Transcript Highlights:

• First, project review.
• Likewise, Caltrans review can drag on for months to years.
• Likewise, Caltrans review can drag on for months to years.
• Any time a developer comes to us to review a project, then we go through our environmental review process
• This Legislature asked us to get expert help for that review.

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Regulatory Authority held its first hearing to examine how California’s regulatory framework affects housing availability and affordability. Chair Pacheco and Assembly Member Haney framed the discussion around the state’s housing shortage, rising costs, and the need to reduce unnecessary delays and burdens while still protecting public health, safety, and environmental goals. The first panel included housing policy experts and industry representatives, who argued that overlapping state and regional rules, complex code requirements, utility delays, and lengthy review processes add substantial cost to new housing. Bill Fulton described California’s land use system as a “big Rubik’s Cube” of competing goals, while CBIA’s Chris Ochoa and Bob Raymer urged more attention to affordability impacts in code adoption and state agency rulemaking. The Bay Area Council’s Louis Marante called for a statewide cost target for housing and stronger accountability for state agencies, citing project review delays, regulatory costs, and indirect impacts from water, stormwater, and transportation policies. State agency witnesses generally defended their roles as balancing housing with other statutory mandates. HCD said its enforcement of housing element law, streamlining statutes, and technical assistance has helped increase production, reduce entitlement times, and approve tens of thousands of homes that might otherwise have faced discretionary review. CARB said SB 375 does not regulate local land use or reduce housing supply, and that sustainable community strategies are planning tools that could support housing if fully implemented. The Coastal Commission said it has worked with local governments to streamline coastal housing approvals, approve density bonus and ADU ordinances, and support legislation to exempt some affordable housing from coastal permits, while still protecting coastal resources and sea-level-rise hazards. The Energy Commission said its building energy standards are required by statute to be cost-effective and save consumers money over time, though they can add some design complexity and upfront cost. Other agencies emphasized collaboration and early engagement as the best way to reduce delays. Fish and Wildlife said its mission is to protect California’s natural diversity and that better early coordination with developers can improve outcomes. DTSC said brownfield cleanup and vapor intrusion review are necessary to protect public health, but that early engagement, workshops, and site-specific approaches can help projects move forward; it also noted grant funding supporting affordable housing on contaminated sites. The Water Board said it uses general orders and basin planning to streamline permitting while meeting federal and state water-quality obligations, and that its infrastructure grants and loans support housing affordability. In response to Assembly Member Haney’s questions, several agencies said they already coordinate across departments, but he pressed for more cross-agency clarity and less siloed decision-making. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Title 43, Section 1191, which says child support guidelines, shall be reviewed by the Judiciary Committee
• I am the Deputy Director of Child Support Services, and we're here on the four-year review of the child
• Is there a web portal where parents could go in and review it and look this up?
• So, I feel like we're kind of right on point on a review from that new statute requirements.
• Appreciate you all being here and meeting that and having those reviews.

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• Today, there are four higher education audit reports for the committee's review.
• when they do their annual reviews.
• And is this something that's included in your scope of review?
• This concludes the reports for review on the committee's agenda.
• Staff would recommend that these reports be refiled as reviewed.

Committee: All LEGISLATIVE JOINT AUDITING-EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

