:24.640> the<00:42:24.880> interface default.
• It doesn't change the interface default.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The House convened, established a quorum, and approved the journal from February 4, 2026. Members then took up resolutions out of order, including Senate Joint Resolution 9 recognizing Missing Persons Day. Supporters described the scale of missing-person cases in Colorado and nationally, emphasized the role of families, law enforcement, and the public, and noted the importance of prompt investigations and technology. The resolution was adopted on a 58-0 vote, with seven excused. The chamber then moved to special orders and considered House Bill 1041, concerning electronic vehicle records and electronic certificates of title. The committee report was adopted after an amendment clarifying that any party to a vehicle transaction may request a paper or electronic title. Supporters said the bill would reduce delays, costs, and administrative burdens while preserving ownership and lienholder protections and keeping paper titles available as the default. The bill passed the House unanimously. Finally, the House began consideration of House Bill 1038 on county commissioner redistricting. The sponsor outlined seven committee amendments addressing county commissioner authority, outdated hearing references, competitiveness language, legislative declaration wording, elector standing to challenge maps, a correction to the competitiveness formula, and a bill-number fix. Debate then focused on amendment L10, which would remove the word “integrity” from the short title; supporters said the term could imply wrongdoing, while opponents wanted to keep it. L10 failed on a voice vote. Members then moved to amendment L8, which would carve out smaller counties from the bill’s redistricting requirements; discussion began, but the transcript cuts off before a final vote on that amendment or the bill itself.

Transcript Highlights:

• For example, this act provides clear default rules allowing owners to resolve these disputes lawfully
• 00:07:09.280> act<00:07:09.599> provides<00:07:10.080> clear<00:07:10.400> default
• <00:07:10.800> rules this act provides clear default rules this act provides clear default
• It's a default waiver that the towns get as a deed restriction for disclaiming any responsibility for

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Not by verbiage of the bill, but by default with the laws that have been passed?"
• Not by verbiage of the bill, but by default with the laws that have been passed?"
• Not by verbiage of the bill,<03:11:27.200> but<03:11:27.520> by<03:11:27.680> default
• with<03:11:28.479> the<03:11:29.200> with<03:11:29.439> the bill, but by default
• with the with the bill, but by default with the with the laws<03:11:29.920> that<03:11:30.080

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• emphasizing at least three concerns: the right to know, the right to erasure, and strong privacy by default
• Protections should be by default.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee hearing focused on a package of Massachusetts privacy and technology bills, especially measures to ban the sale of location data, establish a comprehensive consumer data privacy law, and regulate biometric recognition and surveillance pricing. Chairs and sponsors argued that self-regulation has failed, that data brokers and large tech companies routinely collect and monetize sensitive information, and that state action is needed because federal protections are weak or absent. Several speakers tied the bills to reproductive health, gender-affirming care, domestic violence, children’s data, and other sensitive uses of location and biometric information. Supporters included legislators and advocates who backed H. 86/S. 197 (Location Shield), H. 78/S. 45/H. 104/S. 29 (comprehensive privacy bills), H. 99/S. 47 (surveillance pricing in grocery stores), and H. 36/S. 36 (biometric recognition accountability). They emphasized data minimization, bans on selling sensitive data, consumer rights to access, delete, and opt out, and in some cases a private right of action. Several witnesses said Massachusetts should lead or align with other states, while others argued that stronger protections are needed because data can be weaponized by stalkers, anti-abortion actors, abusive partners, insurers, or law enforcement. Industry and coalition witnesses urged the committee to favor a more standardized, interoperable framework modeled on laws already adopted in other states, warning that novel definitions, data-minimization rules, and private rights of action could create compliance burdens, confusion, and costs for businesses, including small businesses. They argued that entity-level exemptions for sectors already covered by federal laws like HIPAA or GLBA promote consistency, and that Attorney General enforcement is preferable to private lawsuits. Committee members questioned witnesses on patchwork concerns, the scope of exemptions, and whether the proposed bills would harm or help consumers and small businesses. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing; written testimony was noted as due later, and the committee continued taking testimony from multiple panels and virtual witnesses.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we've spent years teaching him to say, 'No, speak to my parents,' but he always gives a default reply
• And we've spent years teaching him to say, 'No, speak to my parents,' but he always gives a default reply

