Transcript Highlights:

• The state collected over $2.4 billion in Fair Share revenue in FY24.
• across the Commonwealth was fair funding in needed areas.
• These are all very good things, and these are all very fair.
• That is not a fair share of this funding for our municipalities.
• This formula ensures a fair share of... ...the high cost of doing roads.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The House opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and adopted two ceremonial resolutions: one commemorating the dedication of the Woburn Battle Road Memorial as part of the Massachusetts 250th celebration, and another recognizing May 1-7 as Elks National Youth Week. The chamber then took up House Bill 4005, a fiscal year 2025 supplemental appropriations bill using FY24 Fair Share surtax surplus funds, and ordered it to a third reading before later considering it for passage to be engrossed. During debate on the bill, the House heard a lengthy presentation in support of the proposal, which would direct about $828 million to transportation and $353 million to education. The transportation spending was described as primarily supporting the MBTA, including workforce and safety funding, reserve replenishment, station and infrastructure improvements, reduced fares, and reimbursement for tunnel closure costs, along with smaller amounts for regional transit authorities and unpaved roads. The education side included additional special education circuit breaker funding, vocational school capital, early education workforce supports, early literacy, universal school meals, higher education endowment matches, Green School Works, and ESOL waitlist reduction, with the Inspector General directed to review circuit breaker cost controls. Members then debated several amendments. One amendment related to a school athletics policy was modified by a further amendment calling for DESE analysis before implementation; both the further amendment and the underlying amendment as amended were adopted. A transportation amendment to shift $50 million from MBTA funding to Chapter 90 municipal roads was supported by members emphasizing rural road needs but was rejected on a roll call, 25-120. Another transportation amendment adding at least $300,000 for Route 93 mitigation costs in Medford was adopted, 133-20. The bill itself then passed to be engrossed on a roll call, 140-14. The House also observed moments of silence for former First Lady Kitty Dukakis and for victims of the Santo Domingo nightclub collapse, and later adopted an order to meet the next day at 11 a.m. before adjourning in memory of former Representative Philip W. Johnston.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that's all prorated. a few of them that have multiple fairs a few of them that have multiple fairs
• feat and the task of putting on a a fair feat and the task of putting on a a fair uh<01:23:40.239
• uh I think admissions to the county fair uh I think admissions to the<01:23:53.199> fair<01:23
• I am here representing Minnesota Federation of County Fairs.
• > fairs<01:31:22.400> our renting from other fairs our renting from other fairs our specifically

Bills: HF711, HF653

Keywords: agriculture, agricultural education, leadership development, Minnesota Agricultural Education and Leadership Council, MAELC, chapter 41D, grant funding, general fund appropriation, commissioner of agriculture, farm education, youth agriculture programs, ag literacy, workforce development, extension education, research funding, extension services, technology transfer, grant programs, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Is it fair to say, Discretion that was used, is it fair to say that if someone else that was not you,
• Same thing with the Fair Districts.
• Yeah, I mean, that's fair.
• voted for the Fair Districts Amendment.
• The people of Florida deserve fair voting maps.

Summary: The Select Committee on Congressional Redistricting met to consider HB 1D, which would establish Florida’s congressional districts using the governor’s proposed map, EOG PCRP 26. Representative Persons-Mulicka briefly introduced the bill, and Jason Jazeel and Jason Pareda of the governor’s office presented the legal rationale and map details. Jazeel argued that mid-cycle congressional redistricting is not prohibited, that the governor’s position is to draw districts without considering race, and that federal equal-protection principles should control over state race-based redistricting provisions. Pareda said he drew the map alone using 2020 census data and census blocks, while also considering population growth estimates, traditional redistricting criteria, and county/city boundaries where feasible. Pareda described the map as race-neutral and said it keeps 48 counties whole, 382 cities whole, and has a boundary-analysis score of about 85.7%. He walked through regional changes, including major revisions in South Florida, adjustments in Central Florida, and changes in the Tampa Bay area, explaining that population shifts and the need for exact congressional population equality drove many of the district configurations. Members questioned the timing of the special session, the use of 2020 census data versus newer population estimates, the role of the legislature versus the governor, the legal basis for mid-decade redistricting, and whether the map complies with the Voting Rights Act and Fair Districts amendments. Motions to place witnesses under oath and to extend the committee meeting by 30 minutes both failed. During public testimony, every speaker who was heard opposed the map. Commenters argued that the proposal was a partisan power grab, would reduce Democratic and minority representation, and violated the Florida Constitution and voting rights protections. Several speakers criticized the short notice and lack of public input, while others said the map would confuse voters or split communities. The chair repeatedly reminded attendees to maintain decorum and limited each speaker to about one minute.

