Transcript Highlights:

• Data and evidence from around the world across time and geography shows that five out of six brands grow
• We must move from opinion-based traditions to evidence-based reality, as described in our memo.
• We recognize that wine overall and collectively needs to level up its marketing and its community to
• And the reason was because the evidence was very clear: millennials were not driving.
• And the reason was because the evidence was very clear. Millennials were not driving.

Transcript Highlights:

• Data and evidence from around the world, across time and geography, shows that five out of six brands
• We must move from opinion-based traditions to evidence-based reality, as described in our memo.
• We recognize that wine overall and collectively needs to level up its marketing and its community to
• And the reason was because the evidence was very clear: millennials were not driving.
• And the reason was because the evidence was very clear: millennials were not driving.

Summary: The Senate Select Committee on California’s wine industry held its first meeting at Napa Valley College, with opening remarks from Chair Senator Christopher Cabaldon and Assembly Majority Leader Cecilia Aguiar-Curry emphasizing the wine industry’s importance to California’s economy, communities, and tourism. The chair said the hearing was intended to gather information and ideas, not to take legislative action that day, and to prepare for future work on legislation, budget, and oversight. The first panel focused on research and trends, with experts from Sonoma State, UC Davis, and Terrain describing a major structural downturn: falling wine production and sales, rising costs, labor shortages, housing pressures, changing consumer habits, tariffs, and the loss of younger consumers. They argued the industry needs to shift toward new-customer acquisition, more accessible products and messaging, evidence-based business decisions, and greater investment in research, education, and innovation, including work on disease, climate stress, and health-related consumer questions. Committee members pressed the panel on whether the industry’s future depends on adaptation by existing producers or market-driven consolidation, and on how California can reduce regulatory burdens while maintaining standards. Witnesses said the state’s universities are a “superpower” but are underfunded for wine research, especially on the business and regulatory side, and they urged review of outdated rules, better data collection, and more efficient compliance systems. They also discussed trade competitiveness, especially with imports and the collapse of exports to Canada after tariffs, and raised the need for transitional support for vineyard removals and replanting. The chair and majority leader emphasized that regulations should be evaluated for effectiveness and that California should use its research capacity to improve both industry practices and regulatory implementation. A second panel included representatives from growers, the Wine Institute, and family winemakers. Michael Miller of the California Association of Wine Grape Growers described a severe grower crisis: grapes left unpicked, vineyards abandoned or removed, falling vineyard values, and a need for relief on regulatory costs, trade barriers, water policy, and vineyard removal expenses. Honor Comfort of the Wine Institute focused on consumer outreach, especially younger drinkers, and described the Share Wine Co-Lab, an open-access marketing platform with research, webinars, case studies, and office hours to help wineries better reach Gen Z and millennials. Jane Lisa Tamayo of Family Winemakers of California was present but her remarks were largely garbled in the transcript. Committee members again stressed the need for education, better messaging, and caution about simplistic policy fixes, while also noting the importance of Canada as an export market and the risks of tariffs. The final panel addressed tourism, farmworker impacts, and water regulation. Visit Napa Valley CEO Lindsay Gallagher said Napa’s tourism economy remains relatively strong but is feeling the same international headwinds as the wine sector, including reduced Canadian visitation; she said Napa is broadening its message beyond wine to cuisine, wellness, and outdoor experiences. Sonia DeLuca of the Napa Valley Farmworker Foundation said declining sales and rising costs are reducing hours, wages, and training opportunities for farmworkers, and urged targeted relief, removal of barriers to sales, wage-loss support, and continued bilingual workforce training. She also said Napa’s workforce-development model is ready to support technology adoption if legal changes allow more automation. Finally, State Water Board official Annalisa Kihar gave an update on the Winery General Order, explaining that it was created in 2021 to streamline and standardize wastewater permitting, with tiered requirements and exemptions for very small wineries; she said 56 wineries have enrolled and 122 are under review, and that the board is working with industry and regional agencies to improve compliance support and flexibility.

Transcript Highlights:

• Data and evidence from around the world, across time and geography, shows that five out of six brands
• We must move from opinion-based traditions to evidence-based reality, as described in our memo.
• We recognize that wine overall and collectively needs to level up its marketing and its community to
• And the reason was because the evidence was very clear: millennials were not driving.
• And the reason was because the evidence was very clear. Millennials were not driving.

