Transcript Highlights:

• support them as the individual that they are, and school teams wrap around the individual, it really lends

Summary: The House Education Committee held a work session on reducing restraint and eliminating isolation in schools, then moved into a public hearing on House Bill 1795 and its proposed substitute. Chair Sharon Santos reviewed committee procedures and emphasized the short session timeline, then framed the discussion as part of a longer-running effort to address student restraint and isolation. Representative Callan, the bill sponsor, said the committee’s pilot and demonstration sites would help identify both benefits and implementation challenges for legislation. OSPI Acting Director of Policy and Legislative Affairs Misha Cherniski presented an update on the state’s demonstration project, saying it is in its third year and has $2 million per year in the current budget for fiscal years 2026 and 2027. He described intensive, targeted, and universal supports, including grants to pilot and demonstration districts, a technical assistance manual, and statewide professional learning. He reported that 68% of project sites saw reductions in restraint and isolation compared with the prior year, and said OSPI’s immediate policy recommendations are to extend prohibitions on dangerous restraints such as prone, supine, wall, mechanical, chemical, and noxious spray restraints, and to clarify the definition of “imminent likelihood of serious harm.” Committee members asked for more detailed disaggregated data by race, ethnicity, grade level, incident type, and sample size, and raised questions about authorized entities, student movement, and whether data captures incidents in nonpublic settings. Representatives from Auburn, Bainbridge Island, and Concrete school districts described how the grant-funded work has affected their districts. Auburn reported major reductions in isolation after removing its last isolation room, expanding behavior supports, and training staff through multiple professional development options; the district said the biggest challenge has been shifting staff mindset and navigating delayed access to vendors and grant systems. Bainbridge Island said it has used grant funds for universal staff training, administrator training, social-emotional MTSS work, and partnerships with multiple providers; it reported zero isolations and sharply reduced restraints, while noting the need to monitor nonpublic agencies closely. Concrete, a much smaller district, said the grant allowed it to hire a part-time BCBA, adopt Safety-Care training, and use OSPI’s manual and tracking tools, but staffing shortages and limited substitute coverage make it hard to attend demonstration sites or training in person. During the public hearing, the substitute bill was summarized as prohibiting certain restraints, banning isolation as a planned intervention, narrowing the definition of serious harm, and extending requirements to other providers of public educational services, while preserving lawful duties of school resource officers. Proponents included disability advocates, the Washington Education Association, and public school employees, who said the bill would reduce trauma and align practice with student safety and dignity. A parent testified about a child harmed by a room that was later used for involuntary confinement. A representative from a specialized learning center testified in opposition, arguing that a complete elimination of isolation for younger students could increase danger in some settings, that medical-provider requirements could be difficult to meet, and that specialized providers need broader exemptions. No vote was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• beautiful because we are creating a structure that, while we're focused on a specific topic today, could lend

Summary: The committee held a work session on voting rights in the United States and Washington, beginning with testimony from Marissa Wright of Campaign Legal Center and David Montes of the ACLU of Washington. They described the federal Voting Rights Act’s main protections—preclearance, vote suppression, and vote dilution—and argued that Supreme Court decisions such as Shelby County v. Holder and Brnovich have weakened those tools. They said Washington should consider stronger state-level protections, including a preclearance program and broader safeguards against discriminatory voting practices. Members asked about Washington’s history of discrimination, voter roll purges, noncitizen registration, and remedies under the Washington Voting Rights Act, including ranked-choice voting and district-based systems. The committee then heard from the Office of Equity and several commissions, which described their roles in advising state government and working with communities. They focused on the immigration sub-cabinet created under Executive Order 2509, saying it is intended to improve coordination across agencies, the legislature, the courts, and community organizations on issues such as data privacy, language access, health care, education, and accountability under the Keep Washington Working Act. Members asked about the use of NGOs, accountability for KWW violations, and the sub-cabinet’s goals, and the panel said the effort is meant to help government respond more quickly and collaboratively while centering immigrant, disability, LGBTQ, and other communities. The final panel was from the University of Washington Elections Database Project, which presented data on vote-by-mail ballot challenges, cures, and rejections from 2020 to 2024. They reported that about 1.5% of ballots are signature-challenged in most elections, roughly 60% of challenged ballots are cured, and overall rejection rates are about 1% in general elections and 1.5% in primaries. The researchers said voters of color, younger voters, and some tribal-area voters experience higher rejection rates, and that differences appear tied to signature mismatch, language access, ballot timing, and familiarity with the system. In the last panel, Maria Fernandez and Vicki Frausto of EIA described voter education and civic engagement work in Yakima County and Sunnyside, including concerns about intimidation, language barriers, signature mismatch, and at-large election systems; they said stronger Washington Voting Rights Act protections would help communities elect candidates of choice. No votes were taken during the work session.