Transcript Highlights:

• Further, HCD promotes fair and... ...applications annually.
• This proposal lacks basic fairness and HCD accountability.
• Despite our state's strong fair housing laws, there's no state funding for our fair housing.
• They trust their local fair housing centers.
• I'm a fair housing coordinator with Project Sentinel.

Summary: The subcommittee heard an extensive presentation on the administration’s housing reorganization proposal, which would centralize multifamily affordable housing finance under the new Housing Development and Finance Committee (HDFC) and align it with the Governor’s trailer bill language. Administration officials said the plan is intended to create a one-stop application and award process, reduce duplicative timelines and costs, and pair state subsidy with private activity bonds and federal tax credits more efficiently. They also described proposed changes to the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities program, including shifting a larger share of funding toward housing-related awards while preserving a portion for sustainable communities investments. The Legislative Analyst’s Office generally supported the streamlining concept but recommended changes to the proposed bond set-aside timing and urged flexibility for integrated applications and future reporting on demand. Senators, especially Senator Cabaldon, raised concerns that the proposal could weaken the original climate-and-transportation purpose of the sustainable communities program and that the reorganization would be undercut by the lack of new housing production funding in the budget. The item was held open without a vote. The committee then received a report from the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee on federal and state housing tax credits. Staff explained that the federal H.R. 1 change lowering the bond-financing threshold from 50% to 25% greatly expanded the number of projects able to use the 4% federal tax credit, allowing California to fund many more projects and units. They also described the state low-income housing tax credit as an important gap-filling tool for projects that still need additional subsidy, and noted existing set-asides for rural, homeless, at-risk, and extremely low-income projects. Members discussed rehabilitation as well as new construction, and the item was informational only. Finally, the Civil Rights Department reported on the effects of federal civil rights policy changes and on three programs facing expiration: California vs. Hate, the Community Conflict Resolution Unit, and Investigations and Conciliation Enhancement. Director Kevin Kish said federal cuts and policy shifts have reduced support for fair housing and other civil rights functions, while CRD’s caseload has grown from about 8,700 open matters a year ago to more than 12,000, with a six-month wait for interviews despite overtime triage efforts. Senators expressed strong support for continuing the programs and concern about the broader federal rollback of civil rights enforcement. The department said it is using overtime, intake triage, and outreach partnerships to manage the workload and direct Californians to appropriate state, local, and nonprofit resources.

Transcript Highlights:

• who gave their very lives for fair who gave their very lives for fair representation<00:25:37.840
• United Front who's wants fair United Front who's wants fair representation<00:47:19.800> and<
• If it's fair for you, you should want it to be fair for me as well.
• don't deserve a fair opportunity. don't deserve a fair opportunity.
• to be fair for me as well. to be fair for me as well.

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And, you know, that brings me to a question: well, what is fair? Like, is it fair for us to charge?
• think um there's certainly a fairness think um there's certainly a fairness issue<00:12:28.560><
• <00:12:35.519> Like well what is fair? Like well what is fair?
• It's not saying it's fair.
• It's not really fair.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The working group approved the prior meeting minutes with one correction to reflect Laura Ziggler’s attendance. Staff then outlined the report due February 13, 2026, which must summarize the group’s activities and include findings and recommendations adopted by the group; the report will go to the governor and legislative transportation leaders. The chair emphasized that the group’s charge is broad and includes analyzing electricity used as vehicle fuel infrastructure opportunities and barriers, developing policy and funding recommendations for sustainable transportation funding, and reviewing other states’ laws and policies. Discussion focused heavily on how to replace declining gas tax revenue as more vehicles become electric. The chair framed the issue as a fairness and implementation challenge, noting that EVs are a growing share of the fleet and that the group should consider both policy and funding, not just one or the other. Members and guests raised several ideas already submitted, including a road user charge, changes to the EV charging tax, ending or modifying the EV surcharge, broadening the tax to publicly owned charging stations, reducing the charging level threshold to level 2, ending sales tax on electricity, addressing off-road use, and expanding the definition of auto parts to include charging equipment. Representative Elkins argued that charging based on electricity used at home is impractical for most vehicles, that public charging is already much more expensive than home charging, and that the current sales tax plus surcharge amounts to double taxation for public-charging users. He said a mileage-based user charge modeled on Utah’s approach is workable, could be phased in, and could preserve privacy by allowing a voluntary or alternative method for home charging estimates. Senator Howe responded that home electricity use can be estimated similarly to mileage deductions on taxes and said the state should tax all electricity used as fuel, regardless of charger level, if it can be identified. Other speakers echoed that all road users should pay a fair share and that the main challenge is implementation. Tony Kis of Quick Trip asked that a late letter be included in the record and urged clarification of the sales, use, excise tax, and collection rules to avoid double taxation and reduce administrative burden, noting the current monthly collection date and suggesting the group should streamline collection methods. No final policy decisions or votes were taken beyond approval of the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• So what is fair use?
• And it's also possible that there'll be some fair uses and some not fair uses, and it's going to be hard
• And fair use cases are decided on their facts.
• As a starting point for a fair and functional creative economy, As a starting point for a fair and functional
• It’s a fundamental issue for fairness.