Summary: The House and Senate Legislative Audit committee met to approve prior minutes and review four higher education audit reports. Staff first presented the University of Arkansas System report, which included three findings that had been certified and referred to the Governmental Bonding Board, the attorney general, and the appropriate prosecuting attorney: unauthorized purchases at UAPB totaling about $37,000, a fraud scheme involving falsified FAFSA/transcript records at East Arkansas Community College with about $66,000 in losses, and unallowable charges in the Veterans Upward Bound program at UA Fayetteville totaling $8,500, of which $6,700 was recovered. Committee members praised the institutions’ internal audit and management teams for identifying the issues and asked detailed questions about how the fraud was detected, especially the online student identity-theft scheme at EACC and the safeguards now being used to verify student identity and prevent similar cases. EACC officials explained that the fraudulent admissions involved online applicants using falsified transcripts and identity-theft tactics, that 39 suspicious students were identified, and that seven slipped through far enough to receive federal aid, resulting in a $2,500 reimbursement obligation to the university. They said the college now uses a cross-departmental student validity team, extensive red-flag protocols, direct outreach to high schools, ID verification, and other checks, and that the issue has been shared across the UA system and with other campuses. UA Fayetteville also clarified that no veterans were harmed by the Veterans Upward Bound finding; the program was closed and students were redirected to other veteran support programs in the state. The committee then deferred the Northwest Arkansas Community College report. Staff next summarized two additional reports, from Southeast Arkansas College and Southern Arkansas University Tech, which contained only financial statement misstatements corrected during audit fieldwork; SAU Tech also had a finding involving unauthorized withdrawals that the college discovered and recovered. With no further questions, the committee voted without objection to file the reviewed reports and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the measure we are discussing today is HB 1979 HD3, relating to environmental review.
• </c> relating to environmental review relating to environmental review shortens<00:01:07.760><c> the<
• So, the review is not the problem. Mainly, it's like permitting problems, etc.
• So, the review is not the problem. Mainly, it's like permitting problems, etc.
• So, the review is not the problem. Mainly, it's like permitting problems, etc.

Bills: HB1979

Committee: Senate Agriculture and Environment

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 1979 HD3, which would shorten the time to file certain judicial challenges to environmental assessments and environmental impact statements for affordable housing and clean energy projects, and would also affect transfer of some environmental court appeals to the Supreme Court. The Office of Planning and Sustainable Development supported the amended bill, saying the changes were improved from earlier versions and that the shorter filing period was reasonable for these priority projects. Hawaii Gas asked that the bill’s clean energy definition be broadened to align with existing renewable energy law so emerging technologies like renewable hydrogen and renewable gas would be included. Kauai Island Utility Co-op and Greenpeace Hawaii testified in support and opposition, respectively, with supporters arguing the bill would reduce litigation uncertainty and opponents saying the shorter deadline would limit public participation and not solve the real causes of project delays. Opposition testimony came from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Earthjustice, Sierra Club, 350 Hawaii, and others, who argued the bill could chill legitimate public-interest claims, especially where there is limited public notice, and that environmental review was being unfairly blamed for delays caused by permitting, financing, or infrastructure problems. Several speakers said the measure would reduce transparency and make it harder for communities to respond in time. One testifier from Earthjustice said the environmental review process itself is not the problem and should not be weakened for projects that still need public disclosure and community engagement. The committee then moved to decision-making and, citing the volume of opposition and concerns about public participation, transparency, and whether the bill would actually improve timelines, the chair deferred HB 1979 HD3 indefinitely. The hearing was adjourned after the vote decision was announced. The transcript then shifted to HB 2585, relating to tourism and statewide standards for agritourism. Testimony was mixed: farmers and agricultural groups described agritourism as essential to keeping small farms and ranches viable, while also urging safeguards so it would not be abused or displace real agricultural production. Some speakers warned the bill’s revenue-based limits could unintentionally shut down existing farm stays and related operations, especially in Maui County. The Hawaii Farm Bureau said it supported the intent but wanted clearer protections for bona fide agriculture and more flexibility around revenue requirements and force majeure situations. The discussion was still underway when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:10:04.320><c> um</c><00:10:04.640><c> you</c> without their input uh and review um you without
• it would have every faculty review it would have every faculty including<00:19:44.559><c> the</c><00
• every four years uh performance review every four years uh and<00:19:52.480><c> I</c><00:19:52.679><
• currently uh it says in the review currently uh it says in the statute<00:20:06.039><c> that</c><00:
• This adds to the list of causes based on the review performance review set up by the Board of Regents

