Transcript Highlights:

• House members? Senator Polsky? Senator Rodriguez? House members?
• And that's really what's at issue on that unit. The next unit is the security services unit.
• The next unit is the security services unit, that's correctional officers and correctional probation
• And that's really what's at issue on that unit. The next unit is the security services unit.
• The next unit is a law enforcement unit that's sworn law enforcement officers across several agencies

Summary: The Joint Select Committee on Collective Bargaining met to hear impasse presentations from the Department of Management Services and several bargaining units. The department reported that most articles had been resolved in each of the full-book contracts, with remaining disputes centered largely on wages and a handful of non-economic issues. For the FDLE special agents, security services, law enforcement, Florida Highway Patrol, and Florida State Fire Service units, the state described its wage offers as generally a 2% competitive increase plus a 3% special pay increase, along with various bonuses, retention funds, or career-development funding in some units. The department also said it wanted to keep existing language on work schedules, seniority, grooming, equipment, grievance procedures, and other items, often characterizing its changes as housekeeping or alignment with current practice. The department noted that insurance had been agreed to with no increased employee cost, and it confirmed that correctional officers do receive overtime pay. Representatives for the Florida State Fire Service Association strongly disputed the state’s position, arguing that firefighters should not be required to perform major construction work, that their work schedules and on-call/callback arrangements unfairly suppress overtime, and that wildfire and fire-rescue employees are underpaid and underprotected. They also pressed for better compensation for EMT/paramedic-certified firefighters, additional protective clothing, on-site decontamination and shower/laundry facilities, and stronger cancer-prevention language. The association said the state had not bargained in good faith and urged the committee to support the union’s proposals. The Police Benevolent Association’s Florida Highway Patrol unit focused on wages and a career development plan, saying troopers remain underpaid compared with other states and are leaving for better-paying agencies. It also sought a veteran stipend, broader grooming/tattoo language, safety improvements for high-mileage vehicles, and changes to seniority and inflation-related pay. The PBA law enforcement unit raised similar safety concerns about aging vehicles, sought limits on performance evaluations tied to case presentations, and requested a $7,000 across-the-board wage increase. The security services unit, representing correctional officers, probation officers, and ISS officers, said its main issue was wages and asked for an $8-per-hour starting pay increase, retention bonuses, special pay for death row and close-management staff, added pay for SOTEC officers, and overtime pay for lieutenants and captains who currently receive comp time instead. No votes were taken, no public testimony followed, and the committee adjourned after taking the presentations under advisement.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> the United States pursu to house the United States pursu to house resolution<03:06:06.080><c> 5<
• States House of Representatives, the United States Senate, and the White House.
• States House of Representatives, the United States Senate, and the White House.
• the United States Senate, and the White House.
• They did not give us the majority in the United States House of Representatives, the people's House,

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Wednesday, January 15, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• When insurers observe window units, housing providers have received cancellation notices.
• Removing window-mounted units from the bill does not prohibit housing... devices.
• When insurers observe window units, housing providers have received cancellation notices.
• Removing window-mounted units from the bill does not prohibit housing. Coverage.
• Removing window-mounted units from the bill does not prohibit housing providers from allowing them.

