Transcript Highlights:

• eligible uh in terms of the contract eligible uh in terms of the contract with<00:02:48.440>
• We don't want somebody just to be simply denied services because they don't have a contract.
• We don't want somebody just to be simply denied services because they don't have a contract.
• I'm hoping the new contract for the background studies will address some of those challenges.
• I'm hoping the new contract for the background studies will address some of those challenges.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I had contracts that were pending, and I continued to submit contracts from companies that were willing
• At 5:45 that night, I got a call from HR, and HR said, oh, and by the way, any contracts that are not
• should supersede Employment contract should supersede Employment contract law<00:25:45.520> if
• And when people make private contracts, they still have to follow the law.
• And when people make private contracts, they still have to follow the law.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• faith, therefore actually averting strikes and giving workers a better chance of getting a fair contract
• Right before that strike, we had been working without a contract or under the terms of the previous contract
• in our toolbox would definitely give us a better chance at the bargaining table to get a better contract
• We hope that you guys would support bills like this to help workers gain better contracts in the future
• We hope that you guys would support bills like this to help workers gain better contracts in the future

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Labor and Workforce Development held a hybrid hearing on legislation concerning unemployment insurance, non-compete agreements, prevailing wage, and minimum wage issues. Committee leaders outlined the hearing process, asked witnesses to keep oral testimony to three minutes, and invited written testimony through November 20. No votes were taken during the hearing; it ended with a motion to adjourn and notice of the next hearing on November 20. Much of the testimony focused on bills to expand unemployment insurance for striking workers, including H. 2168 and S. 1319. Labor leaders, union members, and legal advocates argued that workers who are out on strike for more than 30 days should be able to receive UI benefits, saying the policy would help workers and families meet basic expenses, reduce employers’ ability to “wait out” strikes, and encourage good-faith bargaining. Speakers cited recent strikes, including the Republic Services strike, and said the proposal would not meaningfully increase strike activity or strain the UI trust fund. Another major topic was minimum wage legislation, especially H. 2107/S. 1349 to raise the minimum wage to $20 by 2029 and index it to inflation, and H. 2191 to create a $25 enhanced care worker minimum wage. Supporters said current wages are not keeping pace with housing, food, and childcare costs, and that care workers, direct support staff, and human service employees face chronic vacancies, burnout, and turnover. Testimony also supported H. 2126 on prevailing wage by adding apprenticeship and training contributions to the wage calculation, and H. 2159 and S. 1363 on prevailing wage-related issues. One witness, Russell Beck, testified against S. 1336, which would ban non-competes, and against H. 2118, arguing Massachusetts’ current non-compete law is a balanced compromise that should not be disrupted.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:11:16.480> Specifically, or federal contract work.
• Specifically, or federal contract work.
• It also requires that any contract between the Department of Revenue and a county attorney for collecting
• It also requires that any contract between the Department of Revenue and a county attorney for collecting
• It also requires that any contract It also requires that any contract between<00:24:47.039> the

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:05 Attendance Roll Call: 00:09 HB 456 Discussion: 02:05 HB 456 Vote: 07:00 HB 136 Discussion: 07:54 HB 136 Vote: 09:36 HB 448 Discussion: 10:28 HB 448 Vote: 13:26 HB 220 Discussion: 14:12 HB 220 Vote: 17:14 HB 213 Discussion: 18:17 HB 213 Vote: 19:19 HB 518 Discussion: 20:23 HB 518 Vote: 23:03 HB 600 Discussion: 24:05 HB 600 Vote: 25:17 Adjournment: 26:32, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have 57 counties and over 100 reservations and rancherías in our contract, which receive allocations
• And NCIDC also contracts directly with each tribal government or their designated tribal entity.
• We have over 100 tribes on our contract, and many of the smaller tribes receive under $1,500 a year.
• that was built with ARRA funds but never got off the ground, and the Feeding America contract.
• They lost the Head Start project contract, the Senior Nutrition Program, Meals on Wheels program, the

