Transcript Highlights:

• Aging in one's own home and community is not only the preference of the overwhelming majority of older
• I told the doctor I would prefer to go home with an IHSS provider and ask the public authority to find
• Finding an available skilled nursing bed can take several days, so patients cleared for discharge often
• Something's very off there, if those figures are real. ...to patient care.
• One of the unique things about our coalition is that we have both care providers and patients.

Transcript Highlights:

• That means that we are already meeting that the patient hour per day need as well as being able to increase
• remake a number of our processes first, to continue to look at how we can maintain the appropriate patient
• And it would be my strong preference that we do that rather than contract out for ongoing work as well
• And it would be my strong preference that we do that rather than contract out for ongoing work as well

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on State Administration heard several CalVet budget updates first. CalVet reported progress on the Southern California Veterans Cemetery at Gypsum Canyon, explaining that DGS is revising the earlier feasibility study to reflect a smaller footprint and lower grading costs, with updated numbers expected by the end of April. Members and public commenters emphasized the project’s importance and asked whether additional budget authority or trailer bill language was needed; CalVet said it may need more spending authority but wanted to return after the revised study is complete. The committee also reviewed the Yountville skilled nursing facility replacement project, where CalVet said construction is nearing completion, a certificate of occupancy was received, and the new 240-bed facility will replace Holderman Hospital while older buildings will be repurposed for lower levels of care. CalVet also defended eliminating about 178 vacant positions at Yountville and West Los Angeles as a fiscal and staffing efficiency measure, saying current care levels can still be met and that retention and hiring efforts are improving. The committee then took up the Department of Cannabis Control’s enforcement and legal affairs proposal. DCC described the size of the illicit cannabis market, said enforcement alone cannot solve the problem, and asked for additional sworn staff, a new Redding-area field office, and more analysts to focus on distribution networks, organized crime, environmental harms, and high-priority public safety cases. Finance supported the proposal as a targeted investment, while the LAO had no additional comment. Members asked about funding impacts and local co-location options, and DCC said the request would be funded from cannabis excise tax revenues and could help shift sales into the legal market. Public testimony from the cannabis industry strongly supported more enforcement against illicit retail and said it would help legal operators compete. DCC also presented its hemp enforcement and regulation proposal tied to AB 8. The department said the law closes loopholes around intoxicating hemp products, strengthens enforcement across agencies, and prepares for hemp to enter the cannabis regulatory framework in 2028. DCC requested staff for a civil enforcement unit, field-testing equipment, lab capacity to detect synthetic cannabinoids, a track-and-trace specialist, and a policy specialist. Members asked about enforcement in informal retail settings and consumer confusion, and DCC said the biggest problems have been smoke shops and online sales. Public commenters from the legal cannabis industry supported the proposal, saying intoxicating hemp has harmed the regulated market and created public safety risks. The Cannabis Control Appeals Panel then requested ongoing funding of $3.4 million to support 12 positions and its quasi-judicial appeals function. The panel said that with provisional licenses largely phased out, more annual licensees now have appeal rights and the workload is beginning to increase, with two cases currently on the docket. The LAO recommended limiting funding to three years and requiring a workload and comparative analysis before making the funding permanent, while Finance supported ongoing funding as consistent with the panel’s permanent statutory role. Members questioned the panel’s compensation and workload, noting that the five-member body is paid at a high statutory rate despite historically meeting only quarterly, though panel staff said the work now includes substantial case preparation and monthly hearings. Finally, the Department of Consumer Affairs introduced two proposals: $2 million ongoing for the Contractors State License Board’s IT needs and $251,000 plus one limited-term position for the Board of Pharmacy to implement Proposition 34-related licensing policy and reduce barriers to licensure.

Transcript Highlights:

• clarification happens, I don't necessarily have a problem with what you're trying to do here, but my preference
• In the United States, we are required to treat that patient.
• And if that patient doesn't have a lot of money, and if they're a state employee, they likely don't,
• Farmers, along with construction workers, snowplow operators, anybody who’s working outdoors, they prefer

Committee: House Government Efficiency

Transcript Highlights:

• And if you were ranking them, do you have a preference in your mind?
• I think, from a traffic safety perspective, our preference would be for a full-fledged driver-ed program
• And House Bill 2396, Representative Bromley, thank you for being so patient.
• And House Bill 2396, Representative Bromley, thank you for being so patient.

