Transcript Highlights:

• Can we set additional regulations for the federal grant program? Can we set additional regulations?
• I think that will comply with that regulation, right?
• The state Constitution certainly limits our ability to regulate the UC system.
• We're not asking for an opportunity at this point statewide.
• ... ...to make recommendations for development of a statewide dashboard.

Summary: The committee began without a quorum and first heard AB 302, which would prohibit schools from requiring students to use addictive social media feeds as a condition of participating in extracurricular activities and would require schools to offer a non-social-media way to communicate with students and families. The author and a student witness argued the bill protects minors from being forced onto addictive platforms, while senators asked how coaches and clubs would communicate; the author said email, built-in messaging, and other direct methods would still be allowed. The bill was held on call for absent members. The committee then took up AB 2504, creating a pilot program to train creative-industry workers for AI-related changes through partnerships among community colleges, employers, unions, and tech companies. Supporters from WME and the Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office said the program would help workers adapt to rapid industry change, while senators discussed the pilot’s size, geographic diversity, and sunset date. The bill passed on a due-pass motion to the Senate Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection Committee. AB 1534 followed, adding state guardrails for federal Workforce Pell short-term training programs, including limits on tuition, restrictions on certain financing products, and transparency rules for partnerships with unaccredited entities. Support came from TICAS, EdTrust-West, and the Campaign for College Opportunity; senators questioned the scope of state authority and why private institutions were not clearly included, and the author said the broader approval framework was being handled in trailer bill language. The bill passed on a due-pass motion to the Senate Labor, Public Employment and Retirement Committee. The committee also heard AB 1381, a gut-and-amend proposal to strengthen screening for school teachers with histories of egregious misconduct while balancing due process and privacy concerns. Supporters and opponents both emphasized student safety and the need for reliable information-sharing, and members noted the bill was similar to a previously held measure; the author said amendments were still being worked out. The bill passed to the Senate Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection Committee. AB 2202, which would create a Closing the Achievement Gap Commission to coordinate statewide efforts, drew broad support from school board and education groups but also concern that it could duplicate existing work and add bureaucracy; after extended debate about whether the commission would identify causes or solutions, it passed to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Finally, AB 1547, requiring a UC feasibility study for a branch medical school in Kern County, drew local support but opposition from a senator who argued the Legislature cannot direct UC’s internal operations under the state Constitution; the chair said the Legislature can make recommendations and the bill remained under discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• The challenges of resources and regulations.
• No, it’s statewide.
• Is it totally federally regulated?
• considered a statewide continuum of care. that prohibits a state from being considered a statewide continuum
• We'd love for it to be statewide.

Summary: The committee first approved a motion, then heard a lengthy presentation on homelessness policy and behavioral health. Testimony focused on the view that Arkansas should shift toward more data-driven, outcomes-based responses to homelessness, including stronger treatment options for serious mental illness and substance use disorder, better data collection, provider accountability, and possible statewide use of the Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinic (CCBHC) model. Speakers from Fort Smith, Restore Hope, Our House, and Western Arkansas Counseling described local work, the need for better coordination across providers, and the role of crisis services, ACT teams, and employment support. Members asked about sex offender tracking, the difference between sheltered and unsheltered homelessness, how to scale successful programs statewide, and whether Arkansas could apply for a statewide Continuum of Care or CCBHC planning grant. The discussion also touched on camping bans, civil commitment, and federal funding changes, with several speakers urging the state to pursue the CCBHC planning grant and more transparent reporting systems. After the homelessness discussion, the committee moved through a series of Department of Energy and Board of Nursing rule reviews. DEQ proposed updating the post-closure cleanup threshold for solid waste matters from $50,000 to $2 million to match Act 791 of 2025, and members asked about financial assurance and oversight; the rule was reviewed without objection. The Board of Nursing then presented multiple rule changes tied to recent acts, including adding fees for dialysis patient care technician registration, expanding contact-information requirements, implementing APRN delegation authority to unlicensed workers, clarifying APRN authority for death certificates and durable medical equipment prescriptions, updating certified medication assistant training and insulin-injection authority, and conforming independent-practice rules for clinical nurse specialists. Each rule was reviewed without objection. Near the end of the meeting, Senator Irvin announced that UAMS had completed its NCI designation submission for the Winthrop Rockefeller Cancer Institute, calling it an important milestone for the state. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• , that's of statewide importance?
• Sometimes, often, regulations and the impacts of those regulations aren't apparent until very later on
• Sometimes, often, regulations and the impacts of those regulations aren't apparent until very later on
• And it's regulation, it's layer upon layer upon layer.
• We are layering regulation on top of regulation. We're driving up costs.

Committee: Senate Environmental Quality

Transcript Highlights:

• We operate over 150 HHW collection facilities statewide, not just RCRC counties but local governments
• But I think we see the value and the benefit of establishing a durable, holistic, statewide approach
• Our industry in California is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the entire world.
• It's been heavily regulated, and they've been decontaminated over the years.
• I think that, you know, because of cap and trade, because of all these other regulations.

