Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:17:57.200><c> in</c> General holds a lot of information in General holds a lot of information
• </c><00:18:12.240><c> I</c><00:18:12.320><c> would</c> of personal information I would of personal information
• </c> party who wants to hide information party who wants to hide information from<01:07:26.200><c> the
• , is speculate about what that information is, why the attorney general is hiding information, and what
• general hiding information and what is general hiding information and what is he<01:10:12.920><c> hiding

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:16:21.199><c> Um,</c> for information only today. Um, for information only today.
• ,</c><00:37:27.520><c> I</c> and for the cabinet's information, I and for the cabinet's information,
• </c> information already in your portal? information already in your portal?
• </c><01:25:41.600><c> that</c> voluminous amount of information that voluminous amount of information
• </c> information regarding a person's sanity. information regarding a person's sanity.

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes and then recognized a staff member’s birthday and a guest shadowing Senator Adams. It then moved into informational review of Education and Labor Cabinet, Department of Education regulation 702 KAR 3:30, which sets insurance coverage requirements for school district buildings and structures. Department of Education officials explained that districts are expected to carry coverage at replacement cost and said they understand some districts participate in self-insurance pools with backup policies, but they deferred detailed insurance questions to the Department of Insurance. Senators raised concerns that pooled coverage could leave districts exposed if claims exceed pool limits, and the chair asked KDE to follow up with DOI to confirm districts are adequately covered, especially for bondholders. No vote was taken on the informational review. The committee then reviewed emergency ABC regulations 804 KAR 130:01 through 130:04 implementing Senate Bill 100’s new licensing requirements for tobacco, nicotine, and vapor product businesses. ABC and Public Protection Cabinet representatives outlined the emergency rules governing enforcement, license applications, denial criteria, and transitional licenses. Retail industry witnesses Shannon Stiglet and Brian Clark said they support licensure in principle but argued the rules add duplicative requirements borrowed from alcohol licensing, create confusion about transitional licenses, and may be too burdensome for the roughly 7,000 affected businesses to meet by the January 1 deadline. They also said guidance has been inconsistent and requested the agency revise the regulations, remove requirements not grounded in law, and provide clearer, separate processes for new and existing businesses. Committee members asked whether the industry had worked directly with ABC and noted the public comment period was still open. Witnesses said they had communicated with ABC and the Public Protection Cabinet, but responses had been uneven and they wanted written guidance. Members expressed concern about the short timeline and the need to avoid disruption so businesses can operate legally on January 1. Representative Marzian asked for clarification that the discussion concerned emergency regulations already in effect while ordinary regulations remain in process. No formal action was taken beyond receiving the informational testimony and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• The information will be spread upon the record.
• The amendments are concurred in, and the clerk will inform the Senate accordingly.
• The information will be spread across the record.
• The information will be spread across the record.
• For the information of the members, there will be no further votes.

Summary: The House met in extended session with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, quorum call, and a series of journal, committee, and Senate bill reports. Members also received several referrals and Senate messages, and the Speaker signed multiple bills already prepared for the Governor. The chamber then took up a long slate of measures, largely budget-related and conference/concurrence items, with repeated roll-call votes and several brief floor remarks for and against the bills. Among the major actions, the House passed or concurred in a number of Senate bills addressing fiscal code and budget implementation, abusive towing practices, telemarketing robocalls and caller ID spoofing, prostitution penalty changes, veteran notification procedures, the cosmetology licensure compact, solar decommissioning, Korean War Veterans Armistice Day, E85 flex fuel definitions, local road transfers, civil penalties for unlicensed commercial driving schools, and trailer sales. The House also adopted House Resolution 580 designating July 18, 2026, as Piping Plover Day. Most of these measures passed overwhelmingly, many by unanimous or near-unanimous votes. The most significant debate centered on House Bill 2400, the General Appropriations budget for fiscal year 2026-2027, and House Bill 1505, the education-related budget implementation bill. Supporters described the budget as a bipartisan compromise that funds adequacy and tax equity for schools, public safety, mental health, roads and bridges, veterans, seniors, and workforce programs while avoiding broad-based tax increases. Opponents argued the budget used accounting maneuvers, deferred spending, and was structurally unbalanced. After extended debate, the House concurred in the Senate amendments to HB 2400 by a 167-35 vote and to HB 1505 by a 172-30 vote. The House also considered House Bill 2559, which included Commonwealth property conveyances and a controversial provision affecting Penn State branch campus properties. A motion to recommit the bill failed, and the House ultimately concurred in the Senate amendments by a 105-97 vote after members debated property rights, labor effects, and the future use of the campuses. The session concluded with the Senate later concurring in several House amendments, the Speaker signing the final bills, and the House adjourning until September 9, 2026, unless recalled sooner.

