Transcript Highlights:

• Today we will have panel discussions on Proposition 36 focusing on judicial perspectives and we will
• I'm going to talk a little bit about the implementation of Proposition 36.
• 47 and how Proposition interacts with that.
• So, Proposition 36 partially rolled back those punishment reductions that were made by Prop 47, and so
• it will reduce the savings attributable to Proposition 47, and therefore impact the savings estimate

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In opposition to AB 103, this bill exempts 181 million of Proposition 4 bond funds from the Administrative
• Second, this bill authorizes the Board of State and Community Corrections Proposition 64 Public Health
• We could have found some funds to get this proposition implemented to save our communities.
• colleague mentioned there are there were differences of opinion in the Democratic caucus about proposition
• that's why this budget has uh about 350 million dollars in it in various ways that are linked to proposition

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• A bond proposition, though, is what the courts have termed a contract with the voters.
• The voters are taxing themselves when they pass a bond proposition by agreeing to pay whatever tax is
• Well, it says basically that the proposition in question here is void ab initio, that it was illegal
• It's always been a standard bond proposition. Right.
• They rejected it. But we don't have that.

Bills: SB1331, SB1375, SB1443, SB1578, SB2251, SB2519, SB2553, SB2655, SB2764, SB2907, SB3030, SB3033, SB3035, SB3036, SB3037, SB3043, SB3047, SB3050, SB3051, SB3056, SB3057, SB3063, HB9, HB467, HB331, HB 1244, HB1399, HB2559, HB2730, HB3307, HJR1, HJR99, SB3048, SB3052, SB3053, SJR78, HB1327, HB2723

Keywords: civil service, firefighters, police officers, municipalities, local government, repeal, voter petition, health care, provider participation, continuation programs, population-based regulation, health care provider participation, Medicaid, hospital funding, voluntary compliance, mandatory payments, public health, healthcare program, county participation, nonpublic hospitals

Summary: The Committee on Local Government heard a series of local bills and public testimony focused on hospital districts, municipal management districts, local provider participation funds, manufactured housing, transit financing, development moratoriums, and property tax procedures. Early items included House Bill 467, which would help dissolve the defunct Maybank Kemp Hospital District and establish an Andrew Gibbs Memorial Nursing Endowment, and Senate Bill 3063, creating the Bio Bell Municipal Management District in Liberty County; both drew no public opposition and were left pending subject to call. The committee also heard House Bill 1327, extending the Harris County local provider participation fund through 2027, and Senate Bill 1375, extending Collin County’s LPPF authority, both presented as mechanisms to draw federal Medicaid matching funds for hospitals. A major portion of the meeting centered on Senate Bill 2764, which would require earlier notice to buyers of manufactured homes about how to convert a home from personal property to real property. Senator Cook described the bill as a consumer-information measure tied to displacement concerns at a mobile home park in her district, and a resident testified in support, saying the notice would help families make informed decisions. The committee also discussed Senate Bill 2519, a bill by Senator Bettencourt aimed at preventing local governments from shifting maintenance-and-operations tax revenue into debt-like uses and from changing the purpose of tax rate elections after voters approve them. Supporters argued it would protect taxpayers and preserve the separation between M&O and debt service, while opponents tied the bill to Austin’s Project Connect transit financing and warned it would disrupt an approved project and invite litigation. The committee heard and left pending several other bills, including House Bill 1244 on agricultural land ownership changes without reapplying for an ag exemption, House Bill 2559 on development moratoriums, and Senate Bill 2063 on unequal appraisal protests. Testimony on House Bill 2559 came from developers and builders who said moratoriums in Conroe had delayed projects and harmed buyers, while supporters of the bill said it would impose clearer limits and notice requirements. On Senate Bill 2063, the sponsor explained a committee substitute narrowing how market value evidence may be used in unequal appraisal appeals. The committee also considered multiple local district bills, including new MUDs and management districts in Montgomery, Denton, Fannin, Travis, Hays, and Williamson counties. At the end of the meeting, the committee took up pending business and voted out several measures, including House Bill 1244, House Bill 2559, House Bill 467, House Bill 1327, House Bill 1399, House Bill 2723, House Bill 2730, House Bill 3307, House Joint Resolution 99, and multiple district bills such as Senate Bills 3037, 3043, 3047, 3048, 3050, 3052, 3053, 3056, 3057, 3063, and others. Most were reported favorably, often with committee substitutes, and many were recommended for the local and uncontested calendar. Several bills, including the transit-related SB 2519 and the manufactured housing bill SB 2764, remained pending subject to call after testimony closed.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Governor's budget proposes $1 million one-time Proposition 98 General Fund for the Superintendent
• The Governor's budget proposes $25 million one-time Proposition 98 General Fund.
• The proposal is to provide $25 million one-time Proposition 98 General Fund, available through the 2029
• The Governor's budget includes $40 million one-time Proposition 98 for LEAs that administer literacy
• In terms of the kitchen infrastructure grant funding, we do recommend rejecting that proposal.