Summary: The Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee heard three main bills after initially lacking a quorum and deferring the consent calendar. SB 501 by Senator Allen would expand California’s battery extended producer responsibility program to include medium-format batteries, such as those used in e-bikes, lawn equipment, and portable power systems. Supporters from local governments, recycling groups, environmental organizations, and battery stewardship interests said the bill would reduce fire risks, improve collection and recycling, and close a gap in existing law. One industry witness sought clarification about off-highway vehicles and a battery association requested guardrails for mixed battery formats; the California Retailers Association moved from opposition to neutral after discussions with the author. SB 1125 by Senator Menjivar would create a statewide, state-funded low-income drinking water rate assistance program administered by the State Water Resources Control Board, contingent on funding. The author and supporters said many Californians face water debt and that the bill would help address affordability while working around Proposition 218 limits on local ratepayer-funded assistance. Water districts, local governments, environmental justice groups, and conservation organizations testified in support, and there was no opposition. SB 1259 by Senator Blakespear, as amended, would require refineries to provide advance information on closure, cleanup costs, and timelines to help communities plan for refinery transitions and remediation. Supporters, including the City of Benicia, environmental justice groups, and advocacy organizations, argued that communities need transparency before closures occur and that other energy sectors already provide similar planning information. Opponents from labor, petroleum, and business groups argued the bill was unnecessary, burdensome, and could discourage refinery investment or signal premature decline of the industry. After extensive debate, the committee voted to pass SB 1259 as amended to the Assembly Utilities and Energy Committee, and also approved SB 501 and SB 1125; the consent calendar items SB 1253 and SJR 13 were adopted.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> to be grounded in this larger statewide to be grounded in this larger statewide vision<00:08:36.560
• It means building an statewide AI hub?
• In some ways it comes down to regulating the technology versus regulating the impact.
• </c><01:02:53.839><c> against</c> protections and regulation against protections and regulation against
• </c> should be aiming for in any regulation should be aiming for in any regulation considered<01:03:38.880

Bills: HF1316 , HF4369

Committee: House Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy

Keywords: HF1316, child support, new hire reporting, centralized work reporting system, independent contractors, payors, employers, payor of funds, withholding orders, income withholding, child support enforcement, Minnesota Department of Children, Youth, and Families, gig economy, rideshare drivers, delivery drivers, W-9, W-4, newly hired workers, rehired employees, labor organization

Transcript Highlights:

• It's new around the regulations... ...new.
• Regulation is a complex process to change any regulations, right?
• regulations, I should say.
• It's the regulations of that law.
• It's the regulations of that law.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight

Summary: The Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight held an oversight hearing on draft regulations implementing Article 97 of the Massachusetts Constitution under Chapter 274 of the Acts of 2022, the Open Space Act. Chairs Cabral and Collins framed the hearing as a review of how the new process for dispositions or changes in use of Article 97 land would work, including public notice, environmental justice protections, replacement land, appraisals, and the role of the legislature. Under Secretary Stephanie Cooper and Commissioner Adam Bakke testified for EEA/DCAM, followed later by Deputy Inspector General O’Neill and Deputy Inspector General Giles on appraisal review. Much of the discussion focused on how the draft regulations would operate in practice. EEA said the regulations would require advance public notice, define “comparable location” for replacement land, and allow the Secretary to make findings on whether an action would adversely affect environmental justice communities. Members pressed for longer public comment periods, clearer notice to local officials, more frequent updates to the site evaluation tool, and a clearer definition of terms such as “limited duration” for permits and licenses. EEA said the regulations are intended to standardize a process that has been handled through policy and case-by-case review, and that the legislature still retains the final authority to approve any Article 97 disposition. Committee members also questioned whether the draft rules shift too much discretion to the Secretary and whether the proposed “proponent” process could allow private entities to drive Article 97 actions. EEA responded that non-public proponents would still need municipal support and legislative sponsorship, and that the regulations do not create a new avenue to bypass the existing home rule and legislative process. Members raised concerns about the current policy’s unanimous-vote requirements for municipal commissions, the proposed waiver provisions, whether MEPA applies, and the lack of explicit enforcement or penalty language in the act or regulations. EEA and DCAM said the act does not provide an enforcement mechanism and that disputes would generally be handled through the courts or the Attorney General. The Inspector General’s office explained its role in reviewing appraisals for special legislation, including Article 97 matters, to ensure compliance with USPAP standards and to forward its review to DCAM. The hearing did not include any votes or formal committee action; members indicated that the committee may later issue recommendations to the executive agencies based on the testimony and questions raised.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> holistically statewide. holistically statewide. &gt;&gt; Thank<00:31:06.080><c> you.
• These are rules for regulating game bird hunting and regulating game mammal hunting.
• These are rules for regulating game bird hunting and regulating game mammal hunting.
• These are rules for regulating game bird hunting and regulating game mammal hunting.
• So in terms of statewide, the latest statewide coverage survey was conducted by NOAA in 2024, and we