Summary: The Senate Select Committee on California’s Wine Industry held its first meeting at Napa Valley College, with Chair Christopher Cabaldon and Assembly Majority Leader Cecilia Aguiar-Curry opening the hearing by stressing the wine industry’s importance to California’s economy, communities, and tourism. They said the purpose of the hearing was informational rather than legislative, with no votes or bill actions taken, and framed the day as a fact-finding session to inform future legislation, budget work, and oversight. The first panel focused on research and trends, with Dr. Damien Wilson of Sonoma State, UC Davis professor Ben Mumpeteet, and wine economist Chris Bitter describing the industry as facing structural change rather than a temporary downturn. The research panel highlighted falling wine production and sales, rising costs, and changing consumer behavior. Wilson argued the industry has relied too heavily on premiumization and technical elitism, pricing out younger consumers and needing to focus more on new customer acquisition, accessible brands, and evidence-based business decisions. Mumpeteet emphasized external threats such as grapevine diseases, extreme weather, water shortages, and wildfire smoke, and called for more public investment in viticulture and enology research, especially through California’s university system. Bitter said growers are dealing with depressed grape demand, a grape glut, vineyard removals, and sharply higher production costs driven largely by regulation and labor, and he urged review of regulatory costs, trade conditions, vineyard removal support, and barriers to replanting. Committee members then asked about how the industry can adapt, whether change will come through existing producers or market turnover, and how California might use its research capacity to improve regulation and compliance. Witnesses said the industry needs cultural change, better marketing to younger consumers, more data on health and consumption trends, and more efficient, science-based regulation. The second panel, with representatives from growers and the Wine Institute, described severe market stress: unharvested grapes, vineyard removals, and closures in some regions. Michael Miller said growers are seeing fruit left on the vine and called for relief on regulatory and trade pressures, while Honor Comfort described Wine Institute’s Share Wine Co-Lab, an open-access marketing platform aimed at helping wineries reach younger consumers through digital and data-driven strategies. A final panel addressed tourism, farmworkers, and water regulation. Visit Napa Valley’s Lindsay Gallagher said Napa remains relatively strong but is broadening its message beyond wine to cuisine, wellness, and outdoor experiences, while noting international visitation, especially from Canada, has fallen sharply. Sonia DeLuca of the Napa Valley Farmworker Foundation said declining sales and rising costs reduce hours and income for farmworkers and called for targeted relief, wage-loss support, and continued workforce training. Annalisa Kiara of the State Water Board provided an update on the Winery General Order, explaining that it was created to streamline and standardize wastewater permitting while protecting water quality; she said 56 wineries have enrolled and 122 more are under review, and noted ongoing coordination with industry sustainability programs. Throughout the hearing, members and witnesses repeatedly returned to the need for updated regulations, better data, and collaborative solutions, but no formal action was taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• Data and evidence from around the world across time and geography shows that five out of six brands grow
• We must move from opinion-based traditions to evidence-based reality, as described in our memo.
• We recognize that wine overall and collectively needs to level up its marketing and its community to
• And the reason was because the evidence was very clear: millennials were not driving.
• And the reason was because the evidence was very clear: millennials were not driving.

