Transcript Highlights:

• Assembly Bill 310 by Assembly Member Alonis and act relating to youth health.
• Assembly Concurrent Resolution 55 by Assembly Member Jeff Gonzalez.
• Thank you, Assembly Member. Assembly Member Rubio, you are recognized.
• Thank you, Assembly Member. Assembly Member Arambula, you are recognized.
• Thank you, Assembly Member. Assembly Member DeMaio, you're recognized.

Summary: The Assembly convened after a quorum call, prayer, pledge, and a moment of silence for Marysville Police Officer Osmar Rodarte. Members then handled several procedural motions, including re-referring bills and moving items on the file, with AB 567 re-referred by a recorded vote of 42-17 and the remaining referral requests approved without objection. The chamber also heard a brief personal statement from Assembly Member Macedo thanking colleagues and staff for support during a health episode. On the floor, members presented and passed several measures. AB 310 by Assembly Member Alanis, requiring youth sports organizations to have AED access, emergency response plans, and coach training, passed 56-0. AB 437 by Assembly Member Lackey, expanding CIF reporting to include sports-related injuries and medical problems, passed 59-0. ACR 55 by Assembly Member Jeff Gonzalez, commemorating the 40th anniversary of ARC v. DDS and the Lanterman Act, received 62 co-authors and was adopted by voice vote. The Assembly also adopted HR 28 recognizing Major League Baseball Opening Day 2025, with extended lighthearted remarks about the Dodgers, Giants, and Athletics, and HR 23 honoring Cesar Chavez Day, which drew broad support from caucus leaders and members speaking to Chavez’s labor and civil rights legacy. Both resolutions were adopted by voice vote after adding co-authors. The chamber then approved the second-day consent calendar, including ACR 39 on Missing and Murdered Indigenous People Awareness Month and ACR 53 on Women’s Equal Pay Day, and later adjourned in memory of Ralph Miller after tributes from Assembly Members Hart and Gibson. The House adjourned until Tuesday, April 1 at 1 p.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you, Assembly Member Corky Silva, and one of our newest Assembly Members.
• Assembly Member, Senator, where to go?
• Thank you, Assembly Members. Oh, a little too close. Assembly Members, good to see you.
• Assembly Member Valencia?
• Thank you, Assembly Member Valencia.

Summary: The hearing focused on the long-delayed Southern California Veterans Cemetery project at Gypsum Canyon in Anaheim, with opening remarks from Assemblymember Sharon Quirk-Silva, Senator Tom Umberg, and Assemblymember Avelino Valencia emphasizing the project’s importance to Orange County veterans and families. Anaheim city leaders, including the mayor pro tem and council members, voiced strong support and described the city’s role in planning, utilities, and final approvals. Quirk-Silva reviewed the project history, including prior legislation, county and state funding commitments, and the recent federal determination that the site meets VA criteria for a state veterans cemetery. The first panel, representing the veterans community, included the American Legion, American Gold Star Mothers, and Valor. They argued that Orange County—home to a large veteran population—still lacks a local veterans cemetery, forcing families to travel long distances to Riverside or elsewhere. Testimony stressed the emotional and practical burden on aging veterans and grieving families, and called for immediate action and possession of the property. Some speakers were sharply critical of CalVet and the pace of the process, saying veterans have waited too long and that the project should move forward without further delay. The second panel, from Orange County, described the county’s and cemetery district’s support and the unique opportunity to develop a shared site for a public cemetery and a separate state veterans cemetery. County officials said the county has dedicated land and funding, and that shared infrastructure—roads, utilities, grading, and access—could reduce costs substantially if the two projects are coordinated. They also said the county is ready to transfer the property to CalVet when appropriate and that the project has already cleared major local approvals and litigation. The final panel from DGS and CalVet explained the state’s feasibility study and current planning work. DGS said the 2023 study estimated the state’s portion of phase one at about $126 million, largely driven by site work and grading, though that estimate may change as assumptions are updated. CalVet said it is working with DGS and the county on a revised concept plan to lower costs and refine the timeline, and that legislative budget action will be needed to authorize spending from the Southern California Veterans Cemetery fund. No formal vote was taken; the hearing was informational, and the main action was continued coordination among the state, county, city, and veterans groups, with public comment at the end overwhelmingly urging faster construction.