Bills: SB2606 , SB3253 , SB237 , SB3252 , SB1178 , SB2322 , SB2019 , SB3043 , SB3014 , SB2972 , SB1190 , SB2488

Committee: Senate Water, Land, Culture and the Arts

Summary: The committees heard testimony on several measures related to wildlife, conservation, shoreline adaptation, and climate governance. On SB 2606, which would establish the Freshwater State Recreational Area Wildlife Sanctuary Corporation, the Department of Land and Natural Resources said it had concerns about employee eligibility and was not yet prepared to comment further on the bill’s ramifications. After testimony ended, a senator asked DLNR to follow up with more detail, and the department said it would relay the questions to leadership and respond later. No vote was taken on the measure during the excerpt. On SB 3253, which would create the Hawaii Conservation Sanctuary as a nonprofit entity to work with DLNR, the department said it supported the bill. In discussion, DLNR said Hawaii has not done anything like this before, described a similar model in New Zealand, and estimated that developing such a sanctuary could cost millions of dollars. Members also discussed whether the concept would fit with existing efforts such as Hakalau, and DLNR said the bill could apply to private or state lands depending on the site. No action was taken. The most extensive discussion was on SB 237, which would expand state and county authority to develop adaptation pathways for relocating infrastructure away from sea level rise and coastal flooding areas. DLNR supported the bill, saying it prioritizes public trust resources over economic development or private property. The Kahana Bay Steering Committee and the Shoreline Preservation Coalition opposed the measure, arguing it was too focused on managed retreat and should include a broader range of shoreline responses, such as erosion mitigation, groins, sand nourishment, and other interim protections. The Office of Planning and Sustainable Development said it appreciated the bill’s intent but wanted broader language that would allow more tools in the toolbox. Members debated whether retreat is inevitable, whether different shorelines require different approaches, and whether the bill should be more flexible. No vote was taken. The final measure discussed was SB 3252, which would amend the powers and duties of the Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission, create a coordinator position, and appropriate funds. The commission’s coordinator testified in support, while OPSD opposed the bill, saying it would remove the two cabinet-level co-chair positions, raise accountability concerns, and duplicate some of OPSD’s functions. In questioning, members debated whether the current commission structure has been effective, who would appoint or confirm the coordinator, and whether the bill would improve transparency and implementation. OPSD said it supported more statewide interdepartmental funding for climate planning and staffing, but had concerns about the proposed governance changes. No vote or final action was taken in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Statewide recalls are 160 days.
• Statewide recalls are 160 days.
• Statewide is... ...for all the elected officials statewide is 160 days.
• Statewide is 160 days; locally, it is determined by the number of registered voters.
• It allows the California Secretary of State to establish a secure, regulated process.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Elections and Constitutional Amendments heard several election-related bills. SB 1175 by Senator Rubio would require lobbyists to file employment changes and terminations directly with the Secretary of State through the new Cal-Access replacement system, rather than through employers or firms, to reduce delays and improve transparency. SB 1357 by Senator Ochoa Bogh would protect the privacy of voters who sign a notice of intention to circulate a recall petition by omitting signatures and street addresses from the published notice and adding a disclosure explaining the notice’s purpose. Both bills drew support from state election officials and were advanced by committee vote. The committee also heard SB 1369 by Senator Reyes, which would add safeguards to judicial recall efforts by requiring oral disclosure when signature gatherers are paid and shortening the signature-gathering period for judicial recalls from 160 days to 80 days. Supporters, including judges and trial lawyers, argued the bill would protect judicial independence and safety amid recent recall efforts, while one senator questioned whether judges should be treated differently from other officials. The bill passed on a 3-1 vote and was re-referred to the Senate Committee on Public Safety. SB 1414, also by Senator Reyes, would create an independent redistricting commission for San Bernardino County; supporters said it would reduce gerrymandering and improve public trust, while county representatives raised concerns but remained open to amendments. It advanced on a 3-1 vote to the Local Government Committee. SB 970 by Senator Cervantes would direct the Secretary of State to adopt regulations allowing military and overseas voters to return ballots electronically, responding to the loss of the federal DOD fax service and mail delays. County election officials and veterans groups supported the bill, while the Secretary of State’s office and voting integrity groups opposed it, arguing that secure electronic ballot return is not feasible and could conflict with existing law. The bill passed 4-0 to Appropriations. The committee also heard SB 1420 by Senator Richardson, which would expand voter awareness of “sign, scan, and go” voting and require guidance on implementation; it was supported by election officials and advocacy groups and advanced to Appropriations. Finally, SB 1310 by Senator Choi would allow limited sharing of jury questionnaire information with election officials to help update voter rolls, but opponents warned it could lead to erroneous voter cancellations; the author narrowed the bill’s scope in response to concerns, and it passed to Judiciary. Several bills were held on call briefly until absent members were added, after which the committee completed its business and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• These groups can regulate or limit the use of property by their members.
• Before you is Senate Bill 601 related to scissor-stair regulations in the State Building Code.
• By way of background, the State Building Code provides a set of statewide standards and requirements
• We want to be careful that we get the details right before implementing a statewide approach.
• With the adopted comprehensive plan and applicable development regulations.