Committee: House Elementary and Secondary Education

Summary: The committee met in executive session first and took up House Bill 3239, adopting a Hurlbert amendment that capped the program at $4 million and then adopting the House Committee Substitute. The substitute bill passed 11-7. The committee then combined House Bill 2913 and House Bill 3228 into one substitute; members discussed that it would not cover student teachers and was intended to start with the current scope and broaden later. The combined substitute passed unanimously, 19-0. In open session, the committee heard House Bill 2195, which would create a Missouri Integrated Safe Driving Program to let DESE vet and distribute safe-driving lesson materials for voluntary use in existing courses starting in 2027-2028. Sponsor Representative Reedy said the bill is intended to improve teen driver safety without a fiscal note. Supporters included AAA Missouri, traffic-safety and motorcycle groups, MoDOT, and the Missouri Insurance Coalition, who cited teen crash and fatality data, the benefits of formal driver education, and the need to address distracted driving, traffic stops, and motorcycle awareness. No one testified in opposition. The committee also heard House Bill 2502, which would clarify how records from closed nonpublic schools and charter schools are transferred and stored so students can later obtain transcripts and graduation records. The sponsor said the bill responds to missing records from closed schools and would direct records to the appropriate public district; a technical correction was noted to avoid including homeschool records. Missouri NEA supported the bill and suggested charter-school performance contracts include compliance expectations. The committee then heard House Bill 2396, which would allow retired teachers to return to PSRS-covered teaching jobs without a time limit, similar to existing critical-shortage provisions. The sponsor argued it would help districts, especially smaller ones, and could benefit teachers and students without harming the retirement system. PSRS/PEERS testified that the bill could raise contribution rates by an estimated 1.44% to 2.45% and raised concerns about behavior changes and IRS qualification issues; Missouri NEA and the Missouri State Teachers Association opposed the bill, saying it would not solve recruitment and retention problems and could damage the retirement system. The Missouri Retired Teachers Association testified for informational purposes, warning that the bill could prompt many eligible teachers to retire sooner.

Transcript Highlights:

• Patients in the steward hospitals at the time you bought them made $85,120 at a 23% annual raise.
• Well, Senator Scott, you've been most patient. Thank you, Chairman. Well, Ms.
• I've helped the Secretary and the President improve DoD, preferably in total anonymity, and I'll fade
• The president does not typically replace nonpartisan generals and flag officers with his preferred choices

Committees: Senate Cybersecurity Subcommittee , Senate Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Personnel

Keywords: Steven Feinberg, Deputy Secretary of Defense, national security, budget cuts, military readiness, global threats, Department of Defense

Summary: The meeting primarily focused on the nomination of Steven Feinberg as Deputy Secretary of Defense. The committee emphasized the urgent need for strong leadership in response to a complex array of global threats posed by adversarial coalitions, including China, Russia, and Iran. The discussions highlighted concerns regarding budget cuts and personnel reductions within the Department of Defense, showcasing the challenges posed by the current economic context and the pressing need to maintain military readiness and capabilities. Various members expressed their apprehensions about how impending layoffs and budget reductions would impact the defense workforce and national security.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, as a pediatrician, I often see patients for the very first time because they were sent and referred
• Thank you, Representative Way, for being patient on that. Mr.
• quote this for you, this measure would prevent the state from giving BIPOC-owned businesses any preference
• I think I can speak for most legislators: we highly prefer electronic in many cases, right, because,
• So the goal here obviously is that electronic is preferred.

Bills: HB2015 , HB2060 , HB2062 , HB2100 , HB2118 , HB2165 , HB2258 , HB2327 , HB2397 , HB2445 , HB2460 , HB2641 , HB2745 , HB2876 , HB2917 , HB4011 , HB4049 , HB4056 , HB4087 , HCR2013 , HCR2016 , HCR2040 , HCR2044 , HCR2048 , HCR2056

Committees: Senate Government , Senate Senate Government Committee of Reference

Keywords: budget procedures, late filing penalty, accounting standards, financial reporting, state appropriations, abortion, educational institutions, health education, state aid, public schools, Buffalo Soldiers, monument, commemoration, Arizona, public funding, Wesley Bolin Plaza, military history, historical memorial, small land subdivision, land use

Transcript Highlights:

• First, it protects patients, the consumers, from the technology itself.
• In one instance, a patient of one of our members was screened by an AI intake tool.
• The patient relapsed before anyone caught the mistake. Those are just two examples.
• In one instance, a patient of one of our members was screened by an AI intake tool.
• The patient relapsed before anyone caught the mistake. Those are just two examples.