Summary: The committee heard a series of budget proposals focused on education finance, with repeated questions about whether the state’s investments are coordinated, targeted to the highest-need students, and likely to produce measurable results. On the first item, the administration proposed $1 million for a study of California’s curriculum framework, standards, and instructional materials process, plus $250,000 for supplemental ELA/ELD guidance. CDE and Finance said the study would examine how other states organize standards, frameworks, and adoptions, while the chair and members questioned why California has gone so long without updating some standards, what the study would actually accomplish, and whether the proposal was too vague to justify the cost. The issue was held open. The committee then took up a proposed $25 million statewide literacy network within the system of support. CCEE and CDE said the network would coordinate multiple existing literacy leads, create a clearinghouse of evidence-based resources, and improve coherence across the state’s many literacy initiatives. Members pressed on how a one-time, five-year allocation could support a long-term system, how the work would reach distressed and rural districts, and whether the proposal would translate into classroom change rather than just another layer of coordination. The issue was also held open. Next, the committee reviewed a $500 million proposal to expand literacy coaches and reading specialists and to create a math coaches program. CDE described the existing literacy coach cohorts as producing positive reports from participating LEAs, while the LAO recommended modifications, especially for the math coach portion, including limiting eligibility to elementary schools, setting minimum grant amounts, directing funds to eligible school sites, and making eligibility automatic rather than application-based. Members focused on whether coaches were actually being placed at the schools with the greatest need and whether the state has a coherent long-term strategy for literacy and math investments. The committee also heard a $40 million proposal for training and implementation of K-2 reading difficulty screeners, which the LAO said was reasonable but could be reduced because $25 million had already been provided for training; CDE said the new funds were needed for full implementation, procurement, and sustainability. Finally, the committee heard a $10 million proposal for a developmentally appropriate TK multilingual learner screener, with CDE explaining why the preschool language-identification process is different from K-12 EL assessment and the chair asking staff to explore whether a single, more consistent approach could be developed. The meeting concluded with a presentation on universal school meals and kitchen infrastructure, including a $31.5 million backfill, an $84.1 million increase for projected meal growth, a COLA adjustment, and $150 million for kitchen upgrades and training to support freshly prepared meals.

Transcript Highlights:

• Accordingly, we recommend rejecting the funding proposed from the Unfair Competition Law Fund without
• Accordingly, we recommend rejecting the funding proposed from the Unfair Competition Law Fund without
• In addition, we recommend rejecting the remaining positions that the department plans to reassign to
• First, we recommend rejecting $2 million for the proposed legal affairs positions.
• It has maintained, for example, valuable public-facing dashboards on Proposition 36 and CDCR's prison