Summary: The committee heard public testimony on several housing-related bills. On SB 6054, Senator Hunt’s bill to prohibit common-interest community rules from blocking wildfire home-hardening materials, staff explained that HOA and condominium governing documents could still impose reasonable aesthetic rules, but not ones that make fire-resistant materials infeasible or more than 10% costlier. The sponsor described the bill as a response to HOA requirements for less fire-resistant roofs. Testifiers generally supported the goal but objected to the 10% cost cap, saying it could limit community-specific design choices and create unintended conflicts with aesthetic standards. The committee also heard SB 601 on scissor stairs in the building code. The sponsor and supporters from Futurewise, architects, and housing advocates said scissor stairs could make mid-rise and high-rise housing more efficient, reduce corridor space, and improve unit layouts without sacrificing life safety. They noted the design is used in places like Vancouver, B.C. and in some Washington venues, and argued the bill would help lower costs and increase housing supply. No opposition was presented during the hearing. For SB 6015 on permit-ready residential plans, staff said L&I would create a process for publishing approved plans for factory-built housing and certain small residential types, with local governments required to approve applications using those plans on qualifying lots starting in 2027. Supporters from builders, architects, Habitat for Humanity, and Sightline said statewide standard plans could reduce duplication, speed permitting, and help scale factory-built and potentially site-built housing. Counties and L&I were supportive in concept but raised concerns about mandating local adoption of model ordinances and about whether the bill should include site-built plans as well. The committee also heard SB 5470 on detached ADUs outside urban growth areas, with supporters saying it would help rural homeowners and intergenerational living, while Futurewise opposed the bill as written and sought tighter density, lot-size, and metering limits. Finally, the committee heard SB 5729, a permit-streamlining bill that would deem completeness for applications prepared by licensed professionals and limit local governments to three review cycles. Builders and business groups supported it as a way to reduce delays and costs, while counties, cities, and Futurewise argued it could lead to more denials, less communication, and unintended liability concerns. In executive session, the committee adopted the proposed substitute for SB 5884 and moved it forward with a do-pass recommendation to Ways and Means.

Transcript Highlights:

• AB 431 would create a statewide plan to guide the development and implementation of AAM infrastructure
• It provides the structure and statewide coordination needed to turn emerging AAM technologies into real
• I really like the concept of a statewide framework.
• I really like the concept of a statewide framework.
• UCS believes this bill will inadvertently interfere with the regulation... ...or not considered.

Summary: The committee heard and advanced several transportation-related bills, beginning with AB 431 on advanced air mobility. The author and supporters from AUVSI, Joby Aviation, United Airlines, Wisk Aero, the City of Long Beach, and Archer said the bill would create a statewide plan and technical framework for eVTOL/advanced air mobility infrastructure, public outreach, and local implementation. No opposition testified, and the bill passed the committee as amended to Appropriations on a unanimous roll call. Members then took up AB 630 on abandoned or hazardous RVs. The author and supporters, including Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass’s office, argued the bill would curb a cycle in which inoperable RVs are towed, auctioned cheaply, and returned to the streets by predatory buyers, while adding notice, recovery, and reporting requirements. Opponents from Western Center on Law and Poverty and ACLU California Action warned the bill would destroy RVs that serve as shelter for unhoused residents and could worsen homelessness. After discussion about the bill’s focus on dismantling rather than towing, the committee passed AB 630 as amended to Appropriations. The committee also approved AB 314, which would support transit-oriented development around planned and existing high-speed rail stations; AB 1223, which gives Sacramento County communities more flexibility to use local transportation revenues for related infrastructure supporting infill development; AB 1111, which adds flexibility to the zero-emission school bus transition for rural and disadvantaged districts; AB 1190, which caps fees charged by DMV business partners and requires clearer disclosure of the official DMV site; AB 987, which limits unreasonable towing fees and related charges; and AB 911, which creates a narrow exemption from Advanced Clean Fleets rules for telecommunications bucket trucks and sail-on-wheels used in emergencies. Most bills drew support from local governments, industry, or consumer groups, while AB 1111 and AB 911 drew opposition from clean transportation and environmental advocates concerned about weakening emissions goals. All of the bills were reported out as amended to the Committee on Appropriations, with recorded roll-call votes and several members adding their names as co-authors or supporters.

Transcript Highlights:

• State regulations have not been effective, with more than one aspect of those regulations already being
• but could not support regulation for many reasons, but essentially for regulation to be effective, you
• Alcohol is that they self-regulate at a very high level.
• The legislature directed statewide expansion in 2015.
• At the least point, we're not quite statewide.

Committee: Senate Health & Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• income while they're elected as a statewide official.
• Yeah, I would just say you can't lobby as a statewide elected official.
• I'm trying to get to just what you said: no statewide elected official can lobby.
• What statewide elected official gets compensated for lobbying? Well, I just...
• Are they only statewide...