Summary: The Senate Housing Committee heard public testimony on several bills. SB 6091 would prohibit real estate brokers from marketing residential properties to limited or exclusive groups unless the listing is also marketed to the general public and all brokers, with exceptions for health or safety and private party sales. The sponsor and supporters, including Washington Realtors, Habitat for Humanity, Zillow, the Fair Housing Center, and others, said the bill promotes transparency, competition, and fair housing by preventing “pocket listings” and insider access. Opponents, including Compass representatives and some brokers, argued it would limit homeowner autonomy, harm privacy-sensitive sellers such as seniors, and create legal risk for brokers; the Attorney General’s office said it supported the competitive goal but wanted a different enforcement mechanism than WLAD. The committee later closed testimony on SB 6091 without taking final action in the hearing. The committee also heard SB 6200, which would allow tenants and residents in manufactured home communities to install portable cooling devices, subject to safety, code, and electrical restrictions, and would require landlords to notify tenants of their rights and limitations. The prime sponsor and many public health, tenant, and climate advocates said the bill is needed to prevent heat-related illness and death during extreme heat events, especially for renters in older or low-income housing who lack built-in cooling. Landlord and property management groups supported the idea of portable floor units but raised concerns about window-mounted devices, citing fall hazards, property damage, and insurance issues. Testimony emphasized that the bill includes liability protections for landlords and is intended as a narrow public health measure. The committee then heard SB 6096, which would require cities and towns collecting water and sewer connection charges to offer a deferred payment option for qualifying residential construction until final inspection or certificate of occupancy. The sponsor and builders’ groups said deferral would reduce upfront financing costs and help housing production. Cities and utility districts opposed the bill, arguing it shifts financial risk to utilities and ratepayers, complicates infrastructure planning, and could delay or reduce needed system investments. Finally, the committee heard SB 6153, which would create a senior independent housing ombuds program, require registration of senior independent housing facilities, and make certain landlord-tenant violations subject to Consumer Protection Act enforcement. The sponsor said the bill responds to complaints from seniors in independent living settings who lack an ombuds or other practical recourse, while staff noted the bill carries an estimated $4.4 million biennial fiscal impact.

Transcript Highlights:

• years will be almost 300,000 housing units short.
• 00:10:13.120><c> continue</c><00:10:14.079><c> the</c> housing units and if we continue the housing units
• We must do housing units short.
• units and help reduce the total cost of a housing unit.
• c> town</c> denser housing units like condos, town denser housing units like condos, town houses,<00:

Committee: Senate State & Local Government

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:04 Attendance Roll Call: 00:08 SB 141 Discussion 00:58 SB 141 Vote 07:03 SB 9 Discussion 09:10 SB 9 Vote 19:47 Adjournment: 21:20, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• those units to a housing reposition those units to a housing Choice<00:37:36.960><c> voucher</c><00:
• units down, we can't afford to lose affordable housing units.
• units down, we can't afford to lose affordable housing units.
• units down, we can't afford to lose affordable housing units.
• /c> affordable housing units so this is affordable housing units so this is going<00:42:44.119><c> to

Committee: House Housing Finance and Policy

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• United States.
• We were concerned that if we put citizen that we would would violate the Fair Housing Act and the United
• Don't take houses from us.
• Those people who cannot afford a house still cannot afford a house. Okay.
• They can't rent a house in. then they cannot buy the house.

Bills: HB17 , HB34 , HB41 , HB 118 , HB 119 , HB 127 , HB 128 , HB 129 , HB 130 , HB132 , HB133 , HB17 , HB41 , HB118 , HB119 , HB127 , HB128 , HB129 , HB130 , HB132 , HB133

Committee: House Homeland Security, Public Safety & Veterans' Affairs

Keywords: foreign ownership, real estate, national security, designated countries, Texas property law, lobbying, foreign adversaries, compensation prohibition, transparency, civil penalties, higher education, foreign adversary, research security, trade secrets, academic partnerships, HB 128, sister city, sister-city agreement, international exchange, municipal diplomacy

Transcript Highlights:

• SB 417 would directly benefit this housing and help us provide these housing units to the families that
• housing Which clarifies that project sites identified for multi-unit housing in the housing element,
• were 2,400 other applicants who also deserve housing, all vying for 72 units of available housing.
• This bill will expedite referrals and provide affordable housing developers with a backstop for units
• But what we can clearly say is because we haven't been building the affordable housing units.