Summary: The committee heard several bills focused on artificial intelligence, child safety, mental health, and privacy. SB 574 by Senator Umberg would require transparency and human oversight when attorneys, judges, and court neutrals use AI; it drew support from privacy advocates and committee members, with no opposition. SB 1276, the End Child Exploitation Act, would update child sexual exploitation laws to cover live-streamed and AI-generated abuse material and clarify that viewing such content can be criminally punishable; prosecutors, child advocacy groups, and others supported it, while no one appeared in opposition despite opposition on file. SB 813 would create a California AI standards and safety commission and a voluntary two-tier certification framework for AI safety standards; supporters said it would create scalable, independent oversight, while TechNet and CalChamber opposed it as duplicative, under-defined, and likely to create a de facto mandate. The committee discussed market pressure, federal preemption concerns, and the role of voluntary standards, but no final vote was taken in the excerpt. Senator Padilla also presented SB 300, which would strengthen protections for minors from sexually explicit chatbot content by moving from a reasonableness standard to an affirmative duty to prevent such exposure and to prohibit facilitation. Supporters said new evidence showed greater risks and that companies can and should build stronger safeguards; opponents, including TechNet and CCIA, argued the bill was premature because SB 243 had only recently taken effect and warned it could create strict-liability-like exposure. Padilla then presented SB 903, which would bar AI chatbots from being advertised as therapists, require licensed clinician oversight and informed consent for AI use in psychotherapy, and protect patient confidentiality; it received broad support from mental health professionals and labor groups, while industry and health associations were opposed unless amended over triage and crisis-detection language. The committee members emphasized the need for human judgment in mental health care and noted ongoing negotiations on amendments. The committee also heard SB 1119, a companion to AB 2020, which would require annual risk assessments, crisis-response protocols, default child settings, parental controls, limits on data use, public incident reporting, and third-party audits for chatbots used by children. Supporters argued the bill would address documented harms and improve transparency, while industry groups objected to ambiguous standards, liability exposure, and the private right of action. A roll call vote was taken on SB 1119 after quorum was established; the motion to pass to Appropriations succeeded on a 5-1 vote, with one no vote and the measure left on call for absent members. Finally, SB 354, a privacy bill for insurance consumers, would modernize outdated insurance privacy rules, bar sale of personal information, and expand consumer rights to know, correct, and delete data. Supporters said it would implement Proposition 24’s privacy mandate, while a large coalition of insurers, agents, brokers, and related businesses opposed unless amended, mainly seeking a small-business exemption and narrower treatment of publicly available information; members and the author said negotiations were ongoing and the bill had already been substantially revised.

Transcript Highlights:

• is to send the and our preference is to send the committees<00:18:18.640><c> our</c><00:18:18.880><c
• We would prefer that people be more disclosed.
• We<01:18:33.640><c> would</c><01:18:33.800><c> prefer</c><01:18:34.240><c> that</c><01:18:34.800><c>
• prefer that people be more disclosed.<01:18:36.240><c> I</c><01:18:36.400><c> would</c><01:18:36.600
• or uh, clients of a the patient or uh, clients of a hospital hospital hospital uh,<01:50:27.400><c>

Committee: House Commerce and Consumer Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• So some people claim that the civil penalties for people who have been involved with serious patient
• One was the Arizona Surge Line, which was stood up to help load-balance hospitals with COVID patients
• So this acted like a sort of transfer center for all of the hospitals to distribute those patients.
• So this acted like a sort of transfer center for all of the hospitals to distribute those patients.
• They've been warm, welcoming, and patient with me. These state employees work hard.

