Transcript Highlights:

• forensic medical records of a child who's been a victim of child abuse or neglect, or a forensic interview
• These children are entrusting CACs with their forensic evidence interview, their medical records that
• judge in issuing a protective order to protect the child from the abuser to look at that forensic interview
• judge in issuing a protective order to protect the child from the abuser to look at that forensic interview

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and considered several bills, mostly dealing with open meetings, public records, election administration, and local government notice requirements. Senate Bill 1 by Sen. Jenkins would authorize electronic voting under the Open Meetings Law and apply retroactively to validate prior electronic votes; after brief discussion and support from the Louisiana Municipal Association, it was reported favorably. House Bill 1052 by Rep. Spell would exempt certain child advocacy center and multidisciplinary team work product, forensic interviews, and related sensitive records from public records disclosure to protect child abuse investigations; testimony from child advocacy organizations emphasized the need to prevent misuse of records and preserve court-controlled access, and the bill was reported favorably. Senate Bill 289 by Sen. Abraham, concerning confidentiality of certain university records and negotiations, was amended to clarify protections for proprietary research, donor confidentiality, and limited confidentiality for industry negotiations, then reported favorably as amended. Senate Bill 218 by Sen. Talbot, allowing alternative certification programs for election officials if approved by the State Board of Election Supervisors, and Senate Bill 220, a technical correction regarding the official journal of the state, were both reported favorably. Senate Bill 161 by Sen. Seaball, repealing a requirement that certain high-salary unclassified state employees register vehicles in Louisiana, was also reported favorably after questions about its scope and purpose. The committee then took up House Bill 1193 by Rep. Sawyer, which authorizes the Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority to use indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity construction contracts for maintenance and emergency work. CPRA officials said the model would speed small repairs and pre-construction tasks, improve efficiency, and mirror a similar DOTD approach; an amendment narrowed the public-records language and excluded design-build contracting. Members raised concerns about public records transparency and inclusion of minority and small contractors, but the bill was reported favorably as amended. House Bill 249 by Rep. Green, a constitutional amendment creating an independent compensation commission for elected officials and tying adjustments to CPI, drew extensive debate over removing the legislature from setting salaries, the appointment structure, and whether the state could afford automatic increases. After opposition from several members and a roll-call vote, the bill failed to be reported, 6 yeas to 9 nays. Because HB 249 failed, the companion enabling bill, House Bill 248, was deferred. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 997 by Rep. Edmondson, which would let parishes, municipalities, and school boards use their own websites as an alternative to newspaper publication for public notices. Supporters from the Police Jury Association argued the bill would reduce duplicative costs, preserve all existing notice requirements, and simply add a third option alongside newspaper publication and newspaper-hosted digital publication. An amendment narrowed the bill to parishes, municipalities, and school boards, removing other political subdivisions. Members questioned transparency, enforcement, record retention, and whether the change would undermine newspapers; supporters said courts would still enforce notice requirements and that local governments already maintain the records. The bill remained under discussion at the end of the transcript, with no final action shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• . >> Let's go bigger picture, and you mentioned this in the beginning of the interview, but the federal
• be very helpful there. >> Let's go bigger picture, and you mentioned this in the beginning of the interview
• be very helpful there. >> Let's go bigger picture, and you mentioned this in the beginning of the interview
• uh great to be here. >> Let's go bigger picture, and you mentioned this in the beginning of the interview

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And we have expressly excluded prosecutorial records, law enforcement records, and forensic interview
• records, law enforcement records, and records, law enforcement records, and forensic<00:45:18.319> interview
• <00:45:18.800> recordings<00:45:19.280> of forensic interview recordings of forensic
• interview recordings of records.<00:45:19.839> There<00:45:20.000> were<00:45:20.160><

Bills: HB227, HB454, SB323, HB266, SB52, SB53, SB296, HB37, HB429, HB93, HB249, HB328, HB111, HB132, HB26, SB261, HB227, HB454, SB323, HB266, SB52, SB53, SB296, HB37, HB429, HB93, HB249, HB328, HB111, HB132, HB26, SB261

Keywords: firefighter benefits, occupational disease, line of duty, disability pension, death benefits, retirement benefits, hypertension, heart disease, respiratory disease, cancer presumption, HIV, hepatitis, municipal firefighters, state firefighters, fire districts, workers' compensation, public safety employees, post-retirement benefits, benefit eligibility cutoff, occupational illness

Transcript Highlights:

• So this means Guardians ad Litem conduct interviews and observe children and significant people in their
• c><00:04:47.400> conduct Guardians ad light them conduct Guardians ad light them conduct interviews
• and<00:04:48.400> observe<00:04:48.840> children<00:04:49.320> and interviews
• and observe children and interviews and observe children and significant<00:04:50.000> people

