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.

Transcript Highlights:

• There is a gap in the NIL agents registry and regulation.
• So this is unrelated to athlete agent regulation entirely.
• We don't have parents that are involved directly with the rules and regulations.
• So there are different regulations in law for high school and college athletics.
• This bill mostly contemplates the regulations. It does not.

Bills: SB389 , SB525

Committee: House Civil Law and Procedure

Keywords: athlete agent, registration, endorsement contracts, name image likeness, eligibility, unfair trade practices, student athletes, unclaimed property, abandoned property, escheat, state treasurer, administrator, claimant, purchase agreement, assignment, property recovery, owner verification, documentation requirements, fraud prevention, bankruptcy

Transcript Highlights:

• They need to definitely be regulated.
• I mean, we regulate.
• What are those laws that regulate that?
• Each state is federally mandated to regulate.
• Regulate combative sports.

Transcript Highlights:

• However, that effort has stalled, and today hydrogen pipelines remain subject largely to regulations
• That creates uncertainty for communities, regulators, and project developers alike.
• Current California law does not clearly identify which state agency is responsible for regulating the
• That creates uncertainty for the communities, regulators, and regulations, projects developers alike.
• It's not a regulated chemical under the U.S.

Summary: The Assembly Emergency Management Committee met late in the evening and first approved a consent calendar containing SB 837, SB 894, SB 973, and SB 1079, sending those bills to the Committee on Appropriations. The committee then heard SB 904, which would codify coordinated state response and permitting review efforts for wildfire recovery, and SB 1263, which would limit post-disaster debris removal work to properly licensed contractors with required hazardous-materials training. Both bills drew support from the authors and industry/public-safety witnesses, with SB 1263 also drawing an opposed-unless-amended position from contractors who said they were working toward agreement on final language. Both measures passed to Appropriations on unanimous or near-unanimous votes. The committee next heard SB 804, the Hydrogen Pipeline Safety Act, which would designate the State Fire Marshal as the safety regulator for interstate hydrogen pipelines and require hydrogen-specific safety standards. The author and supporters from building trades and pipe trades argued the bill would provide clear safety rules before hydrogen infrastructure expands, while one industry witness said the correct agency had been identified but that some concerns remained. The bill passed as amended to Appropriations, with Assemblymember DeMaio voting no. Finally, the committee considered SB 883, which would impose additional oversight on facilities storing methyl methacrylate and other reactive chemicals after a recent Orange County evacuation tied to a potential explosion risk. Supporters, including community, environmental, and public-health groups, said the bill would improve transparency, emergency planning, and safety protections near homes and schools. Chemical and manufacturing groups opposed the bill in its current form, citing undefined terms, concerns about mandated cooling systems, and possible conflicts with existing regulatory frameworks, but said they were willing to continue working on the measure. The bill passed to the Committee on Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials on a 4-2 vote, with Assemblymembers Hadwick and DeMaio voting no.

Transcript Highlights:

• They regulate the equipment of vehicles.
• And I'm just curious, when do those regulations, the regulations in your proposed column, go into effect
• And I'm just curious, when do those regulations, the regulations in your proposed column, go into effect
• First of all, the proposed regulations.
• The proposed regulations.

