Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:04:11.599><c> um</c><00:04:11.840><c> in</c> regulator which is the PUC. um in regulator which
• </c><00:04:41.600><c> most</c> Um the PUC does not regulate most Um the PUC does not regulate most aspects
• </c><00:26:35.600><c> center</c> talk a little bit about data center talk a little bit about data center
• </c><01:03:00.640><c> center</c> reflection of the data center reflection of the data center legislation
• </c><01:08:39.359><c> legislation</c> patterning uh data center legislation patterning uh data center

Committee: Senate Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate

Transcript Highlights:

• One way we do this is by using satellite imagery data that you've trained on ground truth data for our
• And so anytime you can collect more data, especially in the world we are now, where data is key for a
• That's a lot of data.
• Or to abusing somebody's privileged data. The state is very rich with data, and that's where.
• Based on the data points, we are making data-centric decisions, prioritizing based on risk and other

Committee: House Science, Technology & Telecommunications Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• And our group is pro-regulation and patient safety.
• To be clear, we support regulation, but we want the right regulation, and we would like to partner and
• get regulation but we want the right regulation and we would like to partner and get this right.
• Third, there is a risk of duplicating existing regulation.
• Third, there is a risk of duplicating existing regulations.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Public Health

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Health heard testimony on four bills: H. 5013 and S. 2928, which would establish a three-year celiac disease screening pilot program for children during routine cholesterol/lipid screening around ages 8 to 12; H. 5087, regulating the operation of medical spas; and H. 5115, establishing statewide food truck regulations, though the hearing focused almost entirely on the celiac and medical spa bills. Committee chairs outlined three-minute testimony limits and noted members present in person and online. Supporters of the celiac screening bills, including Rep. Badger, Sen. Lovely, patients, clinicians, and researchers, described long delays in diagnosis, the lack of a cure beyond a gluten-free diet, and the potential for early screening to prevent years of damage, missed school and work, and long-term complications. Testifiers said celiac disease is common but frequently undiagnosed, that a simple blood test can identify many cases, and that a pilot would help assess feasibility, cost, accuracy, and family acceptance. Several witnesses emphasized that the proposal includes education and support for families after diagnosis, and some cited international screening efforts, especially in Italy, as evidence that population screening can work. Testimony on H. 5087 was largely opposed by medical spa owners, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and a plastic surgeon. Witnesses argued the bill is outdated, duplicative of existing Massachusetts licensing and public health rules, and inconsistent with current scopes of practice and team-based care. They said the proposal could restrict access, burden small and women-owned practices, and fail to address the real issues of training, compliance, and patient safety. Some said they support regulation in principle but want the bill revised to reflect current law and modern practice. Committee members asked a few clarifying questions, including about celiac testing methods and the relationship between the medical spa bill and current state law, but no votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you, Lee, always appreciate your input.
• We can look at all that data.
• That's what my data says. Payments have gone up to anesthesiologists.
• And so, I would encourage the committee to dive into that data.
• So I guess the data in 2024 has shown that we are making improvements.

Bills: HB136 , HB451 , SB425 , SB466 , SB905 , SB1986 , SB2311 , SB2450 , SB2805 , SB2826 , SB2919 , SB3001 , HB136

Committee: Senate Health & Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• Input or economic output is 79.8 million.
• Produced water and injection data systems of 7.6 million dollars.
• They are still collecting... collecting data. We want to move a lot of that data over to us.
• Look, they regulate a lot too, we regulate the whole oil and gas space, they regulate everything else
• Staples provide some of those data points.

Committee: House Energy Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• No, just thank you for the data.
• There is data that shows that basically as you overheat, it's more difficult to regulate your emotions
• The data that we would like to Accessing and using data on credentialing is something that we're still
• So we should be able to get at most of. the state-regulated market by getting that data from OSI.
• Data, through surveys, through satisfaction, but even using existing data, existing data could still

Committee: House Legislative Health & Human Services Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• , such as data produced by laborers, how much is paid for other types of data, such as data produced
• and those buying data.
• So there's two sources of data. ...buying the data, right?
• Thank you. ...reduced to a speck of a data point in a massive sea of inputs.
• Mainly hide their training data, something that prevents effective regulation, not only in copyright,

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:

• have not adequately communicated the true costs of regulations experienced by everyday Californians.
• AB 2366 directly addresses these challenges by improving how regulations are evaluated before adoption
• Manufacturers experience the cumulative impact of regulations across Critical step forward.
• The banking lobby also says that AB 2243 bypasses regulatory review by the state's financial regulator
• Any future bank would still require approval and oversight by appropriate regulators.