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee met to review May Revision proposals for several departments and emphasized that no votes would be taken that day. The Legislative Analyst’s Office opened with a warning that the state budget is balanced only through one-time resources and still has structural deficits, recommending that the Legislature avoid new ongoing spending and instead preserve reserves and other solutions. The Judicial Council then presented proposals for language access and interpreter services, appellate court security, a backfill to the state court facilities construction fund, and an extension of the lactation-room mandate; Finance supported the language access item with reporting language and supported keeping the court facilities backfill. Members raised concerns about judicial pay freezes, judge vacancies, and uneven judge allocations across counties, and also asked about the cost and completion of courthouse lactation rooms and remote-hearing infrastructure. The Board of State and Community Corrections items focused on $10 million one-time grants for missing and murdered Indigenous people and for a human trafficking vertical prosecution program. The LAO suggested the Legislature consider whether the Tribal Nations Grant Fund could support the MMIP work, while Finance said it preferred General Fund support and wanted more review before any fund swap. On the human trafficking grant, Finance said the need was clear based on reported cases and California’s share of hotline reports. Members strongly supported MMIP funding and discussed whether ongoing funding would be needed beyond the one-time proposal, while also debating whether BSEC or OES should administer the prosecution grants. The Department of Justice presented antitrust litigation funding, Medi-Cal fraud and elder abuse staffing, organized retail criminal enterprise case completion, and a continuous appropriation for the Victims of Consumer Fraud Restitution Fund. The LAO raised concerns about the Unfair Competition Law Fund’s solvency and recommended rejecting that portion unless DOJ could show the fund could support it without General Fund repayment, and it opposed the continuous appropriation in favor of more legislative oversight. Finance said the fund would remain solvent under current projections and defended the continuous appropriation as necessary to pay victims promptly. Members also clarified that the Medi-Cal fraud unit targets providers, not beneficiaries, and asked about delays in restitution payments. A lengthy portion of the hearing covered CDCR’s May Revision package and the Boston Consulting Group cost-savings effort. CDCR described revised savings from workforce optimization, workers’ compensation, and procurement, but members repeatedly expressed frustration that the promised savings had fallen far short of earlier estimates. The LAO recommended deeper cuts to some parole positions, more detail on proposed eliminations and contract changes, and caution about counting unallocated future savings. CDCR also presented population projections showing continued declines and the LAO again urged the administration to close a prison to reduce ongoing costs. The committee also heard proposals on workers’ compensation, Corcoran honor housing, incarcerated firefighter pay, agricultural food purchasing requirements, menopause care, mental health receiver staffing, resource teams, crisis intervention teams, medical classification staffing, and AI note-taking in electronic health records, with the LAO generally recommending limited-term approvals and reporting requirements while Finance defended ongoing funding and said it was open to additional reporting language.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're looking at opportunities that would expand and really follow the lines of Proposition 4.
• So, I'll be presenting on behalf of the Fairground Updates as they relate to Proposition 4.
• This funding has come from bond funds, including Proposition 40, Proposition 14, Proposition 15, and
• Proposition 20.
• 40 and Proposition 68.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In regards to the timeline to begin implementing Proposition 35, as I noted, the proposition requires
• But it is a matter that the proposition lays out a process.
• We are following the process outlined in the proposition.
• There are also some changes in Proposition 35 itself.
• Proposition 35 was passed with nearly 70% voter approval.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So we do recommend rejecting that particular language.
• We also would reject the suspension of the child care cost of living COLA.
• So the first item I'll cover is the climate bond or Proposition 4.
• We do reject the characterization that this is a right. sizing.
• I urge you to reject these cuts, reject these proposals, thank you. Thank you very much.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• taxes are calculated after the plat is filed, but before the county clerk records it, the clerk may reject
• House Bill 2025 deals with this by preventing the rejection of a plat, replat, or amended plat solely
• The purpose stated for the ballot proposition or any order or resolution calling for an election required
• You know, so this is not a reasonable proposition for a city to put themselves in that position, I think

Bills: SB3038, SB3045, SB3065, SB3069, SB3071, HB2025, HB2149, HB3370, HB4205, HB4506, HB5424, HB5652, HB24, HB3687, HB24