Summary: The Senate Select Committee on California’s Wine Industry held its first meeting at Napa Valley College, with opening remarks from Chair Senator Christopher Cabaldon and Assembly Majority Leader Cecilia Aguiar-Curry emphasizing the industry’s importance to California’s economy and communities. The chair said the hearing was intended to gather information and ideas, not to vote on legislation, and to inform future policy, budget, and oversight work. The first panel focused on research and trends, with speakers from Sonoma State, UC Davis, and Terrain describing the industry as facing structural change rather than a temporary downturn. Panelists said California wine is confronting falling consumption, rising costs, labor shortages, housing pressures, tariffs, and competition from imports. Dr. Damien Wilson argued the industry has relied too heavily on premiumization and must focus on attracting new consumers, especially younger generations, through more accessible products, better marketing, and evidence-based decision-making. UC Davis’s Ben Mumpeteet said grapevine disease, extreme weather, and water shortages require long-term research investment and stronger university-industry-state partnerships. Chris Bitter, a wine economist, reported that California wine sales are down about 25% since 2019, that large amounts of grapes have gone unpicked, and that vineyard removals and falling vineyard values reflect a severe supply-demand imbalance; he urged regulatory review, trade competitiveness analysis, and transition support for growers. The committee then heard from industry representatives. Michael Miller of the California Association of Wine Grape Growers described a crisis in which growers can produce high-quality fruit but have no buyers, leading to abandoned or removed vineyards, lost farm revenue, and pressure to restore market balance. Honor Comfort of the Wine Institute presented the Share Wine Co-Lab, an open-access marketing platform designed to help wineries better reach younger consumers through data-driven, collaborative outreach. Jane Lisa Tamayo of Family Winemakers of California discussed the burden on smaller wineries and growers, including regulatory and market challenges. Members and witnesses also discussed changing consumer preferences, the need to adapt to younger drinkers, and concerns about tariffs and trade policy, with the chair warning that broad tariff calls had harmed export markets such as Canada. A final panel addressed tourism, farmworker impacts, and water regulation. Visit Napa Valley’s Lindsay Gallagher said tourism remains strong in Napa but is increasingly dependent on broader destination marketing beyond wine, while international visitation has declined. Sonia DeLuca of the Napa Valley Farmworker Foundation said declining sales and rising costs reduce hours and income for farmworkers and urged targeted relief, wage-loss support, and continued bilingual training. State Water Board official Annalisa Kihar outlined the 2021 Winery General Order for winery process water, saying it was designed to streamline permitting, improve consistency, and reduce burdens on small wineries while protecting water quality; she reported 56 wineries enrolled and 122 under review, and said the board is working with industry partners on technical support and sustainability-based compliance pathways.

Transcript Highlights:

• fundamentally, you could be innocent or in the legal way of looking at it, the state may never have enough evidence
• 00:27:52.000><c> never</c><00:27:52.240><c> have</c><00:27:52.480><c> enough</c><00:27:53.200><c> evidence
• </c> the state may never have enough evidence the state may never have enough evidence to<00:27:53.840
• If the murderer gets, you know, sells the house for 400,000, you know, the victim's family can collect
• We have a deal. can collect that. But an innocent third can collect that.

Summary: The subcommittee work session focused on SB 148 and competing amendments dealing with forfeiture and civil recovery in murder cases. Members compared the “Lynn” and “Burge” amendments and narrowed the remaining disputes to two issues: whether the bill should apply only to first-degree murder or also to second-degree murder and related federal offenses, and whether any civil action could be brought before criminal charges or conviction. The group concluded that the pre-conviction approach created serious practical and constitutional problems, including Fifth Amendment concerns and uncertainty over how a civil case would proceed while a criminal investigation was pending. The discussion then shifted toward limiting the bill to post-conviction remedies. Members agreed that the Department of Justice pre-charge stay language should be removed, that the bill should not try to define “victim” in a way that included the person convicted of the murder, and that the definition should be revised to mean the estate of the victim or the victim’s immediate family, excluding the convicted person. They also agreed to delete language about “after right to appeal has been exhausted,” to correct a typo on page one, and to remove a section dealing with pre-conviction probate-style procedures and third-party notice issues. The committee also discussed how to handle third parties such as insurers, publishers, and innocent purchasers. Members concluded that third parties acting in good faith should not be liable if they make payments or transfer property without notice, but if they receive notice they should not disburse funds. They noted that existing post-conviction civil recovery language already allows victims to sue within three years, making the earlier pre-conviction mechanism unnecessary. The meeting ended with the members saying they had reached a deal on the revised language and would bring the updated amendment forward for further processing.