Summary: The Committee on Director Nominations met with four members present and approved the prior minutes without objection. Chair Jay Kaufman outlined the committee’s role in reviewing executive nominations and explained the hearing process for three nominees: Mary Foote for the Office of Economic Opportunity, Debbie Johnston for the Department of Health Services, and Chuck Bassett. Foote did not appear for her hearing, and members discussed her absence and alleged omissions in her disclosure materials, including prior service with Planned Parenthood-related organizations. The committee then moved to reject her nomination, and the motion passed 3-2, recommending that the full Senate reject Mary Foote. Debbie Johnston, nominee to lead the Department of Health Services, appeared and gave an opening statement describing her Arizona background, prior Senate staff work, and more than 20 years with the Arizona Hospital and Health Care Association. She said her priorities at ADHS include rebuilding trust in public health licensing, improving stakeholder engagement, standardizing rulemaking communication, addressing alleged religious discrimination and retaliation concerns in licensing, and using technology and AI to improve efficiency. In questioning, senators pressed her on her management style, conflict-of-interest safeguards given her prior industry role, enforcement priorities, budget pressures, behavioral health and assisted living oversight, and the department’s response to COVID-19. Johnston said she would follow statutes, recuse herself from enforcement matters involving former contacts, and resign if directed to carry out an unlawful policy. She also said the department does not regulate therapy itself, only facilities, and that it would rely on legal counsel regarding the governor’s conversion-therapy executive order and related federal civil-rights allegations. Several senators focused on public health trust and the department’s pandemic response, with Johnston acknowledging concerns about closures, data collection, and communication during COVID-19 while saying she would review past after-action materials and be better prepared in the future. Public testimony from stakeholders in aging services and health care strongly supported her confirmation, praising her accessibility, responsiveness, and collaborative approach. After testimony, the vice chair moved to recommend Johnston’s confirmation to the full Senate. The roll call was underway when the transcript ended, with several members voting aye and one member expressing reservations about her not reviewing the pandemic after-action report before another crisis occurs.

Transcript Highlights:

• That would be my preference today, to vote on the ones that can be voted out before...
• So, I start with an exam on all of my patients, a physical exam.
• I have some serious concerns about patient safety.
• visits and for patients in rural communities and for clients who can't regularly access patient care
• The first time with the patient.

Bills: SB34 , SB119 , SB261 , SB532 , SB1035 , SB1245 , SB1247 , SB1267 , SB1442 , SB1930 , SB1948 , SB2078 , SB2112 , SB2143 , SB2155

Committee: Senate Water, Agriculture and Rural Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• wanted to confirm DOJ's jurisdiction is over the Medi-Cal providers, not necessarily the Medi-Cal patients
• to decrease suicide watch hours, decrease the number of referrals that are rescinded, and decrease patient
• decrease suicide watch hours, decrease the number of referrals that are rescinded, and to decrease patient
• It will increase the accuracy of notes and allow the provider to focus on the patient versus note-taking
• I could run through the rest of the issues and we could do questions all at once, whatever the preference

Transcript Highlights:

• services provided by local child support agencies are invaluable to many families, many parents may prefer
• Please come up to the desk or microphone, whichever you prefer. Witnesses in opposition? Okay.
• It's the habit that is leading patients to these cardiovascular challenges.
• If patients can create better eating habits, the long-term benefits are indisputable.
• a result, dietary patterns, especially excessive sugar... ...intake directly influence whether a patient

Committee: House Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• We're providing hands-on care to California patients.
• They're providing hands-on care to California patients.
• Nurses see the impacts of corporate profiteering on patients.
• And how when these benefits are cut off, patients and their families... ...help patients and their families
• Programs that patients truly lean on to survive. Thank you.

