Transcript Highlights:

• I know that when we did our analysis in 2021 of the other states, that analysis is in there and you can
• in 20 21 of the other states analysis in 20 21 of the other states that<00:36:35.640> analysis
• and so should they best use analysis and so should they arrive<00:58:29.200> that<00:58:29.720
• right with the understanding analysis right with the understanding that<01:03:46.839> there<01
• <01:04:01.000> thank analysis thank analysis thank you<01:04:02.839> thank<01:04:03.000

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I would also say we've done a lot of analysis of whether this is unusual to have a 2 to 3% budget.
• I would also say we've done a lot of analysis of whether this is unusual to have a 2 to 3% budget.
• I would also say we've done a lot of analysis of whether this is unusual to have a 2 to 3% budget.
• I would also say we've done a lot of analysis of whether this is unusual to have a 2 to 3% budget.
• I'm the director of research, analysis, and policy.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Also, in thinking about proposing this, has there been any analysis around how many providers will lose
• Where maybe the department makes some kind of qualitative analysis.
• I'm part of the statewide evaluation team for CRDP and the lead for CRDP's cost-benefit analysis.
• We raised a number of concerns with the proposal in an analysis earlier this year.
• Yeah, we've been doing an analysis of target drugs.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And it also includes information on tax incidents, which is an analysis of who ultimately pays, uh, the
• This particular analysis is done in, uh, largely with a model that at LBB right now.
• Analysis, uh, you know, I think that we generate a lot of revenue for the state and sort of the initial
• Uh, you would have analysis that would show how that, you know, might impact people in terms of, uh,
• Um, you know, do you have any, any thoughts or analysis on, on that?

Bills: SB843, SB1733, SB1476, SB1237, SB1410, SB1894, SB1272, SB1204, SB1721, SB1725, SB1735, SB1337, SB1339, SB1461, SB1975, SB1450, SB1458, SB1232, SB1238, SB1325, SB1209, SB1362, SB2072, SB1451, SB1540, SB1581, SB1535, SB1266, SB1927, SB1460, SB2084, SB2182, SB392, SB985, SB1265, SB1283, SB1441, SB1307, SB1425, SB1826, SB1365, SB1696, SB1870, SB1722, SB1639, SB715, SB716, SB182, SB609, SB169, SB134, SB1611, SB432, SB1407, SB2039, SB1356, SB1288, SB2019, SB1705, SB1878, SB2118

Keywords: school boards, educational governance, conflict of interest, employee relations, Oklahoma statutes, child abuse, reporting requirements, sexual misconduct, law enforcement, school personnel, confidentiality, student safety, land office, land exchange, investment, education funding, real estate management, Teachers' Bill of Rights, education, teachers' rights

Transcript Highlights:

• This is the state's forest inventory analysis.
• The USDA does an analysis of the entire landscape of New Hampshire once every five years.
• The USDA does an analysis of the entire landscape of New Hampshire once every five years.
• <01:41:32.520> is the pending cost benefit analysis is the pending cost benefit analysis is
• <05:16:54.520> um quantifiable cost benefit analysis um quantifiable cost benefit analysis

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• originally was, again, two sessions ago, but this last session refined it to be a business case analysis
• And so the State Energy Research Center and the ERC are working on that business case analysis.
• But it won't show up in the SIF trust fund analysis until next biennium because of the delayed effective
• There are a number of activities related to this analysis that have been included in the testimony that
• It's all part of the analysis. And part of it would be the cost of the different.

Summary: The committee took roll, approved the March 18 minutes, and then received a compliance-report update on the Industrial Commission and related funds and programs. Staff reviewed the status of one-time appropriations and grant programs, including electric grid resiliency, lignite research, enhanced oil recovery, the Clean Sustainable Energy Authority, the salt cavern business-case study, and the new NDSU research and technology park grant. Members asked about funding balances, reimbursement timing, matching requirements, and how some commitments would affect the State Investment Fund and future biennia. Industrial Commission staff then gave a broader update on the agency’s administrative office, grant management system, leadership transitions at several commission agencies, and active grant rounds. They reported that the grant management system is nearing completion, that several agency leadership searches have concluded, and that the commission’s grant programs currently have 108 active grants totaling more than $165 million. They also described the Clean Sustainable Energy Authority round, the oil and gas research program’s enhanced oil recovery awards, the grid resiliency grants, the salt cavern study, and the research technology park program, noting that some projects are awaiting federal funds or additional matching cash. Ron Ness, speaking for the Oil and Gas Research Council, focused on the state of the oil industry and the enhanced oil recovery “Bakken 2.0” effort. He said production remains steady, but future growth depends on better infrastructure, longer laterals, and new EOR methods such as CO2, natural gas, and surfactants. He emphasized the importance of the Bakkeneast pipeline and related gas-utilization projects, the recent DOE funding that will return some money to the research council, and the need to modernize tax and incentive rules for CO2-based recovery. Members discussed the potential economic benefits for oil, agriculture, and manufacturing. The Bank of North Dakota then presented its compliance report and a broader strategic update. Bank leadership reviewed the bank’s mission, governance, participation lending, student lending, disaster programs, and legislatively directed programs, and said the bank is managing for a flatter deposit base and stronger liquidity because of fintech competition and changing market conditions. They reported improved earnings, with net income rising to about $231 million, and described Rough Rider Coin as a new internal payment rail for North Dakota banks and credit unions, not a public cryptocurrency. Members asked about student loan eligibility, disaster lending, and the bank’s capacity to support state programs while maintaining its balance-sheet and liquidity requirements.