Summary: The Senate and Assembly Human Services Committees held a special oversight hearing on California’s 2026-27 Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) state plan, a federal anti-poverty funding stream. Committee members opened by citing statewide poverty and homelessness data and said the hearing was meant to review how CSBG dollars are used, how local agencies respond to community needs, and how the state is preparing for possible federal funding cuts. Jason Wimbley of the Department of Community Services and Development (CSD) explained that California’s CSBG network works through 60 organizations in 58 counties, serving about 1.5 million low-income Californians in 2023, and that the state received $68.4 million in federal CSBG funds in fiscal year 2025. He described the program as flexible funding used for housing, employment, education, food, health, transportation, and emergency response, and noted that the federal administration had proposed eliminating CSBG, though the Senate Appropriations Committee had voted to fully fund it for the coming year. Representatives from the California Community Action Partnership Association and several CSBG-funded agencies described how the program supports local anti-poverty work and leverages other funding. CalCAPA emphasized local flexibility, workforce development, partnerships, and data systems such as ROMA, while also warning that agencies are preparing for possible reductions by tightening budgets, planning staffing contingencies, and seeking private foundation support. Agency witnesses from Contra Costa County, Northern California Indian Development Council, Proteus, and Sacred Heart Community Service described services including housing assistance, food distribution, utility help, employment training, youth programs, and culturally specific services for Native communities and migrant farmworkers. They repeatedly said CSBG is essential because it funds staffing and infrastructure that allow them to braid other grants and serve people who do not qualify for standard safety-net programs. Members also asked about the impact of federal staffing changes and the Los Angeles fires. Wimbley said federal layoffs had affected some CSD programs but not CSBG administration, and that the department coordinated disaster response with state agencies and used CSBG-funded supply distribution, food, water, clothing, and documentation support during the fires. Witnesses said they were preparing for possible future cuts by diversifying funding, reducing expenses, and considering service changes, while county officials warned that state and federal reductions could not be backfilled locally. During public comment, one speaker urged stronger oversight of community action agencies and raised concerns about transparency and compliance with state law. The chair then thanked the witnesses, emphasized the importance of CSBG for low-income seniors, youth, and people with disabilities, and adjourned the hearing without any votes or formal action taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• We contract state contracts with community be community-based care, lead agencies for the delivery of
• If I'm having a contract with a case management organization.
• So like updating that contract monthly, right.
• We have contract oversight units. We have all kinds of mechanism.
• because you can share cost and cost cost to contracts.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• State-funded treatment court contracts have been eliminated.
• <00:07:40.680> This contracts have been eliminated. This contracts have been eliminated.
• So, we have 14 contracts across the state, which with each of the comp cares.
• So, if somebody did not have Medicaid, then they could bill our state contracts.
• The contracts are actually in process.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Justice and Judiciary received an update from the Administrative Office of the Courts on implementation of House Bill 504, the judicial branch budget, and court facility projects. AOC leaders said they do not anticipate problems balancing the outgoing biennium or fiscal year 2026, and explained that the budget changes were driven by the need to reduce costs while preserving required constitutional, court-rule, and statutory services. They also said the new filing fee increases authorized by HB 504 took effect that day and are expected to generate up to $5 million, while the reorganization is projected to save about $3 million in general fund dollars. The bulk of the presentation focused on a major reorganization of the Office of Statewide Programs, which includes specialty courts, family and juvenile services, and pretrial services. AOC said the plan eliminates 170 positions and creates 109 new ones, mainly by reducing middle-management layers, expanding regional service delivery, and cross-training staff. Officials said 110 employees had already been offered or accepted placements, 24 had chosen voluntary separation, and the final number of employees leaving remains fluid until the process concludes around August 1. They emphasized that specialty court programs were not eliminated, but state-funded treatment court contracts and behavioral health liaison positions were removed, with treatment costs shifted to Medicaid or participants where appropriate. Members asked about the process, staffing impacts, specialty court participation, juvenile services, and how AOC will monitor the changes. AOC said the reorganization was developed by leadership, HR, and legal staff under direction of the Chief Justice and approved by the Supreme Court, and that it is intended to improve efficiency and frontline support rather than reduce services. They said specialty court participant levels are being watched closely, that CDW services will continue to use outside providers for programming, and that the agency will keep judges and stakeholders informed as the new structure goes into effect. No votes were taken, and the committee did not approve minutes because a quorum was not present.