Summary: The joint informational hearing examined California’s taxation of multinational corporations, especially the Water’s Edge election versus worldwide combined reporting. Chairs opened by framing the issue as a review of whether current rules fairly and sufficiently tax foreign subsidiary income, given profit shifting concerns, budget pressures, and the long history since Water’s Edge was adopted in the 1980s. The first panel from the Legislative Analyst’s Office and Franchise Tax Board explained the mechanics of unitary taxation, apportionment, and the Water’s Edge election, and provided filing data showing Water’s Edge filers are a small share of returns but account for a large share of corporate tax liability. FTB witnesses said the agency already administers both methods and could handle a shift to mandatory worldwide reporting with education and outreach, though revenue estimates are difficult because foreign affiliate information is not directly available. Committee members asked about foreign government pushback, administrative burden, industries with more profit shifting, revenue uncertainty, and whether companies would leave California. LAO and FTB witnesses said pushback from foreign governments was plausible, but they did not expect major business flight because California’s tax is largely based on sales rather than physical presence. They also said worldwide reporting could reduce profit shifting but might increase revenue volatility and litigation risk. A second panel of academic and tax policy witnesses argued that Water’s Edge is a loophole that rewards aggressive tax planning, that worldwide combined reporting would better capture income tied to California, and that modern federal and international rules such as NCTI/GILTI, CAMT, and Pillar Two reduce compliance concerns and make a return to worldwide reporting more feasible. They also said California’s current system can create selection effects and may under-tax large multinationals. In the next panel, a California Budget and Policy Center witness urged eliminating the Water’s Edge election, calling it a costly loophole that benefits large global corporations over smaller domestic businesses and deprives the state of billions in revenue that could support health care and other services. A Silicon Valley Leadership Group witness gave historical context for why Water’s Edge was adopted and began outlining concerns about compliance, double taxation, and the risk of overreaching beyond income truly connected to California. No bill was voted on or advanced; the hearing was informational only, with members using the testimony to weigh the policy trade-offs and possible transition periods if the Legislature were to change the current rules.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senators, this bill protects patients. Thank you, Chair.
• Senators, this bill protects patients and the public at large from being misled by the misuse of health
• But again, there was an additional step that you sort of added there when you said, and seeing patients
• When patients go to seek treatment, they need to know who is treating them.
• It provides equal opportunity, or equity if you prefer, for all of the Americans in the Americas.

Summary: The committee took up a long agenda of bills, beginning with CS/SB 678, which would allow pawnbroker transaction forms to be printed or digital; it drew support from a business representative and was reported favorably. Members then heard several bills by Senator Leak, including SB 466 to designate St. Johns County as the site of the Florida Museum of Black History and create a board to work with the museum foundation and Florida Memorial University; the bill drew supportive testimony about preserving accurate Black history and the significance of the site, and it passed favorably. Leak’s CS/SB 578 would let Florida wineries use recyclable inserts and other alternative containers for larger wine sales, and it also passed favorably. SB 582 would increase penalties for unlawful demolition of historic buildings and structures, limiting the higher penalties to certain nationally or internationally recognized historic properties; it was supported by preservation advocates and reported favorably. CS/SB 1168 would create an aggravated offense for installing or using tracking devices or apps in furtherance of crimes such as murder, domestic violence, or robbery, and it passed favorably after a brief discussion about stalking and violent crimes. CS/SB 806 would make the Florida Attorney General the exclusive public official with standing to enforce Florida charitable trusts, limiting out-of-state attorneys general from suing over Florida-administered trusts; members debated whether this would burden out-of-state beneficiaries, but the bill was reported favorably. SB 1228 would advance spring restoration efforts for Ichetucknee Springs and Santa Fe spring flows and allow a utility compliance plan amendment to deliver reclaimed water to replenish the aquifer; it passed favorably. CS/CS/SB 304 would require a qualified medical opinion in child protective investigations involving infants and young children with possible genetic or medical conditions that can mimic abuse, and it drew emotional support from parents and advocates before passing favorably. SB 1286 would clarify that ordinary unsupervised childhood activities like biking or playing outside do not constitute neglect absent reckless endangerment, and it was reported favorably. SB 1318, the hands-free driving bill, generated the most extensive debate: it renames the texting-while-driving law, expands the prohibition to handheld device use, and adds penalties in work zones and school zones; supporters cited fatal crash statistics and personal loss, while opponents raised concerns about enforcement, civil liberties, racial disparities in traffic stops, and the need for broader distracted-driving and insurance reforms. Despite those concerns, the bill was reported favorably after amendments. The committee also approved two claims bills, SB 14 for the estate of Penao-Hanvier against Miami Beach and SB 20 for J.N. against Hillsborough County, both settled claims recommended favorably by the special master. Finally, CS/SB 68 would modernize health facilities authority financing for private not-for-profit health systems, and CS/SB 172 would restrict misuse of health care specialty titles while preserving titles authorized under existing practice acts; both were discussed with questions about doctors, optometrists, and CRNAs, and both were reported favorably after amendment and debate.

Transcript Highlights:

• The typical Medicare patient is a completely different entity than workers' comp.
• The specific diagnosis and/or treatment of these patients The specific diagnosis and/or treatment of
• these patients are often different than the younger worker whose injuries are often more severe.
• ' comp fee schedule threaten patient access to quality care and reductions in practicing orthopedics
• who are willing to treat workers' comp patients.