Transcript Highlights:

• I understand the intent here and re-read the analysis.
• I re-read the analysis.
• Our letter somehow wasn't reflected in the analysis.
• We want to thank the committee and the author for the amendments addressed in the analysis.
• We want to thank the committee and the author for the amendments addressed in the analysis.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard several bills focused on privacy, AI, consumer protection, and public safety. AB 1979 would require a licensed health care professional to retain final clinical judgment when using AI tools in health care and would limit chatbot access to medical records; supporters, including nurses and TechEquity, said it preserves human decision-making, while hospitals and industry groups opposed it unless amended, citing burdens and training concerns. The bill passed 6-1 and was placed on call. AB 2624 would expand the Safe at Home confidentiality program to immigrant service providers and workers facing harassment and doxing; supporters described threats against advocates and their families, while one senator raised concerns about a private right of action and penalties. The bill passed 4-1 and was placed on call for further committees. AB 2103 would make Engaged California a permanent statewide public engagement program; supporters said it broadens civic participation and transparency, while concerns were raised about partisan balance in topic selection. It passed 6-0 and was placed on call to Appropriations. The committee also considered AB 2, which would set statutory damages and other financial accountability measures for large social media platforms when negligence causing harm to children is proven in court. The author and supporters, including a parent who lost her daughter and child-safety advocates, argued that stronger remedies are needed because social media design features are harming children and existing enforcement has been insufficient. Opponents, including TechNet, CCIA, CalChamber, and others, argued the bill blurs content and conduct, could increase litigation, and is unnecessary given existing lawsuits and verdicts. Several senators said the bill was a consumer-protection measure and supported it; it passed 5-0 and was placed on call. AB 883, as amended, would use California’s Delete Act/DROP system to help elected officials and judges remove personal information from data brokers, while also shortening the deletion timeline for all Californians from 45 to 30 days. Supporters said the bill responds to rising threats against public servants and improves privacy tools broadly; some opponents removed or softened opposition after amendments, though CalChamber and CCIA remained opposed unless amended, largely over the private right of action. The bill passed 4-0 and was placed on call. The committee then recessed briefly before taking up AB 2023, a chatbot safety bill for children that would require age verification, safety audits, default protections, parental controls, crisis-response measures, and limits on targeted ads and data sharing. Supporters said it builds on prior AI and child-safety legislation and is needed to prevent harms like self-harm and manipulation; opponents raised concerns about vague harm standards, audit requirements, and liability. The hearing continued with testimony and committee discussion, but no final vote on AB 2023 was shown in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• If you knew there were concerns through the session, why are we still waiting for analysis?
• And I have and also I will provide committee our first analysis of this bill because I all during this
• And I have and also I will provide committee our first analysis of this bill because I all during this
• <00:38:07.440> of<00:38:07.680> this committee our first analysis of this committee
• our first analysis of this bill<00:38:08.880> because<00:38:09.119> I<00:38:09.440>

Bills: HB55, SB15, SB247

Keywords: fishing, licensing, jubilee, Marine life, Alabama, regulations, sex offenders, employment restrictions, first responders, public safety, juvenile offenders, local laws, registration requirements, picketing, protesting, residential protest, noise amplification, amplified sound, residential picketing, harassment

Transcript Highlights:

• The factor eight analysis does not support this.
• The factor eight analysis does not support this.
• The factor eight analysis does not support this.
• The factor eight analysis does not support this.
• The factor eight analysis does not support this.