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 305, which would clarify and expand a healthcare workforce bill to explicitly include physician assistants and dietitians in efforts to address shortages, especially in rural areas. Rep. Fleming said the change was intended to help with Medicaid-related needs such as diabetes care and noted a decline in dietitian internship applications. Rep. Roarx supported the bill, emphasizing the value of dietitians in helping patients make practical nutrition changes. The bill received a unanimous favorable expression, 14-0, and was reported to the House floor. The committee then considered House Bill 427, which would create statewide 60-credit-hour transfer pathways for high-demand bachelor’s degree programs under the Council on Postsecondary Education. Rep. Grossl explained the bill is meant to prevent students from losing major credit when transferring between KCTCS and four-year institutions, using nursing as an example. Questions focused on rigor, dual credit, how high-demand programs would be selected, and the July 1, 2026 implementation date; the sponsor said CPE and faculty would map curricula and align standards. The Kentucky Student Rights Coalition testified in support, saying the bill would help students complete degrees faster and make credits count toward majors. HB 427 also passed unanimously, 14-0, with favorable expression. The committee then took up House Bill 424, as amended by a committee substitute. Rep. Tipton said the substitute removed language allowing up to six-year contracts and instead set up a process for four-year contracts and periodic performance reviews for faculty, including presidents, at public postsecondary institutions. He said the bill is intended to give universities clearer authority to remove underperforming employees and be more efficient with taxpayer dollars. Several faculty witnesses opposed the bill, arguing it would erode tenure protections, create arbitrary performance standards, and harm recruitment, retention, and academic freedom. The committee adopted the substitute and heard testimony, but no final vote on HB 424 is shown in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• hearing in their Sunset Review Report and the committee's Sunset Review Background Paper.
• hearing in their Sunset Review Report and the committee's Sunset Review Background Paper.
• SB 1368 addresses the issues discussed during the board sunset review hearing in their sunset review
• SB 1368 addresses the issues discussed during the board sunset review hearing in their sunset review
• report. addresses the issues discussed during the board sunset review hearing in their sunset review

Committee: Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development

Summary: The Senate Committee on Business, Professions and Economic Development met as a subcommittee due to the lack of a quorum, then later established quorum and took up a series of bills, mostly sunset extensions for licensing boards. SB 1302, SB 1303, SB 1304, SB 1363, and SB 1368 all dealt with extending board operations to January 1, 2031 and making related technical or policy changes. SB 1303 for the Board of Naturopathic Medicine added a fictitious name permit program and other administrative changes, while SB 1304 for the Respiratory Care Board drew significant testimony over whether licensed vocational nurses should be allowed to perform basic respiratory tasks in skilled nursing facilities and hospitals. SB 1363 updated barbering and cosmetology apprenticeship and licensing rules, and SB 1368 added a retired license category and strengthened continuing education oversight for speech-language pathology, audiology, and hearing aid dispensers. The committee also heard SB 865, which would create a California Music Festival Preservation Grant Program to support large independent multi-day music festivals. Supporters, including Visit Sacramento and festival promoters, said the bill would protect jobs, tourism, hotel nights, and local tax revenue; opponents raised concerns about using state funds during a deficit year and questioned whether profitable events should receive subsidies. The committee also heard SB 1297, which would create regional public-private partnerships and financing tools for wildfire mitigation projects; the author and supporters said it would help address the state’s large wildfire prevention funding gap by leveraging local and private investment, while members asked how the bonds would be repaid and whether the state would bear costs. SB 993, presented on behalf of Senator Ochoa-Bogue, would restore privacy protections for mental health professionals working in correctional and state hospital settings by limiting routine disclosure of identifying information while preserving a complaint process. Supporters described safety threats, stalking, and staffing concerns, and the bill passed unanimously. SB 1304 also passed after committee discussion, with members and the author noting ongoing negotiations over LVN scope and training in higher-acuity settings. SB 865 passed on a 9-1 vote, SB 1297 passed 10-0, and the sunset bills SB 1302, SB 1303, SB 1363, and SB 1368 all advanced unanimously to the Senate Appropriations Committee. SB 1333 was not heard, and SB 1445 was on the consent calendar.

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome to the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee's Initiative 900 performance audits by the
• I am chair of the Joint Legislative Audit Review Committee, Representative Jerry Pollack from the 46th
• Joining us on Zoom will be several other representatives and senators from the Joint Legislative Audit Review
• Agency senior management should regularly review progress on plan strategies and performance.
• That's JLARC, standing for Joint Legislative Audit Review Committee.

