Transcript Highlights:

• But when you onboard new attorneys, there's an onboarding process, there's a training process, there's
• A multi-multi-stage process.
• Everyone in this hearing room who took the time to attend today's hearing, whichever side of the aisle
• Great to hear. Question two. Thank you. Great to hear. Question two. Thank you, Madam Chair.
• We get to hear that debate, right? I want to hear what you have to say.

Keywords: 970, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The purpose of today's hearing is, of course, to hear from the public before we go into that process.
• Can you hear me? Yes, I can. Can you hear me? I can hear you.
• Can you hear me? Yes, I can hear you. Perfect, we can hear you.
• Can you hear me? I can hear you. You can hear me. Perfect.
• Your constituents want a fair districting process, ample hearings, and ample time to see and hear justification

Keywords: 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's currently in process.
• It's currently in process.
• This is a budget hearing. It's a budget and oversight hearing.
• This process started January 4th, decision-making process across the department.
• It's a mandatory process.

Summary: The hearing focused first on sexual abuse, harassment, and retaliation in California’s women’s prisons, with testimony from CDCR wardens, the Office of Inspector General, advocacy groups, and formerly incarcerated survivors. Legislators and witnesses described a pattern of staff misconduct, fear of retaliation, gaps in reporting, and the need for stronger accountability, better investigations, and more outside access for survivor support organizations. CDCR said it has expanded training, body-worn and stationary cameras, outside partnerships, and PREA-related response procedures, while the Inspector General requested additional funding and staff to monitor more grievances and staff sexual misconduct cases under SB 1069. Members pressed CDCR on why accused staff are not always placed on leave, how cases are referred to prosecutors, and whether current protections are enough; several members argued the state should aim to investigate all complaints and do more to prevent retaliation and repeat abuse. The second issue was rehabilitative and reentry programming in women’s prisons. CDCR’s Division of Rehabilitative Programs and the wardens highlighted education, vocational training, substance use treatment, peer support, and community reentry programs, citing increased enrollment and recent graduates earning diplomas, degrees, and certifications. They said these programs are intended to reduce recidivism and improve public safety. Formerly incarcerated advocates and community providers argued that current offerings are still too limited, outdated, and not aligned with today’s job market, especially around digital literacy and transferable credentials, and they urged more funding for community-based, trauma-informed, gender-responsive programming. A coalition representative asked for a $20 million continuation and expansion of the Wright Grant program, and members discussed additional budget requests for reentry and related women’s services.

Transcript Highlights:

• . we will refer for a contested process. we will refer for a contested case<00:25:08.240> hearing<
• through this revalidation process? through this revalidation process?
• process? process?
• Can you hear me? Yes, we can absolutely hear you. Thank you. Perfect.
• Can you hear me?

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm not sure if you were here to hear that testimony. I was listening to the hearing, yes.
• committee hearing.
• So it is because the process has come so far that we're going to do it in this instance, but hear me
• You all know the process to get that done. I hold your process out as a beacon, really.
• Their processes are going to be hugely bogged down. They're going to have to give due process.

Summary: The committee heard several water, wildlife, conservation, and local government bills. AB 362, by Assembly Member Ramos, would add tribal water uses as a statewide beneficial use and strengthen tribal consultation in water planning; tribal representatives and conservation groups supported it as a long-overdue correction, while water agencies, business groups, and agricultural interests raised concerns about CEQA, regulatory uncertainty, and impacts on existing water planning. The bill was moved on a due pass motion to Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials, with some members noting ongoing stakeholder discussions and one abstention. AB 1089, by Assembly Member Carrillo, would expand local permitting authority under the Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act to include commercial and industrial projects. The author and the City of Adelanto argued it would speed housing and economic development in the high desert while preserving the overall conservation framework, but environmental groups opposed it as premature and potentially weakening protections for Joshua trees. The committee approved the bill on a due pass motion to Appropriations. AB 1024, by Assembly Member Harabedian, would require a regional black bear mitigation plan for the San Gabriel Valley and related areas; Sierra Madre officials described rising bear intrusions and the need for state help, and the bill passed to Appropriations. AB 846, by Assembly Member Connolly, would streamline permitting for local wildfire preparedness and vegetation management projects in local responsibility areas by creating a faster review process at Fish and Wildlife and improving mapping coordination with Cal Fire. Local government, fire service, and agricultural witnesses supported the bill as a common-sense wildfire prevention measure, and it passed to Natural Resources with no opposition. AB 263, by Assembly Member Rogers, would extend emergency minimum-flow regulations for the Scott and Shasta Rivers for five years or until permanent rules are adopted; supporters said it protects salmon recovery, tribal subsistence, and the fishing economy during a transition period, while opponents argued it bypasses normal regulatory process and harms farmers. The committee approved it on a due pass as amended motion to Appropriations, with one abstention and two no votes. AB 1044, by Assembly Member Bains, would create a new Tulare County groundwater sustainability agency for undistricted lands after other local agencies split off; the bill passed to Local Government. AB 1426, by Assembly Member Arambula, began testimony on creating a Diablo Range Conservation Program to fund habitat protection and restoration across the range.