Transcript Highlights:

• Does this uh violate the contracts Does this uh violate the contracts clause<00:10:19.040> of<
• <00:10:44.200> usually That's about private contract, usually That's about private contract
• And part of the contract for it is an NDA.
• And part of the contract for it is an NDA.
• The last time I read the the contract The last time I read the the contract clause,<00:14:05.520

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So this contract is year-by-year. Yes, that's right.
• <01:28:03.199> and through uh DAGs ASO and contracting and through uh DAGs ASO and contracting
• Yes, that's this contract is yearbyear.
• We work to prepare a contract for each teaching partner.
• And like Karen said, sometimes the contract work itself, like we are actually literally writing contracts

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Culture and the Arts held an informational briefing on May 22 with the Hawaii Arts Alliance, the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts (SFCA), and the King Kamehameha Celebration Commission. Chair Capella said the purpose was to better understand the organizations’ work and strengthen relationships ahead of the interim and next session. The Hawaii Arts Alliance, led by Executive Director Gay Humphrey, described its mission to enrich Hawaii’s cultural fabric through arts education, advocacy, and community engagement, and highlighted its history tied to Alfred Price, including the creation of Hawaii’s 1% for art law and the alliance’s 45 years of service. The alliance outlined its current work, including administering SFCA-funded statewide programs such as Artist in the Schools and the new folk and traditional arts program, with 34 teaching partners serving more than 100 public and charter schools and Kumu Hawaii as the single grantee for traditional weaving instruction. It also discussed Arts First Partners, the incubation of Arts at Mark’s Garage, expanded advocacy efforts supported by Creative West grants, and new multi-year philanthropic support from the Hawaii Community Foundation and Atherton Family Foundation. The alliance said it is launching statewide listening sessions and an arts advocacy training program, and noted that most SFCA funds pass through the alliance to program partners, with the organization retaining 10 to 14 percent for administration. SFCA Executive Director Karen Ewald then described the agency’s role as the state arts agency, its strategic planning process, and its main programs, including Art in Public Places, the Capital Modern museum, Artist in the Schools, apprentice mentoring grants, community arts grants, the Hawaii State Poet Laureate program, a statewide cultural extension program, and the Hawaii Open Arts Program. She said SFCA has 21 staff with one vacancy, is awaiting a federal NEA partnership agreement, and is considering new revenue streams such as a cultural trust. She also noted that the King Kamehameha Celebration Commission was recently attached to SFCA, which has improved coordination and allows SFCA to provide funding for conservation and upkeep of the King Kamehameha statues statewide. No votes were taken; the meeting was informational only, with questions deferred until after the presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um we option to contract for services.
• a pivotal piece of um state contracting a pivotal piece of um state contracting when<00:34:24.960
• the GCD because we are under a contract the GCD because we are under a contract with<00:37:16.400
• :30.320> approved<00:37:30.720> by recent contract was just approved by recent contract
• Federal funds have existing contract.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:07:57.159> for submit their Grant contracts for submit their Grant contracts for approval
• active grant contracts.
• active grant contracts.
• determinations in in each Grant contract determinations in in each Grant contract They<01:10:56.040
• enforcing policy and Grant contract enforcing policy and Grant contract agreements<01:19:37.239>

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• five years ago we had to sign contracts five years ago we had to sign contracts at<00:40:17.720>
• <01:08:35.600> with bidding process and sign a contract with bidding process and sign a contract
• This contract is personal for me.
• <01:29:35.320> changes explanation of the contract changes explanation of the contract changes
• setb back for our family this contract setb back for our family this contract gives<01:30:29.480

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill then voids contracts that violate the bill and provides for a private right of action against
• I'm here today to present AB 1801, which will strengthen the public engagement process for contracts
• required a 180-day review period and at least two public hearings before local government could contract
• I'm here today to present AB 1801, which will strengthen the public engagement process for contracts
• Contracts and agreements related to detention facilities are subject to these transparency requirements