Summary: The committee held a work session on autonomous vehicles, beginning with an overview from the Washington State Transportation Commission on the state’s five-year AV work group. The commission described its 2018 legislative mandate, the 35-member executive committee and seven subcommittees, and the resulting 29 recommendations and “roadmap to the future.” The presentation emphasized six policy “building blocks” for Washington: agency readiness, public outreach, equity, safety, testing and pilots, and a path to deployment. It also noted current Washington law requires AV testing companies to self-certify with the Department of Licensing, carry $5 million in liability insurance, report collisions and violations, and notify local law enforcement before testing; three companies are currently certified. State regulators from California and Arizona then outlined their AV frameworks. California described its long-running permit system for testing with and without a safety driver and for commercial deployment, its current rulemaking to expand use cases to heavy-duty trucks and passenger shuttles, and new requirements for mileage, operational assessments, and more detailed crash and incident reporting. California also said it is creating a new enforcement tool allowing citations to be issued to manufacturers for moving violations by AVs. Arizona described its executive-order-based approach, later codified by statute, which allows testing and driverless operations through self-certification, law enforcement interaction plans, quarterly meetings with companies, and reporting of crashes or near misses; Arizona also said it tracks crashes monthly and has not recorded fatalities attributed to AVs. Industry representatives from Waymo, Zoox, and the Autonomous Vehicle Industry Association argued that AVs can improve safety, accessibility, and mobility while creating jobs. They described extensive sensor systems, community outreach, first-responder engagement, and current operations in multiple cities. Waymo cited more than 127 million rider-only miles and said its data show large reductions in injury-causing and pedestrian crashes; Zoox said it operates in Las Vegas, San Francisco, and Seattle and stressed its purpose-built electric robotaxi and local jobs; AVIA said its members have driven more than 145 million autonomous miles and that 26 states now expressly authorize driverless operations. Members asked about public education, crash and fatality tracking, enforcement, weather, school zones, first-responder interactions, and labor impacts. Labor and public-safety witnesses from the Teamsters, firefighters, and driver unions opposed commercial AV deployment without stronger safeguards. They argued Washington should not be an unregulated testing ground, especially for heavy trucks and hazardous materials, and warned of job losses for drivers, taxi and rideshare workers, and related occupations. Firefighters and driver representatives raised concerns about AVs interfering with emergency scenes, blocking responders, and creating risks in dynamic roadway incidents. Committee members also asked for comparisons to human-driven vehicles, data on citations and crashes, and more information on how AVs interact with pedestrians, first responders, and workers.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill also puts a due date on when the regulation transparency and public comment.
• This bill also puts a due date on when the regulation should be established.
• It’s just the regulation and the policy of how this will be regulated is what I’m looking at, and I don
• We are updating Regulation 728. It is out of date.
• So once you update Regulation 728, will that take care of all this?

Bills: SB293 , SB279 , SB293 , SB279

Committee: House Education

Summary: The House Education Committee met and first heard Senate Bill 293, the Youth Camp Licensing Act, which would amend child care licensing rules for youth camps. The sponsor said the bill, with amendments, would remove accreditation language, clarify shelter requirements for outdoor camps, and eliminate limits that had restricted the number of children camps could serve, especially for families using purchase-of-care assistance. YMCA and school representatives testified in support, saying the measure would expand access to safe, affordable summer care for low-income working families. The committee voted to release the bill. The committee then approved Senate Bill 328, which would require the Department of Education’s school facility evaluation instrument to be established by regulation and to include lead-based paint hazards in the standard of good repair. The Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Advisory Committee supported the bill, explaining that lead had not been included in the original evaluation tool and that the new language would improve transparency and public comment. Senate Bill 318, updating the Delaware State Education Association special license plate program, also passed after DSEA testified that proceeds support scholarships for educators and students pursuing education careers. House Bill 443, dealing with background checks for education volunteers and mentors, passed as well. The sponsor said it would allow DOE to continue receiving wrapback reports for mentors in the state mentoring program and ensure state and federal criminal background checks remain in place. The committee also released Senate Joint Resolution 15, which directs DOE to reevaluate Delaware’s use of the SAT, modernize the accountability framework, and develop additional measures of student achievement and readiness; supporters argued the SAT does not capture career and technical pathways or other indicators of success. House Bill 459, which prohibits the sale of energy drinks on public middle and high school campuses during school hours or events, passed after discussion focused on whether the bill would affect possession versus sale and whether it could lead to student discipline; DOE said the bill only bans sales, and the sponsor said an amendment would clarify intent. Finally, House Concurrent Resolution 137 passed, directing DOE to review math instruction and MTSS supports statewide; testimony emphasized low math proficiency and the need for stronger, more coherent interventions. The committee also began hearing Senate Bill 279 on occupational therapist salary placement, with discussion centered on aligning OT compensation with other specialist roles and broader salary regulation updates, though the transcript cuts off before final action is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• So these both flow into what we call the marijuana regulation fund.
• “It also puts at risk the patients and consumers who rely on legal, regulated cannabis.
• Massachusetts voters chose a regulated system over prohibition.
• Regulated cannabis is popular, and it is safe... ...marijuana policy is dangerous.
• Regulated cannabis is popular, and it is safer than the alternatives.