Transcript Highlights:

• Some of the other things we offer would be we have a big lending library.

Committee: Senate Early Learning & K-12 Education

Summary: The committee first received an overview of Washington’s Alternative Learning Experience (ALE) programs from OSPI. Staff explained that ALE is a course-level funding designation for instruction that occurs partly or wholly away from the traditional school setting, and that it can take the form of online, site-based, or remote courses. OSPI said ALE is still basic education, with the same student rights and district responsibilities as other public school programs, and that the agency provides technical assistance, annual reporting review, and program reviews. Members asked for more detailed statewide data on demographics, outcomes, and post-graduation tracking, which OSPI said it would follow up on. Representatives from several ALE programs then described their models and student populations. Washington Virtual Academies, Columbia Virtual Academy, Pearl, and River Home Link each said they serve students through different combinations of online, remote, or site-based learning, with families choosing these programs for reasons such as medical needs, athletics, travel, homeschooling preferences, religious or political concerns, bullying, or the need for more individualized instruction. The presenters emphasized that they provide certificated teachers, special education and multilingual services, assessments, clubs, field trips, and other supports, while also noting funding and capacity limits. Senators asked about for-profit versus district-run structures, transportation, meals, early learning, CTE access, vaccination requirements, and how students socialize and transition to high school. Several presenters said they would provide follow-up information on demographics, language access, and funding details. The committee then shifted to an update on artificial intelligence in schools. OSPI described its AI guidance, which centers on human input, AI output, and human evaluation, and said it has issued practical documents for classroom use and ethics, revised standards to emphasize critical thinking, digital literacy, media literacy, and data literacy, and supported statewide professional development. OSPI also highlighted an AI innovation summit, educator training courses, and new AI-related course codes and equivalency frameworks. District presenters from Quincy and Peninsula described local AI integration efforts, including board policies, classroom guidance, teacher professional learning, custom support tools, and career-connected programs such as drone certification. They stressed that AI should be introduced in a human-centered way and asked for state support for innovation, equity, workforce partnerships, and clear governance standards.

Transcript Highlights:

• But I think there's a lot that's already funded through the Public Education Department that would lend

Transcript Highlights:

• So note that some of the projects from 2025 are a little different and don't lend themselves as well

Committee: House Legislative Health & Human Services Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• people, you know, be on their bikes and ride, you know, but even the pictures as you show kind of lends

Committee: Senate Transportation

Summary: The committee began with a transportation budget and revenue overview from Haley Gamble and Brian Moore. They reviewed the 2025-27 adopted transportation budget, noting $15.5 billion in expenditures, with the Department of Transportation making up the largest share. They said the 2025 session’s new revenues, including the fuel tax increase and other fee changes, allowed the committee to move from projected structural deficits to a balanced four-year plan, while preserving major programs such as culverts, ferry timing adjustments, highway preservation, and local maintenance funding. They also discussed updated revenue forecasts, including a modest downward revision in fuel consumption and uncertainty around some revenue sources, but said overall revenues remain stronger than previously projected. Committee members asked for more detail on dedicated funds, regional fuel tax patterns, and whether preservation needs could be supported through bonding. The committee then heard a remote presentation from Dr. Jessica Chichino of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety on traffic safety trends and countermeasures. She described the group’s “30 by 30” goal to reduce traffic fatalities 30% by 2030, citing increases in deaths for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcyclists, and comparing U.S. fatality rates unfavorably with other high-income countries. Her presentation emphasized speed management, impaired driving enforcement, safer roadway design, and pedestrian protections such as lower speed limits, speed cameras, traffic calming, roundabouts, better lighting, and pedestrian beacons. She also highlighted research showing that larger vehicles increase pedestrian risk and discussed Bellevue pilot projects using smart signal technology that reduced near misses. No action was taken on the presentation. In the final work session item, Barb Chamberlain of WSDOT and Justin Leighton of the Washington State Transit Association discussed potential transit and active transportation grant programs that had been proposed but not enacted in 2025. Chamberlain explained how new grant programs require runway time, staff capacity, and clear program design, and contrasted “projects first, funding after” with “funding first, projects after” approaches. She addressed the proposed Senior Transportation Emphasis Program and regional trails/cycle highways concepts, noting questions about eligibility, scoring, and how such projects would fit with existing active transportation and preservation work. Leighton reviewed the state’s transit grant portfolio and argued that a transit safety and security grant could help agencies fund operator barriers, lighting, shelters, behavioral health support, and non-uniformed security staff. He also raised concerns about sales tax treatment of security contracts, staffing shortages, federal uncertainty, CDL non-domicile issues, and long procurement timelines for buses. The committee asked questions about definitions, program purpose, and implementation challenges, but did not take any votes or formal action.