Summary: The Senate Judiciary Committee and Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee held an informational hearing at Stanford on the intersection of artificial intelligence, copyright, transparency, and California’s creative economy. Chairs and members emphasized that the hearing was not on a specific bill and no vote would be taken. Opening remarks framed the issue as balancing protection for artists and other rights holders with the need to keep AI innovation and related economic activity thriving in California, while noting that federal action is unlikely and that state policy may influence national standards. The first panel featured Professor Pamela Samuelson and Stanford researcher Rishi Bommasani. Samuelson reviewed the current copyright litigation landscape, including dozens of lawsuits over AI training, and explained the fair use framework, the Google Books precedent, and the uncertainty around newer theories such as market dilution. She said states can likely regulate transparency, deepfakes, privacy, and safety, but warned that some proposals may be preempted by federal copyright law. Bommasani described widespread opacity around training data among major California AI companies, discussed AB 2013 and the EU AI Act as transparency models, and identified gaps in disclosure design, enforcement, and whether transparency alone can address copyright and IP concerns. Members asked about open-source models, opt-outs, machine unlearning, user data, and state options for protecting creators. The second panel included SAG-AFTRA board member Jason George, Animation Guild president Danny Lynn, and OpenAI copyright counsel Mark Gray. George and Lynn argued that AI training on performers’ and artists’ work without consent or compensation threatens jobs, bargaining power, and reputations, and they supported stronger transparency and licensing requirements so creators can identify when their work is used. Gray said AI is already being used as a productivity tool and highlighted partnerships between AI companies and publishers, record labels, and studios, while arguing that specific harmful uses such as deepfakes should be regulated directly rather than restricting general-purpose AI development. Committee members discussed labeling and watermarking of AI-generated content, transparency around model use, and whether state law should require more detailed disclosure of training data; no formal action was taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• Further, HCD promotes fair and Applications annually.
• And this proposal lacks basic fairness and HCD accountability.
• Despite our state's strong fair housing laws, there's no state funding for our fair housing.
• They trust their local fair housing centers.
• I'm a fair housing coordinator with Project Sentinel.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The subcommittee heard an overview of the Governor’s housing reorganization proposal and trailer bill language that would consolidate several affordable housing finance programs under the new Housing Development and Finance Committee (HDFC). Administration officials said the plan is intended to create a one-stop application and award process, reduce duplication, and pair state subsidy with private activity bonds and federal tax credits so projects can move from award to construction more quickly. The proposal would also shift some positions and reallocate portions of the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities program and other housing funds. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the concept has merit but raised concerns about the proposed bond set-aside floor and recommended more flexibility and earlier reallocation of unused bonds. Several senators questioned the structure and, especially, the proposed changes to the climate-related ASIC program, arguing that it could weaken the program’s original transportation-and-housing integration and that the budget lacks enough direct funding for core housing production programs. The item was held open. The committee then received an update from the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee on federal tax credit changes and state housing finance tools. Staff explained that federal H.R. 1 increased the 9% low-income housing tax credit allocation and reduced the bond-financing threshold for the 4% credit from 50% to 25%, allowing California to finance many more projects. They reported that emergency regulations were adopted quickly to implement the new federal rules, resulting in awards for 195 projects and more than 25,000 units in the 4% program, while the 9% program funded 58 projects and nearly 3,000 units. Members discussed the importance of state enhanced low-income housing tax credits, with committee questions focused on how much additional leverage state credits provide and how they help fill remaining financing gaps. The final portion of the hearing focused on the Civil Rights Department’s response to federal civil rights policy changes and on three programs facing the end of limited-term funding: California vs. Hate, the Community Conflict Resolution Unit, and Investigations and Conciliation Enhancement. Director Kevin Kish said federal civil rights enforcement has been weakened by closed offices, shuttered programs, and reduced support for fair housing organizations, while CRD’s open caseload has grown from about 8,700 to more than 12,000 matters. He said the department is using overtime, triage, and process reengineering to manage the surge and to direct people to the right services. Senators expressed strong support for continuing the programs and concern that California is being asked to do more with less as federal protections erode. No votes were taken on the informational items, and the committee discussed the vote-only budget requests for CRD separately.