Committee: House Economic Development, Growth, and Household Impact

Transcript Highlights:

• Chatbot regulation is primarily state driven through laws regulating user safety, minor protections,
• centers or the data.
• Are you concerned that if these data centers go into place before we have a chance to regulate them,
• the data center.
• easiest to build the data center.

Committee: Joint Artificial Intelligence and Data Center Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• The committee is authorized to hold hearings, conduct site visits, request data, and gather input from
• The committee is authorized to hold hearings, conduct site visits, request data, and gather input from
• The committee is authorized to hold hearings, conduct site visits, request data, and gather input from
• I don't know if Vince, if you have any input. Madam Whip, I didn't hear the question.
• Right now there's really no regulation.

Summary: The meeting covered a long series of bills, mostly in health, education, commerce, federalism, and government. In health, members discussed radiology technology updates (HB 2050), a tribal Medicaid waiver/drawdown measure with no state cost (HB 2177), an emergency medicine study committee (HB 2183), fetal death certificate and remains-transfer requirements (HB 2184), a physician assistant licensure compact (HB 2190), dementia care telemonitoring funding (HB 2202), SNAP error-rate reduction and fraud/eligibility oversight bills (HB 2206, HB 2442, HB 2797), child welfare protections like credit freezes and recorded interviews (HB 2321, HB 2322), and podiatric licensure compacts (HB 2438). Several of these were described as consent-calendar items, while HB 2206 and the SNAP-related measures drew discussion about fraud reduction, administrative burden, and work requirements. In commerce and finance, the committee heard bills on mobile food vendors and local permits (HB 2118), earned wage access services with fee caps and disclosure rules (HB 2309), CPA licensure changes (HB 2476), cash acceptance for retail purchases under $100 (HB 2555), drone delivery and unmanned aircraft guardrails (HB 2875), timeshare salesperson licensing (HB 2877), and a prohibition on state-mandated social credit scoring in lending decisions (HB 2903). The tax and retirement-related items included 529 plan conformity and Roth IRA transfer rules (HB 2477), annual tax conformity to the Internal Revenue Code (HB 2785), ASRS technical and disability-related changes (HB 2089, HB 2090, HB 2092), and a bill on employee health insurance definitions (HB 2089). The Arizona Commerce Authority bill (HB 2754) would add legislative members to the board and shift more control over trade offices and Arizona Competes Fund spending to the legislature. The education section focused heavily on school governance and finance. Bills included patriotic youth group presentations in schools (HB 2312), school board term limits (HB 2318), mandatory training for governing board members (HB 2379), independent municipal advisors for bond elections (HB 2320), restrictions on districts buying operating charter/private school sites to game enrollment formulas (HB 2376), conflict-of-interest limits for school facilities board architects and engineers (HB 2378), public meeting and travel transparency rules for districts (HB 2380), limits on long-term school property leases and reporting requirements (HB 2384), tighter bidding rules for school construction job orders using Building Renewal Grant funds (HB 2482), and a voluntary computer science proficiency seal (HB 2764). Sponsors repeatedly framed these as transparency, accountability, and anti-abuse measures, while some opposition centered on local flexibility, housing use, and existing training providers. In federalism and government, the committee heard bills to give counties more time to mail sample ballots (HB 2006), require courts to identify veterans at first appearance for possible veterans court referral (HB 2226), study veterans’ awareness of benefits (HB 2406), broaden military leave protections (HB 2663), require SAVE verification for voter registration and certain state services (HB 2806), require U.S.-sourced voting machine components by 2029 (HB 2901), affirm the Electoral College (HB 2902), and establish due process protections for justice of the peace courts against outside administrative action (HB 2976). Government committee items included a later deadline for library trustees’ annual reports (HB 2129), a two-year limit on certain adult protective services reports to the Attorney General (HB 2228), and an exemption for public and semi-public cold plunges from ADEQ spa rules (HB 2439). Several bills were reported as consent-calendar items, and a number of sponsors noted committee votes, fiscal neutrality, or favorable testimony in support of the measures.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 118, a bill to be entitled an act relating to regulation of presidential libraries.
• Senate Bill 118, a bill to be entitled an act relating to regulation of presidential libraries.
• Existing regulations.
• for OPPAGA to submit a consolidated version of that data in accordance with Florida statutes.
• Thank you for your input. Senator Pizzo, questions on the amendment.