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee approved the January 21 minutes and then reviewed committee rules, emphasizing deadlines for handouts, testimony notices, and substantive amendments, along with a warning that disruptive signs, noise, or demonstrations could lead to removal from the hearing room. The chair said the rules would be shared with the full House and noted the committee would operate with quorum and not tolerate chaos. The committee then heard a presentation from Tammy Baker Olson, the state program administrator for the Guardian ad Litem Board, on the program’s structure and budget request. She explained that guardians ad litem are independent voices for children’s best interests in child protection and family court cases, not attorneys or direct service providers. She said the program operates statewide, with 243 employees, and in 2024 advocated for more than 12,000 children, attended over 30,000 court proceedings, and filed reports in over 16,000 hearings. She also described specialized Family Court and Indian Child Welfare divisions, efforts to address racial disparities, and training requirements for guardians. Members asked about mileage and travel demands, the distinction between a child’s attorney and a guardian ad litem, caseloads, re-entry outcomes, the move from contractor/volunteer models to employee-based staffing, and the role of volunteers. Olson said most guardians use personal vehicles and mileage reimbursement, average caseloads are about 24, and the program has not seen a statewide increase in cases but does face staffing vacancies and turnover in some areas. She said the board believes the employee model improved advocacy and supervision, while the program is rebuilding a modest volunteer pool. She also said the program supports Indian Family Preservation Act-related work and has a formal process for handling conflicts of interest, which should be raised immediately to a supervisor rather than waiting for a complaint process.

Transcript Highlights:

• Panels of three or more will have a total of six minutes.
• Are there any questions for the panel?
• Just a reminder for panels, and we got the time wrong here, but it’s six minutes for the whole panel.
• As a panel, and then Michelle Delima, you're on deck.
• Can I be on a panel? Is that okay? Sure, three minutes. Can I do on a panel? Is that okay? Sure.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Housing opened a hybrid hearing focused on housing production bills, with Chairs Julian Cyr and Rich Haggerty emphasizing Massachusetts’ housing shortage and the need to produce more than 200,000 units over the next decade. The committee then heard testimony on a wide range of proposals, including social housing, starter homes and the “missing middle,” accessory dwelling units (ADUs), single-stair residential buildings, permanent affordability homeownership, and housing for people with disabilities. Several witnesses framed the bills as tools to expand supply, lower costs, and address racial and generational wealth gaps. Representative Connolly testified for H. 1478 on the Massachusetts Social Housing Program, describing publicly owned, mixed-income housing financed through a revolving loan fund. Senator Feeney testified for S. 989 on missing middle starter homes, arguing for zoning changes, incentives, and affordability tools to support smaller starter homes and duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes. Multiple witnesses, including housing advocates, real estate representatives, and local officials, supported the ADU trust fund bill and the single-stair study bill, saying they would reduce barriers, support homeowners, and enable more family-sized and infill housing. Some witnesses opposed bills they said would weaken ADU reforms or add new restrictions, while others urged broader deregulation to speed production. A major portion of the hearing focused on H. 1576/S. 1010, the Homes for Lasting Affordability bill, which would create a permanent affordability homeownership program for low- and moderate-income buyers and support small developments with long-term affordability restrictions. Testimony from community land trust leaders, legislators, and housing advocates emphasized that permanent affordability can preserve public investment, stabilize neighborhoods, and help families build wealth over generations. Senator Miranda and Representative Worrell tied the bill to closing the racial wealth gap and expanding access to homeownership for Black and Latino residents. The committee also heard testimony on S. 971, which would reform the Housing Development and Incentive Program to require more affordability in Gateway City projects. The committee additionally heard from Senator Kennedy and disability advocates on S. 1004, which would strengthen the Alternative Housing Voucher Program for people with disabilities by codifying project-based vouchers and aligning the program more closely with other voucher systems. Witnesses described long waitlists and the lack of accessible, affordable units as major barriers that can lead to homelessness or unnecessary institutionalization. No votes were taken during the hearing; the session was devoted to testimony and questions from committee members.

Transcript Highlights:

• after the panel finishes their testimony.
• You know, we'll hear from a camp panel.
• Members, any questions for this panel?
• So what does the panel think about?
• Any questions for this panel? Seeing none, I will just say what I said the last panel.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we'd either have to go to a physicians panel under the board statute, which is 329, or we have the
• > to<00:08:54.880> we<00:08:55.040> have<00:08:55.120> a<00:08:55.279> panel
• <00:08:56.000> uh either have to go to we have a panel uh either have to go to we have a panel
• > the<00:08:58.800> board physicians panel under uh the board physicians panel under uh
• We'd like to schedule an interview with you."