Transcript Highlights:

• We don't want to have to come back year after year and conduct hearings and hear from folks who oftentimes
• We will accelerate the process, which is absolutely essential, We will accelerate the process, which
• Last year, in this hearing, I spoke at this hearing last year.
• That process has never been developed. That process has never been developed.
• So, you know, we sit here and we hear the apologies. I don't want to hear your apology.

Summary: The joint hearing of the Select Committee on Native American Affairs and the Joint Legislative Audit Committee focused on the University of California’s compliance with NAGPRA and CalNAGPRA and the return of Native American human remains and cultural items. Senators and Assembly Members opened by emphasizing the sacredness of repatriation, the ongoing trauma caused by delayed returns, and the need for stronger systemwide accountability. The State Auditor presented the third audit of UC’s repatriation efforts, concluding that UC still lacks the urgency, oversight, and clear timelines needed to promptly return remains and belongings. The audit found thousands of remains and hundreds of thousands of cultural items still in UC custody, new undisclosed collections at several campuses, weak budgeting and underspending, and repatriation plans that often lacked concrete deadlines. The auditor recommended stronger UCOP oversight, performance metrics, proactive searches for undiscovered items, and possible legislative action to tie funding to measurable progress. UC officials responded that the system is committed to full compliance and has accelerated its work since adopting a new policy in 2022. UC Provost Catherine Newman said the system repatriated more than 2,800 ancestors and nearly 80,000 funerary belongings in the past year, and that UC now says 80.3% of Native American remains are either repatriated or available for repatriation. UC announced a new systemwide plan to complete repatriation of human remains by the end of 2028, to finish high-risk campus reviews by June 2026, to recall all loans by January 2026, and to require quarterly reporting to UCOP. UC also said it will spend an additional $8.8 million over three years, expand staffing, improve databases, support tribal consultation costs, and identify potential reburial sites on UC land. Berkeley and San Diego described increased staffing, consultations, and repatriation activity, while Santa Barbara said it had corrected earlier omissions, notified tribes about previously unreported ancestors, and was working toward completing repatriations and updated inventories. Committee members pressed UC on why progress has been so slow, why the audit’s timelines differed from UC’s public reporting, and whether the 2028 goal applies only to human remains rather than all cultural items. UC said the 2028 target is for human remains, while cultural items will take longer, and acknowledged that more work remains. Members also asked about the technical expertise needed for repatriation, the role of tribal experts, and whether repatriation should be embedded more permanently in UC governance or statute. Tribal leaders and representatives then testified that remains and belongings were taken without consent and must be returned with tribal consent and leadership. They criticized the repeated delays, stressed that tribes are the experts on their ancestors and cultural heritage, and urged UC to treat repatriation as a top priority and to return all associated items, not just human remains, so ancestors can truly rest.

Transcript Highlights:

• You're having trouble hearing you. You're breaking up.
• Yeah, can you hear that okay? Is that better? There we go. Yeah, can you hear that okay?
• Is it going to hear you know. So we can hear you now. Okay, super.
• And you were talking about the frustrations that you hear.
• of the lead time that’s needed with staff reports, scheduling hearings, hearing examiner decision.