Summary: The Senate convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a series of introductions recognizing FSU Day at the Capitol, Catholic lay leaders, seniors advocates, Broward County school officials, and veterans-related guests. The chamber then moved through its special order calendar, beginning with several Florida Statutes revision bills. SB 36 adopted the 2025 Florida Statutes and prior session law; SB 38 conformed statutory terminology for the Division of Criminal Investigations; SB 40 removed repealed provisions; and SB 42 cleaned up obsolete language, cross-references, and typographical errors. Each passed unanimously or nearly unanimously after brief explanations and no substantive debate. The Senate also passed CS/SB 50 on nature-based coastal resilience, as amended to strengthen the Florida Flood Hub’s role under USF and clarify research and modeling responsibilities; CS/SB 116 on veterans, which expanded veteran awareness and coordination efforts, added mental health training, and authorized adult day health care; SB 118 on presidential libraries, which preempted local regulation to give a future Florida presidential library maximum flexibility; CS/SB 126 on prescription hearing aids, allowing mail distribution for adults after appropriate professional evaluation; SB 150 on abandoning restrained dogs during natural disasters, amended to conform to the House; SB 294 limiting collaborative pharmacy practice from being expanded to certain serious cardiac conditions; and SM 314 urging Congress to increase Florida National Guard force structure. Most of these measures passed with strong bipartisan support, though SB 118 drew questions about local zoning, parking, and safety and passed 36-3, with one senator later changing to a no vote over local control concerns. Later, the Senate approved CS/CS/SB 322 creating a nonjudicial process for removing unauthorized persons from commercial property, and CS/SB 348 on ethics, which would penalize false claims of military rank or honors for material gain and require paycheck withholding for delinquent ethics fines owed by public employees. The chamber also passed CS/CS/SB 7012 on child welfare, which included a CPI/case manager recruitment program, a treatment foster care pilot in two judicial circuits, and improved data collection and capacity analysis for commercially sexually exploited children. CS/SB 108 on administrative procedures was adopted after a detailed explanation of rule review, transparency, and rulemaking deadlines, and CS/SB 160 on public accountancy passed after an amendment clarifying contracted services and discussion of CPA licensure pathways. The longest and most celebratory debate centered on CS/SB 110 for rural communities. The bill created an Office of Rural Prosperity, a Renaissance grant program, housing and road funding, school and health care investments, and related rural support measures. Amendments refined transportation priorities in the Everglades agricultural area and clarified the FARM road program. Senators from across the chamber praised the bill as a long-awaited investment in rural Florida, agriculture, broadband, health care, and quality of life. After extensive debate and emotional closing remarks from the sponsor and leadership, the bill passed overwhelmingly.

Transcript Highlights:

• The regulator oversight is critical.
• Separately, I also think it's really important for the regulator to be able to provide comparative data
• , up-to-date data about differences, Sorry, for the regulator to be able to provide comparative data,
• up-to-date data about different CCRCs.
• And I circled, “We need to strengthen our regulator insight.”