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee discussed House Bill 185, which would amend RSA 3109 to add timelines for OPLC’s complaint review and investigation process. Members reviewed the existing five-year limitation period for misconduct complaints and noted that the bill would add a 30-day deadline for the office to make a recommendation to the board and a 90-day deadline to complete investigations. Some members raised concerns that the new deadlines could conflict with the existing statute of limitations, create pressure to dismiss cases too quickly, and potentially undermine the separation between OPLC’s investigative role and the boards’ adjudicatory role established by House Bill 655. Nicholas Fry, OPLC general counsel, testified that the agency’s fiscal note originally assumed it would need roughly double its staff to meet the proposed deadlines, though a later amendment reduced that estimate somewhat. He said OPLC would still need additional personnel, including investigatory paralegals and a physician investigator for the Board of Medicine, to meet the timeframes. He also explained OPLC’s current complaint and hearing procedures, including new consumer-friendly correspondence, website guidance, and efforts by the enforcement division to improve transparency and communication with complainants and licensees. Bob Quinn of the New Hampshire Association of Realtors testified in support of the bill’s basic goal of speeding up intake and investigation, saying the 30-day intake/review period was reasonable and that the bill would not change OPLC’s role in that first step. He argued, however, that the investigation step is where delays occur, especially for lower-priority complaints, and that some cases have remained unresolved for years. Committee members also questioned how the added staffing costs would be paid, with discussion of whether they would come from license fees or the general fund. No vote or final action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then, of course, we have a third panel of industry participants and the fourth panel of leadership
• And then, of course, we have a third panel of industry participants and the fourth panel of leadership
• I think all members, we do have the second panel. We have four panels, members.
• Next panel is Chair calls.
• Not this panel, but the last panel is going to be, Ercot, president, CEO, Pablo 3625 Not this panel,

Summary: The Senate Committee on Business and Commerce held its first interim hearing on securing critical infrastructure and supply chain integrity, with a focus on Texas’s electric grid and the Lone Star Infrastructure Protection Act. The chair also highlighted Texas’s relatively low electricity prices and welcomed new committee members. ERCOT, the Public Utility Commission (PUC), and the Attorney General’s office were invited to explain how the state screens market participants and grid equipment for ties to China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea, and how the agencies respond to noncompliance. ERCOT testified that it has implemented the requirements of three related Senate bills by requiring attestations on corporate affiliations and on critical grid equipment and services. ERCOT said it has processed thousands of attestations, used additional requests for information and third-party verification tools such as Dun & Bradstreet, and terminated nonresponsive market participants. ERCOT also said it has not seen a case requiring direct Attorney General involvement, but it does refer matters to the PUC when needed. The PUC said it can investigate suspected violations and impose penalties of up to $1 million per violation per day, and that most investigations into late or missing attestations have been resolved through compliance, market exit, or removal by ERCOT. The Attorney General’s office said its role is currently limited to audits and court involvement, and that it lacks broad independent investigatory authority under the act. Members pressed the panel on whether the current system is too reliant on self-reporting and whether it adequately addresses indirect foreign influence, especially through supply chains for batteries, inverters, transformers, and other equipment with routable connectivity. ERCOT acknowledged that the current attestation process has gaps and said it plans to refine definitions of critical grid equipment and grid services, improve information requests, and continue stakeholder rulemaking. The panel also discussed possible legislative changes, including tying prohibitions to the Department of Defense Section 1260H list and the Texas Prohibited Technologies list, clarifying warranty and service access, and expanding the statute to cover grid services more directly. Several senators raised concerns about cost, reliability, and the extent to which foreign-sourced components remain embedded in Texas infrastructure, while others suggested incentives for domestic manufacturing and stronger verification tools, including possible work with national labs such as Sandia.

Transcript Highlights:

• go, but we've also taken a little bit slowly because it's hard for the existing staff to actually interview
• go, but we've also taken a little bit slowly because it's hard for the existing staff to actually interview
• , mentor, and, Existing staff to actually interview, mentor, and, you know, onboard all these people.

Summary: The Government Finance Committee met with new leadership, approved the December 11 minutes, and received a series of informational updates on the state’s finances and related policy issues. The Office of Management and Budget reported the general fund is tracking very close to forecast, with revenues about $2 million above forecast and an estimated ending balance of about $397 million, higher than previously expected. OMB also reviewed balances in major funds, including the budget stabilization fund, legacy fund, foundation aid stabilization fund, social services fund, and strategic investment and improvements fund, and answered questions about oil tax revenues and fund management. The Tax Department provided updates on taxable sales and purchases by county and industry, noting Cass County as the largest county by taxable sales and that retail trade remains the largest industry sector. Tax Commissioner Brian Kroshus also discussed the federal One Big Beautiful Bill Act and its estimated effects on North Dakota income tax collections, explaining that the projected revenue impacts are measured against a 2025 baseline and that some provisions are temporary while others are permanent. He also reported that primary residence tax credit applications were running ahead of last year, with more than 154,000 received so far and an expectation of roughly 160,000-plus applications. The committee also heard fee-study presentations from the Department of Transportation and the Information Technology Department. DOT explained that driver’s license fees cover only about half of program costs and that the shortfall is subsidized by the highway fund, while also noting recent changes such as the blackout plate and motor vehicle excise tax distribution changes. NDIT described its internal service fund model, current billing structure, and possible future changes to simplify invoices and billing frequency. Legislative staff also updated the committee on office space needs in Bismarck-Mandan and on legislative branch space planning, and subcommittees reported progress on fixed-route transit funding and regional jail capacity, including a visit to the Burleigh-Morton detention facility and discussion of future prison bed needs. No formal votes or legislative actions beyond approving the minutes were taken, and the committee adjourned with its next meeting set for June 25.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we are going to do a combination of interviews, in person and also via Zoom, of various individuals
• So we are going to do a combination of interviews of in-person and also via Zoom of various individuals
• And we have our last trustee to interview, and that will be Tab 22, and that is Mr. Sean Hindle.