Bills: HF3771, HF3658, HF3453, HF3358, HF1775

Keywords: disaster assistance, contingency account, Minnesota emergency management, public safety, state disaster aid, FEMA, federal cost-share, emergency relief, natural disaster, budget report, appropriations report, management and budget, local governments, utility cooperatives, public works, infrastructure repair, chapter 12B, chapter 12A, emergency management, disaster recovery

Transcript Highlights:

• Phase one portion of the work is a postpay analysis.
• This wasn't a forensic analysis of fraud.
• This wasn't a forensic analysis fraud. This wasn't a forensic analysis of<01:03:13.200> fraud.
• <01:15:51.360> So be more granular in the analysis. So be more granular in the analysis.
• ,<01:30:11.120> there investigations and data analysis, there investigations and data analysis

Bills: HF3378

Keywords: human services, Optum reports, data privacy, transparency, legislative oversight, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We also have limited ability to do analysis on some of the data that we have because we've just had a
• We also have limited ability to do analysis on some of the data that we have because we've just had a
• Generally, more than half of the commission staff work in the Regulatory Analysis Division.
• The Regulatory Analysis Division is made up of four subunits: Financial Analysis, which handles utility
• meetings the regulatory analysis meetings the regulatory analysis division<01:18:15.120> is

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So much of what we do starts with that analysis.
• So much of what we do starts with that analysis.
• So much of what we do starts with that analysis.
• um we starts with that analysis um we understand<00:38:12.240> that<00:38:12.359> our<
• cost analysis the lcpr is<00:41:12.800> responsible<00:41:13.280> for<00:41:13.480>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Beth continued that the draft would include analysis of fiscal impacts, including the cost of personnel
• Kraft, include counties in that analysis. Mr.
• Kraft that we include counties in that analysis. Mr.
• Maybe we could at least add in the verbiage in the first line under F, an analysis of fiscal impacts
• Okay, so analysis of fiscal impacts and efficiencies. Okay. All right.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I also want to say thank you to your committee for a very thoughtful analysis.
• Oh, I'd like to thank the committee staff for their thoughtful analysis.
• That's not taken into account in some of the economic analysis that you've looked at.
• The taxes in our economic analysis are federal and state taxes, not local.
• The taxes in our economic analysis are federal and state taxes, not local.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 13, which would restructure the CPUC to increase legislative oversight, add legislative liaisons, require more detailed and timely reporting on rate-setting decisions, and add a public advocate member. The author and supporters argued the bill would improve transparency, accountability, and geographic diversity in CPUC decision-making amid rising utility rates. Witnesses from TURN, San Joaquin County, SDG&E, and former CPUC Commissioner Loretta Lynch offered support or support-in-principle, while no opposition testimony was presented. Members generally praised the bill’s transparency goals, and AB 13 passed 10-0 to Appropriations, with the roll left open for absent members. The committee then adopted the 2025-2026 committee rules and approved three consent items: AB 61, AB 365, and AB 406. The next bill, AB 99, would cap investor-owned utility rate increases above inflation except for specified costs such as safety, modernization, and fuel/commodity costs. The author and supporters, including a representative of the California Senior Legislature, said the bill was needed to protect ratepayers, especially seniors and low-income customers, from repeated rate hikes. Opposition came from utility labor, utilities, the Chamber of Commerce, and others, who argued the bill was too simplistic, could suppress labor costs, and did not account for major cost drivers such as wildfire mitigation, mandates, and net metering. Several members supported moving the bill forward as a starting point on affordability, while others criticized it as overly blunt. AB 99 passed 11-0 to Appropriations, with the roll left open. The hearing then shifted to an informational panel on strategies to reduce California transmission costs. A Public Advocates Office staffer described a growing backlog of approved-but-unbuilt transmission projects, rising transmission access charges, and long project timelines driven largely by utility pre-application and construction periods. Panelists from Net Zero California and consulting firms presented research suggesting that public financing or public-private partnership lease models could reduce transmission costs by lowering financing, tax, and capital costs, with estimated savings of up to 57% and as much as $123 billion over 40 years. PG&E’s representative said the utility is already pursuing federal loan guarantees, grants, and a public-private partnership with Citizens Energy, but warned that state ownership could create tax, wildfire-liability, and governance risks. Members asked about the CPUC’s role, the causes of delays, and whether public financing could complement existing competitive solicitation processes.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:27:13.679> um would be needed to conduct analysis um would be needed to conduct analysis
• <00:31:45.200> without<00:31:45.679> being conduct an impact analysis without being
• conduct an impact analysis without being able<00:31:46.159> to<00:31:46.559> identify<
• Chair, Senator Johnson Stewart, um, that was in reference to the cumulative impacts analysis, and we
• Erl's analysis is available to everyone in writing. Senator Nelson.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Everyone, please remember this analysis... All right, members, thank you for being here.
• As part of this resolution, we would have to go through the analysis, not just the inventory, but the
• financial accounting, the cost-benefit analysis, and all of the description.
• It's going to trigger the reporting, the review, analysis, and reporting that's in this resolution.
• did any one of those other triggers, then they would be back in for us to do the inventory, the analysis