Keywords: Fort Bend County, Municipal Utility District, MUD, special district, Rosenberg, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, TCEQ, ad valorem tax, bond issuance, assessments, fees, taxes, eminent domain, road district, storm drainage, infrastructure financing, development agreement, municipal consent, temporary directors, public utility district

Transcript Highlights:

• California has been using a similar system since the state passed Proposition 14 in 2010.
• They rejected that.
• Pretty sure they rejected it overwhelmingly; more than 65% of the voters said no.
• They rejected that.
• Pretty sure they rejected it overwhelmingly; more than 65% of the voters said no.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-12, H.503, a proposal to implement all-party state primaries for Massachusetts state and federal elections. The committee opened with procedural remarks explaining Article 48 requirements and then heard first from two subject-matter experts. Professor Costas Panagopoulos of Northeastern University testified that top-two primary systems in other states have produced mixed results: they may modestly increase primary turnout in some cases, but the research does not show a reliable reduction in polarization, and such systems can weaken party gatekeeping, increase strategic behavior, raise campaign spending, and reduce general-election choice for voters whose preferred party is not on the ballot. Katie King of the National Conference of State Legislatures outlined the different primary models used nationwide, explained that Massachusetts currently uses an open-to-unaffiliated primary, and reviewed legal distinctions between blanket primaries and top-two systems; she noted that blanket primaries were struck down by the Supreme Court, while Washington’s top-two system was upheld because it narrows the field rather than nominating party candidates. She also said voter education and administrative preparation would be important if the system changed. The proponents’ panel, led by Danielle Allen of the Coalition for Healthy Democracy, argued that Massachusetts has chronically uncompetitive elections, low turnout, and too many uncontested races, and that all-party primaries would give every voter a meaningful choice in the first round and force candidates to appeal to a broader electorate. Allen said the proposal is designed specifically for Massachusetts and differs from other states by allowing party endorsements to appear on the ballot, which supporters said would preserve useful information while shifting control of the preliminary election from party insiders to voters. Jim Henderson, the coalition’s counsel, said the bill is narrowly tailored to state-level primaries and would amend Chapter 53 to put all voters on equal footing. Other supporters, including Kevin Johnson, Kate Kavanaugh, and Spencer Reynolds, emphasized that the reform could increase competition, reduce polarization, improve participation by independents and underrepresented voters, and create more accountability to the full electorate. Committee members pressed the witnesses on turnout, the practical effect of endorsements, whether the proposal would simply shift party influence to an earlier stage, and whether it could disadvantage minority-party or independent candidates. Senator Fattman repeatedly asked about evidence that turnout would materially increase, while Representative Peisch and others questioned whether requiring or seeking endorsements would create new barriers or pressure candidates to clear the field. Supporters responded that the system would modestly increase primary participation, that the general election would remain the decisive contest, and that endorsements would be optional and handled through party rules. No vote was taken at the hearing; the committee heard testimony and questions only.

Transcript Highlights:

• When we know that there are risks and threats that are ever changing, I urge you to reject this audit
• When the agency returned, it increased the price, rejected a lower independent appraisal, and continued
• county boards of education, derives most of its revenues from property taxes and from us, from Proposition
• This is trying to make sure that the dollars that we're appropriating for under Proposition 98 to support
• This is trying to make sure that the dollars that we're appropriating for under Proposition 98 to support