Transcript Highlights:

• The DNA testing grant program will provide dedicated funds and resources to assist DNA evidence testing
• Does that become a problem presenting that evidence?
• Actually, it's probably more accurate to say this information is already collected, right?
• And when somebody is convicted of the crime, that... ...information is already collected, right?
• This is a database of information that is already collected by the clerk of courts, which is just not

Summary: The committee heard and voted on a long agenda of criminal justice, public safety, and civil justice bills. Among the measures reported favorably were SB 984, which adds aggravating factors for capital sentencing when a murder occurs during religious, school, or public government gatherings; SB 1140, creating a Hillsborough County pilot program to address substance abuse among offenders on probation; SB 1180, expanding child pornography laws to cover lewd altered or filtered images and solicitation; SB 10, providing compensation to Sidney Holmes for a wrongful conviction; SB 500, creating a Spectrum Alert system and training for missing children with autism; SB 1054, increasing penalties for tampering with electronic monitoring devices; SB 1072, establishing an expedited DNA testing grant program; and SB 240, the Haven Act, which aligns domestic and dating violence protections and creates a feasibility study for a discreet emergency contact system for victims. Several bills were amended before passage, including funding for the Spectrum Alert program and technical changes to the DNA, juvenile justice, and other proposals. Members also advanced SB 494, creating a statewide FDLE animal abuse database and increasing sentencing consequences for aggravated animal cruelty, with strong support from animal welfare groups and county officials. SB 1422 was reported favorably to strengthen penalties for unmanned aircraft over critical infrastructure and for weaponized drones, though members raised concerns about the bill’s “reasonable force” language. SB 1268 updated FDLE statutes and increased reimbursement for retired police dogs. SB 1252 was amended into a feasibility study for a statewide pawn data database, and SB 1386 increased penalties for assaults and batteries on utility workers, drawing support from utility and industry groups. The committee also approved SB 1084 on sexual cyber harassment, which criminalizes dissemination of intimate images and digitally forged intimate images, and SB 1654, which revises sexual offender and predator registration rules, including online reporting for certain in-state travel residences. SB 1650 expanded the vexatious litigant law, and SB 1652 created a public records exemption for stricken non-criminal court filings. Finally, SB 1284, expanding Florida’s Wrongful Death Act to allow civil claims for the death of an unborn child, drew extensive testimony both for and against; supporters called it a life-affirming measure, while opponents warned it could increase litigation, affect abortion-related care, and discourage physicians from practicing in Florida. The bill was heard with multiple public comments, but the transcript excerpt does not show a final vote on SB 1284.

Transcript Highlights:

• They collect information about assets, revenues, balance sheets.
• They collect information about assets, revenues, balance sheets. That data does have a lag.
• But they do collect quarterly data, and they publish that.
• And they will be collecting some data just to ensure eligibility for the program, too.
• So they would have collected the most recent quarter, which would have ended on March 31st.

Committee: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review

Transcript Highlights:

• But if it's online, what recourse does an illegal lender have to collect on such a loan? Mr.
• We do not take you to collections, garnish wages, or take you to court. Follow-up: Thank you, Mr.
• We don't take people to collections, we don't garnish wages, and we don't take them to court.
• Take people to collections, we don't garnish wages, and we don't take them to court.
• I don't know if there's any other evidence or anything else you can add to that that might put what we

Committee: House Business

Transcript Highlights:

• When I was there, we did an analysis on how much money was collected from the High Desert, still L.A.
• The money that was collected that went down to the county did not really—we didn't get anything close
• to what was collected from the Antelope Valley.
• I think the data that was just presented is only scratching the surface of the evidence of monumental
• And I think the data that was just presented is only scratching the surface of the evidence of monumental

Committee: House Revenue and Taxation

Transcript Highlights:

• Paul alone, 2025 to 2026, it is still at 97.1% of rent collected on time.
• to 2026, it is still at 97.1%<00:07:59.600><c> of</c><00:07:59.720><c> rent</c><00:07:59.960><c> collected
• </c> 97.1% of rent collected on time. 97.1% of rent collected on time.
• A decision last week by a Trump-appointed judge found compelling and troubling evidence of racial profiling
• </c> found compelling and troubling evidence found compelling and troubling evidence of<00:25:07.320>

Transcript Highlights:

• difference between drivers who are not impaired at all, meaning they had a zero BAC and no other drugs evident
• So if they do a breath test and that's at the per se limit and above, they can proceed on that evidence
• The 0.05 standard is a measured, evidence-based practice for public safety.
• We think that there are millions of dollars out there that are not being collected, which is not fair
• We think that there are millions of dollars out there that are not being collected, which is not fair