Bills: SR125 , SCR70 , SCR12 , HB4 , HB251 , HB623 , HB819 , HB944 , HB986 , HB1098 , HB1222 , HB1257 , HB221 , HCR58 , SCR22 , SCR24 , SB29 , SB30 , SB32 , SB41 , SB42 , SB43 , SB47 , SB84 , SB93 , SB113 , SB192 , SB199 , SB219 , SB220 , SB221 , SB222 , SB241 , SB253 , SB255 , SB289 , SB292 , SB306 , SB314 , SB351 , SB399 , SB404 , SB14 , SB102 , SB133 , SB151 , SB165 , SB169 , SB170 , SB200 , SB217 , SB280 , SB291 , SB300 , SB303 , SB330 , SB449 , SB489 , SB521 , SB45 , SB156 , SB181 , SB203 , SB274 , SB304 , SB379 , SB396 , SB410 , SB425 , SB427 , SB436 , SB424 , SCR61 , SCR9 , SB35 , SB65 , SB215 , SB246 , SB249 , SB269 , SB282 , SB296 , SB323 , SB363 , SB369 , SB474 , SB490 , SB492 , SB500 , HCR31 , HB296 , HB299 , HB322 , HB364 , HB519 , HB535 , HB538 , HB568 , HB571 , HB622 , HB635 , HB676 , HB772 , HB784 , HB1006 , HB1018 , HB1043 , HB1070 , HB1134 , HB1239 , HB62 , HB193 , HB203 , HB210 , HB220 , HB228 , HB246 , HB420 , HB475 , HB486 , HB574 , HB584 , HB750 , HB813 , HB815 , HB826 , HB870 , HB949 , HB953 , HB1045 , HB1092 , HB1151 , HB1162 , HB1176 , HB1177 , HB1196 , HB1214 , HB1241 , HB22 , HB28 , HB33 , HB41 , HB47 , HB87 , HB115 , HB162 , HB195 , HB214 , HB217 , HB233 , HB283 , HB290 , HB319 , HB324 , HB345 , HB362 , HB363 , HB368 , HB377 , HB380 , HB382 , HB386 , HB392 , HB406 , HB431 , HB441 , HB466 , HB503 , HB533 , HB559 , HB575 , HB590 , HB593 , HB618 , HB636 , HB655 , HB664 , HB685 , HB692 , HB707 , HB715 , HB732 , HB738 , HB741 , HB748 , HB776 , HB807 , HB822 , HB856 , HB860 , HB868 , HB887 , HB888 , HB905 , HB908 , HB961 , HB980 , HB990 , HB992 , HB999 , HB1000 , HB1010 , HB1146 , HB1157 , HB1233 , HB1236 , HB1243 , HB54 , HB137 , HB180 , HB192 , HB310 , HB321 , HB396 , HB512 , HB552 , HB578 , HB638 , HB663 , HB708 , HB717 , HB718 , HB1009 , HB1082 , HB1104 , HB1107 , HB1198 , HB1246 , HB1250 , HB17 , HB36 , HB73 , HB119 , HB126 , HB129 , HB133 , HB140 , HB159 , HB166 , HB211 , HB226 , HB245 , HB271 , HB280 , HB337 , HB351 , HB354 , HB399 , HB677 , HB712 , HB723 , HB726 , HB728 , HB759 , HB789 , HB844 , HB850 , HB966 , HB1036 , SB149 , SB382 , SB441 , HB134 , HB258 , HB359 , HB782