Summary: The committee met as a subcommittee for much of the hearing because it initially lacked a quorum, then later established one and began taking votes. The state auditor gave a status update on ongoing audits, including several JALAC-requested audits in progress, other statutory audits, staffing growth in his office, and the number of new JALAC audits his office could start in the coming months. The committee also heard that one audit request on Prop. 28 was held, and another PUC-related request was moved off consent and heard on the regular calendar. Members then heard and discussed several audit requests. Senator Cervantes presented a request to audit California fusion centers, with witnesses from the FBI and ACLU supporting the need for transparency and oversight; opponents argued the request was politically motivated and could interfere with counterterrorism work. Senator Allen presented a request on CPUC enforcement of Rule 21 interconnection timelines for solar and storage projects, supported by industry and school representatives who described long delays and financial harm, while CPUC staff said the issue was being addressed through workshops and a formal proceeding. Senator Perez presented a request to audit Caltrans’ administration of the former SR 710 extension properties and affordable sales program, citing tenant complaints about maintenance, pricing, and transparency; Caltrans said it was working to complete sales and improve administration. Senator Umberg presented a request to audit the Orange County Board of Education over transparency, contracting, litigation spending, charter oversight, and whistleblower issues, while board representatives said there was no factual basis for an audit and that existing legal remedies had not been invoked. After quorum was established, the committee approved the consent-calendar DMV license revocation audit and then approved the PUC utility timeliness audit and the Caltrans SR 710 audit. The fusion center audit was left on call after a split vote, and the Orange County Board of Education audit continued with testimony from the board’s representatives after the committee had already moved on to other business.

Transcript Highlights:

• they hear them and then vote, vote them back to the full committee, and then we look at them and reject
• Uh, so, uh, slide nine kind of shows, uh, what we've been able to do mainly with the, the Proposition
• 1 and Proposition 7 investments in our state highway system, uh, because of those, those large investments
• That's about a 235% increase since 2014 before those two propositions were enacted.
• Since the passage of Proposition 1 back in 2014 $19.1 billion of severance taxes have flowed into the

Transcript Highlights:

• , and Proposition 47 funding for substance use disorder treatment and mental health programs.
• I'm going to talk a little bit about the implementation of Proposition 36 statewide.
• 47 and how Proposition 36 interacts with that.
• Proposition 36 interacts with that.
• So Proposition 36... ...use treatment.

Summary: The committee heard extensive testimony on Proposition 36 and its implementation, with judicial and budget officials describing it as a major shift from misdemeanor to felony processing for repeat drug possession and certain theft offenses. Witnesses explained that the law creates a treatment-mandated felony process that can lead to dismissal if a defendant completes treatment, but also requires evaluations, court monitoring, and potentially long, open-ended supervision. Judicial representatives said the new law is already generating large numbers of filings, creating workload, staffing, courtroom, and facility pressures, and that access to treatment beds, housing, and evaluation capacity is limiting participation. Several speakers emphasized that collaborative courts are effective but are not a perfect fit for Prop. 36 because those programs are typically probation-based and serve different risk/need populations. Court officials from San Bernardino and Orange counties said the impacts vary by county but are severe, with some counties seeing hundreds or more filings in a short period and others moving more slowly to build treatment infrastructure first. They argued that Prop. 36 is effectively an unfunded mandate unless the state provides more resources for judges, staff, facilities, treatment, housing, and supervision. The Legislative Analyst’s Office noted that Prop. 36 will reduce the Proposition 47 savings that fund mental health and substance use treatment grants, but said the near-term reduction is relatively modest and that the full effect will take time to appear because of the way those savings are calculated. Members of the committee repeatedly raised concerns that the state is underfunding the courts and counties needed to carry out the new law. The committee also reviewed the Governor’s proposed trial court operations budget, including a partial restoration of a prior $97 million cut and additional ongoing funding. Judicial branch officials said the restoration helped avoid furloughs, hiring freezes, and service reductions, and supported cybersecurity, technology, staffing, and records management. The LAO recommended that the Legislature seek more detail on how midyear restorations are handled and consider clarifying language for transferring unspent trial court trust fund monies to the General Fund. Finance said the flexibility in the ongoing funding was intentional and would be taken back for consideration. In a separate item, the committee heard testimony on a $6.3 million increase for Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal appointed counsel programs. Judicial officials and appellate project representatives said the system is facing a crisis because indigent appeals have risen sharply while the number of panel attorneys has fallen, leaving many cases waiting months for counsel. They argued the proposed increase would help but is still below what is needed to recruit and retain attorneys and prevent delays that affect criminal, juvenile, and child welfare cases. The committee also discussed the Tracy courthouse project in San Joaquin County, where local officials said reopening a courthouse closed since 2011 is necessary to serve a growing population and relieve overcrowding elsewhere. The LAO and Finance both noted the project is next in line under the facilities plan, though LAO suggested the Legislature could consider whether other facility priorities should come first.