Summary: The committee first heard CS/SB 270, which would extend Bright Futures eligibility by 12 months for certain students whose parent was serving overseas in public service and then retired, giving military and diplomatic families more time to return to Florida without losing scholarship eligibility. Senator Burgess also explained a late-filed amendment to set the bill’s effective implementation for the 2025-26 school year, and the committee adopted the amendment without objection. The bill received supportive testimony, including from Senator Smith, and was reported favorably by a roll call vote. The remainder of the meeting focused on confirmation hearings for appointees to state college boards of trustees, with the chair emphasizing a new process of hearing from each nominee individually rather than taking a blanket vote. Nominees from Tallahassee State College, St. Johns River State College, South Florida State College, Broward College, State College of Florida Manatee-Sarasota, Palm Beach State College, Pasco-Hernando State College, and Valencia College described their backgrounds and priorities, which largely centered on workforce development, nursing and health sciences, dual enrollment, fiscal responsibility, student retention, and partnerships with local employers and communities. Several nominees highlighted their own educational or professional ties to the colleges, and some noted the importance of serving rural or military-connected communities. One nominee, John Aloko for Pasco-Hernando State College, was not present because he was attending a conference in Hawaii and was deferred to a later hearing. After hearing all other nominees, the committee voted to recommend confirmation of the remaining appointees in a block vote, covering Tabs 2 through 22 except Tab 8, and the motion passed. Two members later asked to be recorded as voting in the affirmative on earlier items.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair and panel. Thank you for your presentation.
• Chair and panel. Thank you for your presentation.
• <00:18:24.400> Chair<00:18:24.720> and<00:18:25.440> panel.
• Chair and panel. Thank >> Thank you, Mr. Chair and panel.
• That's where I send a six-member team after we interview everybody a month ahead of time to measure the

Keywords: Call to Order and Roll Call – 0:00:04 Approval of Minutes – 0:03:57 United Way of Southern Kentucky –0:04:30 Preschool Education – 0:36:46 School Safety Updates – 1:01:41 Kentucky Association of School Superintendents – 1:41:47 Educational Cooperatives – 1:55:18 Adjournment – 2:07:37, 958, all