Summary: The commission’s fifth meeting focused on consumer protections and resident rights in continuing care retirement communities (CCRCs), with a presentation by Yvonne Choyah of UC Law San Francisco. She described California’s CCRC framework, including entrance fee structures, monthly fee increases, contract types (A, B, and C), disclosure requirements, and regulatory oversight. A major theme was that residents often do not understand the contracts they sign, while providers retain broad discretion over fees, transfers, terminations, and changes to the physical plant. She also emphasized that California’s regulator is understaffed and not well suited to oversee the complex financial and insurance-like aspects of CCRCs, and that resident complaints and litigation can be slow and difficult. Choyah and commission members discussed several consumer-protection issues, including refundable versus repayable-on-resale entrance fees, rising monthly care fees, the decline of life care contracts, and the need for clearer disclosures and better comparative data for prospective residents. She noted that California requires annual disclosure statements, resident bill of rights materials, and some fee-related reporting, but that enforcement and accessibility remain weak. Members raised questions about resident board representation, accreditation, refund requirements, and whether state agencies or resident associations could help explain contracts to consumers before admission. Choyah suggested stronger oversight, more financial expertise in regulation, and better transparency about ownership and fee-setting. The meeting ended with discussion of the commission’s next steps toward its August report. Staff said a draft report would be prepared from the commission’s discussions and circulated for comment before final revisions. The chair also announced staff transitions: Jennifer would be leaving the State House role, and Juliana Fernandez and Vicky Halal would be the main contacts going forward. The commission adjourned after thanking Choyah for her presentation and answering member questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any data?
• Any data?
• And we now have access to really good data.
• We also license and regulate five tote companies.
• So wondering if you had gotten input on that.

Summary: The Judiciary Interim Committee met to begin its study of charitable gaming and the ownership of alcoholic beverage establishments by licensed charitable gaming organizations, a study directed by Senate Bill 2334. Legislative Council gave an overview of the constitutional and statutory framework for charitable gaming, site authorizations, rent limits, proceeds, and recent legislative changes. The Attorney General’s Gaming Division then clarified the financial flow of gaming, explaining that in fiscal year 2025 North Dakota had about $2.5 billion in gross gaming proceeds, with roughly 88-90% paid back in prizes and about $256 million available to organizations after taxes; most of that activity came from electronic pull tabs. Members asked for more detail on winnings, replays, rent, and the breakdown of manufacturer/distributor revenues, and the AG’s office agreed to provide supplemental information. The committee also heard from the League of Cities and the Association of Counties about local site authorization. Cities said they have a limited role in approving gaming sites, can adopt policies after public hearing, may charge up to $100, and can set certain conditions, including local nexus requirements, but cannot require donations or force a specific charity or site. The League said it had worked with stakeholders on a model policy to provide more consistency, though members raised concerns that local requirements could become too restrictive for charities serving broader areas. Counties said the issue is mostly a city matter, with little county involvement beyond minimal site fees and general site approval. The North Dakota Gaming Alliance testified in support of the study and provided IRS-related material suggesting charities may use asset diversification, while emphasizing it had not taken a position on whether charities should own bars. Members questioned whether bar ownership is being used for site stability or to channel charitable gaming dollars, and whether city policies might disadvantage charities with broader missions. The committee also discussed the relationship between gaming organizations, manufacturers, and distributors, including restrictions on incentives and interference, and asked for more information on those entities and their ownership. Later in the meeting, the Racing Commission gave its regular update on live racing, pari-mutuel wagering, ADW providers, purse and promotion funds, a new TRPB contract, and concerns about cease-and-desist actions from other states. Finally, the State Hospital superintendent briefly reported on the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s support services, including the SORT team, training, and security assistance for the hospital campus.

Transcript Highlights:

• Data, for years now, show that when you make these types of investment, you build a sidewalk or a bike
• So that's enabling public input to shape how it gets allocated.
• I'm a big fan of open data portals and seeing whether you can achieve the same thing through an open
• data portal as opposed to a thousand formalized reports that somebody has to sign.
• We feel like there's a lot of good opportunity for public input, and so we would support that trailer

Transcript Highlights:

• The Data Exchange Framework includes a common data-sharing agreement and policies and procedures that
• The data exchange framework includes a common data-sharing agreement and policies and procedures that
• collection, data validation, and program administration to collect data from over 10,000 health care
• Data form?
• Emergency department data.

Transcript Highlights:

• Data calls.
• Data calls.
• Data calls.
• Data calls.
• Data calls.

Bills: HF1545 , HF2426 , HF1615 , HF2403

Committee: House Commerce Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• She asked for data, and I didn't hear any data, but to your answer to Rep.
• The data, and I'm going to go back: if you hold a town hall meeting, I'm sure the data will come from
• They would have to hire someone to be a data input analyst, and that will also require training for all
• Because if they say, okay, this is now added to your job description for whatever data input employee
• Reference the questions, where is there a problem about the data.