Transcript Highlights:

• Assembly Member Parison, not voting. Assembly Member Colosa, aye. Assembly Member Garcia, aye.
• Assembly Member Lee? Aye. Assembly Member Lee is aye. Assembly Member Wicks?
• Assembly Member Wilson? Aye. Assembly Member Wilson, aye.
• Assembly Member Caloza? Aye. Caloza, aye. Assembly Member Ta? No. Assembly Member Ta? No.
• This is Assembly Member Papan's bill. Aye. Assembly Member Wilson is aye.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 1157, the Affordable Rent Act, which would lower California’s annual rent cap, remove the single-family home exemption, and eliminate the sunset on existing tenant protections. The author and supporters argued that renters are facing severe affordability pressures, especially in single-family rentals, and that stronger statewide rent stabilization is needed to prevent displacement and homelessness. Opponents, including apartment, building, and property-owner groups, said the bill would discourage housing production, harm small landlords, and override a deal they said was intended to be temporary while the state focused on building more housing. Public testimony on AB 1157 was extensive, with many renters, tenant advocates, labor groups, and community organizations speaking in support, while many landlords, business groups, and property-owner representatives spoke in opposition. Committee members were split: some praised the bill as a necessary response to the rent crisis, while others warned it could reduce investment and worsen the housing shortage. The committee ultimately voted 7-5 to pass AB 1157 to the Assembly Judiciary Committee. The committee then approved the consent calendar, including AB 413, AB 1152, and AB 1275, on a 9-0 vote. It also heard ACA 3, which would require the University of California to make available a limited number of down payment loans for eligible long-term support staff who are first-time homebuyers. Supporters said the measure would help lower-wage UC workers afford homeownership and improve retention, while UC and other opponents argued the proposal was duplicative of existing state programs, unnecessary, and potentially harmful to UC finances. The discussion focused on financing mechanics and the relationship to CalHFA, but no final vote on ACA 3 was included in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Item number 4, AB 1696 by Assembly Member Stefani. File item 7, AB 1868 by Assembly Member Hadwick.
• File item 19, AB 2352 by Assembly Member Valencia. File item 22, AB 2348 by Assembly Member Banta.
• Item 22, AB 2348 by Assembly Member Banta. File item 25, AB 2486 by Assembly Member Addis.
• I want to thank Assembly Member Herbedian for allowing Assembly...
• Senator Menjivar, hi, Assembly Member... Hi, Assembly Member.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Assembly Member Bonta, Assembly Member Patterson, Assembly Member Chiavo, Assembly Member Here.
• Assembly Member Bonta, Assembly Member Patterson, Assembly Member Chiavo, Assembly Member Solachi, Assembly
• Good afternoon, Assembly Member, Madam Chair, and Assembly Member Chiavo.
• Assembly Member.
• Assembly Member.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I have a motion by Assembly Member Burner and a second by Assembly Member Nguyen.
• I have a motion by Assembly Member Burner and a second by Assembly Member Nguyen.
• We moved the bill by Assembly Member Nguyen, seconded by Assembly Member Burner.
• Motion by Assembly Member Nguyen, second by Assembly Member Alanas. Second.
• Motion by Assembly Member Nguyen. Second by Assembly Member Alanas.

Summary: The committee heard several bills focused on public employment, retirement, and recognition of cultural and public service issues. AB 569 would allow local governments and unions to negotiate supplemental pension contributions for certain employees; AB 989 would make California Native American Day an official paid state holiday; AB 268 would recognize Diwali as an official state holiday; AJR 3 would urge protection of Social Security, Medicare, and Medi-Cal from federal cuts; AB 1067 would require misconduct investigations to continue even if an employee retires during the process; AB 1510 made technical and conforming changes to state employee pay and benefits laws and to Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority labor law; and AB 1233 would create a statewide database of classified school employee employment history and serious misconduct records. The committee also took up AB 1383, which would lower the retirement age for certain first responders and restore some bargaining rights over retirement benefits, drawing extensive testimony for and against. Supporters of the holiday bills emphasized long-overdue recognition of Native American and South Asian communities and the importance of honoring California’s diversity. Supporters of AJR 3 described the reliance of seniors, people with disabilities, and families on federal and state health and retirement programs, warning that cuts would cause serious harm. AB 1067 was presented as a way to prevent employees from retiring to avoid accountability, while AB 1233 was framed as a student-safety measure to help schools identify applicants with prior egregious misconduct. Opposition to AB 1233 focused on due process and the breadth of the misconduct records, and opposition to AB 1383 argued it would reverse PEPRA reforms, raise pension costs, and strain local budgets, while supporters said firefighters and other first responders face unique health and safety risks and deserve earlier retirement. Most bills were reported out of committee on unanimous or near-unanimous votes and placed on hold for add-ons or referral to Appropriations or another committee. AB 912 was taken up on the consent calendar and held; AB 569, AB 989, AB 268, AJR 3, AB 1067, and AB 1510 all advanced with do-pass recommendations and were placed on hold. AB 1233 was moved to the Committee on Education. AB 1383 drew the most extensive debate, with many witnesses in support and opposition, and committee members largely expressing support for first responders while also noting concerns about cost and pension policy.