Summary: The committee heard a long housing agenda with several bills presented before quorum was established. AB 1725, as amended, would require disclosure of nearby oil wells and methane monitoring issues in a specific district; the author and community witnesses described serious health and safety risks in Vista Hermosa Heights, while the California Apartment Association, California Building Industry Association, and California Chamber of Commerce opposed, arguing the bill targeted the wrong industry and that the state should instead fix abandoned wells directly. AB 2110, a local finance tool to create tax increment districts for workforce housing for education, health care, manufacturing, and public safety workers, drew no witnesses in support or opposition and was presented as a way to help workers live closer to jobs. AB 1732 would expand CEQA streamlining for public university and college housing projects; UC and several housing and labor groups supported it, while housing advocates raised concerns about amendments affecting existing 100% affordable housing exemptions. AB 1771, amended into a study bill, would direct HCD to report on the long-standing resident manager requirement for apartment buildings with 16 or more units; the rental housing industry supported studying the issue, while the chair emphasized the need to consider tenant protections and the impact on current resident managers before changing the law. The committee also heard AB 2185, which would direct state affordable housing programs to update guidelines to better support factory-built housing; it drew broad support from housing, labor, technology, and local government groups, with no opposition. AB 2748 would delay new EV-readiness requirements for 100% affordable housing developments, keeping the prior 40% standard through 2035; supporters said the higher standard would add significant costs and threaten project feasibility, while clean air and transportation advocates argued the code changes are modest, important for equity, and should not be rolled back. Members split along those lines, with some emphasizing housing production and others urging more public subsidy for EV infrastructure rather than delaying the code. SB 417, a proposed $10 billion affordable housing bond for the November ballot, received extensive support from housing organizations, local governments, labor, and business groups, but Habitat for Humanity and the Los Angeles mayor’s office asked for specific allocations for CalHome and interim housing; the bill was ultimately moved to Appropriations on an 8-0 vote, with members noting ongoing negotiations over funding priorities. Finally, AB 1740 would create an urban multimodal community designation for Santa Monica, allowing local approval of certain low-impact coastal-zone activities—such as some housing, bike and bus lanes, outdoor dining, and building changes—without Coastal Commission review. The author and Santa Monica officials said the bill would reduce delays and uncertainty for infill housing and local economic recovery while preserving protections for sensitive coastal resources; supporters included housing, business, and city groups. The Coastal Commission and environmental organizations opposed, saying the bill would carve out broad exemptions, weaken public access and appeal rights, and bypass the local coastal program process that Santa Monica has not completed. Committee members debated the Commission’s role, with some criticizing it for opposing legislation and others arguing the bill was a common-sense way to modernize coastal permitting. A motion and second were made on AB 1740, and the bill was left pending with the committee’s action to be taken when appropriate.

Transcript Highlights:

• And of course at that point it was basically all over housing in buildings six or more units.
• a housing emergency.
• units... ...and then the year later, you could only do it for housing that was a year old.
• and inspection of units under the Housing Access Voucher Pilot Program. 94A, by Senator Kappa, an act
• to amend the Public Housing Law in relation to priority applicants and inspection of units under the

Committee: Senate Housing, Construction, and Community Development

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Housing, Construction, and Community Development met on March 31, 2026, with a quorum present and noted that the Legislature was in budget negotiations and approaching a scheduled break. The committee took up several housing-related bills, with most being reported to Finance after discussion. The first bill, S.3742A, would require information to be provided in new and renewal leases for certain housing accommodations, and it was reported without opposition. S.4659B, the Rental Emergency Stabilization for Tenants Act, generated the longest debate; supporters said it would give local governments outside New York City a more flexible way to determine a housing emergency and opt into rent stabilization, while opponents argued it lacked a clear vacancy-rate standard, could discourage development, and would benefit higher-income tenants. The bill was ultimately reported, with some negative votes and one or more votes without recommendation. The committee then discussed S.8168, which would create a deconstruction and salvage framework for building materials, including local options, technical assistance, grants, and related code updates. Supporters said it could reduce landfill use, lower disposal costs, and encourage reuse markets, while opponents questioned costs, market demand, and whether the program would raise housing and demolition expenses. The bill was reported, again with some negative or without-recommendation votes. S.8595, dealing with how certain valuations and amounts due are calculated in foreclosure actions, was also reported. S.8672, the Employer-Assisted Housing Matching Grant Act, would provide a state match for employer housing assistance for certain nonprofit human services employers; members raised concerns about scope, possible double-dipping, and whether the program should be expanded to other workers, but the bill was reported with some negative and without-recommendation votes. The final bill, S.94A, made a minor amendment to the Housing Access Voucher Pilot Program regarding priority applicants and unit inspections, and it was reported as well. Throughout the meeting, members repeatedly emphasized that several proposals were optional for local governments or employers rather than mandates, and many of the exchanges focused on affordability, housing supply, local control, and the fiscal effects of the bills. No floor votes were taken; the committee’s actions were limited to reporting the bills to Finance, with some reported favorably and others reported with negative or without-recommendation votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• About 59% of school districts and charter schools gained at-risk EL units because of House Bill 63.
• The deductions in their units have to be attributable to House Bill 63.
• units, TCI units, and KTOL Plus units for you to review for all these awardees.
• The at-risk unit losses could be mirrored like the provisions from House Bill 5 and Senate Bill 1 that
• So, not only did they lose units from House Bill 63, they have fewer units overall, which reflects the