Summary: The subcommittee first took up HB 387 on ADS-B airport billing. The sponsor and supporters said the bill would stop airports and third-party vendors from using federally required automatic dependent surveillance broadcast data to calculate landing or touch-and-go fees, arguing the technology was intended for safety and collision avoidance, not invoicing. An amendment clarifying touch-and-go landings and other fee calculations was adopted, and the bill was reported favorably 15-0. Members then heard several local and policy bills. CS/HB 803 on private-provider building permits and inspections drew broad support from industry groups and was reported favorably 14-1. HB 451 and HB 4053, local fire-district assessment bills, were presented as relief for homeowners and churches facing higher non-ad valorem assessments; both were reported favorably after amendments, with testimony emphasizing impacts on houses of worship and local communities. PCS/HB 1329 on local government spending transparency prompted extensive debate over searchable budget formats, posting requirements, and possible unfunded mandates; supporters framed it as taxpayer access and accountability, while opponents argued many local governments already provide this information and that the bill could impose costs. It was reported favorably 8-4. The committee also advanced PCS/HB 927 on local land planning and development, which would allow qualified professionals to assist with pre-application reviews; local government representatives raised concerns about preemption and environmental restrictions, but the bill was reported favorably 13-2. HB 929 on chickee huts, PCS/HB 4081 on expanding a local water and sewer district by referendum, and HB 489 conveying the Trenton Train Depot to the city and county all passed unanimously or near-unanimously. HB 1211, a Department of Military Affairs bill updating leave and assistance-program provisions, was amended and reported favorably. HB 1041, creating business incentives for veteran- and military spouse-owned businesses, also passed 13-0 after amendment and supportive testimony from members and veterans. The final item shown was HB 1001, a bill restricting county and municipal DEI-related actions and contracting; the sponsor described it as a response to division and waste, and members began questioning its definitions, scope, and potential effects on training and civil actions, but the transcript cuts off before any vote or final action on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• Are those the same maps that you're using for this, or are you using new and updated data?
• And if so, Or are you using new and updated data? And if so, where are you getting it? Sure.
• To streamline development regulations.
• And then within the two blue areas here, we Thank you. to streamline development regulations.
• So how does policy get translated into regulations? How is it implemented across departments?

Committee: Senate Local Government

Transcript Highlights:

• That's something we're working on with Robert McGoo, State Data team, AR Data, transformation shared
• We track that data and we have to report on it.
• We track all that data. Okay.
• When I ran the legislation to create the data chief data officer and the data panel, it was to try to
• reports and data matches.

Committee: All ALC-HOSPITAL, MEDICAID, & DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES STUDY SUBCOMMITTEE

Transcript Highlights:

• You mentioned data.
• </c> years when you actually have some data years when you actually have some data and<00:15:08.240><
• The boards have to regulate their industries, right?
• The boards have to regulate their industries, right?
• The boards have to regulate their industries, right?

Summary: The subcommittee hearing focused on House Bill 271, which would remove the exam requirement for licensure as a Licensed Social Work Associate (LSWA). The chair and several members expressed reservations about repealing a requirement that was only created in 2021, arguing that licensure should include some measurable demonstration of competency and that it is too early to judge whether the current standard is working. Members also raised concerns about the social work compact and the lack of uniformity across states, saying that changing the requirement now could undermine the standards New Hampshire agreed to at the outset. Testimony in support of the bill argued that the LSWA exam is a barrier for applicants because the level is intended for people without formal social work education, and the exam is the same national exam used for licensed social workers. The witness said there is only one LSWA in New Hampshire, so there is little pass/fail data, but noted that the Association of Social Worker Boards reported 78% of its membership favored retaining the exam. Supporters also emphasized that LSWA holders complete 30 hours of training and extensive supervised hours, and that they are not intended to work independently. Opponents or skeptics questioned whether the exam is the right measure for this role and asked for data showing actual failures or barriers. The discussion turned to possible alternatives, including a different exam, a practical skills assessment, or broader rulemaking authority for the board to set LSWA criteria. One suggestion was to amend the law to give the board authority to develop appropriate standards in rulemaking, rather than naming a specific exam in statute. Members also discussed whether the board could create a more suitable assessment and noted that the current law requires a national proctored examination approved by the board, but there is no national exam specifically for LSWA. No final vote or action was taken in the excerpt, and the subcommittee indicated it would gather more information, including the existing rule language, before moving the bill forward.