Summary: The Local Government Committee met in work session and heard a series of presentations on SEPA, permitting reforms, and building code implementation. Department of Ecology staff gave an overview of the State Environmental Policy Act, explaining its role in state and local decision-making, common exemptions, planned actions, and recent housing-related statutory changes such as transit-oriented development exemptions and SEPA appeals protections for certain local ordinances. Committee members asked about repeated SEPA reviews, cultural and historic resource review, and how SEPA relates to NEPA; Ecology responded that repeated reviews usually occur when proposals change and that programmatic EISs can help front-load analysis. Seattle’s Department of Construction and Inspections described how recent SEPA exemptions reduced residential review volume and supported more housing permits, and said the city is considering raising thresholds further. The State Building Code Council provided an update on code adoption timelines and legislative tasks tied to the 2024 codes, including single-stair housing, multiplex housing, dwelling unit size, and temporary emergency shelter standards. Council staff said the content of the codes is largely set, but administrative timelines have been delayed, prompting a motion to postpone final adoption while pursuing ways to preserve the planned implementation schedule. Members asked about the timing of code changes and the impact on housing costs, and staff said the legislative topics remain on track for inclusion in the 2024 code package. Committee staff then reviewed recent permitting legislation, including SB 5290’s permit decision deadlines and fee-refund provisions, later bills limiting pre-application meetings and clarifying that building permits are excluded from those timelines, and project-specific changes affecting middle housing, ADUs, lot splits, passive house projects, self-certification, transit-oriented development, and parking requirements. Commerce’s Dave Anderson reported on SB 5290 implementation, including guidance on permit fees, studies on staffing and statewide permitting systems, grants to local governments, and the first annual performance report, which showed mixed results and highlighted the importance of digital tools, clear checklists, staff training, and coordination across departments. Local officials from Issaquah and Kitsap County described their own process improvements, including code updates, optional pre-application meetings, new staffing, reporting systems, and a phased “Two by Six” review model in Kitsap, while also noting challenges from staffing shortages, agency coordination, and the burden of implementing multiple new mandates.

Transcript Highlights:

• This contested case hearing process is unique to Texas, but it also is a hurdle that adds six to twelve
• Projects in Texas face a longer permitting process because of the contested hearing process, which can
• contested case hearing process, setting that preliminary hearing date, like Senator Sparks talked about
• So, currently where we are is pending the contested case hearing process.
• Administrative hearings for a hearing, a preliminary and a contested hearing. And the timeline.

Bills: SB2037, SB1757, SB1758, SB1759, HB29

Keywords: rock crushing, permits, air quality, environmental monitoring, aggregate production, seismicity, public meeting, land use, SB 1758, cement kiln, portland cement, aggregate production operation, aggregate quarry, semiconductor wafer manufacturing, chip fabrication, semiconductor plant, vibration, seismic disturbance, liability limitation, TCEQ

Transcript Highlights:

• , and then the parole hearing process, which is conducted up to 60 days prior to the initial parole eligibility
• to the process, which is hard to hear, particularly if you’re the victim or survivor of a crime.
• hearing.
• The board will hold a hearing and recommendations are then made. That’s kind of the process.
• And then, you know, as far as the various processes attend a governor’s council hearing, and then we

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Commission on Criminal Justice Reform 3.0 heard a presentation from the Massachusetts Parole Board focused on consolidation, cooperation, and evidence-based supervision across the correctional system. Parole Board Chair Angela Gomez-June described the board’s mission, its coordination with the Department of Correction, houses of correction, courts, probation, law enforcement, victim services, and UMass partners, and outlined 2024 activity including 2,810 institutional release hearings, 18,238 victim notifications, 53 pardon petitions, 70 commutation petitions, 41 early termination applications, and supervision of 2,993 parolees. She emphasized the board’s shift toward individualized, data-driven decision-making, including revised GPS use, graduated sanctions, and more service-oriented community supervision. Members and sheriffs pressed for clearer breakdowns of the board’s data, including the difference between releases, hearings, and active supervision; average length of supervision; the share of lifers in the caseload; and how many people are placed in housing, employment, and treatment. The board said its active supervised population fluctuates around 1,600 to 1,800, with more than 400 lifers, and that about 30 to 36 percent of its population is housed through programs such as MASH, community justice resource centers, and sheriff-run residential programs like Rocky Hill and HOPE. Members also discussed parole refusals, noting that some individuals decline parole to avoid supervision or to serve time inside instead, and asked for a more detailed breakdown of those cases. The board and commission also discussed collaboration with DOC and UMass on risk assessment, reentry planning, and community pathways, including a tablet video explaining the parole process and pharmacist support for medication-related drug test issues. The board reported that after the SJC’s Matus decision, 210 individuals were identified as affected, 144 were immediately eligible for hearings, 100 hearings had been completed, and 10 more were scheduled; it also said clemency and commutation work had been slowed by staffing and Matus-related demands. The meeting ended with a request for follow-up data on outcomes, supervision lengths, housing and employment placements, and other consolidated statistics, and the commission announced its next public hearing for March 9 at 10 a.m. before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• on the public hearings for the hazardous waste management plan, for the Exide cleanup process.
• I'd like to hear a little bit more.
• process that our teams are working closely to implement in the final plan. ...process that our teams
• Hear those voices.
• hearings because of speaking Spanish. ...is permitting processes where folks were thrown out of hearings