Transcript Highlights:

• housing also impacts health care.
• income-restricted housing in a time prior to Housing Navigator Massachusetts, there was a clear divide
• housing, often referred to as Section 8 housing, and any kind of housing with project-based vouchers
• Common examples of those are referred to as tax credit housing or workforce housing and an abundance
• And everything on the right are types of housing that we do not include on Housing Navigator.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Long-Term Services and Supports and Health Equity Subcommittee met with a presentation from Housing Navigator Massachusetts. Staff described the nonprofit’s mission to improve access to affordable housing through a free, 24/7 search tool and public data dashboards. They explained how the site distinguishes between rent-based-on-income units and fixed below-market rent units, how mobile vouchers such as AHVP and Section 8 interact with those listings, and what types of housing are included or excluded from the database. They also reviewed accessibility filters, supportive housing resources, and related state programs such as EOHLC resources and RAFT. Committee members asked about the organization’s funding, the availability of voucher programs, and whether the site tracks demand for accessible units or wait lists over time. Housing Navigator said it is primarily supported through the state, works closely with the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities, and does not collect personal application data because it is not part of the application process. Staff said accessible units appear to be in high demand, but they do not have direct data on how many people are waiting or how many applications result from site visits. They also said they are working to improve data sharing, more frequent updates, and future research tools. Members discussed ways to increase public awareness of Housing Navigator, including sharing a one-page fact sheet or infographic through disability organizations, local disability commissions, independent living centers, and the Massachusetts Office on Disability. The subcommittee also briefly discussed future goals, including inviting MassHealth to a January meeting, seeking regular updates on federal Medicare and Medicaid developments, reviewing the annual report’s recommendations, and possibly planning a future health equity event. The meeting ended with the introduction of new commission member Victoria Gill and a motion to adjourn, which was approved unanimously.

Transcript Highlights:

• , up to 10-unit projects, on infill sites.
• California's housing crisis continues to limit homeownership opportunities and increase housing costs
• Housing experts have estimated a shortage of between 840,000 and 3.5 million housing units.
• Housing experts have estimated a shortage of between 840,000 to 300, 3.5 million housing units. to 300
• , 3.5 million housing units.

Committee: Senate Housing

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 2118 is related to common interest community restrictions on the types of use of a unit.
• So House Bill 2118 would add a new limitation on HOA authority to regulate the types of use of a unit
• than those restrictions that existed when the unit owner acquired the unit, unless the unit owner agrees
• the previous unit owner.
• We have 600 units.