Transcript Highlights:

• Very much, Assembly Member. Mr. Chair and colleagues. Very much, Assembly Member.
• Senator Caballero, we're on Assembly Bill 1595 by Assembly Member Schultz.
• Senator Cabayor, we're on Assembly Bill 1595 by Assembly Schulz.
• Assembly Bill 1816.
• And so I, Assembly of Zabr, Assembly Rata is before you in file order.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• General Fund for Bringing Families Home, and $44.6 million General Fund for HDAP.
• Shy Forbes again, Assembly Budget Committee: That is... That is correct, Assembly Member.
• Hi, Assembly Member. Jennifer Kim with the Assembly Budget Committee.
• Assembly Member Hart.
• Thank you very much, Assembly Member. I think Assembly Member Fong.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee held an informational hearing on the final three-party budget agreement and related trailer bills, with the Department of Finance outlining the major budget bill and omnibus measures. Finance described a package built around balancing the state budget amid economic uncertainty, preserving core health and safety-net programs, and making significant ongoing reductions in some state programs. The budget bill included major items such as shifting $1 billion from the General Fund to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund for Cal Fire, funding universal transitional kindergarten, deferring some UC and CSU funding, supporting foster care and homelessness programs, providing Proposition 36 implementation funding, and achieving Medi-Cal savings through changes to benefits and eligibility. The committee also heard that votes on the budget bills were expected later in the week and the following Monday. Finance then walked through the trailer bills, including health, human services, early learning, education, resources, energy, transportation, labor, housing, tax, public safety, courts, general government, cannabis, and energy-related measures. Notable provisions included a Medi-Cal enrollment freeze for certain adults, new premiums and benefit changes for some immigrants, child care COLA changes, education funding for literacy, teacher support, universal meals, and community college student support, as well as resource and climate measures affecting Cal Fire staffing and energy permitting. The housing trailer bill drew the most discussion, with provisions on CEQA streamlining, a vehicle miles traveled mitigation banking program, a renters’ credit trigger, and a six-year moratorium on new residential building standards. Members also discussed a film tax credit expansion, cannabis enforcement funding, a tribal police pilot program, and changes to tax policy, including military retirement income exclusions and wildfire settlement payment exclusions. Committee members largely praised the staff and the budget process, but several raised concerns and asked detailed questions, especially about the housing trailer bill’s new wage standards, tribal consultation provisions, and possible effects on prevailing wage protections. Finance explained that the housing language was intended to set wage floors for market-rate projects receiving CEQA streamlining, with different county-based tiers and a notwithstanding clause preserving existing prevailing wage laws. Members also questioned the size and timing of funding for the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative, Clean Cars for All, Proposition 36, and the film tax credit expansion. Other members highlighted support for public safety, veterans’ tax relief, child care providers, housing production, and higher education, while some expressed concern that the budget’s policy changes were being negotiated too quickly or without enough stakeholder input.

Transcript Highlights:

• Assembly Member Garcia, aye. Assembly Member Kassia? I'm sorry, I didn't hear that.
• Assembly Member Garcia, aye. Assembly Member Ta? This is item number nine, 2094.
• Assembly Member Ta is a no? Assembly Member, thank you, Pa. No? Assembly Member Wilson?
• Assembly Member Garcia, Assembly Member Tangifa, aye. See, aye.
• Item number two, Assembly Member Garcia, aye. Assembly Member Tangipa, aye. 12 to 0 on that.