Bills: H5005

Committee: Joint Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a hearing on Initiative Petition 25-10 / House Bill 5002, “An act to restore a sensible marijuana policy,” which would repeal Massachusetts’ adult-use cannabis legalization framework. The chair explained the Article 48 initiative process and noted that, if the Legislature does not enact the measure as written, additional signatures would be needed for it to qualify for the 2026 ballot. The committee heard testimony from an expert, proponents of the petition, opponents, and members of the public, and accepted written testimony through March 27 at 5 p.m. Jessica Trow of MassBudget testified first, focusing on cannabis revenue and spending in Massachusetts. She said legalization has generated nearly $2 billion for the Commonwealth and municipalities since FY 2018, including excise tax, sales tax, local option taxes, fees, and community impact fees. She described how revenues are distributed to public health, the Cannabis Control Commission’s social equity efforts, the cannabis social equity fund, the MBTA, the School Building Authority, the general fund, and local budgets, and argued the industry has supported social equity and community investments. Opponents of the petition argued that repeal would harm public health, consumer safety, jobs, tax revenue, and social equity programs. Wendy Wakeman, speaking for the ballot committee, said legalization has increased potency, addiction, and mental health concerns, and that the state lacks sufficient data on harms. In contrast, business owners, clinicians, and advocates including Caroline Pino, Kristen Rogers, Drudus Ledbetter, Armani White, Lucas Thayer, and Jeff Rawson said the regulated market provides tested products, jobs, tax revenue, and pathways for people harmed by prohibition, while repeal would push consumers back to the illicit market and undermine equity goals. Committee members questioned witnesses about the evidence base, the role of out-of-state funding, the petition’s impact on existing businesses, and whether narrower regulatory fixes might address concerns instead of repeal. No vote was taken; the hearing was closed after testimony ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• We should act on HF 296 to create a regulated, supervised access pilot program to treat severe mental
• This bill creates a small, highly regulated program with a maximum of 1,000 patients and a maximum of
• In both Oregon and Colorado, regulated psilocybin programs already exist.
• Licensure and both Oregon and Colorado were regulated. Psilocybin programs already exist.
• That's exactly why a regulated framework matters.

Transcript Highlights:

• I then completed the draft regulations and submitted them to MDAR's legal division.
• Years overdue, inadequate regulations, inadequate response. There's no excuse for it.
• How much discretion would you have in the regulations to apply sanctions like fines?
• Sort of in the absence of regulation, what types of things?
• So that's something that we're working on right now as we wait for the regulations.

Committee: Senate Senate Committee on Post Audit and Oversight

Summary: The joint Audit Committee hearing focused on implementation of Ollie’s Law, including MDAR’s progress on regulations for commercial boarding and training kennels and the new municipal reporting requirements. MDAR Director Mike Cahill said the department formed the required advisory committee, held two Zoom trainings for municipal officials, created a public information webpage, and completed draft regulations that are now under secretariat review. He reported that 269 of 351 municipalities had submitted kennel data, leaving 82 out of compliance, and said the department has been posting compliant and noncompliant municipalities online to increase transparency. Committee members pressed MDAR on the lack of a clear enforcement mechanism for municipalities that fail to report and on the delay in finalizing regulations. The chair urged the department to consider stronger sanctions and asked for a central reporting system for injury data, noting that injury reports currently go only to municipalities. Cahill said the statute does not give MDAR explicit authority to fine municipalities, though he supported a House bill that would grant that power. He also said the department could not easily add municipal penalties through regulation alone. Representatives from the Animal Rescue League of Boston and the MSPCA, including the advisory committee chair Jenny Mather, said the advisory process was thorough and aimed to balance animal safety, consumer transparency, and fairness to compliant businesses. They supported better municipal accountability, more standardized training and resources for animal control officers, and clearer reporting of injuries and kennel information to MDAR. They also raised concerns about third-party advertising platforms that may list unlicensed home-based kennels and argued that public education and enforcement should focus on bad actors rather than penalizing well-run facilities. The hearing ended without a vote or formal action, but with support expressed for the pending bill and for continued regulatory revisions.