Transcript Highlights:

• Fair maps mean fair elections, and fair elections are the backbone of a functioning democracy.
• Fair maps mean fair elections.
• Everyone deserves fair treatment.
• That's not fair.
• We don't want cheating; we want things to be fair. This isn't fair.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think there's at the fair plan.
• <01:02:02.559> plan only speak to the way the fair plan only speak to the way the fair plan
• the surplus lines market or the fair the surplus lines market or the fair plan.<01:37:26.880>
• trying to posit here is that the fair trying to posit here is that the fair plan<01:56:01.520>
• you know plan for from the state fair you know plan for from the state fair from<02:01:15.840>

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And I just want the people to know that, you know, we talked about fairness and fair map.
• Let's have fair maps. Let's have a fair process. So I'll get into the bill. Thank you.
• And most importantly, it is a fair map.
• And so even with that, we deserve that shot to make it fair.
• So when you look at fairness, a 5-1 map is not going to be fair.

Summary: The Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee met on May 12, 2026, and focused primarily on Senate Bill 407, a congressional redistricting proposal, with Senate Bill 121 also scheduled for later. The chair explained the committee would first take up SB 407, consider amendments, then hear public testimony, and would not take up SB 116 or SB 130. Two amendment sets were adopted on SB 407: one technical set adjusting dates to align with the upcoming election cycle, and another updating the map in the bill. Committee members and the bill sponsor described the proposal as a 4-2 congressional map intended to comply with the Supreme Court’s CalA ruling, preserve traditional redistricting criteria, and avoid using race as the basis for district lines. Supporters of SB 407 argued the map was compact, contiguous, kept parishes and cities together, and created two opportunity districts without racial predominance. Several senators said the map better reflected Louisiana’s political and demographic realities and could withstand legal challenge under the Equal Protection Clause and First Amendment. Testimony in support also emphasized fairness, representation, and the idea that the state should not move to a 5-1 map. Some speakers, including former legislators and community advocates, said the state should maintain or preserve two districts where Black voters and Democratic voters could elect candidates of choice. Opponents of the broader redistricting effort criticized the process as rushed and confusing, especially because early voting had already begun and the Secretary of State was not present to answer questions. Some speakers said the legislature had not been properly involved in the election suspension process and raised concerns about whether votes already cast would count if maps changed. Others argued the proposed changes were an attempt to dilute political power and disenfranchise voters, particularly Black, poor, and queer communities. The committee heard extensive public testimony on both sides, but no final vote on the bill was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• What's fair?
• What's fair? Is it things affordable. What's fair?
• So, it's just not fair, and I think we could work on something that's fair for all the people.
• So, it's just not fair, and I think we could work on something that's fair for all the people.
• have fair have fair for<00:24:48.120> the<00:24:48.240> people.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Hawaiian Affairs heard several Senate concurrent resolutions. SCR 11, urging Congress to amend the Civil Rights Act to prohibit discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity, drew support from the Hawaii State Commission on the Status of Women and Pride at Work Hawaii, both of which backed the measure as a statement of equality and protection for LGBTQIA+ people. A member also reminded testifiers to keep signs and statements relevant to the measure. SCR 22, recognizing the 50th anniversary of the restoration of Ahu and Aliʻa, had no testimony. SCR 58, calling for a progressive enforcement framework for parking violations in DLNR boating and ocean recreation lots, drew strong support from multiple testifiers who argued that towing is overly punitive, costly, and unfair to beach and harbor users; they favored warnings or smaller citations instead of towing and raised concerns about signage, contract oversight, and the cost of proposed enforcement technology. One member asked about whether DLNR could use HPD or other officers for citations, and the discussion focused on staffing and enforcement authority. The committee then heard SCR 60 SD1, requesting an update on the “Breaking Cycles” study on alternative rehabilitation and restorative justice models on Oahu. The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation was not present, but the Corrections Reform Working Group strongly supported the resolution, saying the study reflects extensive community outreach and should not be shelved. Testifiers urged the committee to use the report to examine alternatives to a new jail, including diversion, pre-trial reform, probation reform, and renovations to existing facilities, and one testifier suggested amendments to add experts in those areas and technical assistance from the Prison Policy Initiative. Another testifier described Maui’s use of wraparound reentry services, prosecutorial discretion, and programming as an example of reducing incarceration without expanding jail capacity. SCR 184, asking the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission to examine anti-discrimination laws as applied to algorithmic and automated decision systems, had no in-person testimony, with the chair noting one support and one comment submitted. The final measure, SCR 89 SD1, which would create an advisory committee under the Hawaii correctional system oversight commission to develop recommendations on alternative rehabilitation and restorative justice models on Oahu, also had no testimony from the department, but the Corrections Reform Working Group supported it as a way to ensure community input into jail planning. A later testifier echoed concerns about building a large new jail and urged the committee to consider alternatives to incarceration and to include people with expertise in diversion, pre-trial reform, and probation reform. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Fair enough. Fair enough. Okay. Okay.
• And I think that’s a fair question.
• >> I don't have a complete list, but I can tell you Cheshire Fair and I can tell you Deerfield Fair,
• >> At the Cheshire Fair, absolutely. >> At the Cheshire Fair, absolutely.
• <05:48:31.920> So fairs in those areas? No, I have not. So fairs in those areas?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• > and It restores dignity, fairness, and It restores dignity, fairness, and safety<00:08:26.360
• Minnesota girls for fairness. Minnesota girls for fairness.
• And kids learn fairness in sports. And kids learn fairness in sports.
• And<01:14:20.720> fairness And fairness And fairness requires<01:14:23.280> acknowledging
• Fairness.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• This undermines confidence in the fairness of our tax system.
• This undermines confidence in the fairness of our tax system.
• Thorp. like fair competition between like fair competition between businesses.<00:39:07.520> Isn't
• It's not is a question of fairness.
• fair for for everybody. fair for for everybody.