Summary: The committee heard a long housing agenda with several bills presented before quorum was established. AB 1725, as amended, would require disclosure of nearby oil wells and methane monitoring issues in a specific district; the author and community witnesses described serious health and safety risks in Vista Hermosa Heights, while the California Apartment Association, California Building Industry Association, and California Chamber of Commerce opposed, arguing the bill targeted the wrong industry and that the state should instead fix abandoned wells directly. AB 2110, a local finance tool to create tax increment districts for workforce housing for education, health care, manufacturing, and public safety workers, drew no witnesses in support or opposition and was presented as a way to help workers live closer to jobs. AB 1732 would expand CEQA streamlining for public university and college housing projects; UC and several housing and labor groups supported it, while housing advocates raised concerns about amendments affecting existing 100% affordable housing exemptions. AB 1771, amended into a study bill, would direct HCD to report on the long-standing resident manager requirement for apartment buildings with 16 or more units; the rental housing industry supported studying the issue, while the chair emphasized the need to consider tenant protections and the impact on current resident managers before changing the law. The committee also heard AB 2185, which would direct state affordable housing programs to update guidelines to better support factory-built housing; it drew broad support from housing, labor, technology, and local government groups, with no opposition. AB 2748 would delay new EV-readiness requirements for 100% affordable housing developments, keeping the prior 40% standard through 2035; supporters said the higher standard would add significant costs and threaten project feasibility, while clean air and transportation advocates argued the code changes are modest, important for equity, and should not be rolled back. Members split along those lines, with some emphasizing housing production and others urging more public subsidy for EV infrastructure rather than delaying the code. SB 417, a proposed $10 billion affordable housing bond for the November ballot, received extensive support from housing organizations, local governments, labor, and business groups, but Habitat for Humanity and the Los Angeles mayor’s office asked for specific allocations for CalHome and interim housing; the bill was ultimately moved to Appropriations on an 8-0 vote, with members noting ongoing negotiations over funding priorities. Finally, AB 1740 would create an urban multimodal community designation for Santa Monica, allowing local approval of certain low-impact coastal-zone activities—such as some housing, bike and bus lanes, outdoor dining, and building changes—without Coastal Commission review. The author and Santa Monica officials said the bill would reduce delays and uncertainty for infill housing and local economic recovery while preserving protections for sensitive coastal resources; supporters included housing, business, and city groups. The Coastal Commission and environmental organizations opposed, saying the bill would carve out broad exemptions, weaken public access and appeal rights, and bypass the local coastal program process that Santa Monica has not completed. Committee members debated the Commission’s role, with some criticizing it for opposing legislation and others arguing the bill was a common-sense way to modernize coastal permitting. A motion and second were made on AB 1740, and the bill was left pending with the committee’s action to be taken when appropriate.

Transcript Highlights:

• Assembly Member Solache.
• Okay, I have a motion by Assembly Member Pacheco, second by Assembly Member Solache.
• Okay, a motion by Assembly Member Fong, second by Assembly Member Davies.
• Okay, I have a motion by Assembly Member Solache, second by Assembly Member Soria.
• I have a motion by Assembly Member Solache, second by Assembly Member Rodriguez.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I see Assembly Member Jackson is here.
• Okay, Assembly Member, you may begin.
• We will take them up together, and that's Assembly Member Ortega. Assembly Member Ortega.
• the Assembly Member for her efforts.
• Assembly Member Berman, our good chair of Assembly B&P, thank you for being here.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They are the modern-day assembly grounds for the next generation of leaders.
• Thank you, Assembly Member. Thank you, Assembly Member.
• Member Hoover, Assembly Member Patterson, Assembly Member Wicks, Assembly Member Alvarez, Chair Bauer-Kahan
• , Assembly Member Bonta, who is our health chair, and Assembly Member Muratzuchi.
• Tiffany Brokaw here on behalf of Attorney General Rob Bonta, and he would like to thank Assembly Member