Transcript Highlights:

• I then completed the draft regulations and submitted them to MDAR's legal division.
• Years overdue, inadequate regulations, inadequate response. There's no excuse for it.
• How much discretion would you have in the regulations to apply sanctions like fines?
• And if not, I'd like that in the revised regulations. I'd like that to be sent up. Okay.
• So that's something that we're working on right now as we wait for the regulations.

Committee: Senate Senate Committee on Intergovernmental Affairs

Summary: The joint Audit Committee meeting focused on implementation of Ali’s Law, including MDAR’s progress on kennel regulations and municipal reporting. MDOT/MDAR officials said the department formed the required advisory committee, held trainings for animal control officers and municipal clerks, created a public information webpage, and completed draft regulations that are now under secretarial review. They reported that 269 of 351 municipalities had filed kennel counts, leaving 82 out of compliance, and said the reported statewide total was 1,408 licensed kennels, with an estimated 1,800 to 1,850 statewide. Committee members pressed the department on the pace of rulemaking, the lack of a clear enforcement mechanism for municipalities that fail to report, and the need for stronger accountability. The chair said he wanted to avoid a formal investigation if answers could be obtained, but urged MDAR to move quickly and to consider stronger public reporting and possible sanctions. He also asked about injury reporting and suggested that injury data should be sent to the state and tracked in a way that provides context, such as the number of animals in a facility. Representatives from animal welfare organizations and the advisory committee supported the law’s goals but emphasized that rollout should be fair to compliant businesses and that municipalities and ACOs need better training, resources, and standardized guidance. They backed a filed bill, House Bill 4849, which would give MDAR authority to fine municipalities that do not comply and would add more detailed reporting, including last inspection dates and injury reports. They also raised concerns about third-party advertising platforms that may list unlicensed kennels and argued that public education, consumer transparency, and stronger oversight are needed to prevent bad actors from operating.

Transcript Highlights:

• I then completed the draft regulations and submitted them to MDAR's legal division.
• Years overdue, inadequate regulations, inadequate response. There's no excuse for it.
• “How much discretion would you have in the regulations to apply sanctions like fines?
• And if not, I’d like that in the revised regulations. I’d like that to be sent up.”
• So that's something that we're working on right now as we wait for the regulations.

Committee: Senate Senate Committee on Post Audit and Oversight

Transcript Highlights:

• I agree with the senator to my right on regulations. Regulations harm...
• Business regulations drive business out of the state.
• I think this is as far as regulations.
• And, like I said at the beginning, I don't like regulations.
• EPA has regulations...

Bills: HB3005 , HB3007 , HB3403 , HB1907 , HB3175 , HB3986 , HB3466 , HB3411 , HB4246

Committee: Senate Energy

Transcript Highlights:

• PFOS, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are known to be extremely toxic, but they weren't regulated
• And sadly, those new regulations could be in danger under the new administration.
• Um, it certainly has helped ensure that some of the regulations that do pass around extraction energy
• And so it's helped them uphold any kind of zoning regulations or any kind of regulations that they might
• You then have regulatory agencies passing regulations, and you have the implementation.