Summary: The joint oversight hearing focused on DTSC’s implementation of SB 158 reforms, including enforcement, community engagement, fee stability, the hazardous waste management plan, permitting backlogs, and the Safer Consumer Products program. Senators and Assembly members emphasized protecting overburdened communities and asked how DTSC and the Board of Environmental Safety are using their authority to improve accountability, reduce delays, and address hazardous waste facilities and consumer product chemicals. The hearing also included discussion of extended producer responsibility programs and whether DTSC can support them more efficiently, including through coordination with CalRecycle. DTSC Director Katie Butler said the department is now more transparent, accountable, and fiscally stable, citing stronger enforcement actions, an interactive inspections map, expanded community outreach, and emergency response work on the Los Angeles wildfire cleanup. She said DTSC has made progress on fee reform, the hazardous waste management plan, cleanup grants, permit renewals, and safer consumer products rulemaking, including adding microplastics to the candidate chemical list. Board Chair Andrew Rakestraw said the board has held multiple public meetings and hearings, is working on fee rates and performance metrics, and is revising the hazardous waste management plan after public comment, including removing a proposal to send certain contaminated soil to municipal landfills. He also noted remaining concerns about fee structure, permit delays, and the pace of the safer consumer products program. Public witnesses offered sharply different views. A representative of the California Council for Environmental and Economic Balance said SB 158 reforms have improved permitting and transparency, but urged more attention to risk-based decision-making, reduced duplication, and possible General Fund support for plan implementation rather than relying only on fees. Earthjustice argued DTSC remains too slow and that communities continue to suffer from long-delayed permits and weak protections, urging the Legislature to take a more active role and to prioritize eliminating hazardous substances rather than minimizing costs. Committee members pressed the witnesses on permit renewals, community impacts, and the pace of the safer consumer products program, while DTSC defended its progress and said further legislative collaboration may be needed on hazardous waste management and emerging waste streams.

Transcript Highlights:

• The purpose of today's hearing is to understand how regulatory processes intersect with housing development
• First, processes: uncertainty, inconsistency, and delay all drive costs in the regulatory process.
• And we've refined that process.
• That was a multi-year process to update the prior permit that began with early-enged, process to update
• And we've refined that process.

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Regulatory Authority held its first hearing to examine how California’s regulatory framework affects housing production, affordability, and timelines. Chair Pacheco and Assemblymember Haney framed the discussion around the state’s housing shortage and the need to reduce costs while maintaining environmental, safety, and community protections. The first panel featured housing experts and industry representatives who argued that state regulations, code complexity, utility constraints, and agency review processes add substantial cost and delay to development. Bill Fulton described overlapping state and local land-use authorities and the tension among housing, coastal protection, climate, and wildfire goals. CBIA’s Chris Ochoa and California Apartment Association representative Bob Raymer said building codes, energy mandates, and agency processes have materially increased per-home costs, and they urged more centralized affordability analysis and greater scrutiny of regulatory impacts. The Bay Area Council’s Louis Marante called for a statewide cost target for housing and stronger timelines and accountability for state agency reviews. The second panel brought in state agencies to explain their roles. HCD said its housing element enforcement, streamlining laws, and technical assistance have helped increase production, shorten entitlement timelines, and improve compliance by local governments. CARB said SB 375 is a planning law that does not directly regulate land use, and argued that regional housing assumptions in sustainable communities strategies are not being fully implemented on the ground. The Coastal Commission said it works with local governments to balance coastal protection, sea-level-rise risk, and housing, and noted recent guidance and pilot efforts to streamline housing approvals in the coastal zone. The Energy Commission said its building energy standards are designed to be cost-effective and save consumers money over time, though they can add some design and documentation complexity. Fish and Wildlife and DTSC both emphasized early engagement and collaboration to reduce delays while protecting natural resources and public health; DTSC said it is refining vapor intrusion guidance and using brownfield grants to support redevelopment. The State Water Resources Control Board said it uses general orders and basin planning to provide predictable permitting while balancing water quality, water rights, and housing needs, and noted billions in grants and loans for water infrastructure and site remediation that can support housing affordability. In response to questions from Assemblymember Haney, several agencies described ongoing coordination across departments, including regular meetings among HCD, CARB, the Coastal Commission, and transportation agencies, as well as broader interagency efforts to reduce redundancies and identify pinch points in project delivery. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the hearing; the main outcome was informational testimony and discussion of possible future reforms to improve coordination, predictability, and affordability in state regulatory processes.