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The committee heard AB 1988, which would require companion chatbots to respond to credible crisis expressions with a 988 lifeline notice, human review after repeated crisis signals, and a pause in the chat. The author and supporters said AI chatbots are increasingly used for emotional support but are not equipped to handle suicidal or violent ideation safely; they cited cases of harmful chatbot responses and argued the bill is a limited safety measure, not a ban. Support came from crisis, family medicine, and child/family service organizations, and there was no formal opposition testimony. Members praised the bill’s intent and the author’s work, and the bill was held pending quorum before later discussion moved on to the next item. The committee then took up AB 1709, which would set a minimum age of 16 for accounts on social media platforms with harmful addictive features and create an e-safety advisory commission. The author argued that social media product design—such as infinite scroll, autoplay, and algorithmic feeds—drives compulsive use and mental health harms, especially for children, and said the bill would still allow safer, non-addictive platforms and online spaces. Supporters, including a psychologist and the Organization for Social Media Safety, described cyberbullying, predation, addiction, and mental health harms; several organizations and advocates also supported the measure. Opponents, including EFF, privacy groups, civil liberties organizations, and youth and LGBTQ advocates, argued the bill is overbroad, raises privacy and First Amendment concerns, and could cut off young people from community, news, and support. They pointed to Australia’s experience as evidence that age restrictions are easy to circumvent and may shift harms elsewhere, and urged feature-level regulation instead of age-based exclusion. Committee members debated whether the bill is a “ban” or a delay, how age assurance would work, and whether the commission could meaningfully define and update harmful features; several members said they would support the bill while acknowledging it needs further work and ongoing oversight.

Transcript Highlights:

• Assembly is now in session. Assembly member Sharp Collins notices the absence of a quorum.
• Assembly Bill 463. 566, no zero. Assembly Bill 655. 566, no zero. Assembly Bill 786. 566, no zero.
• Assembly Bill 896. Aye 6, 6, no 0. Assembly bill 992. Aye 6, 6, no 0. Assembly bill 1085.
• Assembly bill 1177. Aye 6, 6, no 0. Assembly bill 1478. Aye 6, 6, no 0.
• Assembly Bill 1436. Aye 66, no 0. Assembly Bill 391. Aye 66, no 0. Assembly Bill 1334.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• File No. 10, AB 1918 by Assembly Member Dixon. File No. 11, AB 1951 by Assembly Member Dixon.
• File No. 29, AB 1954 by Assembly Member Ward. AB 1954 by Assembly Member Ward. All right.
• Oh, it's Assembly. Oh, it's Assembly. Oh, it's Assembly. Thank you very much. Yeah, exactly.
• Assembly Member Calra.
• Assembly member, Carla.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Item 15, Assembly Bill 983 by Assembly Member Massetto, pulled by the author.
• Item number 23, Assembly Bill 1376 by Assembly Member Bonta, pulled by the author.
• Item number 27, Assembly Bill 1488 by Assembly Member Flora, pulled by the author.
• This is Assembly Bill 22 by Assembly Member DeMaio. Assembly Member, the floor is yours.
• This is Assembly Bill 22 by Assembly Member DeMaio. Assembly member, the floor is yours.

Summary: The committee heard AB 82, which would expand privacy and safety protections for patients and providers of reproductive and gender-affirming care. The author and supporters said the bill is needed because of rising harassment, doxing, and threats, and because sensitive health data could be used by hostile actors; opponents argued it would create constitutional problems, enable abuse of safe-at-home protections, and improperly shield providers and records from scrutiny. Public testimony was heavily divided, with many advocates in support and many privacy, civil liberties, and anti-trafficking or sex-based policy groups in opposition. The bill was moved on a due pass recommendation and remained on call. The committee then heard AB 331, which would clarify that county election certification is a ministerial duty, prohibit misleading ballot return envelopes, and require voter information guides to be delivered to jails in an acceptable format. The Department of Justice and several good-government groups supported the measure, the Secretary of State had no position after amendments, and a committee member noted ongoing concerns but supported it after the changes. The bill passed on a do pass recommendation to Appropriations and was placed on call. AB 1178 followed, proposing to protect undercover peace officers’ names, images, and likenesses in public records while preserving disclosure of sustained misconduct records. Law enforcement and public safety groups supported the bill as a needed safety measure, while journalists, transparency advocates, and civil liberties groups opposed it, saying existing law already protects officers and the new language could lead to overbroad withholding. After discussion about the scope of undercover status and the need for judicial discretion, the bill passed as amended to Appropriations. The committee also adopted a consent calendar. Later, AB 981 was heard, creating a five-county pilot program requiring intelligent speed assistance devices for certain reckless driving convictions. Supporters, including traffic safety advocates and crash victims, said the bill could reduce repeat speeding and save lives; opponents raised concerns about cost, installer oversight, liability for automakers, and the breadth of the pilot. The bill passed as amended to Appropriations. AB 22, which would repeal Proposition 57 and restrict release of sexually violent predators and certain sex offenders, drew strong opposition from youth justice, public defender, and civil liberties groups who said it would be unconstitutional and harmful; the chair recommended no, no motion was made, and the bill was held. Finally, AB 897, a squatter-removal bill, was presented with the author arguing it would protect property owners through a faster due-process process; the transcript cuts off during early support testimony and does not show a final action on that measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you, Assembly Member Dixon. Thank you, Assembly Member.
• I'm pleased to present Assembly Bill 1854 today. Assembly Bill 1854.
• General Rob Bonta, who is proud to co-sponsor this piece of legislation, and he'd like to thank Assembly
• We have up next Assembly Ward, followed by Assembly Member Al-Hawari.
• Assembly Member Brian?