Transcript Highlights:

• Each high school must include the name and contact information of the designated point of contact on
• FAFSA, including information about available resources and assistance.
• they need to make informed financial decisions.
• they need to make informed decisions after high school.
• This could mean the complaint did not include all the information required.

Committee: Senate Senate Education Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee heard and advanced several education-related bills. SB 1572, the Return to Civics Instruction Act, would require Freedom Week, civics instruction on the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, and a Declaration recitation for grades 3-12; it passed 3-2 after some members argued schools already provide civics instruction and that the legislature should not mandate curriculum. SB 1798, as amended, would require each high school to designate a FAFSA point person, post contact information, and implement a FAFSA awareness strategy; the Arizona Board of Regents supported it, while some members raised concerns about mandates on charter schools and staffing burdens. The committee also passed SB 1711, which directs the State Board of Education to develop and post age-appropriate resources on preventing and recognizing inappropriate contact, with testimony split between support for parent-accessible safety materials and concerns about sex-education compliance issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• Each high school must include the name and contact information of the designated point of contact on
• need to make informed financial decisions.
• they need to make informed decisions after high school.
• With the information they need to make informed decisions after high school.
• This could mean the complaint did not include all the information required.

Bills: SB1004 , SB1424 , SB1497 , SB1507 , SB1572 , SB1684 , SB1711 , SB1741 , SB1754 , SB1763 , SB1798 , SCR1012 , SCR1041 , SCR1051

Committees: Senate Education , Senate Senate Education Committee of Reference

Keywords: sex offender registration, sex offender registry, A.R.S. 13-3821, sexual offenses, public safety, GPS monitoring, electronic monitoring, transient offender, homeless registrant, online identifiers, internet identifiers, sheriff notification, Department of Public Safety, DPS, DNA collection, juvenile adjudication, kidnapping of a minor, unlawful imprisonment of a minor, lifetime registration, community notification

Transcript Highlights:

• We have to manage and be aware of how our personal information can be shared.
• Madam Chair and Representative, but the information is regulated differently.
• Who is law enforcement selling this information to? Madam Chair.
• It's the holder of the information, which is a private company.
• Madam Chair, I don't, is that, if that's a vendor for this information, yes.

Bills: HB294 , SB40 , SB43 , SB35

Committee: House House Judiciary

Keywords: cannabis, cannabis packaging, cannabis labeling, cannabis regulation, Cannabis Control Division, adulterated cannabis, artificial color additive, food dye, youth appeal, minor appeal, child-resistant packaging, black-and-white packaging, edibles, product labeling, consumer protection, marijuana, hemp, dispensary, licensed cannabis business, cannabis manufacturer

Transcript Highlights:

• It permits members to seek information from staff without superintendent permission.
• Shane Story continued: “Financial information is difficult to access.
• They should seek information, but when I'm reading through the bill, it's very ambiguous.
• It doesn't involve any confidential information, certainly any student information or any private health
• information.