Transcript Highlights:

• That seems very short, but two and three minutes is very common for us to use during the hearing processes
• I look forward to the conversation, the process, and hearing the feedback.
• We certainly will have public hearings and in-person hearings.
• What took place in the 2021 redistricting process—there, it was said many times, whether it was in hearings
• Hello, can you hear me? Mr. Cook, we can barely hear you. Can you speak up? Oh, can you hear me?

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So with the online process, where is that part of the process take place? If you're filling out...
• And those hearings are sometimes presided over by a hearing officer.
• If they have the hearing and the judge finds that there is no probable cause, what is the process of
• You're not hearing both sides of the story. You're only hearing one side of the story.
• If it's in front of a hearing officer, remember, this hearing officer isn't a lawyer who's been practicing

Bills: HR245, SCR30, SCR40, SB259

Keywords: transparency, justice, Epstein, Maxwell, investigation, human trafficking, government accountability, domestic violence, protective orders, online application, judicial administration, Louisiana, 965, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm a hearing officer at the ADLRO.
• that right, and when they considered the process, they included the automatic review process and held
• that right, and when they considered the process, they included the automatic review process and held
• to lessen the need changing the process to lessen the due<00:33:18.600> process<00:33:19.039>
• and an appeal process.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs heard several transportation and public safety measures on March 28, 2025. SB 1195 would prohibit parking within certain distances of crosswalks and intersections, direct parking fine revenue to the Safe Routes to School special fund, and remove the need for signs or curb markings in some cases. The Department of Transportation, Department of Health, and Ulupono Initiative supported the bill, emphasizing improved visibility, pedestrian safety, and funding for school-route improvements; written testimony included both support and one opposition. No vote was taken during the hearing segment provided. The committee also heard SB 1102 on the aircraft rescue firefighting unit chief, which would set term-based appointment provisions for the airport division’s fire chief. DOT supported the measure, saying it would give the director flexibility to select leadership and adapt to changing needs, while a member asked about current removal procedures for underperforming employees. The bill was presented as a management and leadership measure, with no action taken in the excerpt. SB 1216, addressing noisy mufflers and safety inspection requirements, drew DOT support in principle but concern that existing rules already cover inspection standards and that enforcement after inspection remains difficult; DOT also described a planned noise-detection camera pilot on Oʻahu. Testimony included support from neighborhood and advocacy groups and opposition from three individuals. For SB 30, which would require helmets for moped riders under 21, DOT and HPD supported the bill, citing crash data and injury prevention; testimony was evenly split overall, with six in support and six in opposition. SB 344 would require helmets for skateboard users under 18; DOT supported it, and a DOT witness explained current helmet rules for other devices such as e-bikes, scooters, and motorcycles. SB 1095, increasing decal size limits for special number plates, drew DOT concerns that larger decals could interfere with plate readability and automated enforcement. SB 1522 would make proof of filing required vehicle-transfer notice forms a complete defense to actions arising from the vehicle’s later use or abandonment; the Judiciary said it had no position on the bill’s merits but objected to language requiring new court forms and raised access and legal-advice concerns, while Honolulu’s Department of Customer Services supported the measure. The committee then heard SB 597, extending the deadline for the Administrative Driver’s License Revocation Office to issue written review decisions. The Attorney General and DOT supported the extension, citing limited toxicology capacity and shipping delays for testing, and several law enforcement and public health entities also supported it. In contrast, the ADLRO hearing officer testified with serious concerns about due process, warning that eliminating or delaying the review process could create constitutional problems, disproportionately burden people without attorneys, and jeopardize thousands of cases. Finally, SB 1285 proposed a tiered revocation system for DUI arrests; ADLRO strongly opposed it on due process grounds, while DOT supported it as a safety measure and the Hawaii Public Health Institute commented that evidence is lacking for standalone mandatory revocation and suggested stronger impaired-driving standards instead. The committee had not yet taken final action in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• . process. process.
• hearing at the municipal level, is to give the public access to the process without having to go through
• Commission process. Commission process.
• hearing.
• hearing.