Transcript Highlights:

• More and more, almost like a bond proposition, right?
• So I would just be cautious, and we've had the same issue with bond propositions too that they.
• City that has had a tax rate rejected by the voters. I can't tell you off the top of my head.
• Anyway, it looks like ISDs have rejected voters.
• I really don't like that and reject that framing wholeheartedly. You know, we are on the same team.

Bills: HB17, HB23, SB 10

Keywords: property tax, school funding, enrollment changes, inflation adjustment, tax rate notice, property tax exemption, ad valorem tax, Texas Tax Code, nonprofit corporation, charitable organization, educational nonprofit, scientific nonprofit, agriculture support, youth programs, community education, county population threshold, large county, local government revenue, leasehold interest, possessory interest

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill exempts $181 million of Proposition 4 bond funds from the Administrative Procedure Act and
• Second, this bill authorizes the Board of State and Community Corrections Proposition 64 Public Health
• We could have found some funds to get this proposition implemented to save our communities.
• We could have found some funds to get this proposition implemented to save our communities.
• And the facts are clear in this budget that there is funding for Proposition 36.

Summary: The Assembly met on June 4, 2025, first establishing a quorum and then moving through a long budget and concurrence session. After procedural motions, the house took up several budget trailer bills and related measures presented by Assembly Member Gabriel. SB 103, a technical budget cleanup bill addressing the Public School System Stabilization Account, a CDCR shortfall, and Middle Class Scholarship funding, passed 52-16. SB 120 on child care and preschool funding passed 65-1; SB 124 on natural resources and wildfire response passed 69-1; SB 127 on climate change and zero-emission transportation passed 53-17; SB 128 on transportation and DMV/LA Olympics implementation passed 53-17; SB 132 on taxation, veterans, wildfire settlements, film tax credits, and housing passed 64-1; SB 141 on cannabis enforcement and illicit market suppression passed 71-1; and SB 142 extending the Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program passed 68-1 on both urgency and the measure. The Assembly also approved a motion to re-refer several bills to committees and later suspended rules to take up Senate-amended bills without reference to file. The chamber then considered AB 102, the main budget bill reflecting the final three-party agreement with the Governor. Supporters said it balanced compassion and fiscal responsibility while preserving housing, health care, child care, education, wildfire resilience, and public safety funding. Opponents criticized it for unsustainable spending, insufficient Prop. 36 funding, and other omissions. After extended debate, the Assembly concurred in the Senate amendments by a 55-16 vote and sent the bill to the Governor. The Assembly then concurred in Senate amendments to AB 116 on health care, AB 118 on human services, AB 121 on TK-12 education, AB 123 on higher education, AB 134 on public safety, AB 136 on courts, AB 137 on general government, and AB 143 on developmental services, with each bill passing on largely party-line or broad bipartisan votes. Debate on AB 116 focused on Medi-Cal, HIV program backfills, pharmacy benefit managers, and health care cuts; opponents objected to funding for undocumented immigrants and to hospice prior authorization. AB 118 drew support for child welfare, CalFresh disaster readiness, and CalWORKs simplification. AB 121 emphasized record K-12 funding and a $1.7 billion block grant. AB 123 extended the Golden State Teacher Grant Program and supported higher education and fire-impacted career technical education. AB 134 updated CDCR and tribal policing provisions, AB 136 streamlined court reporting and funded courthouse facilities, AB 137 made technical budget adjustments and fee changes, and AB 143 made developmental services reforms while preserving the state’s entitlement commitment. The final item shown was AB 470 on telecommunications, which was presented and discussed as a transition away from copper landlines toward fiber and modern networks, with supporters emphasizing public benefits and labor concerns, but the transcript cuts off before a final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• San Joaquin County rejected 2.56% of ballots.
• And so I completely reject the opposition's position on that.
• And I completely reject the idea that...
• the Board of Supervisors rejected it as well.
• I believe it was forced onto other counties that also rejected it as well.