Summary: The Housing Committee held public hearings on two bills. HB 2118 would limit homeowners associations’ ability to adopt or enforce new covenant restrictions on the use of a unit that are more onerous than those in place when the owner bought the property, unless the owner agrees in writing. The sponsor said the bill is meant to protect buyers from having the rug pulled out from under them on things like chickens or renting part of a home. Staff explained the bill’s grandfathering and recording provisions, and that it excludes rules required by law. Testimony was split: supporters emphasized fairness, certainty, and protecting relied-upon uses, while opponents from HOA and management groups argued it would create fragmented enforcement, higher costs, administrative complexity, and conflict within communities, and that existing law and court decisions already address these issues. The committee closed the hearing without taking a vote. HB 2236 would update Washington Housing Finance Commission statutes. The bill would allow the commission to make direct mortgage loans, extend the term of the commission attorney, remove advance notice to the state finance committee before bond issuance, repeal the housing finance program and housing finance plan requirements, and revise the commission’s purpose language. The sponsor and commission said the changes would modernize outdated statutes, improve efficiency, and give the commission more flexibility to use its revenues and financing tools for affordable housing, gap financing, preservation, and starter homes. Committee members asked about the commission’s bond structure, default risk, and the meaning of “public funds,” and the commission said the transactions remain third-party and tax-exempt, with no state credit risk. Banking industry witnesses said they generally support the commission’s mission but wanted clearer limits on direct lending and the use of public funds, and they were working with the commission on amendment language. Committee members expressed support for the collaboration and the goal of increasing housing production. No votes were taken; both hearings were closed and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• housing units for recreating.
• Also results in a great deal of heat gain in many of our housing units.
• That's difficult to overcome with the systems as they exist in our housing. units.
• In addition, how will it compare what will will it compare these pilot housing units to?
• We're talking less than 20 housing units out of 1,500 overall.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:21:38.240><c> for</c> additional housing units um not only for additional housing units um not
• </c> affordable housing unit and the landlord affordable housing unit and the landlord one<00:23:58.679
• Manufactured housing units are attractive, safe, they appreciate like a regular house.
• Manufactured housing units are attractive and safe. They appreciate like a regular house.
• uh</c><04:43:16.560><c> is</c> United States where housing uh is United States where housing uh is allowed

Committee: House Housing

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• units or congregate residential housing units or congregate housing<00:13:47.920><c> units</c><00:13
• ><c> units</c> housing units, those residential units housing units, those residential units will<00:
• congregate housing units, excuse me.
• units or or uh congre uh housing six units or or uh congre uh housing units<00:24:46.080><c> was</c>
• </c><01:25:26.639><c> units,</c> build housing, six units or 106 units, build housing, six units or 106

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee held a public hearing on Senate Bill 291, which would update religious land-use and property tax exemption rules for church-owned parsonages, parish houses, and similar properties. Senator Tim Lang, speaking for the sponsor, said the bill was intended to address situations where former parsonages are no longer occupied by clergy and are instead used for church-related purposes such as housing staff, religious education, or congregate living tied to ministry, including addiction recovery. He emphasized that the bill was not meant to create commercial rental housing and that it also preserves reasonable zoning and environmental regulations. Committee members pressed the sponsor on how the bill would be applied, especially the meaning of “religious purposes,” the six-unit limit, the “same lot” language, and whether churches could use the exemption to rent units for revenue. The sponsor said the six-unit cap was added to prevent large-scale commercial rental use, that congregate housing would be limited and defined, and that the bill was meant to cover uses like substance abuse recovery, homes for unwed mothers, and religious education, but not apartments converted for ordinary rental. He also said churches would still file annual exemption paperwork and towns could challenge claims they believed were commercial. Questions also raised concerns about whether the bill treated religious and nonreligious housing trusts differently; the sponsor responded that the bill was aimed at church-owned property used in pursuit of a religious mission. Several witnesses testified in support. Representative Mark Pearson, an active clergyman, said the bill would not remove additional property from the tax rolls because clergy housing allowances typically lead clergy to buy taxable homes elsewhere, while the church-owned parsonage remains exempt. Nick Taylor of Housing Action New Hampshire supported the bill as a modest expansion that could help create more attainable housing by allowing better use of existing religious land and structures, though he noted his organization would support even broader use. The hearing ended without a vote or final action, and the chair closed questions after the testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• The House will be in order.
• </c> address the House for one minute. address the House for one minute.
• </c> In fact, for four years, the United In fact, for four years, the United States<00:27:28.320><c>
• </c> business as usual with the United business as usual with the United States.
• </c> under the jurisdiction of the United under the jurisdiction of the United States<00:53:17.599><c

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Friday, March 27, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, we keep talking about the housing crisis, and yet we have thousands and thousands of units
• This bill would enable VTA to designate a percentage of the housing units we provide with a preference
• A majority of the housing units proposed under AB 2263 would be open to the general public and would
• There's funding that occurs at the state and local level for affordable housing units.
• The units are open to the public and in line with fair housing law.

