Bills: SB2060, SB2342, SB2577, SB2580, SB2809, SB2397, SB2315, SB2442, SB2152, SB2380, SB2462, SB2055, SB2438, SB2533, SB2203, SB2087, SB768, SB877, SB1139, SB787, HB963, SB277, SB2663, SB2555, SB2140, SB2115, SB2761, SB2198, SB2032, SB2579, SB2671, SB2835, SB2356, SB2095, SB2093, SB2318, SB2323, SB2485, SB2309, SB2321, SB2405, SB2153, SB2129, SB2170, SB2259, SB2578, SB2544, SB2701, SB2861, SB2108, SB2089, SB2106, SB847, SB3326, SB2047, SB2695, SB2667, SB2919, SB2446, SB2146, SB2723, SB2210, SB2527, SB2645, SB3331

Keywords: rental housing revolving fund, HHFDC, Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation, mixed-income housing, mixed-income rental project, affordable housing, low-income housing, housing finance, housing development, preservation, rehabilitation, pre-development, construction financing, equity investment, credit enhancement, collateral, gap financing, area median income, AMI, perpetual affordability

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> Uh it is a voluntary program program. Uh it is a voluntary program program.
• . program. program.
• >> I'm not sure about United Healthcare. >> How about Blue Cross Blue Shield?
• >> I'm not sure about United Healthcare. >> How about Blue Cross Blue Shield?
• >> I'm not sure about United Healthcare. >> How about Blue Cross Blue Shield?

Keywords: MS House Floor - 4 February, 2026; 10:00 AM, 925, all

Transcript Highlights:

• district from both of those programs.
• district from both of those programs.
• and ASES programs together.
• How are districts accommodating inclusion in the ELOP program?
• to cover high school programs?

Summary: The committee heard presentations on the Governor’s education budget proposals for the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), Learning Recovery Block Grant, and Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), followed by testimony from State Board of Education President Linda Darling-Hammond. On LCFF, Finance outlined the proposed 2.43% COLA, repayment of prior deferrals, and a trailer bill penalty for LEAs that fail to adopt Local Control Accountability Plans on time. The LAO said its COLA estimate was slightly lower and raised concerns that the Governor’s proposed TK staffing ratio increase may be more costly than estimated. Members also discussed whether the current COLA formula should better reflect California-specific or district staffing costs, and whether TK should be more clearly separated from the K-3 grade span adjustment to avoid larger K-3 class sizes. The chair asked staff to work with the LAO on both the TK/K-3 issue and alternative COLA calculations. For the Learning Recovery Block Grant, Finance proposed restoring the first of three delayed payments, $378.6 million one-time Proposition 98 General Fund, while the LAO recommended adopting the proposal but extending the expenditure deadline by at least a year. The LAO reported that districts had spent $1.6 billion of the $6.8 billion received through 2023-24 and said most districts were only now shifting from federal COVID relief to block grant spending. Members questioned whether the large state and federal investments were improving outcomes, citing declining reading and math trends, while Finance and the State Board president pointed to some signs of improvement, especially in math, attendance, and gains for some student groups. Darling-Hammond emphasized that student needs have grown, that recovery spending has gone to devices, ventilation, staffing, tutoring, summer school, and community schools, and that targeted interventions appear to be helping some districts recover faster than others. On ELOP, Finance proposed adding $435 million to expand universal access by lowering the Tier 1 threshold from 75% to 55% unduplicated pupils, bringing ongoing funding to $4.4 billion. The LAO said the estimate was reasonable but recommended delaying implementation for a year, aligning ELOP with ASES to reduce overlap, moving toward funding based on participation rather than enrollment, and considering a fixed Tier 2 rate. Members and witnesses discussed staffing challenges, the use of funds for students with disabilities, and uncertainty in Tier 2 funding caused by unspent dollars and opt-outs. Darling-Hammond supported ELOP as part of California’s broader after-school and summer learning strategy, said most districts are now offering full-day TK and expanded learning, and urged the state to reduce fragmentation across categorical programs and build more unified systems for funding, reporting, and support.

Transcript Highlights:

• The segments already do this for their self-support programs, for their housing programs, for example
• , kinesiology programs, and physical education programs that are being conducted in those facilities.
• , as is unfortunately many other programs.
• This program is not optional.
• This program is not optional.