Committee: Joint JLARC I-900 Subcommittee for SAO Performance Audits

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee’s Initiative 900 subcommittee held a hybrid public hearing on two State Auditor performance audits. The first audit examined efforts to reduce non-emergency use of emergency systems through CARES programs. Auditors reported that Washington has 52 fire-agency-led CARES programs in 26 counties, but many communities without programs said they need one. Major barriers included unstable funding, difficulty hiring qualified staff, volunteer-based rural departments, and lack of statewide guidance. The audit also found that only about half of programs tracked both required performance measures, and it recommended that the legislature consider private insurance reimbursement options and convene a statewide work group to develop guidance, standards, and possible changes to the role of the Department of Health. Agency representatives and fire officials largely supported the findings and emphasized that short-term grants and one-year contracts make programs hard to sustain. Committee discussion focused heavily on financing, especially Medicaid reimbursement and accountable communities of health (ACHs). Auditors clarified that the 10% figure cited in the report referred to direct Medicaid reimbursement for treat-and-refer services, which some agencies do not pursue because the $115 rate is too low relative to the administrative effort. Several fire officials testified that their programs rely on grants and ACH support, but that funding is often year-to-year and uncertain. They also described the value of CARES programs in reducing emergency room use, jail detentions, and long ambulance wait times, while noting barriers to sharing patient records across systems. Members asked whether the new public safety sales tax authority could help, but fire district representatives said it is not a direct funding option for them. The second audit reviewed performance management in the Department of Commerce’s Office of Economic Development and Competitiveness. Auditors found that the division does not yet have a statewide economic development strategic plan and that performance management is inconsistent across its 16 programs. In a limited review, all six sampled programs had goals, but only half clearly identified performance measures and targets, and only three tracked outcomes and published results. The audit highlighted leading practices from other states, including strategic planning, regular progress reporting, aligning program goals with agency goals, and using performance-based contracts and grant monitoring. Recommendations urged Commerce to seek stakeholder input, assess internal and external conditions, set goals and measures, align programs with the strategy, and strengthen monitoring and evaluation. Commerce officials agreed with the audit and said the division is already working toward a strategic plan, with a new assistant director to be hired and a target of completing the work by mid-next year. Members pressed the department on how the plan would connect to workforce, higher education, housing, and other economic development systems, and asked Commerce to return to JLARC next year with progress updates. The meeting ended with instructions for submitting written public comments and notice of the next JLARC meeting schedule.

Transcript Highlights:

• effect and local agencies, local governments, established community oversight commissions or citizen review
• or citizen review boards on their<00:01:49.520><c> own</c><00:01:50.240><c> the</c><00:01:50.479><c>
• </c><00:02:56.640><c> of</c><00:02:56.760><c> the</c><00:02:56.959><c> recent</c> board a review of the
• recent board a review of the recent board<00:02:59.080><c> uh</c><00:02:59.239><c> agenda</c><00:02:
• of the minutes indicates up a review of the minutes indicates that<00:03:11.480><c> there</c><00:03:

Summary: House File 1257, which would eliminate the Public Safety Advisory Committee to the POST Board, was the final bill heard. The bill’s sponsor argued the committee was created in 2020 in response to post-Floyd criminal justice reforms but had since become obsolete because local agencies and communities had created their own oversight bodies and the main POST Board still includes citizen members and public participation. The sponsor said the advisory committee had run out of issues to address and was effectively meeting just to justify its existence. Former Representative Carlos Mariani testified in opposition, saying the committee was a bipartisan part of the 2020 Minnesota Police Accountability Act and was intended to preserve citizen involvement in policing policy and protect civil and human rights after George Floyd’s murder. He argued that eliminating it would weaken a state-level structure created to rebuild public trust and ensure consistent oversight, while still allowing local efforts to continue. Another member asked about compensation and noted the committee has a $20,000 ongoing appropriation through the POST Board; the sponsor clarified members are not individually compensated beyond per diem and travel. After discussion, the sponsor renewed the motion to recommend re-referral to the General Register. The committee voted, and the motion carried, sending House File 1257 to the General Register.