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on the Judiciary held a lengthy hearing on several juvenile justice and parole-related bills, with much of the testimony focused on H. 2051/S. 1087 to end lifetime parole for juveniles and emerging adults, and H. 1923 to raise the age of juvenile court jurisdiction to include 18-, 19-, and 20-year-olds. Chairs Brandy Fluker-Reid and Lydia Edwards opened the hearing by noting the large number of bills and witnesses, the need to keep testimony moving, and special procedures for incarcerated witnesses and sensitive testimony. They also acknowledged the historic nature of the hearing being chaired by two Black women attorneys. No votes were taken during the hearing itself. Many incarcerated speakers and advocates supported ending lifetime parole, arguing that young people can change, that lifetime supervision creates constant fear of technical violations, and that it undermines rehabilitation, family stability, employment, and reintegration. Several testified about their own trauma, youth, and growth in prison programs, while others emphasized the costs of decades of supervision and the racial disparities in the system. Support also came from elected officials, UTEC, the Transformational Prison Project, United Way, CPCS’s Youth Advocacy Division, the Massachusetts Coalition to Prevent Gun Violence, and others, who said juvenile systems are better suited to developmentally appropriate treatment and that the bills would improve public safety and reduce recidivism. There was also opposition, including testimony from family members of a murder victim who argued that lifetime parole should remain for serious violent crimes and that some offenders are not sufficiently rehabilitated. One virtual witness described a family tragedy involving the kidnapping and murder of her infant nephew and warned that ending lifetime parole could remove needed long-term supervision for dangerous offenders. In addition to the juvenile justice bills, the committee heard testimony on H. 1867, a bill related to continuing care for severe mental illness, and H. 2063, which would increase penalties for assaults on correction officers and other prison staff; the correction officers’ union supported H. 2063 and related safety bills. The hearing continued with many more witnesses and bill topics, but no final committee action was announced in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• In this case, it targeted infant/toddler care as one of their priorities, and then we also default to
• And then we also default to local planning council data.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The subcommittee first heard May Revision items for child support, child care, and related human services. The Department of Child Support Services described two technical adjustments, which the LAO said raised no concerns. The Department of Social Services then walked through child care proposals, including a shift in how federal and Proposition 64 funding reductions would be absorbed, a 2.01% COLA, disaster-related child care infrastructure grants, an increase in in-contract administrative support costs for alternative payment agencies, reversion of prospective-pay implementation funding after a federal rule change, a one-time allocation to cover the first quarter of Cost of Care Plus payments in the next fiscal year, reappropriation for existing infrastructure grant closeout work, and estimates of unspent child care funds. The department also outlined trailer bill language on a single rate structure, site safety and emergency procedures, CalWORKs child care data sharing, and child care oversight. The LAO recommended that the Legislature seek more justification for shifting reductions from General Child Care to the Alternative Payment Program, noting that CAP reductions affect more slots and that General Child Care has had significant unspent funds. It supported removing prospective-pay funding, but recommended rejecting the administrative cost shift to a percentage-based rate because it could create future General Fund pressure. It also suggested the Legislature review alignment between the disaster grants and the child care infrastructure program. Senators and members pressed the administration on why the budget would reduce child care slots and COLA percentages while the state still has waitlists and unspent funds, and questioned the need for early funding of Cost of Care Plus payments and the move from a flat administrative amount to a percentage. Public commenters, including providers, advocates, county offices, and infrastructure partners, urged full COLA funding, preservation of child care slots, support for prospective pay, and continued investment in child care access and facilities. After a short recess, the committee moved to Part B on health and heard the Department of State Hospitals. DSH presented a May Revision budget of $3.2 billion and described proposals for a central utility plant replacement at Metropolitan State Hospital, an electronic health record implementation, reduced county bed billing authority due to phased-in LPS bed capacity, limited contract exemption authority for online clinical subscriptions, reversion of prior-year unspent operating funds, and a workforce development proposal shifting some costs to Behavioral Health Services Act funds, including support for an additional psychiatric training cohort at Napa. The department also outlined IST-related savings and a trailer bill to remove the sunset on the independent placement panel program.

Transcript Highlights:

• would just say that we're just trying to, this bill is really not about enhancing penalties or defaulting
• an ability to evade the true costs of that shadow economy that they're profiting. penalties or defaulting