Summary: The committee’s first major discussion focused on higher education facilities across UC, CSU, and the community colleges, with Chair Alvarez framing the issue as a final budget hearing before the May Revise. The LAO presented findings that campuses have grown substantially in buildings and square footage, while classroom and lab utilization remains below legislative standards and deferred maintenance backlogs continue to rise. The LAO also emphasized that the state and segments lack comprehensive data on capital renewal spending and recommended better reporting, clearer funding targets, and long-term planning for renewal and maintenance. UC, CSU, and community college representatives each described large five-year capital plans, aging facilities, seismic and deferred maintenance needs, and the role of student housing, while noting that construction costs are rising faster than inflation. Members questioned the segments about debt service, utilization rates, and how projects are prioritized. UC said its debt service tied to state support is about $665 million annually and described a $30 billion five-year capital financial plan, including housing, medical centers, and building renewal. CSU said it has about $31 billion in five-year needs and more than $8 billion in deferred maintenance, with funding coming from a mix of state-related and one-time sources since the state shifted capital responsibility to CSU. Community colleges said their unmet facilities needs total about $33.5 billion and explained their use of a scoring matrix and FUSION system to rank projects. The chair and members pressed all three systems to better distinguish between projects that are truly shovel-ready and those that are long-term needs, and discussed whether facilities condition data, total cost of ownership, and more standardized metrics should guide future bond proposals. The committee then turned to Proposition 2 and the Governor’s proposed community college capital outlay projects. The Department of Finance said Prop. 2 provides $1.5 billion for community colleges and that the Governor’s budget proposes 29 projects, with two continuing Prop. 51 projects also included. The LAO supported the overall use of the funds but raised concerns about the current 65/35 split between modernization and growth, the unusually large share of gymnasium projects, and some scoring metrics that favor larger campuses and certain regions. Community college officials said the scoring system was developed through participatory governance and would take one to two years to revise, but they supported the funding and agreed to follow up on questions about project categories and the rationale for the weighting. Members also suggested giving more weight to modernization, regional access, and intersegmental or collaborative projects. A final item addressed the CalKids program. The Department of Finance proposed $56,000 ongoing General Fund for three positions, while the LAO recommended approving two positions but rejecting a manager position until the current $7.5 million marketing campaign is evaluated. ScholarShare’s executive director said CalKids has enrolled more than 5 million children, with nearly 600,000 claims and over $45 million distributed, and argued that additional staff and outreach are needed to reach a goal of 1 million claimed scholarships by the end of 2025 and to implement AB 2808. Members asked about marketing effectiveness, data sharing, and eligibility rules, and the program said it is expanding partnerships with Cradle to Career and CSAC. No final vote was taken in the hearing, and the chair indicated the facilities item would be held open.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm Doctor Sarah Dents, principal program evaluator with your LFC.
• The hospital's just barely got this program up and running with Medicaid program.
• So that's a little bit different than some of these other programs.
• and it's we don't see it as this program has failed.
• it's a good program that it's not being implemented properly.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:41:03.119><c> But</c> the property tax relief program. But the property tax relief program.
• </c><00:43:30.800><c> on</c> minutes um just for the programming on minutes um just for the programming
• </c><01:33:24.239><c> um</c> using kind of back of the envelope um using kind of back of the envelope
• program for the tax refunds.
• </c> confusion to them as to which program confusion to them as to which program we're<02:02:39.280><

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think that, you know, we've got a lot of programs.
• We're trying to help those folks with those programs. But at the same time...
• And I would be in favor of a bill that had that intention for a program or a class agenda.
• And I would be in favor of a bill that had that intention for a program or a class agenda.
• , a week-long program.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• in the nation. ...liberal arts program in the nation.
• A duty that goes beyond simply the degree-granting programs, like our welding program.
• Academy and Police Academy, among many other programs.
• See us move forward in workforce programs and add maybe some more four-year programs to the college,
• Of course, we'll remain focused on offering programs.