Summary: The committee heard a long agenda of elections-related bills. It first approved three consent items: AB 808, AB 1029, and AB 1072. The committee then took up AB 1249, which would require non-Voter’s Choice Act counties to offer at least one Saturday early-voting location before statewide elections and allow in-person return of vote-by-mail ballots at designated county offices or satellite locations. Supporters said it would expand access for working voters and those with transportation barriers; some members raised concerns about ballot verification and added workload for rural counties. The bill passed the committee on a divided vote and was placed on call for absent members. The committee next considered AB 25, a voter ID and election integrity measure that would require citizenship verification, government ID for voting, tighter voter-roll audits, and a 72-hour ballot-counting deadline. The author and supporters argued it would restore public trust and improve election integrity, while opponents from the League of Women Voters, ACLU California Action, labor groups, disability advocates, and others said it would restrict access, burden vulnerable voters, and amount to voter suppression. After extensive debate, the committee voted the bill out on a narrow split and kept it on call. Members also approved AB 1164, which clarifies when voters are entitled to a replacement ballot and updates the Voter Bill of Rights language; AB 1441, which would create an independent citizens redistricting commission in Merced County despite opposition from the county board over cost and local control; and AB 16, which would clarify county election officials’ authority to begin processing vote-by-mail ballots earlier and clean up outdated code. The committee also heard AB 1411, which would require non-VCA counties to prepare voter education and outreach plans and use a Secretary of State template, with the sponsor saying it would improve voter information statewide.

Transcript Highlights:

• are amendments that would actually allow this bill to do so, but those amendments were actually rejected
• are amendments that would actually allow this bill to do so, but those amendments were actually rejected
• Over the past 40 years, Proposition 218 has granted voters across 25 counties the ability to approve
• Although Proposition 218 acknowledges the power of the people to effect local taxes, California's Elections
• addresses the discrepancy that exists by aligning the state's Elections Code with the provisions of Proposition

Summary: The Assembly convened after a quorum call, prayer, and pledge, then handled a long consent and concurrence calendar. Early procedural actions included moving several bills to the inactive file, waiving the floor amendment deadline for certain measures, rescinding prior action on SB 733, and approving a motion to withdraw AB 710 from committee to the third reading file by a 42-12 vote. The chamber also re-referred AB 406 to Labor and Employment and later AB 754 to Housing, while taking up numerous Senate and Assembly measures out of order to accommodate authors and guests. The body adopted several resolutions recognizing October 2025 as California Promotoras Month (HR 58), National Fried Rice Day and National Rice Month (HR 71), Direct Support Professional Recognition Week (HR 70), and All California Day (HR 67). Members also concurred in Senate amendments on a wide range of bills covering insurance, horses, emergency vehicles, health facilities, restitution, education, tribal regalia at graduation, behavioral health, air pollution, energy, dams, greenhouse gases, foster youth, court interpreters, tenancy language access, patient privacy notices, discrimination in school facility rentals, hospital visitation rights, diversion, agriculture, insurance studies, electricity, and environmental stewardship. Most of these measures passed with little or no opposition, though a few drew recorded noes. Several higher-profile policy bills drew debate. SB 694 on veteran claim assistance generated the most extensive discussion, with supporters arguing it would stop predatory, unaccredited companies from charging veterans for VA claims help, and opponents warning it could reduce veterans’ choices and should be paired with broader fixes to county VSO access; the bill ultimately passed 46-0. Other notable actions included concurrence on SB 576 limiting loud streaming ads, SB 512 on transportation tax initiatives, and SB 785 creating a tax credit for durable medical equipment for children with complex medical needs. The Assembly also concurred in SB 250 on Medi-Cal provider directories, SB 831 on the Geological Survey, SB 788 on CPA regulation, SB 456 on muralist licensing, SB 72 on the California Water Plan, SB 76 on used-car fee protections, SB 246 on rural health workforce support, SB 484 on coastal affordable housing, SB 680 on sex offender registration, SB 695 on climate-resilient highway projects, and SB 783 on outdoor advertising. Votes were overwhelmingly favorable across the board, with the chamber repeatedly adopting Senate amendments and resolutions by voice vote or recorded roll call.