Bills: S0824 , S1170 , S1620 , S1738 , S7036

Committee: Senate Education Pre-K - 12

Summary: The Education Pre-K-12 Committee considered several K-12 bills and resolutions. SJR 1104, by Senator Massullo, would place on the ballot a proposed constitutional amendment protecting voluntary religious expression in public schools; supporters said it simply codifies existing law and protects student and employee rights, while opponents warned it could entrench religious pressure and exclusion. The resolution was reported favorably. The committee also heard SB 1738, by Senator Yarborough, on educational facilities; an amendment removed crime-prevention-through-environmental-design language and adjusted transparency/safe-space provisions, and the bill was reported favorably as amended. SB 824, by Senator Truenow, was amended into a transparency measure requiring districts to submit annual reports on unimproved land holdings to DOE, and it was reported favorably. Appointments in tabs 7 and 8 were recommended for confirmation. The committee then took up SPB 7036, a comprehensive education package by Chair Simon. The bill would expand educational emergency triggers, adjust Title I withholding uses, align charter school rules with school improvement processes, update safety and early learning provisions, expand literacy and math interventions, and revise educator pipeline policies. Members raised concerns about a provision that could allow the state to develop instructional materials; Simon said that section was still being considered and would need guardrails. The committee adopted a motion to submit the bill as a committee bill, and it was reported favorably. SB 1620, by Senator Leak, proposed a “school board members’ bill of rights” giving board members direct access to district documents and staff, limiting district attorneys’ dual representation, strengthening nepotism rules, and prohibiting nondisclosure agreements. Volusia County school board members and others testified both for and against the bill, with supporters citing transparency and accountability and opponents warning about confidentiality, staff pressure, and undermining the superintendent’s authority. The bill was reported favorably. Finally, SB 1170, by Senator Calatayud, as amended, would allow parents of students in self-contained ESE classrooms to request cameras, with district policies governing review, notice, timelines, and appeals. Parents, advocates, and educators testified strongly in support, while one witness opposed it as an unfunded mandate. The committee reported the bill favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to thank everybody for joining us in this joint informational hearing.
• CDT conducts information security audits for state agencies and departments.
• Doug Novak, the deputy state chief information security officer.
• Through the Information Security Leadership Academy, over 200 information security officers and professionals
• Many graduates now serve as chief information security officers, chief information officers, and cyber

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Cybersecurity and the Committee on Emergency Management held a joint informational hearing on maximizing the value of state cybersecurity investments, with a focus on whether California is fully using the security features already included in vendor contracts. The first panel included Microsoft, Zscaler, and Palo Alto Networks, whose representatives described the products and services they provide to the state, including endpoint protection, data loss prevention, zero-trust access, attack surface management, incident response, and AI-enabled security tools. They generally said utilization is strong in some areas but that underuse can occur because of limited staff, lack of awareness, overlapping tools, audit-driven purchases, and the difficulty of keeping up with rapidly changing threats and products. They also emphasized the need for training, leadership buy-in, and coordination among IT, procurement, budget, and mission staff. Members pressed the vendors on risks such as ransomware, data loss, IoT and operational technology vulnerabilities, major events like the World Cup and Olympics, and the role of AI in both attacks and defense. The vendors said AI is already changing both sides of cybersecurity, speeding attacks but also helping defenders triage alerts and improve response times. They also discussed workforce shortages and the challenge of retaining trained staff in state government. One public commenter argued that restrictive software licensing can worsen cybersecurity by locking customers into vendors and limiting flexibility, integration, and modernization. The second panel featured the Department of Technology, Cal OES/CalSIC, and the California Military Department. CDT said its audits, maturity metrics, independent security assessments, continuous monitoring, advisory services, and vulnerability disclosure program are helping improve statewide security, and that departments are making progress but still vary in maturity. Cal OES and CalSIC described training, advisories, cyber advisory services, and statewide exercises like Cyber Dawn, while the Military Department said its assessment teams have seen significant score improvements over time. Officials said underutilization is not always due to lack of awareness; sometimes features are intentionally disabled to reduce attack surface or because tools overlap. The hearing also covered federal funding concerns, including the reduction of MS-ISAC support and the final year of the state and local cybersecurity grant program, and the meeting adjourned after public comment.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:14:58.800><c> another</c> deed to provide the information another deed to provide the information
• You have a few testifiers. interests um information about interests um information about victimization
• </c> practicable transmit information practicable transmit information relating<03:16:32.640><c> to</
• <03:24:58.199><c> off</c><03:24:58.399><c> of</c> information off of information off of it<03:25:00.199
• Turner has more information. Mr.