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, received an opening prayer from Pastor Elizabeth Ali Frank, and adopted the journal. The chamber then handled a large number of messages, committee reports, resolutions, and House bills, including several ceremonial resolutions and many House measures returned with amendments. Notable resolutions included recognition of World Preeclampsia Awareness Day, commendations for Louisiana sports honorees, and a resolution urging higher reimbursement rates for behavioral health crisis centers, which was adopted. The Senate also concurred in SCR 22 on opioid settlement fund reporting, with Senator Myers explaining the House changes were technical and improved the reporting deadline and detail. A major portion of the meeting was devoted to concurrence or rejection of House amendments on Senate bills. The Senate concurred in several bills involving telehealth, prenatal bereavement care, official journals, ambulance Medicaid coverage, insurance and licensing disclosures, peptide regulation, psychosocial rehabilitation services, university records confidentiality, the Inspector General, religious exercise protections, child care assistance, eye care coverage, teacher retirement, and electronic service of pleadings. The chamber rejected House amendments to SB 42 on AI-created child sexual abuse materials and SB 43 on psychedelic-assisted therapy, and also rejected amendments on SB 29 and SB 32 before later concurring in many other technical or clarifying House changes. Several members explained that the House amendments were mostly technical, clarified effective dates, or adjusted definitions and contact information. The Senate then took up numerous House bills on final passage. Bills passed included measures on inmate workforce development cleanup, jury bond filing by mail, free transcripts for victims testifying before pardon/parole hearings, public awareness on illegal firearm discharge, special masters in complex litigation, paternity acknowledgments in hospitals, juvenile court filing fees in East Baton Rouge Parish, drug-free school zone penalties, criminal history record confidentiality, body brokering/fraudulent patient referrals, bail notice and residence requirements, sex offender registration updates, parish court jurisdictional amounts, court technology fees, deferred retirement options, shared custody standards, women’s policy and research commission membership, sickle cell and uterine fibroids commission membership, child exploitation reporting on online platforms, recreation of the state civil service department, children’s cabinet membership, DCFS employee background checks, AI disclosure in health care visits, the psychology inter-jurisdictional compact, mental health advisory board updates, foster children’s rights, automatic renewal contract disclosures, Orleans sheriff term alignment, access to death records for financial institutions, insurance referral disclosures, radiologist assistant regulation, plumbing licensure reforms, legislative auditor thresholds, developmental disabilities office renaming, insurer investment rules, Medicare Advantage coverage for integrative care services, and more. Some bills were returned to the calendar for further work, including HB 571, HB 475, HB 750, and HB 1162, and HB 490 was set aside after extensive debate on private-use electrical networks and data-center power arrangements. The most prominent floor action was final passage of HB 636, the Caleb Wilson Hazing Prevention Act, which Senator Boudreaux described as a comprehensive response to hazing tragedies on Louisiana campuses. He said the bill was developed by a task force that included the Wilson family and would strengthen education, reporting, accountability, and penalties, including permanent banishment for organizations involved in hazing deaths. After the bill passed 37-0, the Senate recognized the Wilson family and presented flags in Caleb Wilson’s honor. Throughout the day, many bills passed overwhelmingly, though a few drew dissent, including HB 296, HB 538, HB 568, HB 635, and HB 784. The meeting ended with continued consideration of additional House bills and unfinished items returned to the calendar for later action.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so as the regulator over the...
• refineries: the CalARP regulations and the Cal/OSHA regulations.
• The CalARP regulations and the Cal/OSHA regulations do purport, on some level, to address changes in
• That's why we need regulation.
• That's why we need regulation. We already have cost-effective. That's why we need regulation.

Committee: Senate Environmental Quality

Summary: The Senate Environmental Quality Committee held an informational hearing on the environmental impacts and planning considerations associated with refinery closures. In opening remarks, the chair framed refinery shutdowns as a complex part of California’s decarbonization transition and said the committee would focus on environmental and land-use issues, while Vice Chair Gunda argued closures reflect years of policy-driven disinvestment and warned that supply disruptions and higher prices could harm working families. State agency witnesses from the Energy Commission, CARB, and the Water Boards described the state as being in a “mid-transition,” with declining gasoline demand, growing zero-emission vehicle adoption, and increasing conversion of some refinery assets to renewable fuels, but also with abrupt capacity losses that can force greater reliance on imports and storage. They emphasized the need for proactive planning, transparency, and coordination across agencies, and noted that refinery closures can stress pipelines, terminals, and other linked infrastructure, with potential liabilities falling to the state if those assets are not financially supported. The Water Boards explained their cleanup authorities and tools for refinery decommissioning, including investigation, monitoring, remediation, and enforcement under the Water Code, and said site-specific cleanup plans depend on contamination, groundwater conditions, and future land use. They noted that decommissioning can reveal previously inaccessible areas and require additional sampling or wells, and that cleanup costs can range from tens to hundreds of millions of dollars. Committee members pressed the witnesses on whether the state has enough information to plan for land transitions, whether current tools are adequate, and whether more standardized procedures or financial assurances are needed. The witnesses generally said existing tools are useful but that more transparency and better data sharing would help communities and policymakers understand liabilities and long-term redevelopment opportunities. Members also questioned the relationship between California policy, refinery closures, imports, and global emissions. CARB said its programs apply to transportation fuel suppliers whether fuel is refined in-state or imported, and that its climate and air-quality rules are designed to reduce emissions and avoid leakage. Some senators argued that California’s policies have accelerated closures and that demand has not fallen fast enough to offset lost refining capacity, while agency witnesses responded that closures are also driven by global market forces, aging infrastructure, crude quality, and changing fuel demand. The committee then heard from outside experts, including a Notre Dame professor who said closure costs are often underestimated and that stronger financial assurance requirements can shift company behavior, a Stanford/SLAC researcher who outlined five drivers of refinery closures, and an environmental attorney who discussed community impacts and lessons from the Phillips 66 Los Angeles refinery closure. No votes or formal actions were taken; the hearing was informational and focused on testimony and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• , development regulations, things like that.
• Substitute Senate Bill 6287 concerns the regulation of kratom.
• And I absolutely support regulating kratom and natural kratom products.
• I absolutely support regulating kratom and natural kratom products.
• That is what this bill helps regulate, and that's what we're discussing today.