Summary: The committee opened its sixth meeting of the 2025 Interim Joint Committee on Education, confirmed a quorum, recorded attendance votes, and approved the minutes. Chair Lewis reminded presenters to keep remarks brief because of the full agenda and limited time. The first presentation was from United Way of Southern Kentucky, with Anne Puckett, Craig Browning, and Warren County Schools Superintendent Rob Clayton introducing a regional early childhood initiative. The presenters argued that kindergarten readiness and early childhood support are critical to later academic and life outcomes. They cited research and statistics about brain development in the first five years, the effects of unprepared kindergarten entry, and links between low literacy, school discipline, dropout rates, and incarceration. They said their region’s readiness scores fell during COVID and after a tornado, and that the most effective response was in-home parent education to help families support children from birth to age five. They described the model as voluntary, community-based, and not requiring new buildings, and said similar programs have been successful in Missouri. The group said it had already raised more than $1 million in private donations and committed three years of funding for four additional staff, expanding service in Allen, Logan, and Warren counties. They requested $600,000 per year for the next two-year budget cycle to add 12 more educators, serve about 360 families and 660 additional children, and build evidence for a possible statewide model. Members generally expressed support for the concept, with Representative Tipton and Representative Jackson discussing a prior home-based preschool pilot and the importance of starting early. Representative Calloway questioned whether increased family chaos and government involvement justified the approach; presenters responded that the program uses community educators, not a government-run organization, and is aimed at helping overwhelmed families. Representative Stalker asked about eligibility and early intervention, and presenters said the program serves children from birth to age five and can help identify needs early enough to connect families with services such as First Steps.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we want to thank our expert panel.
• when the entire panel is finished. ...of the hearing.
• questions when the entire panel is finished.
• First, thanks to the panel for your advocacy for this issue.
• I appreciate this panel.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-03, House Bill 5000, which would allow single-family homes on small lots in areas with adequate infrastructure. Committee chairs outlined the Article 48 process and the hearing format, then heard first from two subject-matter experts. Under Secretary Chris Clutchman of Housing and Livable Communities explained that the proposal would amend Chapter 40A’s Section 3 (the Dover Amendment) to require most municipalities, except Boston, to allow single-family homes on residentially zoned lots of at least 5,000 square feet with 50 feet of frontage and access to public water and sewer, while still allowing reasonable local regulations on setbacks, height, bulk, and short-term rentals. He distinguished the proposal from Chapter 40Y starter-home zoning, said implementation would likely require regulations to address issues such as wetlands, infrastructure capacity, and nonconforming lots, and answered committee questions about lot subdivision, MBTA Communities, and the relationship to existing zoning tools. Attorney Susan Murphy testified that the petition would significantly override local zoning and could create conflicts with existing statutes, including Chapter 40A Section 6 protections for certain nonconforming lots, subdivision control law, and other residential zoning districts. She raised concerns about how “access” to water and sewer would be defined, whether the measure could apply in business or industrial districts where residential uses are allowed, and whether the proposal could allow large homes on small lots without any affordability limits. She also warned that the measure could have significant infrastructure impacts and argued that the Legislature should consider broader, more comprehensive housing legislation rather than expanding exceptions to the zoning framework. Committee members asked both experts about frontage, lot size, infrastructure capacity, and how the proposal would interact with 40Y and MBTA Communities. The proponents, led by Andrew McCulla of the Legalized Starter Homes Coalition, argued that Massachusetts faces a severe housing shortage and affordability crisis, citing high home prices, high rents, declining listings, and outmigration of younger residents. They said the measure would legalize modest single-family homes on smaller lots, increase housing supply, and help first-time buyers and downsizing seniors, while leaving most other local rules in place. Other proponents, including representatives from Abundant Housing Massachusetts, the Charles River Regional Chamber, and individual residents, emphasized workforce retention, the need for more starter homes, and the view that large minimum lot sizes are a major barrier to production. Committee members pressed the panel on the lack of any home-size or affordability requirement, possible effects on 40B compliance, the number of new lots and homes that might result, and the fact that the ballot initiative would not be amendable by the Legislature. The hearing then turned to opponents from the Massachusetts Municipal Association, who urged the committee to take no action. MMA leaders said zoning should remain a local decision made by residents and elected local officials, and argued that the proposal would preempt local control with a one-size-fits-all mandate. They also said the measure is impractical because many communities with water and sewer are already at or near capacity, so infrastructure availability does not necessarily mean development capacity. The hearing ended during the MMA’s testimony, with no vote or final committee action taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• When the presentation is over, the presenter is going to take their seat on the panel for a panel discussion
• When the presentation is over, the presenter is going to take their seat on the panel for a panel discussion
• Straight to the panel. We can do that.
• Helene, the business owner, did not put his panels on.
• We've used engineered steel panels. We've used engineered steel panels that had to be welded.

Summary: The Banking and Insurance Committee heard a series of presentations focused on mitigation, flood and wind resilience, and insurance discounts. Kevin Guthrie of the Florida Division of Emergency Management outlined several funding streams for mitigation, including federal Hazard Mitigation Grant Program dollars, BRIC grants, flood mitigation assistance, and the state hurricane loss mitigation program. He emphasized the new Elevate Florida initiative, which will use about $400 million initially to elevate or reconstruct flood-prone homes, starting with National Flood Insurance Program properties and severe repetitive-loss homes, with no current per-home cap. Guthrie said the state will contract directly with licensed vendors and aims to reduce future flood losses, lower insurance costs, and keep properties on the tax rolls rather than relying on buyouts. Insurance Commissioner Mike Yaworski described Florida’s windstorm mitigation discount program, explaining that the 1802 inspection form is used to assess a home’s overall “envelope” and determine statutory discounts. He said the office is updating the program based on a new wind loss study, with likely changes including greater recognition of roof types such as metal roofs and possible territorial risk adjustments. He also said the Legislature now requires the office to revisit the study every five years. Stephen Fielder of the Department of Financial Services reported on My Safe Florida Home, noting that the program offers inspections and grants for roof and opening protections, has completed more than 100,000 inspections, and has reimbursed hundreds of millions of dollars. He said the department has validated its discount calculations with insurers and that the program is intended to help homeowners reduce premiums through verified mitigation work. Michael Newman of the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety said Florida’s building code is nationally leading and that post-Ian surveys found no wind-driven structural damage in buildings built after adoption of the code. He argued that mitigation should be treated as a system, not isolated upgrades, and suggested adding Fortified designation to the state’s mitigation form to better document verified resilience improvements. Bill Truex, a county commissioner and builder, stressed the need to educate homeowners about floodproofing and roof choices, citing examples where flood panels prevented damage and noting that asphalt shingles often do not last as long in Florida as their marketing suggests. In panel discussion, senators asked about program eligibility, outreach to elderly and digitally challenged residents, contractor vetting, roof-life disclosures, and whether flood insurance should be more broadly required. Officials said outreach will include call centers and in-person assistance, and several participants urged better consumer disclosure and more data-driven guidance on roof and mitigation choices.