Committee: Senate Housing

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• On February 19th, the House and Senate community lost a beloved and dedicated member of the United States
• Steven also worked for the United Way Shelter Inc. and the to address the house and extend my to address
• The House of Representatives declares, 'It is the policy of the United States to use all means necessary
• The House of Representatives declares, 'It is the policy of the United States to use all means necessary
• States House of leader in the United States House of Representatives Representatives Representatives

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Wednesday, March 4, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So that'll be SB 184, affordable housing, by Senator Gates.
• or workforce housing needs.
• Toward addressing the affordable housing or workforce housing needs.
• , counties, and local housing agencies.
• , counties, and local housing agency.

Committee: Senate Community Affairs

Summary: The Committee on Community Affairs heard three measures. First, SB 184 by Senator Gates would require local governments to allow accessory dwelling units in single-family residential areas, with exceptions for planned unit developments and master-planned communities. The bill and its amendments were discussed at length, including parking restrictions, homestead exemption treatment, short-term rental concerns, impact and mobility fees, pre-approved designs, manufactured ADUs, and an OPPAGA study on mezzanine financing and tiny homes. Testimony from the Florida League of Cities raised concerns about parking, short-term rentals, and fee parity, while several senators supported the concept but asked for further refinement. The committee adopted the amendments and reported CS for SB 184 favorably. The committee then took up SB 118 by Senator Brodeur, which preempts regulation of presidential libraries to the state and defers regulation to the federal government, with the stated purpose of preventing local governments from imposing obstacles to a future presidential library in Florida. There was no debate or public testimony, and the bill was reported favorably. Finally, the committee considered SPB 7704, a proposed committee bill to repeal the sunset date on a public records exemption for property photographs and personal identifying information of applicants or participants in disaster-related housing assistance programs held by state and local housing entities. With no questions, debate, or public testimony, the committee approved the motion to submit it as a committee bill and reported it favorably. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We develop affordable rental housing, own and operate over 3,100 units of rental housing.
• We've developed over 6,700 units of homeownership housing.
• We develop affordable rental housing, own and operate over 3,100 units of rental housing.
• We've developed over 6,700 units of homeownership housing.
• We run first-time homebuyer, 700 units of homeownership housing.

Summary: The hearing was an outcome review of AB 2011, the Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022, focused on whether the law is being used as intended to speed housing production on commercially zoned land while maintaining labor and affordability standards. Chair Haney and Assembly Member Wicks emphasized that the point of the review was not to relitigate the bill, but to assess implementation and results. The first panel of researchers and policy experts said AB 2011 has had real but still limited uptake so far, with roughly 5,800 homes proposed, entitled, or permitted under the law through 2024, concentrated mainly in San Francisco and Los Angeles counties. They also noted that the broader housing market remains constrained by high construction costs, interest rates, and flat rents, making it hard to isolate the bill’s effects from overall market conditions. Witnesses generally agreed that AB 2011 has been most effective for 100% affordable projects and for projects already using public subsidies or prevailing wage, where the ministerial process and CEQA streamlining help move developments forward. Several speakers described the law as a useful bargaining tool that can push jurisdictions to rezone or approve projects more quickly even when AB 2011 is not formally invoked. At the same time, developers and advocates said the mixed-income pathway is much less usable in most of the state because prevailing wage and the 15% affordability requirement add significant cost, especially in lower-rent markets. They also pointed to implementation issues such as narrow site eligibility rules, the “substantially surrounded by urban uses” test, industrial-use exclusions, and confusion about whether the law applies to homeownership projects. The second panel, made up of practitioners using the law, described specific projects that moved forward under AB 2011, including affordable housing developments in the San Joaquin Valley and large mixed-use projects in San Francisco. They said the law’s biggest benefit is certainty: projects that once took years to entitle can now move in months. However, they repeated calls for changes such as clarifying homeownership eligibility, loosening density and site restrictions, narrowing the industrial-use exclusion, and making the law easier to understand for developers and local staff. Members also raised concerns about uneven use across regions, especially the relative lack of AB 2011 activity in Los Angeles and Santa Clara County, and about the accuracy and lag in annual progress report data. The final panel, including the original sponsors, said they remain supportive of the law but are open to adjustments to reduce costs and improve usability while preserving labor protections and affordability goals.