Transcript Highlights:

• We made the changes as directed and reviewed the new budget details with CMS.
• This includes final approval of all grantee selections, administrative review of grant agreements and
• All grant awards are subject to CMS review and approval prior to funding. So HCAI is excited.
• We're developing the grant program designs now, internal review processes.
• We'll review health plan filings and monitor compliance through our routine medical surveys.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then is there a team internally that ...reviews that diagnosis or level of care if it's made by an
• And then on the long-term care side, we actually have a team of nurse reviewers.
• Again, we have that 360 review underway. ...$14 million going out the door is currently on pause.
• Again, we have that 360 review underway.
• Every three years, states are reviewed.

Committee: House Health and Welfare

Transcript Highlights:

• The annual review of the department's tentative work program.
• Periodically, the objectives on these seven items are reviewed.
• The most recent review that we did was in 2020.
• Similarly to the review of the tentative work program and the performance production review, the Commission
• So the first step was looking at a state-of-the-art review.

Committee: Senate Transportation

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee met, took roll, and heard introductory remarks from members about their districts and transportation priorities, with several senators noting congestion and mobility challenges in their regions. The committee then received a presentation from the Florida Transportation Commission on its oversight role for FDOT, including annual and quarterly performance reviews, review of the five-year work program, and monitoring of tolling and transit authorities. Members asked whether the commission gets involved in project prioritization; the answer was no, because it is statutorily limited to high-level oversight rather than day-to-day project decisions. The committee next heard two reports related to transportation disadvantaged and paratransit services. FDOT’s Melissa Smith described the statewide Transportation Disadvantaged program, its governance structure, service models, and challenges such as fragmented administration, cost, inconsistent reporting, and rural service limitations. She outlined recommendations including better use of technology, regional partnerships, improved training, and alternative delivery models like microtransit and TNC partnerships. A University of South Florida researcher, Martin Katala, discussed best practices for paratransit and demand-response service, emphasizing route optimization software, dynamic dispatching, service standards, vendor accountability, and the use of TNCs and mobility management to improve efficiency and reduce travel times. A later presentation from UF’s I-Street program focused on emerging technologies for transit, including in-cabin monitoring, automatic restraints, accessible booking and tracking tools, and the need for statewide safety standards and better driver interfaces. Finally, FDOT Secretary Jared Perdue and District 5 Secretary John Tyler provided an update on the transition of SunRail local entities. They explained the differences among commuter rail, intercity rail, and light rail, and said SunRail’s financial transition to local partners was completed on January 1, with operational transition to follow over up to three years. They contrasted that with Tri-Rail, where FDOT still funds operations and discussions about a future transition are ongoing. Members asked about the differences between SunRail, Tri-Rail, Amtrak, and Brightline, and the presenters explained that commuter rail serves regional daily commuters while intercity rail connects regions. The committee concluded without taking any formal votes or other legislative action.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> were in place the county could review were in place the county could review the<00:50:24.079><c>
• </c><00:56:00.319><c> reports</c> completed post-election review reports completed post-election review
• </c><01:23:27.800><c> that</c> able to review that able to review that data<01:23:29.679><c> and</c><
• </c> say so without the kind of legal review say so without the kind of legal review that<01:34:40.239
• the first standard of standard of review the first standard of review<01:37:10.000><c> is</c><01:37:

Committee: House Elections Finance and Government Operations

Transcript Highlights:

• So our first item is the sunset review of the Credit Enhancement Eligibility Board.
• And I believe Catcher Baden will be presenting the board sunset review.
• , and we will have Demi Michalow, the president of WICHE, to present WICHE's sunset review.
• But basically, we conduct these review standards statewide, Be pretty quick.
• so that they can properly oversee and really target their reviews better.

Committees: House Education , House House Education Committee of Reference

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh we reviewed OHA's comments it.
• </c><00:34:04.960><c> the</c> subject to environmental review the subject to environmental review the
• So, we'd still have public review.
• So, we'd still have public review. review. review.
• </c> expedited timeline for SHPD's review expedited timeline for SHPD's review process<00:51:06.840><