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House first debated House Bill 527, extending the sunset of 30 V.S.A. chapter 248A, which governs telecom tower siting. Members discussed a Senate proposal of amendment that would require a mandatory local hearing with the developer and the Department of Public Service present. Supporters said the change would improve public participation and local control, especially for rural towns, while opponents argued it could either stall telecom development or speed it up with less input. Several members also raised concerns about health effects of RF radiation and cited scientific studies and court actions, while others said they had not seen evidence of the harms claimed and emphasized the importance of connectivity. A proposed further amendment to shorten the sunset to one year was defeated by roll call, 52-89, and the House then concurred in the Senate proposal of amendment by roll call, 122-14. The House then took up House Bill 686, relating to expanding identification of certain lobbying advertisements. After suspending rules, members heard a summary of the Senate’s strike-all amendment, which broadened the definition of lobbying communications and required clearer identification and reporting for paid lobbying ads, while avoiding duplicate reporting where campaign finance disclosures already apply. The Government Operations and Military Affairs Committee reported a 10-1-1 straw poll in favor, and the House concurred in the Senate proposal of amendment. Next, the House considered Senate Bill 326, miscellaneous amendments to motor vehicle laws. The Transportation Committee described the changes as largely technical, including provisions related to hands-free cell phone use for commercial drivers and to mufflers, motorcycles, and annual inspections. After testimony from Legislative Council and the Department of Motor Vehicles, the committee recommended concurrence on a 9-1-1 straw poll, and the House concurred and then voted to message its action to the Senate forthwith. The chamber also took up the conference report on House Bill 642, youthful offender proceedings, with the conference committee restoring House language allowing victims to attend and present impact statements at both hearings and making several technical cross-reference corrections; the report was presented for House consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• uh from the hearing room. uh from the hearing room.
• processes, as well as reflect the Court of Administrative Hearings rebrand from the Office of Administrative
• Hearings to the Court of Administrative Hearings.
• <01:26:40.480> processes,<01:26:41.600> as Administrative Hearings processes, as Administrative
• Hearings processes, as well<01:26:41.960> as<01:26:42.080> reflect<01:26:42.520> the

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The Public Safety Policy Conference Committee met on May 8, 2026, with all conferees present. The chair opened with decorum instructions, explained that the meeting was policy-only, and noted that no public testimony had been signed up. Members then introduced themselves, with several noting they were retiring at the end of the session or year. The committee adopted a series of provisions, mostly by unanimous voice vote, including House language on identity theft and financial crimes updates, supervision abatement and restitution considerations for corrections, protective-order enhancements for murder penalties, prediction markets, victim-notification requirements for plea and sentencing hearings, research data privacy, ignition interlock and impaired-driving license changes, DOC licensing and sanctions for juvenile/adult community-based residential facilities, criminal-conviction employment and licensing standards, jail medication procedures, domestic abuse law changes, and a grant-use extension for dual-status/crossover youth funding. Several items were described as technical or clarifying changes, while others updated law to address AI-related identity theft, foreign protective orders, victim privacy, and corrections oversight. The committee also heard discussion on a Senate provision allowing victims of domestic violence to petition for wireless account and phone-number transfers. A witness supported the concept but urged changes to better align the state language with existing federal law; members noted the issue might need another vehicle or further work. For the domestic abuse item, staff explained that an A15 amendment would later adjust the warrantless-arrest window from 28 days to 14 days. On the jail-medication item, a member emphasized the changes were clarifying and not an admission that last year’s law was flawed. All adopted provisions passed by voice vote without opposition.

Transcript Highlights:

• that hearing.
• As I say, it is essential we hear from the DOJ in this process before we consider any maps.
• If we do not hear quickly... I would hope the committee would entertain a subpoena process.
• Is there anything during this process that makes you think of what you would like to do from hearing
• I believe, as I mentioned at the first hearing, and we're going to take this in a two-phase process.

Keywords: 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That is an information session, not a hearing. The hearings would come later.
• That is an information session, not a hearing. The hearings would come later.
• That is an information session, not a hearing. The hearings would come later.
• . process. process.
• hearing, but to issue a ruling. hearing, but to issue a ruling.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I do think, just as you go through the process, you know, really noting what kinds of process protections
• Madam Chair, Representative, no, this process—the assisted outpatient treatment process—is only civil
• The structure of the hearing is such that at the hearing the client shall be represented by counsel.
• Any hearing provided pursuant to subsection H tells us that Any hearing provided pursuant to subsection
• I have a lot of questions as it relates to process or proposed changes. process and the differentiations

Transcript Highlights:

• have been due process.
• have been due process.
• <00:46:37.079> as process was not a two- week process as process was not a two- week process
• It's a multi-step process.
• > are a a process a step-by-step process are a a process a step-by-step process are you<01:40:

Keywords: 1187, senate, all