Transcript Highlights:

• The leaders in our second panel would also provide the critical insight, Dr. Boyd, Dr.
• The leaders in our second panel would also provide the critical insight, Dr. Boyd, Dr.
• So I appreciate the insight shared by the first panel.
• Next up, we'd like to introduce our second panel. Our speakers for the second panel include Dr.
• Thank you for convening this panel.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Higher Education and the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee held an oversight hearing on the California State University’s AI-empowered initiative, including the systemwide rollout of ChatGPT EDU and broader AI integration across CSU campuses. Opening remarks emphasized both the promise of AI for student success, workforce preparation, and access, and the need to address risks such as bias, privacy, misinformation, environmental impacts, and mental health harms. CSU representatives said the initiative grew out of Academic Senate recommendations and a systemwide generative AI committee, and that the goal was to provide equitable access, training, governance, and workforce alignment across the 23-campus system. CSU officials described systemwide contracts for AI tools, the AI Commons training hub, and faculty grant programs supporting AI-related curriculum innovation. They said more than 93,000 ChatGPT EDU accounts had been activated, over 4,300 faculty had taken voluntary training, and $3 million had been awarded to 63 faculty-led projects from more than 400 submissions. San Jose State University highlighted its own AI-focused programs, courses, orientation training, faculty fellows, student ambassadors, and interdisciplinary efforts to build AI literacy and responsible use into instruction and co-curricular programs. CSU also said it was tracking metrics on adoption, academic outcomes, workforce outcomes, and environmental impacts. Faculty, staff, and student representatives welcomed the educational potential of AI but raised concerns about the rollout, saying it had moved quickly and without enough consultation or consistent systemwide policy. They urged stronger protections for academic freedom, intellectual property, privacy, equity, and worker input, and warned about bias, surveillance, job displacement, and the environmental cost of AI. Legislators pressed CSU and OpenAI representatives on training requirements, data privacy, bias reporting, discipline for misuse, liability, sycophancy, and safeguards against harmful uses such as non-consensual imagery or self-harm-related interactions. CSU said interactions in the licensed tool are private, data are not used to train models, and campuses retain their own conduct processes; members also asked CSU to follow up on systemwide training, policy consistency, and additional safeguards.

Transcript Highlights:

• When we interviewed her, my wife and I interviewed every single candidate together.
• consider a child's age, maturity, and ability to communicate their views, requires that a record of the interview
• be made, and ensures the child is informed of the interview procedure and that it is being recorded.

Bills: HB2268, HB3000, HB3043, HB3066, HB3078, HB3143, HB3144, HB3244, HB3298, HB3320, HB3467, HB3321, HB3329, HB3431, HB3464, HB3499, HB3500, HB3586, HB3590, HB3650, HB3671, HB3695, HB3700, HB3701, HB3764, HB3767, HB3834, HB3931, HB3934, HB3940, HB3944, HB3979, HB3985, HB4113, HB4294, HB4302, HB4317, HB4324, HB4359, HB4426, HB4427, HB4430, HB4431, HB4434, HJR1077, SR42, SR35, HJR1023, HB1225, HB1374, HB1381, HB1590, HB1675, HB2153

Keywords: HB2268, Oklahoma Health Care Authority, OHCA, appropriation, General Revenue Fund, PACE, Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly, elderly care, aging Oklahomans, long-term care, Medicaid, health care funding, provider reimbursement, rate increase, low-income seniors, senior services, integrated care, emergency measure, cosmetology, barbering