Transcript Highlights:

• people, you know, be on their bikes and ride, you know, but even the pictures as you show kind of lends

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee met on October 16, 2025, for a budget and revenue overview, a traffic safety presentation, and a discussion of potential transit and active transportation grant programs. Committee staff reviewed the adopted 2025-27 transportation budget, noting $15.5 billion in expenditures, the large share for WSDOT, and the mix of revenue sources including fuel tax, vehicle-related fees, federal funds, Climate Commitment Act revenue, and new 2025 revenues from SB 5801 and SB 5802. Staff said the 2025 session produced a balanced four-year plan, preserved major project schedules, maintained highway preservation funding, and added money for culverts, local preservation, and other priorities. They also described a September forecast showing lower motor fuel consumption than previously expected, but still enough revenue growth to keep the transportation plan balanced. For the 2026 supplemental, staff said agency requests were relatively modest overall, with most capital requests reflecting reappropriations and timing shifts rather than new projects, while WSDOT’s addendum identified much larger future needs for maintenance, preservation, paving, culverts, and safety work. Senators asked for more detail on how revenues are distributed by fund type and geography, how much of the maintenance and preservation request is actual maintenance versus equipment, whether paving needs could be supported through bonding, and how electric vehicle sales trends might affect forecasts. The committee then heard a remote presentation from Dr. Jessica Chikino of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety on traffic safety trends and countermeasures. She said U.S. traffic fatalities have risen sharply over the past decade, with especially large increases for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcyclists, and argued that the U.S. lags other high-income countries in roadway safety. Her presentation highlighted IIHS’s “30 by 30” goal to reduce fatalities 30% by 2030 through safer speeds, stronger impaired-driving countermeasures, better pedestrian protection, and safer commercial vehicles. She discussed research linking higher speed limits to higher fatality risk, the benefits of lower urban speed limits, speed safety cameras, traffic calming, lighting, pedestrian beacons, and safer intersection design. She also described ongoing work with Bellevue on smart signal technology and pedestrian safety pilots. Committee members thanked her for the presentation and said they would share the materials with others. In the final work session, the committee revisited transit and active transportation grant concepts that had been included in the Senate budget proposal but did not advance in 2025. Barb Chamberlain of WSDOT’s Active Transportation Division explained how grant programs need runway, staff capacity, applicant readiness, and clear criteria, and compared program design to getting a plane off the ground. She discussed the proposed Senior Transportation Emphasis Program and regional trails/cycle highways concepts, noting that some projects could be structured as funding-first programs while others would work better as project-line or project-first models. She said regional trail projects are already eligible under existing programs but often score lower because current criteria emphasize safety and population served. Justin Leighton of the Washington State Transit Association then reviewed transit grant programs and argued that transit safety and security needs remain underfunded, including operator barriers, lighting, shelters, behavioral health coordination, and non-uniformed security staff. He said many transit capital programs are oversubscribed, that operator barrier retrofits alone could cost $20 million to $30 million, and that agencies face uncertainty about how recent sales tax changes apply to security-related contracts. No votes were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• They lend us their expertise and insights into this topic, and they really have helped us formulate a

Transcript Highlights:

• that developers were talking to that they could take, you know, that they could invest that money and lend