Bills: HF3676, HF2959, HF3233

Keywords: Safe at Home, address confidentiality, domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, harassment, victim privacy, survivor protection, confidential address, protected address, secret address, identity protection, residential confidentiality, program participant, nondiscrimination, court disclosure, protective order, service of process, driver's license, state ID

Transcript Highlights:

• This is not merely a question of fairness.
• organizations like Mass Fair Housing, like South Coast Fair Housing, to bring complaints in our own
• So I started South Coast Fair Housing with a lot of help.
• Our organizations like South Coast Fair Housing and Massachusetts Fair Housing Center are staffed by
• H. 2131, an act relative to fairness in workers' compensation benefits.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing opened with the co-chairs introducing House and Senate members and explaining the hybrid format, three-minute testimony guidance, and the deadline for written testimony. The committee then heard extensive testimony on S. 2665, which would require employers to post notice to employees when an I-9 audit or similar federal immigration inspection is underway. Supporters, including immigration attorneys, a pediatrician, a labor leader, and an affected family member, argued the bill would protect privacy, give workers time to gather documents and consult counsel, and reduce fear and wrongful arrests. One witness from Illinois described a similar law there and said it had not caused the problems employers feared, while others said recent ICE enforcement has made notice especially important. The committee also heard testimony on S. 1360, a bill affecting collective bargaining rights for State Police, with the State Police Association arguing that a statutory gap lets departmental rules override their contract and that the bill would restore intended bargaining protections. A separate labor bill, S. 1305, was also briefly supported by the AFL-CIO as part of broader worker-classification protections for app-based delivery drivers. A large portion of the hearing focused on H. 2066, which would impose fines on transportation network drivers who refuse rides to people with disabilities using service animals. Testimony from blind and disabled riders, service dog users, advocates, and the Disability Law Center described repeated ride cancellations, drivers pulling away after seeing a service animal, and the difficulty of enforcing existing anti-discrimination laws through MCAD or other agencies. Witnesses said the current system leaves riders without practical recourse because drivers are hard to identify and complaints can take years, and they argued that fines on individual drivers would create a real deterrent. Several witnesses also described the impact on employment, medical appointments, and daily independence. Committee members asked about service-animal verification, whether refusals are ever appropriate, and whether penalties should target drivers or companies; witnesses said legitimate refusals are limited to misbehaving or unsafe animals and that companies already have policies and some training, but enforcement remains weak. The committee also heard from a witness supporting a related bill on rideshare accessibility and from advocates describing broader transportation discrimination issues. One witness discussed a separate proposal to study service-animal denial, and others noted that Uber’s self-identification feature and company policies have not solved the problem. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the meeting ended after the final witnesses on the service-animal bill and a brief organizational discussion about related legislation and committee business.