Summary: The Senate began with a quorum call, gallery introductions, and extended farewell remarks from Senator Jett, who reflected on his six years in the Legislature, his focus on representing constituents, protecting families, and holding government accountable. Several senators responded with personal tributes, praising his conviction, faith, family involvement, and willingness to ask difficult questions. No votes were taken during the farewell portion. The chamber then considered House Bill 2268, a PACE appropriation to support comprehensive care for low-income seniors and expand services in rural Oklahoma. The bill was amended to restore the title, advanced, and passed 34-9, then passed as an emergency measure 36-7. House Bill 3000, a cosmetology and barbering measure, made multiple changes including board reorganization, adding a human trafficking specialist and massage therapist, shifting some licensing functions to Service Oklahoma, and eliminating the massage therapy advisory board. It drew significant debate over process and policy, especially from senators concerned about late changes, lack of board input, and the human trafficking rationale; it passed 25-19 and then as an emergency 33-11. The Senate also passed House Bill 3043, allowing the Oklahoma Department of Veterans Affairs to hire prorated seasonal staff for veterans homes, 37-6; House Bill 3066, creating a revolving fund for federal workforce training money for behavioral health recruitment and retention, 38-6 and as an emergency; and House Bill 3078, allowing donation options on state payment forms for the ODVA revolving fund, 45-0 and as an emergency. Additional measures passed included House Bill 3143, extending the moratorium on new medical marijuana business licenses to 2028, 39-7; House Bill 3144, capping medical marijuana commercial grower licenses at 2,550 after amendment, 34-12; House Bill 3244 on identity theft, 46-0; House Bill 3298 on child interview procedures in court cases, 46-0 and as an emergency; House Bill 3320, replacing the traditional sunset process with more immediate legislative review of agencies, 33-13 and as an emergency; House Bill 3321, requiring county data collection and reporting related to court costs and financial obligations, 45-0 and as an emergency; House Bill 3329, a trailer bill adding a repealer and a sunset for the Board of Psychological Examiners, 33-10 and as an emergency; House Bill 3431, expanding restrictions on foreign entities owning or leasing land and critical minerals, 43-0; House Bill 3464, setting safety and training requirements for certain projects involving fire code compliance and decommissioning, 43-0 and as an emergency; and House Bill 3499, expanding special judges’ authority over vehicle title orders, which was presented and advanced as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those are the three panels.
• I'll ask the first panel to please come forward.
• You'll hear about that in the next panel.
• So as far as finance perspective, in the next panel.
• Similar to the previous panel, I'll go year by year.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance held its first hearing of the year on Proposition 98, focusing on the Governor’s budget estimates for the three-year budget window, the Public School System Stabilization Account (PSSA), and repayment of education deferrals. The Department of Finance said the minimum guarantee would rise by about $21.7 billion over the 2025 Budget Act, with increases in each year, full repayment of the existing settle-up obligation in 2024-25, a new $5.6 billion settle-up obligation proposed for 2025-26, and a higher guarantee in 2026-27. Finance also noted revised downward estimates for transitional kindergarten attendance and Los Angeles County property tax reimbursements, and said community colleges would be funded above the split because of enrollment growth. The Legislative Analyst’s Office emphasized fiscal risk and volatility, warning that recent revenue gains are tied heavily to the stock market and tech sector and could reverse quickly. The LAO argued the Governor’s proposed $5.6 billion delay shifts risk into future years and recommended instead fully funding the current estimate, making a larger reserve deposit, considering advance payments or pension-related uses, and finding additional non-Prop 98 solutions to reduce the state’s structural deficit. On the reserve and deferral items, Finance described revised PSSA deposits and withdrawals that would leave about $4.1 billion in the reserve by 2026-27, and both Finance and the LAO supported paying off the remaining LCFF and SCFF deferrals as good fiscal practice. Committee members questioned the size of the settle-up amount, the degree of revenue volatility, the use of the reserve, and the ongoing K-12/community college split. Finance said the proposal is meant to avoid overappropriation if revenues fall, while the LAO said a buffer of roughly $3.5 billion would address typical forecasting risk. Public commenters, including school boards, county offices of education, teachers, and advocacy groups, largely opposed the $5.6 billion withholding or settle-up delay, calling it a manipulation of Prop. 98 and urging full funding and more stable revenue solutions. Several speakers also urged dedicated funding for students experiencing homelessness. The hearing ended with no vote, and the chair announced that broader program discussions would occur in later hearings.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we'll be doing panels in that order.
• Okay, so we will turn to our final panel. We have three people.
• And with that, I'll answer, well, I'll allow the next panel to go.
• Well, thanks to all three of you on the panel for your presentation.
• Yes, just for the panel. So I want to share a story that is very specific.

Summary: The Tribal Relations Committee held a work session on the Keep Washington Working Act, hearing first from the Office of the Attorney General, then the Office of the Governor, and finally advocates from the ACLU of Washington, Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, and One America. The Attorney General’s office described the 2019 bipartisan law as limiting state and local involvement in federal civil immigration enforcement, emphasizing minimal data collection, privacy protections, definitions in the statute, model policies for agencies, and the role of court orders and federal funding exceptions. Committee members asked about consistency in legal guidance, possible federal challenges, and whether the law has been litigated in Washington or elsewhere; the office said it has not been challenged in Washington and cited similar laws in other states that have been upheld or dismissed in litigation. The governor’s office said the administration is implementing the law across agencies through case-by-case review of data-sharing requests, coordination with the Attorney General and privacy officials, and a new executive order creating an immigration sub-cabinet to improve agency coordination and community input. Officials said the state will continue to protect immigrant communities, avoid using state resources for civil immigration enforcement, and comply with federal funding requirements where necessary, citing Medicaid and other programs as examples. They also discussed recent court rulings in Washington that blocked federal grant conditions tied to immigration enforcement and said agencies are being trained to review data privacy and sharing practices. Advocates argued that Keep Washington Working is grounded in anti-commandeering principles and is meant to ensure state resources are used for state purposes, not federal immigration enforcement. They said the law helps immigrant communities trust police, schools, and public services, but warned that data sharing and aggressive federal enforcement are eroding that trust and harming families. The panelists described cases involving alleged unlawful local cooperation with federal immigration authorities, family separation, detention, and due process concerns, and suggested possible improvements such as stronger enforcement mechanisms, a private right of action, and broader limits on data sharing. No votes or formal actions were taken; the committee closed the hearing after members thanked the presenters and invited follow-up on implementation issues and potential legislative changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have our panel.
• I appreciate you all being here today and taking part of this panel.
• with a brief presentation on AM after which will have each member of the panel.
• >> I'm going to also let some of my friends on the panel and salute this question.
• We'll go ahead and get moving to the panel. Most are from my right.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Call the first panel.
• Last statement for this panel, Island.
• That's how I remember this panel. Okay.
• Thanks to this panel. All right. Let's move on to the next panel. Thank you. That was entertaining.
• You come on up here and join this panel.