Committee: House Labor & Industrial Relations

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 680 by Representative Weibel, which would modernize Louisiana’s workforce development system by consolidating strategy and administrative functions at the state level while preserving local input. After adopting two sets of technical amendments and a larger amendment package that added a transition advisory team, consultation requirements with local workforce partners, and other planning and governance changes, the committee heard extensive testimony from the author, the Secretary of Louisiana Works, parish and local workforce representatives, and a witness from Utah describing that state’s consolidation experience. Supporters said the bill would reduce overhead, direct more money to training and services, improve coordination, and better align workforce programs with regional labor needs, while several members pressed for assurances that local boards, parishes, cities, and small businesses would remain involved. The committee ultimately adopted the amendments and reported HB 680 favorably with amendments. The committee then heard House Bill 780 by Representative Furman, a workers’ compensation bill aimed at reducing litigation and speeding dispute resolution. After adopting technical amendments and a separate amendment set allowing authorized agents or attorneys to prepare certain notices, members also adopted a committee amendment deleting a statutory definition of “arbitrary and capricious” after concerns were raised that the language could create confusion or conflict with existing jurisprudence. The author and supporting attorneys argued the bill would restore an expedited preliminary determination process, create a single standard for attorney fees, and reduce costs for employers by limiting unnecessary litigation and delays. They said the changes would not affect an injured worker’s choice of physician or existing penalty provisions, and that the bill mainly addressed notice and dispute procedures. Opponents, including attorneys representing injured workers, argued the bill would make it harder for workers to recover penalties and attorney’s fees when benefits are delayed or denied, and said the new standard could favor insurers that are understaffed or slow to process claims. They also criticized the shift from reasonableness to a more restrictive standard and raised concerns about delayed payments and the lack of transparency around defense costs. After hearing testimony from both sides, the committee continued discussion of the bill with these issues still under consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• They have been patient, and they have also been waiting for relief.
• They have been patient, and they have also been waiting for relief.
• This funding would train and add staff to street medicine and recuperative care teams to assist patients
• This funding would train and add staff to street medicine and recuperative care teams to assist patients
• I want to talk to you a little bit about one of the experiences I have with one of my patients.

Summary: The committee heard an extensive Department of Social Services presentation on child care budget issues, including the Governor’s proposed 2026-27 budget, federal CCDF changes, Prop. 64 revenue adjustments, and a one-time $11.5 million disaster-related infrastructure grant for licensed child care facilities affected by 2025 declared disasters. DSS said federal formula updates and lower Prop. 64 revenues would reduce funding and could result in about 4,176 CCTR slots being reduced, but the department said it was working to avoid impacts to currently enrolled children. The LAO supported aligning general child care funding with lower revenues and asked for more detail on the disaster grant. Members pressed DSS and Finance on why reductions were not being backfilled and why so many awarded slots remain uncontracted or unused; DSS said delays are largely due to providers building new infrastructure, licensing, staffing, and enrollment challenges, and that some unspent funds revert to the General Fund. The committee also discussed whether some contract dollars should be shifted to vouchers and whether more flexibility should be allowed for infrastructure and expansion costs. A second panel focused on the state’s commitment to expand child care and on rate reform. DSS reported that nearly 125,000 new slots have been awarded since 2021-22, but speakers from Stanislaus County Office of Education, Parent Voices California, and the California Budget and Policy Center argued that unmet need remains large and that the system still leaves many families without access. Stanislaus County described a large local shortage of infant and toddler care and said reimbursement disparities between child care programs and state preschool create disincentives for providers. Parent Voices gave testimony about the burdens and instability families face when trying to access care, especially for survivors and low-income parents, and called for a universal, publicly funded system. The Budget Center said only about 16% of eligible children were enrolled in 2024, urged expansion across the mixed delivery system rather than concentrating investment in TK, and called for faster rate reform and new revenue. LAO estimated that bringing certain CCTR adjustment factors up to CSPP levels would cost $88 million to $131 million ongoing. Members and witnesses discussed the single rate structure, automation needs, and the need for deadlines and a ramp-up plan; DSS said the goal is to eliminate disparities, but that policy decisions are still needed before automation can proceed. The committee then reviewed several trailer bill proposals. DSS outlined a 2026-27 COLA proposal that would apply a 2.41% increase through cost-of-care-plus payments, though the department said it had inadvertently excluded CalWORKs Child Care and the Emergency Child Care Bridge Program and would revise the proposal; LAO recommended making the COLA methodology uniform across programs. DSS also proposed replacing the market rate survey with the federally approved alternative methodology on a triennial schedule, limiting temporary absences in family child care homes to 20% of monthly hours, defining excessive unexplained absences as more than 30 days in a year, and aligning family fee deductions with new federal requirements so providers receive the full voucher value. Members generally supported the temporary absence change and asked about implementation timing for the family fee deduction, with DSS saying it was in contact with Riverside County. The committee also heard a brief update on the Early Childhood Policy Council reappropriation, which would extend unused funds through June 30, 2028 because prior costs came in higher than expected.