Committee: House House Government, Elections & Indian Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• Let's give the regulations time.
• California's legal industry is among the most regulated in the world.
• Also, this circumvents legal challenges to federal PFAS regulation.
• The emergency regulations make me very nervous.
• It's already been established. emergency regulations.

Committee: House Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials

Transcript Highlights:

• up with the 11 cities and towns that do have cottage housing regulations.
• We require comprehensive plan changes and then new development regulations.
• Or coordinating regulations.
• that regulate all development within that area.
• that regulate all development within that area.

Summary: The committee held a work session on local government issues, beginning with an update from the State Building Code Council on four legislatively mandated code amendments now in CR-102 rulemaking: temporary emergency shelters, reduced minimum dwelling unit size, multiplex housing up to three stories and six units, and single-exit apartment buildings up to six stories. Council staff also described a separate embodied-carbon appendix proposal that remains under public review, with testimony both supporting and opposing it. Members asked about the rationale for some of the code limits, including the restriction on connecting multiplex buildings. The committee then heard a panel on annexations from MRSC, Pierce County, and the Association of Washington Cities. Witnesses reviewed annexation methods, including petition, election, and interlocal agreement approaches, and said larger annexations are increasingly using interlocal agreements because they can address infrastructure, revenue sharing, and public process concerns. They described barriers such as inconsistent local standards, the cost of infrastructure, referendum risk, census requirements, and the difficulty of persuading residents and local officials to support annexation. Members asked about the five-year restriction on residential zoning changes in one annexation method and whether a hearing examiner could reduce political pressure on local decision-makers. A second panel discussed subdivision reform. The Master Builders Association urged raising the short-plat threshold within urban growth areas to 30 lots as a simpler first step, citing permitting delays and added housing costs. The City of Spokane described implementation problems with recent housing laws, including uncertainty about how to review plats under HB 1110, lot-splitting administration, and added notice requirements for unit lot subdivisions. AWC said there was broad agreement that subdivision decisions should be more administrative, but public hearings remained a point of disagreement. The committee also heard from FutureWise, the Washington State Association of Counties, and Lewis County on county development regulation and enforcement, with witnesses emphasizing underfunded code enforcement, inconsistent standards between counties and cities, and the need for better coordination, incentives, and possibly stronger enforcement tools. No votes were taken; the chair said the committee would continue working on possible solutions in future sessions.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the LCFS is not a new regulation.
• We, CARB, through regulation,... The program works in this way.
• And so that sort of really expands the scope of the regulation.
• From another country that have different environmental regulations.
• Statutes amend statutes, regulations amend regulations, and it's time, I think, as we're talking about

Summary: The hearing was a select committee discussion on the transportation costs and impacts of California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), with opening remarks from the co-chairs and members emphasizing affordability, climate goals, and the need to explain the program’s benefits to the public. The first panel from CARB and the California Energy Commission described how LCFS works as a market-based, declining carbon-intensity program that rewards lower-carbon fuels, supports zero-emission vehicle infrastructure, and is intended to reduce greenhouse gases and local air pollution. They argued the program has driven billions in private investment, increased alternative fuel use, and that LCFS credit prices are not the main driver of retail gasoline prices, which they said are dominated by crude oil, refining, and distribution costs. Members questioned the panel on the gap between the regulatory target and actual carbon-intensity performance, the role of credit banking, which fuels are generating the most credits, how the 2025 amendments affected the program, and whether LCFS credits are truly additional. CARB explained that banking helps cost-effectiveness and investment certainty, that ethanol, renewable diesel, and biodiesel currently provide the largest volumes while electricity is expected to grow, and that the updated targets were informed by the state’s 2045 carbon-neutrality goals and the 2030 scoping plan. The Energy Commission said its data show environmental programs add some cost to gasoline but do not drive price volatility, which is mainly tied to crude oil and refinery margins. The second panel, featuring academic and research experts, focused on program design, out-of-state credit generation, and broader economic effects. Speakers said LCFS is successful because it ties incentives to emissions benefit, uses life-cycle analysis, and allows flexible compliance that lowers costs compared with more direct regulation. They also said the program’s benefits generally outweigh costs, that it can reduce air pollution disparities and support equity, but that some issues—especially indirect land use change, additionality, and older program assumptions—need more research and may warrant future rulemaking. One researcher noted that while LCFS likely raises gasoline prices somewhat, the effect is uncertain by design and usually smaller than normal market fluctuations, and another warned that limiting credit generation too narrowly could create legal and efficiency problems.