Transcript Highlights:

• I know there has Fair Public Library.
• to get a a a thought from Fair Hope. to get a a a thought from Fair Hope.
• has<01:00:28.880> told<01:00:29.200> you The Fair Hope Library has told you The Fair
• opinion of the of the board of the fair opinion of the of the board of the fair ho<01:16:32.640>
• appointed by the city council of Fair appointed by the city council of Fair Hope.

Keywords: 924, joint, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This legislation promotes fairness and equal opportunity in education.
• This legislation promotes fairness and equal opportunity in education.
• challenges, deserves a fair opportunity to succeed.
• Thank you for your commitment to fairness and higher education. Thank you.
• Thank you for your commitment to fairness and higher education. Thank you.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education held a public hearing on a large slate of bills, with much of the testimony focused on school discipline and student equity. Bills discussed included measures to address inequities in suspension and expulsion, clarify school exclusion rules, reduce discipline for dress and grooming violations, and expand protections related to fair educational practices. Committee members repeatedly reminded witnesses of the two-minute limit and asked for written testimony to supplement oral remarks. A substantial portion of the hearing centered on the RAISE Act and related school discipline bills, including H. 730/S. 376 and H. 731/S. 380. Testifiers from advocacy groups, legal services, and the legislature argued that exclusionary discipline disproportionately affects Black and Latino students, students with disabilities, low-income students, and DCF-involved youth. They said current law is overly broad or unclear in areas such as “assault on educational staff,” indefinite suspensions tied to felony complaints, and definitions of weapons, leading to unnecessary removals from school. Supporters said the bills would add due process, clearer definitions, and better accountability, while one legislator testified in support of the discipline reforms and opposed several other bills on the agenda. The committee also heard testimony on H. 576/S. 368, which would prohibit suspensions and expulsions for dress and grooming violations and require clearer, non-discriminatory dress code policies. Witnesses cited research and personal stories about disproportionate enforcement against Black girls, girls of color, non-binary students, and students wearing religious attire, and said the bill would prevent physical contact used to enforce dress codes. Another major topic was H. 641/S. 349, which would add “special medical status” protections in education; supporters said it would prevent exclusion based on medical decisions or conditions, though members questioned how it would interact with existing disability law and vaccination-related school requirements. The committee also heard testimony on H. 625, which would extend the ban on corporal punishment from public to private schools, with witnesses citing research on harm and disproportionate impact. Additional testimony covered bills on accelerated learning and gifted education, with parents, educators, and advocates saying Massachusetts under-identifies advanced learners and lacks adequate acceleration pathways. A senator also testified for S. 406 on recovery high schools, saying the funding formula should be updated to better support students in recovery. No votes were taken during the hearing; the chair closed testimony on several bill groups and noted that written testimony would remain open for a week.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that grew to then meeting her at the fair. She liked the fairs.
• Proctor had a fair, Two Harbors had a fair.
• 30:45.679> fair,<00:30:45.919> two<00:30:46.159> harbors fairs.
• Proctor had a fair, two harbors fairs.
• Proctor had a fair, two harbors had<00:30:46.720> a<00:30:46.880> fair.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Ballard: Okay, I understand that's fair.
• They just think they are not going to get a fair trial.
• And then you even ask, 'Can you be fair?' right?
• This bill restores basic fairness and due process.
• Texas holds justice and fairness as core values.

Bills: HB200

Keywords: HB 200, emergency communication, backup communications, satellite phone, portable satellite equipment, radio, floodplain, 100-year floodplain, FEMA, natural disaster, disaster preparedness, emergency preparedness, vulnerable populations, children, elderly, seniors, people with disabilities, care facilities, residential care, assisted living