Summary: The House Committee on Health and Welfare met on May 26 for what was described as the last meeting of the legislative session. H.R. 318 was voluntarily deferred without discussion. The committee first took up H.R. 298, which would have directed the Louisiana Department of Health, with the legislative auditor, to study LDH’s relationships with certain nonprofits, foundations, professional associations, and other nongovernmental entities. The author presented amendments narrowing the definitions, but LDH testified the language was still too broad, would still require substantial review of contracts, memberships, conferences, and related interactions, and would still carry a significant fiscal note. Members raised concerns that hospitals, provider associations, nonprofit care facilities, and other stakeholders could be swept in. The author then voluntarily deferred the resolution, and the committee agreed without objection. The committee then heard Senate Bill 405, which establishes a statewide quality oversight initiative for nursing facilities, directs LDH to work with facilities on care standards and remediation for lower-rated homes, and requires reporting and transparency for families. The bill drew broad support from members and stakeholders, including nursing home and senior advocacy groups, and was reported favorably without objection. House Resolution 290, which asked LDH to study a possible correlation between gender-affirming hormone therapy medications and psychosis or related psychiatric conditions in people 26 and younger, prompted questions about the purpose of the study and concerns that it could affect broader policy debates. The author, a licensed clinical social worker, said the request was intended to examine whether medications were being used too quickly and what effects they might have on adolescent mental health; after discussion, the author voluntarily deferred the resolution, and the committee agreed. Finally, the committee considered Senate Concurrent Resolution 61, urging LDH and commercial insurers to increase reimbursement rates for behavioral health crisis centers operating under a crisis receiving center license. Testimony focused on the Bridge Center for Hope, described as the state’s only Level 3 crisis receiving center, and the need to revisit Medicaid reimbursement for the first 23 hours of crisis care. With no questions or objections, the resolution was adopted. The meeting ended with members thanking the chair and staff, and the committee adjourned for the year.

Transcript Highlights:

• As we look at the legislation as it’s moving today, as proposed for amendment in the analysis, our caution
• If you look on page nine of the analysis, there is some proposed language that we're going to put in
• the bill that says here are the goals that any decontamination “If you look on page nine of the analysis
• There was a lot of data analysis that accompanies the permit application, and we heard that they cost
• bill will alleviate this need by calling for the completion of a watershed-wide water availability analysis

Summary: The committee heard three water- and environment-related bills. AB 1663, by Assembly Member Wallace, would provide relief for high desert homeowners by allowing permits without mitigation fees for removing or trimming up to 10 Western Joshua trees for health and safety needs, including defensible space. Support came from the California Association of Realtors and the Community Water Systems Alliance, and members discussed balancing conservation with property maintenance. The bill was moved out of committee on a do-pass-as-amended vote to Appropriations. AB 1772, by Assembly Member Papin, sought to create a statewide framework to prevent the spread of golden mussels through watercraft decontamination standards, reciprocity for certifications, and long-term funding. Testimony in support highlighted Lake Tahoe’s invasive species prevention program as a model, while Recreational Boaters of California expressed caution about funding fairness, reciprocity, and how the system would work if infestations become widespread. After discussion about mandatory decontamination standards and funding, the bill was also passed as amended to Appropriations. AB 2521, also by Assembly Member Papin, would use a watershed-wide water availability analysis from the California Council of Science and Technology to help streamline groundwater recharge permitting and reduce applicant costs. Members raised concerns about protecting existing water rights and ensuring stakeholder input, and the author emphasized the study would be informational rather than binding. The bill passed to Appropriations, and the committee later took add-on votes confirming passage of AB 1663, AB 1772, and AB 2521.

Transcript Highlights:

• I was trying to understand the analysis and the language.
• make sure that I address a couple of the concerns here in my closing, specifically around the staff analysis
• The staff analysis correctly outlined some basically fiscal impact that was based on the Department of
• Commerce Department analysis on the bill.
• Just want to make a notation here is that in the staff analysis it is showing probably a little bit higher

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• ALARMING STATEMENT FOR ME AS A LEGISLATURE TO HEAR THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF OUR FLORIDA SUPREME COURT, HIS ANALYSIS
• THE GATE AND IT'S ALREADY IN THE IMPLEMENTATION PHASE WHICH IS A LITTLE LATE TO ACTUALLY HAVE THE ANALYSIS
• OF IS THIS COURSE THAT WE'RE ON, DOES IT HAVE THE ANALYSIS OF IS THIS COURSE THAT WE'RE ON, DOES IT
• BELIEVE STORM PROTECTION PLANS, WOULD YOU LIKE AS THE PSC TO BE REQUIRED TO HAVE A BIT MORE ROBUST ANALYSIS
• LOOKING LIKE AND I APOLOGIZE CHAIRMAN, I'M NOT 1000% FAMILIAR WITH YOUR BILL, I AM FAMILIAR WITH THE ANALYSIS

Keywords: 999, senate, all