Summary: The committee heard and voted on two higher education bills before moving to a long series of university and college board appointment confirmations. CS/SB 742 would let charter schools directly access the Workforce Development Capitalization Incentive Grant Program for career and technical education programs tied to industry certifications, and would expand the money-back guarantee requirement from three to six programs at career centers and Florida College System institutions. A question was raised about whether the charter school access could reduce district funding or grant availability; the sponsor said it could, depending on available funds. The bill was supported by one appearance form and was reported favorably. The committee also heard SB 892, which codifies the Florida State University Election Law Center so it can continue and receive recurring funding. The sponsor and FSU witnesses said the center is nonpartisan and focused on evidence-based research, especially on election administration issues related to natural disasters and public confidence in elections. After testimony and questions, including about the center’s scope and funding, the bill was reported favorably. The remainder of the meeting consisted of testimony from numerous appointees to boards of trustees for state colleges and universities, including Tallahassee State College, Valencia College, New College, Pensacola State College, Florida Gulf Coast University, University of North Florida, St. Johns River State College, Palm Beach State College, Santa Fe College, Daytona State College, and Florida Atlantic University. Most nominees emphasized their personal ties to the institutions, support for workforce education, student success, and local economic development. Several highlighted priorities such as keeping tuition affordable, expanding internships and career pathways, strengthening nursing and other workforce programs, and improving graduation and retention rates. Some appointees also described campus-specific goals, including research growth at FAU and Harbor Branch, community engagement at New College, and continued support for health care workforce partnerships at FGCU. The most notable exchange came during testimony from Dr. Joel Rudman for the Pensacola State College board, where Senator Leek questioned him extensively about prior public comments that appeared to reference threats and drug testing legislators. Rudman said his remarks were aimed at Florida House members and not the Senate, denied any knowledge of illicit drug use by current or former senators, and said he was speaking candidly as a private citizen. Public testimony on his nomination included both support and strong opposition, with one speaker praising his community service and another warning about his alleged disruptive behavior and social media posts. The committee also heard from several supporters and appointees who were not questioned further, and the meeting ended with plans to vote on the appointments after all testimony was completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm an ostracist that feels that every time we push the envelope, because the public loves animals and

Summary: The joint Audit Committee meeting focused on implementation of Ali’s Law, including MDAR’s progress on kennel regulations and municipal reporting. MDOT/MDAR officials said the department formed the required advisory committee, held trainings for animal control officers and municipal clerks, created a public information webpage, and completed draft regulations that are now under secretarial review. They reported that 269 of 351 municipalities had filed kennel counts, leaving 82 out of compliance, and said the reported statewide total was 1,408 licensed kennels, with an estimated 1,800 to 1,850 statewide. Committee members pressed the department on the pace of rulemaking, the lack of a clear enforcement mechanism for municipalities that fail to report, and the need for stronger accountability. The chair said he wanted to avoid a formal investigation if answers could be obtained, but urged MDAR to move quickly and to consider stronger public reporting and possible sanctions. He also asked about injury reporting and suggested that injury data should be sent to the state and tracked in a way that provides context, such as the number of animals in a facility. Representatives from animal welfare organizations and the advisory committee supported the law’s goals but emphasized that rollout should be fair to compliant businesses and that municipalities and ACOs need better training, resources, and standardized guidance. They backed a filed bill, House Bill 4849, which would give MDAR authority to fine municipalities that do not comply and would add more detailed reporting, including last inspection dates and injury reports. They also raised concerns about third-party advertising platforms that may list unlicensed kennels and argued that public education, consumer transparency, and stronger oversight are needed to prevent bad actors from operating.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm an ostracist that feels that every time we push the envelope, because the public loves animals and

Keywords: 1212, all

Transcript Highlights:

• issues that are present when it comes to people putting personal identifying information on the envelope

Summary: The Senate convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, roll call, and routine journal and calendar actions, including a gubernatorial nomination referral and bill references. Members also introduced guests in the gallery before the chamber resolved into the Committee of the Whole to consider several election, health care, and child welfare measures. In Committee of the Whole, senators considered SB 1038 on cast voter records and public records, SB 1133 on nominating procedures and candidate financial disclosures, SB 1247 on assisted living centers, and SCR 1001, a constitutional election-requirements referral. Each measure was amended and given a do-pass recommendation. SB 1133 received a floor amendment exempting certain statewide and legislative candidates in an emergency-related provision, SB 1247 was amended to allow a person not receiving care services to live with a resident in an assisted living center, and SCR 1001 was amended to make major election changes, including proof-of-identity requirements, changes to early ballot and drop-off rules, and language affecting mail voting and election administration. Debate on SCR 1001 was extensive, with supporters saying it would improve election security and speed results, and opponents warning it would reduce access, create confusion, and disproportionately burden voters, especially those who vote by mail or in rural and communities of color. On third reading, SB 1038 passed 17-12, SB 1133 passed 23-6 with the emergency clause, SB 1247 passed 28-1 with the emergency clause, and SCR 1001 passed 17-12-1. The Senate also passed SB 1172 and SB 1175 by 28-1 votes. The Committee of the Whole report was adopted, the measures were properly assigned, committee meeting announcements were made, a moment of silence was held for Jesse Jackson, and the Senate adjourned until the next day.