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee held a work session on impaired driving, beginning with data from the Washington Traffic Safety Commission and a discussion of a proposed reduction in the legal per se blood alcohol concentration limit from 0.08 to 0.05. Mark McKekney presented crash and fatality data showing that about half of traffic fatalities involve an impaired driver, that alcohol remains the most common substance involved, and that impairment is strongly associated with speeding and higher crash risk. He also summarized a Washington/AAA survey finding support for lowering the limit rose from 54% to 71% after respondents received information about safety impacts, and he said the most persuasive arguments were that the change would save lives and reduce impaired driving. Committee members asked about how much alcohol can produce a 0.05 BAC, enforcement practices, blood testing in fatal crashes, and whether other states or countries use lower limits. The committee then heard emotional testimony from Joshua Jackman, who described severe injuries and long-term consequences from being struck by a drunk driver in 2007, and said the proposed law could help prevent similar tragedies by encouraging people to plan ahead. A panel followed with testimony from AAA Washington, the Washington State Patrol, and the Department of Transportation. AAA supported a 0.05 standard and cited research and international experience showing fewer fatalities and serious injuries without major effects on arrests or the hospitality industry. The State Patrol said the bill is intended to prevent crashes rather than increase arrests and would not change stop standards or DUI investigative practices. WSDOT described the safety, work-zone, congestion, equipment-damage, and liability costs caused by impaired driving, including recent crashes involving snowplows and road crews. No vote was taken on the impaired-driving discussion. The committee then held a public hearing on Senate Bill 5234, which would raise snowmobile registration fees from $50 to $75 and vintage snowmobile fees from $12 to $18, with additional revenue going to the snowmobile account for grooming, plowing, sanitation, and other State Parks snowmobile programs. State Parks said the program has seen declining registrations and reduced services, while supporters from the snowmobile community said the increase is needed to stabilize the program and keep trails open. Some testimony supported the need for more revenue but opposed the fee increase as the wrong solution, arguing the program needs broader reform and that many snowmobiles remain unregistered. The hearing record noted 3 people signed in pro and 105 con. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 6110, which would clarify the definition of e-bikes, exclude vehicles capable of exceeding 20 mph solely on motor power or easily modified to do so, and direct the Department of Licensing to convene a work group to develop recommendations for regulating electric motorcycles. Committee discussion focused on the distinction between legal e-bikes and faster e-motos, with questions about wattage, speed, youth use, and whether the bill should define e-motorcycles more directly. Students, local officials, city representatives, trail advocates, and bicycle groups testified in support, describing safety concerns, injuries, and confusion in enforcement, while also emphasizing that true e-bikes improve mobility and access. Several local government and advocacy witnesses asked for a clearer statutory definition of e-motorcycles and a civil enforcement path for juveniles. No final action was taken on the bills during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now, it gives me great hope that a million dollars of funding could support evidence-based approaches
• </c><00:04:20.880><c> approaches</c><00:04:21.359><c> to</c> support evidence-based approaches to support
• evidence-based approaches to destigmatizing<00:04:23.199><c> mental</c><00:04:23.520><c> health</c><
• We do it as collectively contractors.
• We do it as collectively together<00:12:58.800><c> with</c><00:12:59.120><c> our</c><00:12:59.279><c>

Committee: Senate Labor

Transcript Highlights:

• Here's the evidence on suspensions.
• Advance policies aligned to evidence don't advance policies where the evidence points towards harmful
• </c> efforts to take an evidence-based efforts to take an evidence-based approach<00:19:35.720><c> to
• Students who evidence on suspensions.
• ><c> policies</c><00:20:25.520><c> where</c> evidence don't advance policies where evidence don't advance

Bills: HF3493 , HF4114

Committee: House Education Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• So the point-in-time counts do often collect that kind of data.
• They're just able to collect... But also the data collected for those administrative systems.
• But this is the largest, most unique statewide collection of homeless data.
• in HMIS or how it is collected.
• ; that data would be collected through the administering departments in other ways.