Transcript Highlights:

• When we regulate, we regulate people's lives, not just products on paper.
• When we regulate, we regulate people's lives, not just products on paper.
• Let's regulate it properly.
• Let's regulate it properly.
• even know what the regulation is supposed to be right now.

Summary: The House opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and approval of the previous journal by roll call. Members then offered personal privilege remarks honoring Dr. Penelope Martin Knox of Raytown Schools for Black History Month and introduced guests, including Adeline Overcast, who was made a page for the day, and visitors from a rural hospital in Rolla. Several new bills were first read, including measures on blind pensions, penalties for impeding first responders, and flag display in the state capitol. The chamber then took up multiple third-reading bills. House Bill 2596, dealing with multiple employee self-insured health plans for small businesses, passed unanimously after supporters said it would help small employers offer affordable health coverage. House Bill 1644, addressing franchisor liability and joint-employer issues, passed 103-45 after debate over whether it protected small businesses or limited workers’ ability to sue franchisors. House Bill 2423, increasing funding for the Division of Finance through fee authority, passed 146-0 despite concerns about higher costs being passed on to consumers. House Bill 2641, regulating intoxicating hemp-derived products and aligning state law with federal changes, drew extensive debate over a beverage carve-out, impacts on hemp businesses, and public safety; it passed 109-34. The House also passed House Bills 2498 and the combined House Bills 2637 and 3155. HB 2498, a juvenile justice reform bill shifting some referral responsibilities to prosecutors and expanding information sharing, passed 100-44 after strong debate over whether it would politicize juvenile cases and overburden treatment facilities, versus claims it would improve accountability and public safety. The combined sentencing bill, HB 2637/3155, passed 102-45 amid disagreement over whether it was truly a transparency measure or instead increased mandatory minimums and reduced judicial discretion. Finally, the House considered House Joint Resolution 154, which opponents described as an attack on Medicaid expansion tied to work requirements. Supporters argued it would encourage able-bodied recipients to work, volunteer, or attend school and reduce administrative costs, while opponents warned it would increase bureaucracy and risk coverage losses for vulnerable Missourians. The transcript ends during the procedural vote on the previous question for HJR 154, before the final disposition is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• It focuses narrowly on disclosure, ethical safeguards, and does not regulate pricing.
• It focuses narrowly on disclosure, ethical safeguards, and does not regulate pricing.
• They allow it to some degree, but they have far more regulations than just disclosure.
• House Bill 2320 relates to the regulation of firearm manufacturing.
• House Bill 2320 relates to the regulation of firearm manufacturing.