Transcript Highlights:

• “On the envelope for their mail-in ballot.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• CAN'T BE PREFILLED, IF IT IS NOT PREFILLED AND IT IS A BLANK AMENDMENT WITH THE EXPLANATION AND ENVELOPE

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , undergraduate programs, especially in nursing, business, and sciences.
• This bill has to do with the school lunch program about healthy.
• But of course this is not a red or a blue. matter. This is about our children.
• We have to preserve that program for those kids who need those meals. Acceptable to the author.
• The Local Food for Schools program.

Bills: SJR18, SCR9, SCR13, SB10, SB11, SB19, SB20, SB25, SB62, SB260, SB263, SB293, SB314, SB384, SB412, SB441, SB442, SB494, SB523, SB569, SB616, SB688, SB707, SB766, SB842, SB869, SB890, SB914, SB929, SB971, SB992, SB1066, SB1145, SB1621, SJR36, SJR18, SCR9, SCR13, SB616, SB565, SB384, SB372, SB495, SB842, SB971, SB1066, SB929, SB765, SB523, SB62, SB19, SB18, SB666, SB688, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB706, SB847, SB869, SB890, SB992, SB1145, SB494, SB290, SB766, SB11, SB10, SB13, SB263, SB412, SB20, SB441, SB442, SB1621, SB569, SB314, SB25, SB293, SB914, SB260, SB1248, SB740, SB14, SB1006, SB20, SB25, SB260, SB293, SB314, SB384, SB442, SB494, SB616, SB869, SB890, SB929, SB992, SB1145, SB1621, SR232, SR237, SR242, SB16, SB22

Keywords: capital gains, taxation, constitutional amendment, state revenue, individual investment, Supreme Court, judicial independence, Keep Nine, checks and balances, water rights, treaty compliance, Rio Grande, agriculture, drought, international water, Texas water supply, education, Ten Commandments, public schools, religious display

Transcript Highlights:

• They will administer the autism grants program I will talk about in a few minutes.
• Most camps and summer programs won't accept a child with autism.
• What we want to do is have a grant program that will establish summer programs for autism, and that would
• And I think with your help and program we are going to provide that to them.
• We have a program where they are working in various facilities across the state.

Bills: SJR18, SCR9, SCR13, SB10, SB11, SB19, SB20, SB25, SB62, SB260, SB263, SB293, SB314, SB384, SB412, SB441, SB442, SB494, SB523, SB569, SB616, SB688, SB707, SB766, SB842, SB869, SB890, SB914, SB929, SB971, SB992, SB1066, SB1145, SB1621, SJR36, SJR18, SCR9, SCR13, SB616, SB565, SB384, SB372, SB495, SB842, SB971, SB1066, SB929, SB765, SB523, SB62, SB19, SB18, SB666, SB688, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB706, SB847, SB869, SB890, SB992, SB1145, SB494, SB290, SB766, SB11, SB10, SB13, SB263, SB412, SB20, SB441, SB442, SB1621, SB569, SB314, SB25, SB293, SB914, SB260, SB1248, SB740, SB14, SB1006, SB20, SB25, SB260, SB293, SB314, SB384, SB442, SB494, SB616, SB869, SB890, SB929, SB992, SB1145, SB1621, SR232, SR237, SR242, SB16, SB22

Keywords: capital gains, taxation, constitutional amendment, state revenue, individual investment, Supreme Court, judicial independence, Keep Nine, checks and balances, water rights, treaty compliance, Rio Grande, agriculture, drought, international water, Texas water supply, education, Ten Commandments, public schools, religious display

Transcript Highlights:

• These programs... ...or one that they absolutely must make, like for a sibling's wedding.
• These programs are a win-win for consumers, airlines, and the economy.
• travel perks, but the cost of those programs is borne by the small business owner.
• These programs are a tool that card issuers use to win cardholder business.
• These programs are a tool that card issuers use to win cardholder business, as we saw with the many envelopes