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee 4 met to hear an oversight discussion focused on homelessness, including the state of homelessness in California, state data systems, and the Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention (HAP) program. In opening remarks, the chair emphasized accountability and the need to focus on families and people at the bottom rung, while the vice chair argued that homelessness and affordability problems stem from policy choices and the state should give counties more flexibility rather than top-down mandates. The committee also announced that the one scheduled vote would be postponed and public comment would be taken later. Dr. Ryan Finnegan of UC Berkeley’s Turner Center presented recent homelessness data, saying California’s homelessness remains high at about 187,000 people in the 2024 point-in-time count, with most still unsheltered, though the unsheltered share has declined somewhat. He explained differences between point-in-time counts and the state’s Homeless Data Integration System (HDIS), noted progress in shelter, permanent supportive housing, rapid rehousing, and interim housing capacity, and highlighted declines in youth and veteran homelessness. He also described persistent racial disparities, the large number of chronically homeless people, and risks from federal changes and possible reductions to programs such as Emergency Housing Vouchers and Continuum of Care funding. Members questioned the causes of recent trends, the role of Housing First, Proposition 47, Martin v. Boise, and how funding streams such as HAP and CalAIM are layered together. The California Interagency Council on Homelessness then outlined its data systems and AB 799 implementation. Staff explained that HDIS aggregates HMIS data from all 44 continuums of care and is used to measure outcomes, disparities, and program effectiveness statewide. They said HAP 4 was cost-effective under the State Auditor’s methodology, and that new AB 799 dashboards will provide more public-facing fiscal and outcome reporting by June 2027. Members asked whether the system can better distinguish which interventions work, how self-sufficiency will be measured, how fraud is detected, and whether the council can meet the auditor’s concerns on time. Cal ICH said it has met prior statutory deadlines, that program outcome data already exist, and that fiscal reporting will be built through a web-based tool and aligned with existing departmental reporting systems.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we think just acknowledging and naming, collecting data, reporting data, and using data to do your
• This is data, the data that he's asking for, it's not data that we currently collect.
• that certain evidence requires... ...that the proposed law prohibition relative to payment of funds
• a preponderance of the evidence that certain evidence requires the payment of an expert witness fee.
• Protect consumers while respecting adult freedom and scientific evidence.

Bills: HR73 , HR272 , HR273 , HR278 , HCR91 , HCR99 , HCR100 , HCR111 , HB255 , HB261 , HB328 , HB378 , HB479 , HB517 , HB564 , HB778 , HB1090 , SB135 , SB278 , SB448

Committee: House Administration of Criminal Justice

Keywords: domestic abuse, protective orders, victim protection, Louisiana State Law Institute, mandatory procedures, parental discipline, corporal punishment, child abuse, cruelty to juveniles, juvenile delinquency, juvenile justice, child welfare, DCFS, Office of Juvenile Justice, reasonable discipline, parental rights, family law, law enforcement reports, abuse allegations, single-parent households

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll continue with petitioner's presentation of facts and evidence.
• Counsel, Mister Gergen, you may present your evidence. Mr. Gergen: Thank you, Your Honor.
• Ben Knope: I try to stay calm and collected and approach the topic reasonably.
• And I found no evidence that either parent would act with anything but concern and high Ms.
• There's no evidence to support a departure from equal time sharing.

Transcript Highlights:

• already investing in medically tailored meals, that we are doing so in a way that is intentional, evidence-based
• Our commitment to government-to-government partnerships, empowering people to choose meaningful evidence-based
• And what I've found is that we don't collect information necessarily on who a parent is.
• with different agencies and stuff, who else might need to know who's a parent and where are we collecting
• as you're saying with the spoken hub model, someone might be able to already know if that's being collected

Bills: SB5966

Committee: Senate Human Services

Keywords: healthcare, nutrition, medically tailored meals, dietary support, food security, chronic illness

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:04:32.560><c> systems</c> master mattress collection systems master mattress collection systems
• ><c> between</c> Collection systems also differ between Collection systems also differ between rural<
• </c> populated areas, uh, curbside collection populated areas, uh, curbside collection works<00:05:12.200
• </c> collection facilities tend to work best. collection facilities tend to work best.
• ,</c> see a state run program for collection, see a state run program for collection, recycling,<00:14

Committee: Senate Environment, Climate, and Legacy

Transcript Highlights:

• I asked... ...ability to refute the evidence until after the designation is done.
• When I asked about evidence, the bill doesn't even have an evidentiary standard.
• evidence you used?
• They either have to provide their evidence. There are methods.
• also the evidence that there was intent to coerce a government action.