Summary: The committee held public hearings on House Bill 2255, House Bill 2548, and House Bill 2320. HB 2255 would regulate third-party litigation funding by requiring disclosure of funders and agreements, prohibiting funder control over litigation, capping funder recovery at 25%, and creating enforcement remedies. Supporters, including the sponsor, insurance groups, and liability reform advocates, described it as a transparency and consumer-protection measure that could improve court efficiency and reduce costs. Opponents, including the Washington State Association for Justice and the commercial litigation funding industry, argued it would burden plaintiffs, reveal protected work product, chill access to justice, and create satellite litigation. No vote was taken; the chair closed the hearing and asked testifiers to submit written comments. HB 2548 would expand state oversight of health care market transactions by broadening the types of mergers, acquisitions, asset sales, and ownership/control changes that trigger notice to the Attorney General, pausing transactions until information requests are substantially complied with, expanding interagency data sharing, and revoking nonprofit status in certain transactions. Supporters, including patient advocates, nurses, the Office of the Insurance Commissioner, the Attorney General’s office, physicians, and individual health care workers, said private equity and consolidation are driving higher costs, reduced access, and lower quality. Opponents from the Washington State Hospital Association and MultiCare said the bill is unclear, may contain drafting errors, does not adequately target private equity structures, and could create problems around nonprofit status and charitable assets. The hearing ended with the committee moving on to the next bill. HB 2320 would update Washington’s ghost gun laws to address 3D-printed firearms, CNC manufacturing, digital firearm manufacturing code, and the sale of machines marketed for firearm production, and would make certain violations per se Consumer Protection Act violations. The sponsor and supporters, including school officials, gun violence prevention advocates, a trauma survivor, a 3D-printing industry representative, and others, said the bill closes a public safety loophole and responds to the growing availability of untraceable weapons. Opponents, including the NRA, makerspace representatives, and some industry witnesses, argued the bill is overbroad, may sweep in lawful 3D-printing and CNC activity, raises First, Second, and Fifth Amendment concerns, and could create uncertainty through rebuttable presumptions and the CPA provisions. The transcript ends during the HB 2320 hearing, with additional testimony panels still to come and no final committee action recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:24:31.679><c> which</c> categories. technical regulations which categories. technical regulations
• Those rules procedural regulations.
• </c> local governments might want to regulate local governments might want to regulate short-term<00:
• </c><00:56:31.680><c> In</c> and states regulating this. In and states regulating this.
• </c> governments the ability to regulate governments the ability to regulate short-term<01:12:11.120>

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from its June 4, 2025 meeting and then heard a series of presentations focused largely on housing and land-use policy. Senator Robbie Mills and Representative Josh Bray discussed two 2025 housing measures: Senate Bill 50, which would create residential infrastructure development districts to help local governments finance infrastructure for new housing developments through special assessments and local debt, and House Bill 7, which would let local governments identify development areas and rebate new property tax revenue to developers as an incentive for housing growth. They said Kentucky faces a statewide housing shortage of roughly 210,000 units, projected to grow if building patterns do not change, and argued that regulatory relief and financing tools are needed to increase supply. Representative Rebecca Rymer presented House Bill 371, which would require local permitting when an industry’s residual waste landfill is located in a different county from the industry itself. She said current law lets such landfills bypass local review, leaving host counties with no say despite road impacts and other local burdens. She said the bill would preserve the existing exemption when the landfill and industry are co-located, and noted support from KLC and KO. Representative Steve Doan also described House Bill 806, a statewide backyard chicken bill that would allow domesticated hens, prohibit roosters, set a minimum of six hens that local governments could not go below, and preserve local authority over setbacks, sanitation, maintenance standards, and egg sales. He said it would override outright local bans but not HOA restrictions, and cited a current Northern Kentucky dispute and ADA litigation as reasons for the proposal. The committee then heard a broader discussion on housing and land use from Charlie Gardner of the Mercatus Center and Nolan Gray of California YIMBY and the Bluegrass Institute. They outlined categories of land-use regulation, described the recent growth of state-level housing reforms nationwide, and cited examples such as ADU legalization, smaller lot sizes, reduced parking minimums, streamlined permitting, and single-stair or other building-code reforms. They argued that housing shortages are a statewide concern, that localities often have incentives to block growth, and that state intervention can reduce costs and uncertainty without compromising health and safety. Members asked about the housing shortage estimate, the effect of red tape on safety and local authority, and how state reforms could be phased in; the presenters said reforms often include lead time, can be targeted to larger jurisdictions, and should focus on reducing time and cost while maintaining basic standards.

Transcript Highlights:

• We need regulation.
• listing out regulations.
• We are grateful for the proposed regulation of 7-OH.
• I'm always in favor of regulation.
• Causing harm that is not regulated.

Committee: Senate Agricultural Affairs