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Assembly chamber Sacramento, Wednesday, June 4th, 2025. The assembly met at 10 AM.
• Landscapes for current and future generations.
• I Worry about a generation from now whether that next generation will be able to have as informed a discussion
• I request unanimous consent to suspend Assembly Rule 63 to allow Assembly Member Gabriel to take up this
• Assembly Bill 130 by the Assembly Committee on Budget, an act relating to housing and making an appropriation

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Motion from Assembly Member Rogers. Second from Assembly Member Burr.
• Second from Assembly Member Chiavo. Second from Assembly Member Chiavo.
• Assembly Member Super.
• Assembly Member Rogers.
• Moved by Assembly Member Schiavo. Second from Assembly Member Harabedian.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Assembly Member Ellis, welcome.
• Oh, Assembly Member Bennett.
• Moved by Assembly Member Bennett. Seconded by Assembly Member Stefani.
• is Deputy Attorney General Tiffany Brokaw.
• Tiffany Brokaw, Deputy Attorney General, here on behalf of Attorney General Rob Bonta, and we're proud

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Assembly Member Kora? Thank you. Assembly Member Kora? Thank you, Madam Chair.
• Assembly Member is a Burr.
• Assembly Member Papin. Assembly Member Papin.
• We have a motion from Assembly Member Davies, second from Assembly Member Chen.
• We have a motion from Assembly Member Davies, second from Assembly Member Chen.

Summary: The committee heard several energy and water affordability bills, with extensive testimony on SB 254 by Senator Becker, SB 541 by Senator Becker, SB 453 by Senator Stern, SB 292 by Senator Caballero, and SB 473 by Senator Padilla. SB 254 was presented as a broad utility affordability package addressing short-term climate credits, a Power Fund, tighter scrutiny of rate increases and utility profits, wildfire spending, securitization of future utility costs, and streamlining. Supporters, including TURN and several environmental and public power groups, said it could lower bills and reduce long-term costs; opponents from investor-owned utilities, labor, business, and local government raised concerns about market impacts, insufficient analysis, and the breadth of the bill. The committee approved SB 254 on a 6-3 vote and placed it on call. SB 541 focused on load flexibility and using existing grid capacity more efficiently. Senator Becker described it as a transparency and planning measure to identify cost-effective load shifting and reduce peak demand, while supporters said it could improve resiliency and save money. Several CCAs and utilities opposed the bill in print or unless amended, arguing that some language implied a mandate and that the concept needed more cost-effectiveness analysis; the author said amendments would remove language dividing the state goal among retail suppliers and clarify that the bill is not a procurement mandate. The committee passed SB 541 as amended to Appropriations on a 9-1 vote and left it on call. SB 453 by Senator Stern would return unspent ratepayer-funded microgrid program dollars and was described as a way to keep the lights on and redirect unused funds. It drew support from local government and environmental groups, with PG&E expressing concern about how the bill would affect its ability to spend awarded funds. The committee passed SB 453 as amended to Appropriations on a 12-0 vote. SB 292 by Senator Caballero would require more granular outage and reliability reporting, including census-tract-level data, to better inform resilience planning after PSPS events; utilities opposed unless amended, citing duplicative reporting and regulatory overlap, but the bill passed 12-0 to Appropriations. SB 473 by Senator Padilla would require or expand water utility decoupling to promote conservation and affordability. Supporters, including water utilities, labor, business, and local government groups, argued decoupling stabilizes revenue, supports conservation, and can keep rates lower for low-use customers. The Public Advocates Office opposed, saying prior pilot data showed no conservation benefit and about $1 billion in added costs, and that the CPUC had already rejected similar requests. Committee members questioned the conservation and capital-investment effects of the different rate structures; the author and supporters argued decoupling helps utilities fund infrastructure while allowing lower fixed charges for low-use customers. The transcript ends during that discussion, before a final vote on SB 473 is shown.