Bills: SB3253 , SB2401 , SB3169 , SB17 , SB3014 , SB3032 , SB1432 , SB2002 , SB2972 , SB3247

Committee: House Water & Land

Summary: The Committee on Water and Land heard testimony on SB 5253 SD2 relating to conservation and SB 2401 relating to regional shoreline mitigation district, with the chair emphasizing short testimony limits and the need to finish before session. On SB 5253, DLNR said it stood on its written testimony and answered questions about the bill’s proposed nonprofit endangered species sanctuary. Members asked whether existing entities or agreements, such as land trusts, private landowners, and DLNR safe harbor agreements, could accomplish similar conservation goals without creating a new entity. DLNR said similar work already exists, but it was not aware of a comparable sanctuary model in the state. A member also questioned language suggesting for-profit businesses in the sanctuary, and DLNR said the intent appeared to be sales of outreach or similar materials, though it agreed that such activities could be handled by a nonprofit. The bulk of the hearing focused on SB 2401, which would create a regional shoreline adaptation/mitigation framework. The Department of the Attorney General said it had concerns about inconsistent use of the terms “mitigation” and “adaptation,” warning of possible title-subject issues. DLNR said it was neutral on the terminology and more concerned with the substance, and noted that the bill would not waive permits; any plan would still require environmental review and applicable state and county permits. DLNR also supported OHA’s recommendation to consider impacts on Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices during regional planning, and said the bill’s language on temporary shoreline protection measures could help address the gap between emergency permits and longer-term planning while avoiding a hardening-only approach. The Office of Planning supported the regional planning concept but noted it is not a regulatory agency and would need to work with DLNR and the Land Board. OHA supported the bill’s planning-based approach but recommended amendments to require assessment of impacts on Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices during plan development and to clarify that environmental review would still apply at the project level. Testifiers from the Ka‘anapali Steering Committee strongly supported the bill, saying it would provide a regional framework for ongoing erosion problems while preserving full regulatory authority and normal permitting, and they proposed amendments to standardize terminology, create a limited pathway for temporary shoreline protection, and address ownership and maintenance responsibilities. Members discussed the meaning of “mitigation” versus “adaptation,” the scope of shoreline hardening, and whether the bill would help the legislature take a broader, more holistic view of shoreline decisions. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The reviewer would have to review the individual's report to identify what they articulate as their imminent
• I wanted to specifically go into the area of concern around the instances of review, the internal review
• You go through your own internal review for 13,500... ...go through your own internal review for 13,500
• So they'll review the audio-video surveillance system, they'll review the body-worn camera footage.
• So we actually do have our legal unit review those allegations.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee hearing focused on the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s handling of mental health care in prisons and allegations of sexual abuse, retaliation, and excessive force in the state’s women’s facilities. CDCR officials described their PREA-based prevention and response efforts, including training, oversight, body-worn cameras, retaliation follow-up, and partnerships with outside groups. The Office of the Inspector General explained its monitoring role, noting increased authority under SB 1069, but also limited staffing and the ability to monitor only a portion of cases. The Legislative Analyst’s Office added that prison population trends could allow the state to close a prison and save over $100 million, with some savings potentially redirected to prevention or response efforts. Advocates and formerly incarcerated witnesses from Sister Warriors Freedom Coalition and the California Coalition of Women Prisoners testified that meaningful systemic change has not occurred and that retaliation, blocked programming, and unsafe reporting conditions remain widespread. They described alleged barriers to community-based services, forced or coercive treatment concerns involving Suboxone, and the need for survivor-centered reentry support, trauma-informed care, and more independent oversight. Sandra DeAnda gave detailed testimony about alleged staff abuse, retaliation, denial of mental health care, and a large use-of-force incident at Central California Women’s Facility, while Amika Mota and April Grayson urged release or resentencing for survivors housed with their abusers and greater investment in outside programs. Members of the committee pressed CDCR and OIG on accountability, use-of-force standards, criminal referrals, disciplinary outcomes, and whether investigations are completed within statutory timelines. CDCR acknowledged cultural problems at both women’s prisons and said it was retraining staff and working on reforms, while OIG said it had monitored 161 investigations and found most grievance routing appropriate, though some cases had lapsed due to time limits. Later exchanges revealed that CDCR has over 13,500 active cases and 109 investigators, and that some cases have exceeded deadlines, prompting concerns from members about whether the current system can adequately investigate misconduct and impose consequences. No votes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> way they uh so it' be the plan review way they uh so it' be the plan review would<00:03:36.879><
• </c><00:15:16.199><c> scheduling</c> processing plan review scheduling processing plan review scheduling
• </c> of the permitting and inspections review of the permitting and inspections review process<00:16:
• <00:36:39.480><c> but</c><00:36:39.720><c> 3</c><00:36:40.000><c> weeks</c> reviewing but 3 weeks reviewing
• We're going to have the review of the committee budget. Ms.