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Judiciary Committee met and heard a series of bills and one resolution, with the chair first outlining the consent calendar and the committee’s testimony rules. Senator McNerney presented SJR 18, a resolution condemning Citizens United and urging limits on corporate spending in elections; he argued that corporate and foreign money distort democracy, and Senator Reyes voiced support. No opposition testimony appeared. The committee then heard AB 2305, which would bar private equity firms, hedge funds, and other corporate lenders from influencing litigation decisions and treat such conduct as unauthorized practice of law. The author and Consumer Attorneys of California said the bill closes loopholes that allow outside financial interests to affect case strategy and settlements; the Civil Justice Association of California also supported it, while the International Legal Finance Association said it was neutral after amendments. AB 1977 followed, a Secretary of State-sponsored bill to clarify and correct the Online Notarization Act so remote notarizations can be implemented by 2030; the Secretary of State’s office and notary groups supported it, and there was no opposition. Assembly Member Rogers presented AB 1657, which would allow domestic violence survivors to seek temporary restraining orders without first giving notice to the restrained person, arguing that notice requirements can increase danger and delay protection. AB 1801, by Assembly Member Lee, would tighten public notice and hearing requirements for local contracts involving private immigration detention facilities, closing loopholes that had allowed rushed approvals; immigrant rights and civil rights groups supported it. Assembly Member Patel’s AB 2179 would extend e-filing and remote appearance options to workplace violence restraining orders, with support from local governments, prosecutors, unions, and other groups. Assembly Member Hart’s AB 1875 would let courts shorten or waive the six-month divorce waiting period for domestic violence survivors, with support from domestic violence advocates and several other organizations. After testimony, the committee took up votes. AB 2179 and AB 1875 both passed unanimously, AB 2305 passed 12-0, AB 1657 passed 12-0, AB 1801 passed 10-2, and AB 1977 passed 8-2. SJR 18 was adopted 10-2. The consent calendar also passed unanimously. The committee then adjourned until the following Tuesday.

Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Chair, members, the reason that Access is saying that is that the individual they're contracting
• with is not within the Access network, so they are not a contracted provider with the Access insurance
• There's a big difference, so it is a higher cost because they haven't contracted.
• It's an open contract. So if the insurance company...
• It's an open contract.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The caucus reviewed a long list of House bills that had returned from the Senate with amendments, with members repeatedly noting that sponsors intended to concur on most items. Topics included public health and vaccination rules (HB 2086, HB 2248), state investment in gold and silver (HB 2140), property records and voter-registration privacy (HB 2327), municipal and county regulation of business property and development fees (HB 2460, HB 2946, HB 2999), legislative subpoenas (HB 2745), cold plunge regulation (HB 2439), nursing-facility complaint timelines and licensed health aide rules (HB 2195, HB 2189), court-ordered treatment review (HB 2923), Access/Medicaid reimbursement and prior authorization for diagnostic services (HB 2932), inmate mental health study committee language (HB 2673), prenatal development instruction in schools (HB 2830), public records requests by legislators (HB 4056), parents’ rights and social transitioning in schools (HB 2249), school district financial compliance and facilities contracting (HB 2481, HB 2482), Native American language proficiency for graduation (HB 2895), advanced math auto-enrollment (HB 2423), special education and military-family procedures (HB 2621), AI rules for state agencies (HB 2592), eviction record sealing (HB 2244), tax filing penalties (HB 2016), shade structures in HOAs (HB 2342), homelessness-related community restitution (HB 2028), medical records timelines (HB 2557), PFAS firefighting foam restrictions (HB 2641), family-court expert testimony and prisoner transition services (HB 2662, HB 2440), address confidentiality protections (HB 2594), guardianship notice attestation (HB 2661), utilities for high-load customers (HB 2756), and nuclear-ready community planning (HB 2456). The committee also briefly moved to Caucus Calendar 19 for additional bills on mobile food vendors, school board training, out-of-state travel and meeting transparency, and a medical-intervention nondiscrimination bill. Several bills drew substantive discussion or criticism. Members debated HB 2932 at length, with staff explaining that Access said the bill would have a high fiscal impact because it would require reimbursement for non-contracted lab services and eliminate prior authorization for a broad range of diagnostic services, potentially increasing costs substantially. HB 2249 also prompted concern from members who argued it could force teachers to out students and create civil liability for using preferred pronouns or failing to notify parents about social transitioning. HB 2830 was criticized as requiring prenatal-development instruction while barring discussion of sexual activity or reproduction. HB 2028, which allows community restitution instead of a $20 probation assessment for people who are indigent and experiencing homelessness, was questioned as potentially punitive. HB 2481 was discussed as a way to help, rather than punish, small rural school districts struggling with financial-record compliance. The caucus also noted that several of the measures were sponsored by Democrats, which was highlighted as notable during the meeting. No formal votes were taken in the transcript. The caucus chair repeatedly asked for questions, and in most cases there were none, after which the sponsor was understood to intend concurrence with the Senate amendments. The meeting ended with adjournment after the caucus moved through the remaining calendar items.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it was a direct contract. Direct contract, okay.
• However, I wanted to also make it part of the public record that in the contract that Access signed with
• That was not solicited from the department and is not part of the scope of work in the contract, and
• But it is unfortunate that it got attached into the formal contract document, and I acknowledge that
• The question is why these payments were made so late, 23 months after the 2023 contract year end, and