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• This is some information that we received for E&T training.
• So that information we can track, yes.”
• make certain that that information is correct.
• Thank you all for the information.
• And I think the information, if you look in the report, the information that’s in this report is very

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Greco: exemption for information pertaining to the U.S.
• Where would this information be listed? Rep.
• But I do worry about how sometimes even when they have information or if they don't have information,
• I think the more information voters have the better.
• that could inform their votes, and others who think it's fine and it will inform their vote to the other

Transcript Highlights:

• And there is a large amount of information that is coming...
• And there is a large amount of information that is coming to us.
• And there is a large amount of information that is coming to us.
• Under each of those, look at the information that's under there.
• Chair and Senator, maybe you don't have this information.

Committee: Senate Health and Welfare

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:42:10.160><c> around</c> information around information around dismissals<00:42:12.280><c> what</
• This is the information age, and some people have access to information.
• A better informed public is a better informed public, and they can make better decisions about what’s
• </c> prosecutors um this is the information prosecutors um this is the information age<00:56:38.640><
• </c> age and some people have information age and some people have information have<00:56:41.400><c>

Bills: HF7

Committee: House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law

Transcript Highlights:

• One has to do with the fact that DPR doesn't have the information, and has not created the information
• One has to do with the fact that DPR doesn't have the information, has not created the information, to
• hear the frustration from residents when they're just trying to get information, obtain information,
• analyze information.
• I provided the information.

Summary: The joint Assembly and Senate hearing examined whether California’s pesticide program is meeting its public-protection goals, with opening remarks from committee chairs emphasizing the state’s large pesticide use, the need to transition toward sustainable pest management, and ongoing oversight including a state audit of DPR and county agricultural commissioner enforcement. The hearing also referenced recent concerns in Ladera Ranch about childhood cancer cases and the need for transparent investigation and community access to information. Panel one focused on human health and the regulatory framework. Dr. Anna Maria Mora described long-running CHAMACOS research showing widespread pesticide exposure in farmworker families, links to neurodevelopmental, respiratory, liver, and cardiometabolic harms, and greater impacts on children facing social adversity. She urged biomonitoring, better linkage of exposure data to health outcomes, regulation of chemical classes and mixtures, stronger buffers around homes and schools, and more community-based research. Professor Tim Malloy explained California’s two-tier system of DPR registration and county permitting, said the state’s program is strong but falls short on cumulative exposure analysis and alternatives assessment, and argued that DPR and counties need better tools, training, and funding to implement legally required protections. Committee members asked about biomonitoring, class-based regulation, and how to make pesticide data more usable for the public. Panel two brought testimony from environmental justice and farmworker advocates, who argued that California remains behind other jurisdictions by allowing highly hazardous pesticides, including 1,3-dichloropropene and paraquat, and by relying on a funding structure tied to pesticide sales. Witnesses said DPR often moves too slowly on reevaluations, rarely assesses combined exposures, and does not adequately account for health, environmental, and social costs or conflicts of interest involving pest control advisors. They also described inconsistent county-level implementation, weak outreach, and confusion over whether DPR or county agricultural commissioners are responsible for enforcement, and urged faster phaseouts, tiered fees, stronger local protections, and clearer accountability. Panel three represented regulated entities and agricultural stakeholders, who supported the goals of safer pest management but stressed that California’s registration process must be more predictable, transparent, and timely. They said AB 2113’s staffing and timeline reforms were important, but backlog and delays still hinder access to newer, lower-risk products and can hurt both consumer and agricultural uses. Agricultural witnesses also emphasized the need to invest more in pest prevention, invasive species detection, extension support, farmer training, and practical incentives for sustainable pest management. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, with members pressing witnesses on timelines, implementation, funding, and the division of responsibility between DPR and county agencies.

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll call the Information Technology Committee to order.
• We used to just feed you that information.
• We used to just feed you that information.
• So, Chairman Bosch, committee members, state information centers, information technology centers are
• That's information they're not going to have.