Bills: HB2242, HB2446, HB2799, HB4502, HB2920, HB2790, HB5620, HB5060, HB5076, HB5080, HB5081, HB5128, HB5130, HB3847, HB5116, HB2969, HB4546, HB4202, HB5624, HB3964, HB4803, HB872, HB4775, HB4777, HB4961, HB5570, HB2988, HB4260, HB1375, HB5009, HB5411, HB5134, HB4388, HB3095, HB1387

Keywords: constables, civil rights, local government, law enforcement, policy-making authority, affidavit, medical bills, civil actions, reasonable charges, healthcare services, judicial statistics, court performance, family law, civil cases, efficiency reporting, court security, emergency management, harassment penalties, judicial safety, court committee

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 4961, which would bar uninsured motorists from recovering non-economic damages after a collision. The author said the bill is intended to create incentives to maintain insurance and to address what he described as an unfair system for insured drivers. Texans for Lawsuit Reform and Texas Eagle Forum testified in support, while the Texas Trial Lawyers Association opposed it, warning the bill could also affect pedestrians, passengers, children, and others who did not choose whether a vehicle was insured. The bill author clarified that passengers would be included in the bill’s coverage. No vote was taken and the bill was left pending. House Bill 5570 would extend a legislative attorney CLE exemption to attorneys appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Senate to boards or commissions. The author said the measure is meant to ease time burdens and encourage service, and a witness supported it as a modest incentive for public service. A committee member noted a discrepancy in the number of affected attorneys, and the author agreed to verify the correct figure. The bill was left pending. The committee also heard House Bill 2969, which would restrict the State Bar from adopting rules or penalties that unreasonably burden attorneys’ religious exercise or free speech based on sincerely held beliefs. The author and several witnesses from Texas Values, Alliance Defending Freedom, and Cecilia Wood argued the bill protects lawyers of faith from an ABA model rule they described as a speech code. No one testified against the bill, and it was left pending. House Bill 4260, which would prohibit county judges and county commissioners from practicing law in courts over which they have jurisdiction, drew opposition from the County Judges and Commissioners Association, which argued existing ethics rules already address conflicts and that the bill would burden rural officials. The author said the bill was prompted by concerns about judges using their office to pressure others. The bill was left pending. House Bill 5134 would limit Rule 202 pre-suit depositions to people who have suffered or reasonably expect actual damages and would allow attorney’s fees against abusive petitioners. The author said the bill is aimed at preventing harassment and fishing expeditions, especially in family-law disputes. Questions focused on how the standard would work and how it differs from current law; the author said the main change is fee-shifting and a clearer legislative directive. The bill was left pending. House Bill 3095, a committee substitute version of a similar uninsured-motorist bill, would bar uninsured motorists from recovering non-economic damages and limit economic recovery, with several exceptions. Trial lawyers argued it was unconstitutional because it capped economic damages and could unfairly affect innocent drivers, pedestrians, and older people who no longer drive. The author acknowledged constitutional concerns and said the bill would need further work; the committee withdrew the substitute and left the bill pending. Finally, House Bill 4388 would require all judges, including county judges who perform administrative duties, to remain subject to the Code of Judicial Conduct. Supporters said some elected judges avoid accountability by relinquishing judicial functions, while opponents argued the bill is too rigid and unnecessary because existing remedies already exist. House Bill 3964 would limit public nuisance claims to their historical role and bar such claims against lawful conduct, conduct already covered by other remedies, and products. The author and supporters said the bill is meant to prevent courts from using public nuisance to make policy, while opponents argued it would eliminate useful remedies and could affect local actions against environmental or product-related harms. The author said the bill would not affect statutory nuisance claims, private nuisance claims, or other causes of action, and would be amended to clarify some provisions. The bill was left pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• Sergeant Perry you have the panel. Thank you.
• We'll have questions for all of you after this panel.
• Senator Perry, you may question the panel.
• Again, we're looking for, in the next panel, Ray Ucconi.
• Again, for the next panel, we ask these folks to be seated.

Bills: SB3, SB810, SB965, SB1073, SB1119, SB1505, SB 3

Keywords: Texas Education Code, public schools, school district, open-enrollment charter school, teacher speech, employee speech, biological sex, pronouns, gender identity, retaliation, discipline, workplace protections, school personnel, education policy, LGBTQ, transgender, charter schools, SB 965, religious speech, prayer