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The Committee on Health and Human Services held another oversight hearing on Access, focusing on fee-for-service behavioral health management, prior authorization and claims processing, the Targeted Investment Program (TIP), and network adequacy. The chair and other members criticized Access for repeated transparency failures, including missing records related to the Covered Behavioral Health Services Guide, lack of public comment, unanswered questions about ARPA compliance, and concerns about ghost networks and delayed payments to providers, especially in Native communities and rural areas. Interim Director Roberta Harrison said Access had improved fraud controls after the sober living scheme crisis and acknowledged the need for modernization. She reported faster prior authorization processing, fewer denial codes, real-time dashboards, additional staffing, and claims processing under 30 days. She also said the agency wants more fraud referrals and is working to strengthen internal systems and communication. On the TIP program, Access officials explained that payments are delayed because of complex data validation and allocation across many provider sites; they said year one of TIP 2.0 was paid, but years two and three had not yet been distributed. The committee requested a formal plan within 30 days for paying the estimated $122 million in delayed TIP funds and asked for CMS-related documentation. Committee members also questioned Access about a direct contract with Constellation for claims processing, noting language in the proposal suggesting higher ROI from denying more claims; Access said that language was not part of the contract scope and was verbally rejected. On network adequacy, officials described time-and-distance standards, annual MCO reports, and internal review processes, but could not immediately confirm whether a fiscal year 2025 report had been submitted to CMS or whether any corrective action plans had been imposed. The chair concluded that Access’s improvements appeared to be driven by legislative pressure, said the committee would review the information received, and announced that Access would be sent detailed monthly reporting directions before the hearing adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Each plan contracts with only a limited number of facilities, leaving beneficiaries confused about which
• people must contact their plans directly or individual facilities to find out which nursing homes contract
• Directly or individual facilities to find out which nursing homes contract with their specific plan.
• a long-term stay, requiring Medi-Cal coverage, but the caller wanted help with choosing a plan contracted
• facilities. ...or call each individual plan in her county to ask them for a list of contracted facilities

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee heard several Senate bills focused on health care access, privacy, and public health data. SB 81 (Arreguín) would require health care facilities to create nonpublic areas and bar immigration enforcement from entering without a judicial warrant or court order, while also protecting disclosure of immigration-related information in medical records. The bill drew strong support from labor, immigrant-rights, health care, and patient advocacy groups, with committee members emphasizing patient safety and privacy; one member raised implementation concerns about how the restrictions would work in practice. The committee voted the bill out on a due pass motion to the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee, with one no vote recorded. SB 250 (Ochoa Bogh) would add skilled nursing facilities to DHCS’s managed care provider directory so Medi-Cal beneficiaries can more easily identify covered facilities. Supporters said the change would help seniors and people with disabilities avoid confusion and rushed placement decisions, especially during hospital discharge, and would make existing information easier to use. The committee passed the bill to Appropriations on a unanimous vote. SB 717 (Richardson) would formally recognize California’s three regional cancer registries in state law to help preserve federal funding and support cancer surveillance data collection. The author and supporters said the measure would protect more than $15 million in annual federal support and strengthen cancer research and tracking; the committee approved it unanimously to Appropriations. SB 504 (Laird) would allow health care providers to disclose personally identifying information about previously reported HIV infections to state or local health officials when needed for disease control or care coordination. The author described the bill as a modernization of reporting and coordination practices, and supporters from the California Medical Association and Planned Parenthood backed it. The committee sent the bill out as amended to the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee on a unanimous vote. The meeting also included routine consent-calendar action and multiple add-on votes, with the committee repeatedly holding the roll open to record additional members’ votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• business programs, and through a competitive process, nonprofit economic development organizations contract
• Funds are reimbursed after metrics in the contracts are met on a quarterly basis, helping to avoid fraud
• <00:02:25.520> with development organizations contract with development organizations contract
• 03:41.040> cont reimbursed after metrics in the cont reimbursed after metrics in the cont contracts
• are met on a quarterly basis contracts are met on a quarterly basis helping<00:03:45.360> to<