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The commission met for its second hearing to study the future of credit card payments and sales transactions and their impacts on small businesses. Members heard extensive testimony from credit unions, retailers, restaurants, and payment-industry representatives on interchange fees, processing fees, fraud, chargebacks, rewards programs, and the ability of businesses to pass fees on to customers. Several witnesses argued that swipe fees have risen sharply, are especially burdensome for restaurants and other small businesses, and are charged on taxes and tips that are merely pass-through amounts. They urged state action to prohibit fees on tax and tip portions, improve transparency, and allow surcharging or convenience fees, while opponents warned that state regulation could reduce fraud protections, increase compliance costs, and threaten consumer rewards programs. Business owners and trade groups described thin margins, rising costs, and the difficulty of understanding merchant statements or negotiating with processors. Restaurant witnesses said card-not-present and online transactions create the greatest fraud and chargeback risk, with money often removed immediately from merchants’ accounts and disputes rarely resolved in their favor. Retail witnesses gave examples of rising effective rates, higher fees on rewards cards, and the burden of processing fees on low-value transactions. A representative from the Massachusetts Restaurant Association and others said restaurants are effectively paying fees on meals tax and gratuities, which they argued should not be subject to interchange charges. On the other side, the Cooperative Credit Union Association said interchange revenue helps credit unions fund fraud prevention, rapid card replacement, and member protections, and warned that state limits on interchange could weaken those safeguards and lead to higher consumer costs or reduced services. Airlines for America testified that airline credit card rewards are popular, support travel and jobs in Massachusetts, and could be harmed by interchange reform. The National Restaurant Association and a payments-policy attorney countered that interchange fees are set by card networks rather than competitive markets, that banks remain highly profitable even with rewards, and that states can act after recent court decisions. No votes were taken; the hearing consisted of testimony and questions from commissioners.

Transcript Highlights:

• These programs are a win-win for consumers, airlines, and the economy.
• On their behalf, we ask that you reject any proposals that would harm these programs in your state's
• Meanwhile, credit card companies continue to heavily market rewards programs, cash back, points, and
• travel perks, but the cost of those programs is borne by the small business owner.
• These programs are a tool that card issuers use to win cardholder business, as we saw with the many envelopes

Summary: The commission met to hear testimony on the future of credit card payments and swipe fees, with a focus on impacts to small businesses, especially restaurants and retailers. Members and witnesses discussed interchange fees, processing fees, chargebacks, fraud risk, rewards programs, and the growing use of card-not-present and digital wallet transactions. Several witnesses urged the commission to support legislation that would prohibit fees on the tax and tip portions of transactions and allow businesses to pass credit card fees on to customers if they choose, while others warned that state regulation of interchange could reduce fraud protections and harm consumer rewards programs. Small business owners and trade groups described rising costs and thin margins, saying card fees are now among their largest expenses and are often charged on money that is merely passing through the business, such as sales tax and gratuities. Restaurant representatives said the current system shifts fraud and chargeback losses onto merchants, with little ability to negotiate rates or recover disputed funds, and argued that transparency and fee relief would help keep independent businesses open. Retailers gave similar testimony, citing rising swipe fees, complex statements, and the burden of online and phone transactions. A representative from the airline industry opposed interchange reform, arguing that airline credit card rewards are popular with consumers and support travel and jobs in Massachusetts. Credit union representatives cautioned that state-level interchange limits could weaken fraud prevention and force higher rates or reduced services, while the National Restaurant Association and a payments-policy attorney countered that banks and networks already operate under fee caps in other contexts and that interchange rates are fixed rather than competitive. Commission members asked questions about how chargebacks work, how fees are broken down, whether businesses can negotiate with processors or POS providers, and how consumer behavior has shifted toward cards, online ordering, and delivery since the pandemic. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• the month this year alone, we ask and ask, and we see what we can do with the Advanced Clean Trucks program

Bills: SB5223, SB5928, SB6071, SB5995, SB5966, SB5841, SB6061, SB5944, SB5520, SB6087, SB6076, SB5916, SB6016, SB6137, SB6009, SB5833, SB6161, SB5890, SB5973, SJM8015, SB5816, SB5053, SB5249, SB5536, SB5834, SB5837, SB5872, SB5879, SB5899, SB5925, SB6019, SB6148, SB6190, SB6237, SB6086, SB5574, SB5873, SB5992, SB5924, SB6134, SB6263, SB5395, SB6282, SB5905, SB6302, SB5950, SB6074, SB6096, SB5970, SB5609, SB5827, SB5838, SB5845, SB5862, SB5880, SB5901, SB5922, SB5943, SB5971, SB5975, SB5981, SB5982, SB5984, SB5988, SB5994, SB6034, SB6035, SB6070, SB6097, SB6110, SB6246, SB6248, SB6278, SJM8016, SB5496, SB6054, SB5835, SB5907, SB6031, SB6155, SB6158, SB6227, SB5947, SB6247, SB6085, SB6234, SB6274, SB6194, SB5909, SB5868, SB6026, SB5974, SB6044, SB5906, SB6081, SB6239, SB5923, SB6323, SB6210, SB6045, SB6106, SB5346, SB6089, SB6170, SB5954, SB5968