Transcript Highlights:

• They don't have any preference over who regulates them.
• I'm just don't have any preference.
• </c> preference over who regulates them. preference over who regulates them.
• </c> case 297 would be preferable. case 297 would be preferable.
• ,</c><02:15:39.520><c> for</c> better experience for the patient, for better experience for the patient

Summary: The subcommittee continued work on Senate Bill 297 and a new amendment dealing with pooled risk management programs and whether they should be regulated under the insurance department. Lisa Duket, executive director of SchoolCare, testified at length that the draft language could allow co-mingling of public entity risk funds, could trigger producer-licensing requirements for staff who are not actually brokers, and may not fit public entity risk pools because they are not insurance companies. She also raised concerns about the March 1 reporting deadline, the proposed uniform accounting language, aggregate excess insurance, examination costs being charged to the program, and confidentiality provisions that she argued may conflict with right-to-know principles for public entities. She urged the committee to slow down and consider a study committee or more time for review, saying the regulated entities were not adequately involved in drafting the proposal. Chairman Hunt and the department responded that the bill is intended to create a licensure-based regulatory model, similar to other licensed industries, and that the pooled risk management program would be exempt from producer licensing while anyone else selling or negotiating such coverage would need a producer license. The department said failure to comply would be handled through an administrative licensing process, with denial or nonrenewal of a license and appeal through the department process. On the reporting deadline, the department said March 1 is a standard filing date used for financial analysis and that the filing can be the most recent annual report, regardless of fiscal year end. They also explained that the confidentiality language was taken from existing RSA 5B, that aggregate excess insurance was included as a solvency measure, and that the draft was intended to preserve familiar language while adapting it for pooled risk programs. The discussion did not include a final vote or formal action on the bill in the portion provided. The committee appeared to be compiling follow-up questions for the insurance department and considering whether additional revisions or a slower process would be needed before moving the bill forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• Prior authorization is a system used by insurance companies that affects thousands of patients and providers
• We're talking patient advocacy groups, medical care providers, and most importantly, actual patients.
• We have listened to concerns from our patients, providers, insurance companies, and the North Dakota
• It balances the needs of patients, respects medical professionals' expertise, and provides responsible
• creates a framework allowing them to receive a discount or incentive if they agree to use an insurer's preferred

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a quorum present. The chamber received notice that the governor had signed several bills, and the Speaker appointed conference committees after the Senate failed to concur with House amendments on Senate Bills 2180 and 2330. The House also approved several sixth-order amendments without objection before moving into reconsideration and final action on House Bill 1300, which concerns legislative term limits. After procedural motions to reconsider and undo concurrence, the House voted to do not concur on HB 1300, sending it back to the chair’s lap for further negotiation. A major portion of the meeting focused on Senate Bill 2232, which changes mandatory reporting rules for prenatal exposure to controlled substances and alcohol. Supporters said the bill is intended to keep pregnant women in prenatal care by removing an automatic CPS report if a woman tests positive but enters and stays on a treatment plan; opponents argued it weakens protections for unborn children and creates vague standards for mandated reporters. The House passed the bill 57-36. The chamber also passed Senate Bill 2280 unanimously, establishing timelines and standards for prior authorization in health insurance, and passed Senate Bill 2186, which creates a civil remedy for interference with court-ordered parenting time, a child custody review task force, and related reporting requirements. The House then took up Senate Bill 2239, an apprenticeship grant program with a $1.1 million appropriation, but rejected it 14-79 after the committee said the program lacked a clear administrative home. Senate Bill 2241, creating a framework for public charter schools, generated extensive debate over school choice, local control, funding, staffing, and rural impacts; supporters emphasized flexibility and community-driven options, while opponents warned about diversion of funds and weak guardrails. The bill passed 64-29. The House also passed Senate Bill 2024, the Department of Environmental Quality budget, after discussion about federal funding uncertainty; Senate Bill 2374, updating property insurance laws and market rules; Senate Bill 2216, creating a waterfowl habitat restoration stamp; Senate Bill 2245, allowing certain duck and goose hunting from anchored floating craft; and Senate Bill 233, establishing a distressed ambulance services process, which drew questions about how affected districts and neighboring services would be involved.