Committee: Senate Labor

Transcript Highlights:

• Moving to the midpoint review that's created in the bill, the bill requires the court to conduct a review
• So I would just encourage you to review it.
• The bill's mid-sentence review is modest; it's manageable.
• conducts audits, evaluations, reviews, and studies.
• First, JLARC is directed to review the funding for CPDAs by December 1, 2034.

Bills: HB2675 , HB2681 , HB2714 , HB2688 , HB2481 , HB2116 , HB1408

Committee: House Appropriations

Keywords: accounts, finance, business regulation, transparency, audits, cannabis, license fees, regulatory framework, revenue generation, legalization, HB 2714, caseload forecasting, food assistance, SNAP, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, state food assistance, budget forecasting, caseload forecast council, caseload forecast supervisor, Washington State

Transcript Highlights:

• a multi-disciplinary review committee.
• So much for a robust and thorough review.
• a multi-disciplinary review committee.
• a multi-disciplinary review committee.
• a multi-disciplinary review committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• SB 327 will put in code the public advocate's authority to discover information and review investor-owned
• Every other generation resource undergoes consistent safety review for this reason.
• They're required to submit an application and go through the review process.
• But that technical review by the utility...
• So, in closing, I will say we are reviewing both the... ...I will say we are reviewing both the study

Committee: House Utilities and Energy

Transcript Highlights:

• ,</c><00:10:29.280><c> and</c> fixes or back-end system reviews, and fixes or back-end system reviews
• >> Um, so, prepayment review is a program integrity tool that I think is very important, but we have
• &gt;&gt; Um<00:20:37.200><c> so,</c><00:20:37.520><c> prepayment</c><00:20:38.080><c> review</c><00:20
• , and now somebody's prepayment review, and now somebody's losing<00:21:03.280><c> services</c><00:21
• </c><00:21:30.400><c> before</c> it happens or prepayment review before it happens or prepayment review

Summary: Senate DFL leaders held a press conference outlining a fraud-prevention agenda centered on transparency, accountability, and modernization of state systems. Majority Leader Erin Murphy said Minnesotans are angry about fraud and that the caucus has already passed multiple fraud-prevention measures, but more work is needed. She and other senators emphasized that outdated county and state IT systems leave programs vulnerable to waste and abuse, and said they want to pursue both immediate upgrades and longer-term funding solutions, including possible bonding for technology infrastructure. Senator Zena Mohamed described legislation to overhaul program integrity in Medicaid and human services by adding safeguards before, during, and after provider enrollment and service delivery. She said the goal is to prevent theft before dollars are spent, rein in third-party entities that profit without accountability, and improve consumer protections and reporting pathways. Senator Amanda Hemmingsen-Jaeger highlighted a bill to ban cryptocurrency kiosks, arguing they are heavily used in scams targeting seniors and vulnerable people, and also backed a state consumer financial protection bureau and stronger False Claims Act enforcement. Senator Rob Kupec focused on ethics and conflicts of interest, including a proposal to bar legislative members and certain state employees from quickly moving into jobs tied to entities receiving state appropriations or grants. He also said lawmakers should strengthen penalties for theft of public funds and restrict state contracts for people convicted of fraud. Senator Heather Gustafson promoted her Office of Inspector General bill, saying oversight is fragmented and an independent office is needed for investigations, safeguards, and early detection; she said the Senate passed the bill 60-7 last year and she wants it enacted. In response to questions, Murphy and Gustafson said the OIG should have law-enforcement powers, that bipartisan support exists in principle, and that the House needs to settle on a single proposal. The senators also said prepayment review can be useful but can disrupt services, and they argued agencies must use the tools already given to them while lawmakers continue oversight.