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee met on February 6, 2026, and first voted to suspend the five-day notice rule for all bills on the agenda. Senators Braun and Gildon objected, arguing the bill needed more public review and that the fiscal note had only just been released, but a roll call vote passed 15-9 and the committee proceeded to Senate Bill 6346. Staff briefed SB 6346 as a proposal to create a 9.9% income tax on Washington taxable income above a $1 million per-household standard deduction, with a $50,000 charitable deduction, apportionment rules for nonresidents and certain professions, quarterly estimated payments, and credits for capital gains tax and certain business taxes. Staff said the tax would begin in 2029 and eventually raise about $3.5 billion annually from roughly 30,000 taxpayers. The bill also would expand the Working Families Tax Credit, create a sales tax exemption for grooming and hygiene products, increase the small business B&O tax credit and filing threshold, and end the B&O surcharge on high-grossing businesses one year early. Members questioned the bill’s constitutionality, its exemption from referendum, treatment of student athletes, natural-resource industries, and whether real estate gains would be captured. Public testimony was sharply divided. Supporters, including labor groups, educators, health care advocates, counties, child care workers, and some business owners and high-income individuals, said the bill would make the tax code more progressive and provide stable funding for health care, education, child care, public defense, and other services, while expanding the Working Families Tax Credit. Opponents, including many small business, construction, housing, and taxpayer advocates, argued the measure would function as a tax on pass-through businesses and retained earnings, harm housing production and investment, encourage wealthy residents and businesses to leave the state, and violate the state constitution or the will of voters. No final action on SB 6346 was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• The regulations process is open to all of the stakeholders.
• Then how do you plan on funding for the revisions of the regulations?
• CaliCyCy shall adopt regulations to implement the program.
• With these regulations, they were not perfect.
• With these regulations, they were not perfect.

Summary: The subcommittee heard presentations on the administration’s Proposition 4 spending plans for extreme heat mitigation and outdoor access, then took up SB 54 implementation, SB 707 textile producer responsibility, and recovery needs related to the Los Angeles fires at state parks. For the extreme heat chapter, agencies described funding for the Extreme Heat and Community Resilience Program, urban greening, urban forestry, fairground upgrades, and technical assistance for community-based climate programs. Witnesses emphasized that these are existing programs with strong demand, that technical assistance is important for reaching disadvantaged and tribal communities, and that the proposed funding would expand outreach and implementation capacity. Members asked for more detail on where funds have gone geographically, examples of successful projects, tree-planting totals, and how fairgrounds could better support fire staging and emergency preparedness. The LAO said the timing of the administration’s proposed funding generally made sense because the programs are already established, and no votes were taken. For outdoor access, State Parks, Fish and Wildlife, and Natural Resources described funding for new parks in underserved communities, deferred maintenance, state lands access, and several new or pending programs. State Parks said the park development program would fund roughly 48 projects and that deferred maintenance funding would address high-priority health, safety, and access needs. Fish and Wildlife said its lands program would improve visitor amenities and access on properties that often lack basic facilities. The Natural Resources Agency also outlined three newer outdoor-access proposals: expanding recreation in disadvantaged communities, enhancing natural resource values and trail access, and a nature/climate/education facilities grant program. The LAO distinguished between existing programs, which are ready to move forward, and the newer proposals, where the Legislature may want more input before funds are allocated. Members also raised concerns about park police vacancies, the need to track outcomes for accessibility investments, and whether Prop. 4 could help with wildfire-related recovery at state parks. CalRecycle then presented on SB 54, the plastics and packaging producer responsibility law, and members pressed hard on the delay in regulations. CalRecycle said it has held workshops, formed an advisory committee, selected the producer responsibility organization, and completed required baseline and covered-material reports, but needs more time to address complex comments and novel features such as source reduction and eco-modulated fees. Members expressed frustration that a statutory deadline was missed and asked for a concrete timeline; CalRecycle said it expects regulations in place by 2026, ahead of the PRO’s January 1, 2027 plan deadline. Finance said the Beverage Container Recycling Fund is currently healthy enough to support short-term loans for implementation. The committee also reviewed SB 707, the textile EPR law, which would create the nation’s first textile producer responsibility program; staff said the proposal would add positions and loan authority, and members noted the statutory deadlines for PRO approval, needs assessment, and later regulations. The hearing ended with discussion of the January Los Angeles fires’ damage to Topanga State Park and Will Rogers State Historic Park, where State Parks described extensive losses, emergency response work, and ongoing damage assessment. Members asked about FEMA eligibility, state funding sources, and community engagement in rebuilding, and the department said it is still assessing costs and will work with the public on reimagining the parks.

Transcript Highlights:

• The regulation was put in place, and it was a regulation; it wasn't a bill that was passed.
• The regulation was put in place, and it was a regulation; it wasn't a bill that was passed.
• The regulation was put in place, and it was a regulation; it wasn't a bill that was passed, in 1961.
• Funds from the last statewide housing bond ran out last year.
• So I've got to trust some regulators to come up with the authority.