Keywords: criminal offense, fingerprinting, law enforcement, state regulations, public safety, wildfire risk, disclosure, safety, environmental policy, risk assessment, overpayment recovery, modernization, health care, legislation, zero emission, cargo handling, port district, environmental impact, grant allocation, healthcare

Transcript Highlights:

• We've had many more children needing the program and many more families eligible than we've ever had
• Last line: Mobility grant program funds. Senator Elias. Thank you, Mr. President.
• This is a federal loan program to support the creation of infrastructure.
• This is a federal loan program to support the creation of infrastructure. Now, I was...
• This is a federal loan program to support the creation of infrastructure.

Bills: SB5223, SB5928, SB6071, SB5995, SB5966, SB5841, SB6061, SB5944, SB5520, SB6087, SB6076, SB5916, SB6016, SB6137, SB6009, SB5833, SB6161, SB5890, SB5973, SJM8015, SB5816, SB5053, SB5249, SB5536, SB5834, SB5837, SB5872, SB5879, SB5899, SB5925, SB6019, SB6148, SB6190, SB6237, SB6086, SB5574, SB5873, SB5992, SB5924, SB6134, SB6263, SB5395, SB6282, SB5905, SB6302, SB5950, SB6074, SB6096, SB5970, SB5609, SB5827, SB5838, SB5845, SB5862, SB5880, SB5901, SB5922, SB5943, SB5971, SB5975, SB5981, SB5982, SB5984, SB5988, SB5994, SB6034, SB6035, SB6070, SB6097, SB6110, SB6246, SB6248, SB6278, SJM8016, SB5496, SB6054, SB5835, SB5907, SB6031, SB6155, SB6158, SB6227, SB5947, SB6247, SB6085, SB6234, SB6274, SB6194, SB5909, SB5868, SB6026, SB5974, SB6044, SB5906, SB6081, SB6239, SB5923, SB6323, SB6210, SB6045, SB6106, SB5346, SB6089, SB6170, SB5954, SB5968

Keywords: criminal offense, fingerprinting, law enforcement, state regulations, public safety, wildfire risk, disclosure, safety, environmental policy, risk assessment, overpayment recovery, modernization, health care, legislation, zero emission, cargo handling, port district, environmental impact, grant allocation, healthcare

Bills: SB5223, SB5928, SB6071, SB5995, SB5966, SB5841, SB6061, SB5944, SB5520, SB6087, SB6076, SB5916, SB6016, SB6137, SB6009, SB5833, SB6161, SB5890, SB5973, SJM8015, SB5816, SB5053, SB5249, SB5536, SB5834, SB5837, SB5872, SB5879, SB5899, SB5925, SB6019, SB6148, SB6190, SB6237, SB6086, SB5574, SB5873, SB5992, SB5924, SB6134, SB6263, SB5395, SB6282, SB5905, SB6302, SB5950, SB6074, SB6096, SB5970, SB5609, SB5827, SB5838, SB5845, SB5862, SB5880, SB5901, SB5922, SB5943, SB5971, SB5975, SB5981, SB5982, SB5984, SB5988, SB5994, SB6034, SB6035, SB6070, SB6097, SB6110, SB6246, SB6248, SB6278, SJM8016, SB5496, SB6054, SB5835, SB5907, SB6031, SB6155, SB6158, SB6227, SB5947, SB6247, SB6085, SB6234, SB6274, SB6194, SB5909, SB5868, SB6026, SB5974, SB6044, SB5906, SB6081, SB6239, SB5923, SB6323, SB6210, SB6045, SB6106, SB5346, SB6089, SB6170, SB5954, SB5968

Keywords: criminal offense, fingerprinting, law enforcement, state regulations, public safety, wildfire risk, disclosure, safety, environmental policy, risk assessment, overpayment recovery, modernization, health care, legislation, zero emission, cargo handling, port district, environmental impact, grant allocation, healthcare