Transcript Highlights:

• They know their patients, they know their families, and they're committed to their patient population
• The patient for 14 days before discharge.
• Currently, we have a census of 17 patients.
• This number can be deceiving, as these admissions account for 12 patients, and four of these patients
• This number can be receiving as these admissions account for 12 patients and four of these patients were

Summary: The hearing focused on the future of Pappas Rehabilitation Hospital for Children, with commissioners, agency officials, workers, and families describing the hospital as a unique integrated setting combining medical care, rehabilitation, education, residential services, and adaptive engineering. Opening remarks from legislators emphasized continued budget funding, the legal requirement that Pappas not close before the commission reports, and a request to extend the commission’s deadline. Several commissioners and witnesses argued that admissions have effectively been curtailed while discharges continue, creating what they described as a de facto closure. Union leaders from AFSCME, SEIU, and the Massachusetts Nurses Association said staff are experiencing uncertainty, morale problems, and loss of confidence because referrals are being discouraged and the census is shrinking. They urged immediate action to stop admission denials and unnecessary discharges, and some proposed temporary modular units or other short-term investments to restore admissions while longer-term plans are developed. Parents and former patients testified that Pappas provided life-changing opportunities and supports that they could not find elsewhere, and that alternative programs or proposed Western Massachusetts options would not meet the same needs. Department of Public Health Commissioner Robert Goldstein said the administration supports keeping Pappas open and stable during the commission’s work, but argued that admissions must comply with hospital-level-of-care rules and that the campus’s deteriorating infrastructure limits who can be safely served. He said DPH is continuing admissions where appropriate, backfilling staff, and exploring ways to expand services, including outpatient therapies and adaptive engineering, while also acknowledging that Pappas is a one-of-a-kind system with no true in-state duplicate. Commissioners requested de-identified admissions and denial data and continued to press the department on whether the current operational changes amount to a silent closure.

Transcript Highlights:

• patient population.
• The patient for 14 days before discharge.
• Most of the patients have drastically different levels of care, from highly medically complex... ...patients
• This number can be deceiving, as these admissions account for 12 patients, and four of these patients
• Our patients and graduates with experience of group homes agree: group homes can never Our patients and

Summary: The hearing focused on the future of the Pappas Rehabilitation Hospital for Children and the work of the special legislative commission studying whether and how the facility should continue. Senators and representatives said the Legislature has continued funding Pappas, that the hospital cannot be closed before the commission reports, and that they are seeking to extend the commission’s deadline. Multiple commissioners and witnesses described Pappas as a unique setting combining inpatient medical care, residential programming, special education, therapy, and campus-based activities for children with complex medical needs. Union leaders, staff, parents, and local officials argued that Pappas is being quietly depopulated through blocked admissions and continued discharges despite the formal pause on closure. They said the hospital’s integrated model cannot be replicated elsewhere, that families and staff are being left in limbo, and that the state should invest in repairs, modernization, and possibly temporary modular space to reopen admissions. Several witnesses emphasized the impact on children who have benefited from Pappas and on workers who fear losing a specialized workforce built over decades. Department of Public Health Commissioner Robert Goldstein said the state is committed to keeping Pappas open and stable while the commission works, but that admissions must meet hospital-level-of-care standards and the current infrastructure limits who can safely be served. He said the administration has been expanding outreach, hiring staff, and exploring ways to broaden services, including outpatient and therapy programs over time. Commissioners pressed him on why admissions remain so limited and whether the facility is being effectively depopulated, while Goldstein maintained that the restrictions reflect legal and safety requirements rather than an effort to close the hospital.