Committee: House Housing and Community Development

Transcript Highlights:

• I think that this regulation is outdated, the kind of regulation against single-stair buildings, and
• The MBTA Communities Act seems like a really great regulation.
• . ...of Hoden, legalizes by-right multifamily housing and ADUs statewide.
• Of Building Regulations and Standards. We believe codes should be made by the experts there.
• Building costs and regulations are always ratcheting these things up.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Housing

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:

• the State Finance Law, the Multiple Residence Law, and the Multiple Dwellings Law in relation to a statewide
• It has statewide expertise on code enforcement.
• So presumably they would, you know, request it. ...it has statewide expertise on code enforcement.
• But just to say, this is a statewide authority that currently has jurisdiction over code enforcement
• Three hundred thousand regulations.

Committee: Senate Housing, Construction, and Community Development

Summary: The Senate Housing, Construction and Community Development Committee met with quorum present and considered a full agenda of housing, code enforcement, and rent regulation bills, many of which had passed the Senate in prior years. Early measures included a statewide residential rental registry (S.912), penalties and reporting for vacant and abandoned properties (S.925), and extending tenant response time for major capital improvement rent increase applications (S.1461). The committee also advanced several code-enforcement and fire/building-code bills, including measures to expand remedies for Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code violations (S.3406), increase the Secretary of State’s code enforcement powers (S.4165 and S.4534), and authorize investigations into code administration and enforcement (S.4535). Members raised concerns about local fiscal impacts, the scope of state authority, contractor use, and whether the bills adequately define or limit “imminent threat” and related enforcement powers. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on S.4852, which would require the Codes Council to review and act on updates to international model codes within 18 months. Senators debated whether the bill would speed up code adoption or, as some feared, weaken economic reasonableness considerations by striking the word “economically” from the statutory standard. Supporters said the bill was intended to ensure prompt review of widely used model codes and noted other statutory safeguards remain in place; opponents worried about reduced attention to cost and practical impacts, especially amid housing and utility capacity constraints. The committee also discussed S.6368A, requiring complainants to receive copies of compliance orders issued after code complaints, and S.6600B, mandating inspections of certain non-fireproof buildings in New York City. Additional bills advanced included standards for all-gender bathroom design and construction (S.7131A), compensation for required code-enforcement personnel training (S.7159), and audits of individual apartment improvements in rent-regulated units (S.8046A). Several measures were reported to Finance, while others were reported to the floor. Throughout the meeting, votes were largely along expected lines, with some members voting negative or “without recommendation” on the more expansive code-enforcement bills. No bill was defeated, and all items on the agenda were reported out of committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you and thank you for the opportunity for us to present on our regulation of the transportation
• CPUC also regulates other passenger transportation.
• We have, well, I think the authority that we have is the authority that we use to do the regulation.
• PNC or otherwise, really every transportation service that is under our regulation.
• And so that's the need for adopting and thinking about new types of regulations.

Committee: House Communications and Conveyance

Transcript Highlights:

• The same regulations have to apply.
• Emergency shelters have to be regulated much the same way that you would regulate a hotel.
• of regulation, same kind of process that would apply to a hotel.
• the type of business, but you can't regulate a class of customer.
• What does that actually look like in your regulations?

Summary: The Housing Committee held work sessions on federal Continuum of Care homelessness funding and on state step-housing siting rules before moving into public hearings on House Bill 2266 and House Bill 2489. Commerce staff said HUD’s late and restrictive Continuum of Care funding notice put about $120 million a year in Washington operating support for existing homeless housing projects at risk, but a lawsuit led by the Attorney General forced HUD to restart renewal funding. Commerce also reviewed how local governments are implementing step-housing requirements, including model ordinances, planning updates, and ongoing compliance reviews under recent state law. House Bill 2266 would require cities and counties to allow step housing in all nonindustrial zones, apply the same permitting and environmental review as other residential uses, limit design review to administrative processes, and remove certain local standards and conditions on existing buildings and affordable housing. Supporters, including Plymouth Housing, Disability Rights Washington, King County, the Attorney General’s Office, and Catholic Community Services, argued the bill would reduce discriminatory barriers, protect people with disabilities, and make it easier to site shelters, transitional housing, and permanent supportive housing. Several city representatives and the Association of Washington Cities opposed or sought amendments, saying the bill was too broad and could limit local authority over operational agreements, safety plans, spacing, community engagement, and funding conditions; some asked for clearer carveouts for emergency shelters and related uses. House Bill 2489 would bar local governments from enforcing public-space anti-camping or similar laws unless adequate alternative shelter space is available, with “life-sustaining activities” and “adequate alternative shelter space” defined in detail. Rep. Gregerson said the bill would create a statewide floor and prevent punishment for survival conduct when no real shelter option exists. The ACLU, service providers, and shelter operators supported the bill, citing displacement from fragmented local ordinances, enforcement costs, and the need to align enforcement with actual shelter availability. Testimony also described low-barrier shelter operations and examples of people stabilizing once housed. The hearing on HB 2489 began with staff explanation and initial testimony; no votes were taken on either bill in the transcript.