Committee: Joint Information Technology Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• And there was a lot of false information... 27, and there was a lot of false information.
• Especially to your point about flood maps, any information you have I think that would be important information
• He was always trying to get that information because that information was important to him.
• checkboxes of information, correct?
• We want to make an informed decision.

Transcript Highlights:

• And this is information that's already provided on the I-9.
• So I mean, I just said that the information is not ...information is accurate.
• be under any obligation to go... ...of that information.
• The digital information.” “We’re back to your intent was the digital, right?
• The digital information.” “Yes, yeah.

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• It does not provide personal information.
• ...information and allows law enforcement and potentially others to backtrack that information over a
• of information that is our core concern here.
• of information that is our core concern here.
• The information should be used... So, Mr.

Bills: SB1072 , SB1111 , SB1114 , SB1116 , SB1122 , SB1179 , SB1250 , SB1308 , SB1455 , SB1456 , SB1457 , SB1487 , SB1547 , SB1549 , SB1551 , SB1552

Committee: Senate Appropriations, Transportation and Technology

Keywords: reimbursement rates, intellectual disabilities, community services, economic security, funding appropriations, automated license plate readers, law enforcement, privacy, data access, public records, behavioral health, patient brokering, appropriation, state funds, Maricopa County, claims review, medical necessity, American Indian health program, healthcare regulations, healthcare

Transcript Highlights:

• We also found that more accurate information about the industry would enable more informed decision-making
• We give them the information that hopefully helps them.
• Internal information sharing...
• And then we also participate in industry information sharing.
• We can't share that information with law enforcement.'

Summary: The committee began with a work session on the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee’s cannabis market study, presented by JLARC staff member Susanna Pratt. The report found Washington’s cannabis production in 2023 was likely two to three times higher than retail sales, with production estimated at 292,000 to 443,000 pounds of THC versus 139,000 pounds sold. Pratt explained that canopy data are inconsistent and that the Liquor and Cannabis Board’s traceability system is incomplete and unreliable, limiting data-driven regulation, tax verification, recall tracking, and diversion enforcement. JLARC recommended that LCB submit a plan by the end of 2025 for obtaining accurate licensee data by the end of 2026; LCB partially concurred and said a 2027 timeline may be more realistic. JLARC also concluded that the social equity producer licenses would likely have only a minimal effect on statewide production capacity, and suggested the legislature consider broader ways to increase equity in the industry. Members asked about the slow issuance of social equity licenses and about comparable traceability systems in other states. The committee then heard a series of presentations on fraud and scam prevention. Paul Benda of the American Bankers Association described the scale of fraud losses, the role of telecom spoofing, social media scam ads, SIM farms, and crypto ATMs, and argued for a shared-responsibility approach involving banks, telecoms, and platforms. Katie Clark of IQ Credit Union described member-to-member fraud, romance scams, and the operational and financial impacts on credit unions, and recommended better information sharing, safe harbors for returning scam-related funds, and stronger fraud education. Kyle Innes of SIFMA highlighted investor fraud and Washington’s 2009 report-and-hold law, which he said helped shape similar protections in most states, and emphasized the need for better communication among financial firms, APS, and law enforcement. Brian Gerard and Ali Higgs from the Department of Financial Institutions discussed “pig butchering” and other investment scams, focusing on how scammers build trust through social media, dating apps, fake websites, and crypto schemes before extracting funds. Across the fraud presentations, witnesses repeatedly stressed consumer education, interagency information sharing, and stronger controls on telecom, social media, and crypto ATM activity. Members asked about model laws from other states, the role of financial education in schools, and whether crypto ATMs should be regulated or banned. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION.
• WE ARE COLLECTING INFORMATION.
• AND THAT INFORMATION WAS COMING IN INCONSISTENT.
• WE CAN'T -- THEY CAN'T GIVE US THAT INFORMATION.
• WE DON'T COLLECT ENOUGH INFORMATION WE ARE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH HAVING ENOUGH INFORMATION FROM A PARTICULAR