Committee: Senate Housing

Summary: The committee heard presentations on several housing finance and permitting tools. Chattanooga described its payment-in-lieu-of-taxes (PILOT) affordable housing program, which ties property tax abatements to the number and affordability level of units provided, using a calculator based on market rents and HUD affordability levels. Senators asked about the 15-year term, auditing, and whether the program was attracting private market-rate developers; the presenter said the first mixed-income project would include 278 units with 42 affordable units and that annual compliance monitoring is conducted. Shoreline then described its MFTE and inclusionary housing approach, emphasizing that longer 20-year exemptions helped make projects pencil out and that most recent development has clustered around light rail station areas; city staff said they will study whether the program should be adjusted further and noted the importance of the new state inclusionary housing law. The Department of Commerce and MRSC discussed tax increment financing, proportional impact fees, and the CHIP program. Commerce explained that TIF can fund public improvements such as roads, utilities, parks, broadband, and some affordable housing or child care facilities, but jurisdictions should only use it when development is likely to occur and the public benefit justifies the investment. On impact fees, Commerce said fees should be proportional to the actual infrastructure demand of a project and based on capital facility plans; it also noted that fee reductions for affordable housing must be backfilled through CHIP. Senators asked for more information on CHIP funding levels, project selection, and how much of it supports affordable housing. Commerce also presented the first annual permit-timelines report under the 2023 permitting reforms, saying 2024 data showed timelines still exceeding statutory goals and that future reports will examine factors such as paper versus electronic processing and local reform efforts. Auburn and Bellevue highlighted local permitting innovations. Auburn said it has moved to fully electronic review, uses MyBuildingPermit.com, has internal performance standards, and offers a stock-plan program that can cut later review to about a week; staff said most stamped plans still require at least two review cycles and that the city is watching how middle-housing code changes affect development. Bellevue described a pilot with GovStream AI to use artificial intelligence for pre-application assistance, document triage, and plan-review support, with the goal of reducing back-and-forth and improving application quality. Finally, Seattle presented a pilot for accessory dwelling unit co-development in which a mission-driven partner would finance, build, and manage backyard ADUs for homeowners, with the owner eventually buying out the partner; senators raised questions about rent-setting, management fees, liability, and what happens if a homeowner sells early. The committee also heard from community land trust representatives, who explained how ground leases and resale restrictions keep homes permanently affordable and allow public subsidies to serve multiple generations.

Transcript Highlights:

• that developers were talking to that they could take, you know, that they could invest that money and lend

Summary: The Senate Housing Committee heard presentations on a range of housing finance, permitting, and affordability tools. Chattanooga described its affordable housing PILOT program, which uses a per-unit property tax abatement tied to the rent loss from providing affordable units, with a 15-year term and annual compliance monitoring. Committee members asked about the program’s structure, whether it had been used elsewhere, and who was participating; the presenter said the first mixed-income project would bring 278 units with 42 affordable units and that the model was attracting private market-rate developers. Shoreline then described its MFTE and inclusionary zoning approach, emphasizing that longer tax exemption periods and station-area zoning changes had helped spur development, with most current pipeline projects concentrated near light rail stations. The committee also heard from the Municipal Research Services Center and the Department of Commerce on tax increment financing, proportional impact fees, and permit timelines. Commerce explained that TIF can fund public improvements such as roads, utilities, broadband, and some affordable housing or child care facilities, while proportional impact fee guidance is intended to help jurisdictions charge fees more closely aligned with actual project impacts. On permit timelines, Commerce presented its first annual report under recent law changes, using 2024 as a baseline year and noting that reported timelines were generally longer than statutory goals; members asked about outliers, paper versus electronic processing, and whether back-and-forth between applicants and staff was driving delays. Commerce said it would follow up with more data, including on CHIP funding and permit reform practices. Several local governments then shared permitting process improvements. Auburn reported relatively short review cycles and described its move to fully electronic permitting, internal performance standards, and a stock plan program that speeds review for repeated home designs. Bellevue described an AI permitting pilot with a local startup to help with pre-application questions, document triage, and plan review, aiming to reduce incomplete applications and revision cycles. Seattle presented a pilot for accessory dwelling unit co-development in which a mission-driven partner would help homeowners split lots, finance, build, and manage ADUs, with the homeowner eventually buying out the partner and retaining ownership; committee members asked about rent setting, management fees, and default risk, and staff said they would follow up. The committee also heard brief overviews of community land trusts and limited equity cooperatives as permanent affordability models, with presenters urging continued state and local funding support and policy recognition for these approaches.