Summary: The committee met without a quorum and operated as a subcommittee while hearing several bills, with members repeatedly noting that votes would be taken later once a quorum was established. Early in the meeting, the committee heard SB 1446 on parole en banc review and SB 1278 on elderly parole eligibility for certain sex offenses. SB 1446’s author said the bill would give commissioners more discretion in en banc review, make votes public, and allow referral for sexually violent predator evaluation in certain cases; supporters included the California District Attorneys Association, while opponents from Uncommon Law, the Ella Baker Center, and public defender groups argued it would add confusion, create constitutional and litigation concerns, and duplicate existing safeguards. SB 1278 would exclude certain rape, child sexual abuse, and habitual/serial sex offense convictions from elderly parole eligibility; district attorneys and police chiefs supported it as a victim-safety measure, while civil rights and defense organizations opposed it as unnecessary, costly, and inconsistent with evidence on aging and recidivism. Both bills were discussed but not voted on due to the lack of quorum. The committee then heard SB 1354, which would bar out-of-state military or law enforcement personnel from entering California to perform such functions without the Governor’s permission. The author and supporters framed it as protecting state sovereignty and limiting unauthorized armed incursions; the committee accepted an amendment removing a criminal penalty and leaving enforcement to the Attorney General. No opposition testimony was offered, and members expressed support, but no vote was taken because quorum was still lacking. The committee also heard SB 926, a bill to fund implementation of Proposition 36. Supporters, including sheriffs, district attorneys, probation officials, and the League of California Cities, said local agencies need funding for treatment, supervision, and administration; opponents argued the proposal was fiscally reckless, lacked accountability, and overemphasized incarceration. Amendments removed a specific appropriation and shifted funding decisions to the budget process, but the bill was also held pending quorum. Later, the committee heard SB 874, which would require background checks for unlicensed providers of Medi-Cal behavioral health treatment services, create a stakeholder workgroup, and direct DHCS to issue guidance and report on program integrity. Support came from local health plans and behavior analysis providers, who said the bill would improve safety and consistency; there was no opposition testimony. The committee then heard SB 1210, which would extend CalGang oversight and due process protections to local gang databases as well as shared ones. Supporters described privacy abuses, racial disparities, and personal harm from inaccurate gang labels; law enforcement opposition argued the bill would impose CalGang standards on informal investigative files and would significantly change the gang definition. The author said the bill closes a loophole and preserves prior reforms, but no vote was taken. The committee also began hearing SB 1019 on creating a California Cargo Thief Task Force, with strong support from BNSF, trucking, shipping, port, and supply-chain representatives who described organized, multi-jurisdictional cargo theft and rail sabotage; no opposition was heard, and members indicated support, but action was deferred pending quorum. The meeting then moved to SB 1217 on a non-consensual intimate image clearinghouse, with the chair and author describing privacy-related amendments and the bill’s focus on helping survivors remove exploitative images; the transcript cuts off as that presentation began.

Transcript Highlights:

• I would just say that we’re just trying to—this bill is really not about enhancing penalties or defaulting
• We’re just trying to—this bill is really not about enhancing penalties or defaulting, say, to increased

Summary: The committee met without a quorum and operated as a subcommittee while hearing several bills on public safety, parole, criminal justice oversight, Proposition 36 implementation, behavioral health, gang database reform, cargo theft, and nonconsensual intimate images. The chair explained hearing procedures and noted that SB 906 was pulled from the agenda. Several measures were heard but not voted on because quorum was lacking. SB 1446, a committee bill, would expand discretion in en banc parole review, make en banc votes public record, and allow CDCR referrals for sexually violent predator evaluation of certain incarcerated people serving determinate or indeterminate terms. Support came from the California District Attorneys Association; opposition came from the Ella Baker Center, Uncommon Law, public defenders, and others who argued it would add confusion, litigation risk, and unnecessary duplication. The author said the bill was intended to clarify review standards and improve transparency. SB 1278 would exclude certain sex offenses and habitual/one-strike offenders from elderly parole eligibility. The San Diego District Attorney’s Office and California District Attorneys Association supported it, citing cases such as Gregory Vogelsang and David Funston; opponents from Uncommon Law, the Ella Baker Center, and others argued elderly parole is already highly restrictive, evidence-based, and cost-effective. Vice Chair Seyarto strongly supported SB 1278, emphasizing victim justice and public safety. SB 1354 would bar out-of-state military personnel not operating under Title 10 from entering California to perform military or law enforcement functions without the governor’s permission; a committee amendment removed a criminal penalty and left enforcement to the Attorney General. SB 926 would provide funding for Proposition 36 implementation, with committee amendments deleting a specific appropriation and shifting funding decisions to the budget process; supporters said counties need resources for treatment, probation, and administration, while opponents criticized the bill as fiscally reckless and duplicative. SB 874 would require background checks and clearer statewide standards for Medi-Cal behavioral health treatment services, especially ABA services for children; supporters said it would improve patient safety and program integrity. SB 1210 would extend CalGang-style oversight, notice, appeal, and DOJ regulation to all gang databases, not just shared ones; supporters described harms from inaccurate, unregulated local databases, while police chiefs opposed applying the CalGang framework to all local investigative files. The committee also heard SB 1019, which would create a DOJ cargo theft task force and add reporting requirements; supporters from BNSF, trucking, shipping, ports, and law enforcement said organized cargo theft is harming supply chains and worker safety, and no opposition was presented. Finally, SB 1217 would create a DOJ clearinghouse to help victims remove nonconsensual intimate images, including AI-generated deepfakes, from covered platforms; amendments narrowed the bill’s scope and clarified law enforcement’s role. The author and survivor witnesses described ongoing trauma from repeated reposting of exploitative images and argued the bill would provide a centralized removal process. The transcript ends during testimony on SB 1217, with no final votes taken on the measures heard.