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The reason is it's hard to defend the idea that children 14 and 15 can sign these contracts when they
• A minor needs parental consent or the consent of an adult who's responsible before they sign the contract
• This approaches it through a contract lens and doesn't have the First Amendment concerns.
• You know, in contracts we learned that no contract made with a minor is enforceable.
• So even if minors are entering contracts, nothing is enforceable from either party.

Bills: SB186, SB187

Keywords: internet filtering, child protection, obscene content, civil liability, manufacturers, app store, app store provider, app developer, mobile app, age verification, parental consent, minor safety, child online safety, parental controls, age gating, digital privacy, data protection, in-app purchases, online consumer protection, deceptive trade practice

Transcript Highlights:

• from an owner and then immediately turn around and sell that contract to another party who would then
• be the purchaser. ...someone without the intent to ever buy a piece of property will get a contract
• from an owner and then immediately turn around and sell that contract to another party who would then
• Members, this bill is designed to say that an insurer's payment under the terms of a contract shall not
• House Bill 315 by Representative Melarine is an act to amend Title 23 relative to non-compete contracts

Keywords: 974, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The audit was conducted by the independent firm Showberg-Eveshank Consulting under contract with our
• Our office has contracted with Showberg Eveshank Consulting to follow up with the board later this spring
• The board terminated the contract and recovered 75% of its fees through a settlement agreement.
• This audit was conducted by the independent firm Showberg-Eves-Shank Consulting, under contract with
• We have contracted with Walker and Armstrong...

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee conducted sunset reviews for the Arizona State Board of Pharmacy, the State Board of Nursing, the Arizona Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners, and the Arizona Regulatory Board of Physician Assistants. The Auditor General’s reports praised each board for timely licensing in some areas but identified recurring problems with complaint investigations, public safety oversight, fee analysis, records/documentation, and internal controls. For Pharmacy, the main concerns were weak enforcement of controlled substances prescription monitoring program (CSPMP) requirements and slow complaint resolution; the board said it had implemented some recommendations, was pursuing a new database vendor, and supported legislation to strengthen CSPMP enforcement. For Nursing, the audit found a large and growing backlog of complaints and repeated delays in resolving cases; the executive director said the board was under-resourced and requested 28 additional investigative positions, while nursing stakeholders supported process reforms and cited a bill to improve timelines and fairness. For Occupational Therapy, the audit focused on missing or poorly documented fingerprint clearance card checks, delayed action on a serious criminal-charge disclosure, and other compliance issues; the board said it had accepted and was implementing all recommendations, including new procedures and rulemaking. For Physician Assistants, the audit found weak oversight by the executive director, extensive delays in complaint handling, and an incentive-pay system that did not align with key performance goals; the board said it had already made structural changes, was improving tracking and IT systems, and planned to continue implementing recommendations. After discussion and testimony from board officials, public members, and nursing stakeholders, the committee voted to continue the Arizona State Board of Pharmacy for six years until July 1, 2032, the State Board of Nursing for four years until July 1, 2031, the Arizona Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners for four years until July 1, 2030, and the Arizona Regulatory Board of Physician Assistants for a continued term with statutory changes (the transcript includes the board review and related discussion, but the final motion text for the physician assistants board is not fully captured in the excerpt). The votes on the first three continuations were approved by roll call, with members generally supporting continuation while expressing concern about complaint backlogs and the need for reforms.