Transcript Highlights:

• They've mentioned that they would be willing to lend the money through the state if the state would guarantee

Transcript Highlights:

• legislature the the moments that stick with me the most are the moments where I have been privileged to lend

Transcript Highlights:

• So CalHFA's permanent lending practices, our single-family programs, the fact that we're governed by

Summary: The joint hearing focused on Governor Newsom’s 2025 reorganization plan to split the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency into two new agencies: a Business and Consumer Services Agency and a California Housing and Homelessness Agency. Secretary Tamika Moss and department leaders from Consumer Affairs, Cannabis Control, DFPI, and Alcoholic Beverage Control said the business-side reorganization would sharpen consumer protection and regulatory oversight without increasing licensee fees or office-space needs. Members generally supported the concept, but several raised concerns about the timing relative to the budget process, the May Revision, and whether the new structure would add costs or disrupt legal and regulatory work. Public commenters from industry groups largely supported the business-side proposal. The second half of the hearing examined the proposed Housing and Homelessness Agency and a new Housing Development and Finance Committee intended to streamline affordable housing funding. Moss, HCD Director Gustavo Velasquez, and CalHFA’s Rebecca Franklin argued the reorganization would reduce fragmentation, speed approvals, improve compliance and asset management, and better coordinate housing, homelessness, and civil rights functions. They said CalHFA’s statutory and financial independence would remain intact, that the proposal would not affect existing homelessness programs administered by HCD, and that the plan would be phased in over several years, with the new agencies and committee expected to become operational by July 2026. Members pressed on whether the plan would truly create a one-stop shop, how it would interact with tax credits and bonds outside the Governor’s control, whether it would include a single application and unified inspections, and how it would address Los Angeles homelessness oversight and federal uncertainties such as tariffs and Section 8 changes. Developer witnesses strongly backed the housing proposal, describing the current system as slow, opaque, and costly. Margaret Miller of the John Stewart Company and Jeffrey Morgan of CHISPA gave examples of projects delayed or lost because multiple funding sources required separate applications, awards, and closings; both said a cabinet-level housing secretary and a consolidated funding process could save time and money and produce more units. Public advocates including Housing California, the California Housing Partnership, and the California Housing Consortium supported the concept but stressed that success would depend on implementation, adequate funding, transparency, and broader coordination with tax credit and bond programs. No formal votes were taken; the hearing was informational, and the committees heard testimony and questions on the proposal.

Transcript Highlights:

• creates a new regulatory board within the DMV specific... to autonomous vehicles so that experts can lend

Bills: HB1540 , HB3837 , HB5571 , SB370 , SB2425

Committee: House Delivery of Government Efficiency

Keywords: government review, Texas Sunset Act, regulatory oversight, agencies, sunset provisions, autonomous vehicles, regulation, safety, criminal offense, Autonomous Vehicle Commission, registration, regulations, Level 4 automation, Level 5 automation, self-driving technology, traffic laws, permit system, collision reporting, safety standards, Automated Vehicle Commission

Transcript Highlights:

• MEMBERS, I ASK THAT YOU NOT ONLY SUPPORT THIS BILL BUT I ASK THAT YOU COSPONSOR THIS BILL AND LEND YOUR

Transcript Highlights:

• My friends, this is not the Texan way. ...is to lend a hand to your neighbor, not question their humanity

Bills: HB1320 , HB2012 , HB2293 , HB2655 , HB3174 , HB4108 , HB4661 , HB4799 , HB5534 , HB5580

Committee: House S/C on County & Regional Government

Keywords: transportation, infrastructure, funding, state budget, public safety, child welfare, county boards, membership, local governance, public welfare, government service, social services, Texas Family Code, regulation, vendors, solicitors, roadside sales, county authority, Sweeny Hospital District, board of directors

Transcript Highlights:

• talent as a mechanic to repair machinery for the Oregon thrift store and support their mission to lend

Bills: HB9 , HB22 , HB908 , HB1392

Keywords: property tax, ad valorem tax, tangible personal property, income-producing property, business personal property, tax exemption, local government finance, appraisal district, chief appraiser, rendition statement, property tax relief, small business, commercial property, leased property, related business entity, unified business enterprise, tax situs, Texas Tax Code, local taxing unit, constitutional amendment

Transcript Highlights:

• designate the Florida Center for Nursing at the University of South Florida as the administrator of the lending

Transcript Highlights:

• Typically we meet at our Health and Human Services colleagues have been gracious enough to lend us space

Transcript Highlights:

• If they can lend a hand they can, but they are not required to go ahead and actually formally and officially