Summary: The House met with a quorum present, heard prayers and ceremonial remarks, and then took up a series of returning messages from the Senate. The first major item was CS/CS/HB 1503 on computer science education and certification. Members explained that the House concurred in a Senate amendment that restored teacher certificate language, kept computer science and AI-related content in the bill, and delayed implementation to give the Department of Education time to develop curriculum. The House adopted the amendment and then passed the bill 105-0. The House also considered CS/CS/HB 1085 on local government cybersecurity. Members adopted a House amendment allowing local governments to buy into the cyber grant program even if they do not receive a grant, adding a five-year sunset and reporting provisions. The House then concurred in the Senate amendment shifting grant administration from a university to the Florida Digital Service, and passed the bill 104-1. Several other returning messages were rejected or sent back to the Senate. The House refused to concur in Senate amendments to CS/HB 351 on concurrent legislative jurisdiction over military installations and HB 6011 on reporting gifts or honoraria, as well as CS/HB 851 on professional learning for instructional and school administrative personnel. The most contentious debate came on CS/CS/HB 1471, which concerns systems of law and terrorist organizations; the Senate amendment defined “promote,” refined notice and timeline requirements, and retained references to Sharia law. Opponents argued the bill was overbroad, lacked due process and evidentiary standards, and threatened First Amendment rights, while supporters said it targeted conduct, not speech, and protected against terrorist support. The House adopted the amendment and passed the bill 80-25. The House then took up a related public records bill, CS/CS/HB 1473, which made a technical conforming change to align with HB 1471; debate focused on transparency and due process concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, but I collectively about the bill.
• People come in, they present evidence, the Office of Planning and the counties present evidence, and
• </c><00:51:17.440><c> the</c> come in um they present evidence the come in um they present evidence the
• </c><00:51:46.240><c> and</c> a judge would weighs the evidence and a judge would weighs the evidence
• The it's introduction of evidence.

Bills: HB1881 , HB2218 , HB1956 , HB2151 , HB1845 , HB1844 , HB2103 , HB2424 , HB1650 , HB376 , HB2599 , HB1861

Committee: House Water & Land

Summary: The committee on Water and Land met on February 10, 2026, with Chair Mark Hashem outlining strict testimony rules and noting a time constraint because of later hearings and floor session obligations. The committee then took up several bills, hearing mostly supportive testimony on HB 1881 relating to land use, HB 2218 relating to DLNR/community management, and HB 1956 relating to freshwater waves, while HB 1845 relating to the Land Use Commission drew legal concerns and opposition. HB 2151 relating to building materials had no substantive testimony presented in the excerpt, and the committee moved through it quickly. On HB 1881, testimony focused on protecting North Shore lands from overdevelopment. A supporter described the area as valuable precisely because it remains largely undeveloped, and a member asked whether the bill’s restrictions on “finculars” would affect existing or future private residential installations; the response suggested the bill was aimed at future commercial uses and that grandfathering or personal-use exceptions might be possible, but the exact wording would need legal refinement. HB 2218 received broad support from OHA, DLNR, Kua, Sierra Club, Hui Maka Aana, the Honlay Initiative, and others, who said the measure would expand community-based co-management across DLNR divisions, build on existing park partnerships, and produce real benefits such as better stewardship, safer access, local jobs, and stronger community trust. Members asked about the bill’s five-year review structure, how multiple community groups would be handled, and whether the model could apply to ocean or nearshore areas; DLNR said the board would retain authority, agreements would be non-exclusive and subject to review, and the department was still working through how the approach would function across different divisions and marine settings. For HB 1956, the Attorney General offered technical comments, urging clearer definitions of “residing” and “freshwater way,” clearer timing for citations and arrests, and more explicit procedural safeguards and agency roles. On HB 1845, the Attorney General and Land Use Commission raised concerns that the bill could conflict with constitutional protections for important agricultural lands and could not be reconciled with existing voting requirements; the LUC also said commissioners cannot vote by proxy under sunshine law and warned that the bill could allow too few commissioners to approve major boundary changes. Members questioned how the bill would work in counties without designated important agricultural lands, and the LUC explained that Kauai is the only county to have completed the IAL process, while the broader statutory process remains county-driven and has been the subject of litigation. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the excerpt.