Transcript Highlights:

• bill raises... ...the exact same policy questions as the prior version from last year, which were rejected
• And for schools, this is a drain on Proposition 98 funding.
• And the board rejected the proposal and cited as part of that rationale that there was an overwhelming
• It's a simple proposition.
• The committee... ...not as simple in execution, but it is a simple proposition.

Summary: The committee began as a subcommittee due to the lack of a quorum and heard several privacy- and technology-related measures. The first item was H.R. 117, a resolution urging Congress to reform Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. The author and supporters argued the law is outdated and shields platforms from accountability for harms such as harassment, exploitation, scams, and other online abuse. Witnesses, including a survivor parent and a gender justice advocate, described harms to children, women, and LGBTQ people and urged a two-year sunset to force federal reform. Some members supported the resolution as a call for federal action, while one member said he could not support it because the resolution was too general and lacked specificity about the reforms being sought. No vote was taken because the committee lacked a quorum. The committee then heard SB 898, which would require manufacturers of connected consumer products to disclose how long they will support the software and to notify consumers when products approach end of life. The author said consumers deserve transparency about security updates and continued functionality, and supporters from Consumer Reports and PIRG emphasized cybersecurity risks, consumer confusion, and electronic waste from unsupported devices. Opponents, including business and industry groups, raised concerns about enforcement through the unfair competition law, notice burdens, labeling issues, and compliance challenges, especially for products with long support windows or third-party dependencies. One member expressed support, noting the cybersecurity risks of end-of-life devices, but again no vote was taken because there was no quorum. The committee also heard SB 435, which would narrow the CCPA definition of publicly available information to limit how businesses classify data as public. The author and supporters said the bill would close a loophole that allows data brokers and others to monetize personal information without meaningful consent and could help prevent surveillance and misuse of data, including by government agencies. Opponents argued the bill would upset the balance between privacy and the free flow of information, create compliance uncertainty, and retroactively reclassify information that businesses reasonably believed was public. Some members said they supported the goal of stronger privacy protections, while others said the bill was too broad. The committee again could not vote due to the lack of a quorum. Later, the committee heard SB 923, which would expand Californians’ right to delete personal information to cover data obtained from third parties and require online businesses to offer a web form or similar method for deletion requests. Supporters, including the California Privacy Protection Agency and consumer advocates, said the bill would make deletion rights meaningful and better address data broker practices. Opponents sought an opt-out-of-processing alternative and raised operational and legal concerns, but supporters said deletion is not the same as retention or processing limits. Members largely spoke in favor of the bill’s privacy goals, but no action was taken. The committee also heard SB 947, the “No Robo Bosses Act,” which would require human review for certain automated employment decisions and limit predictive analysis in workplace discipline and termination. Labor groups supported the bill as a safeguard against biased or erroneous AI-driven decisions, while business, public employer, and local government groups opposed it as overbroad and burdensome. Members voiced support for human oversight in employment decisions, but the item was not voted on because the committee still lacked a quorum. Finally, the committee began hearing SB 1114, the SOGI Data Privacy Act, which would restrict disclosure of sexual orientation, gender identity, and intersex data to federal agencies absent a court order or legal requirement; the author and witness framed it as a response to federal efforts to obtain sensitive LGBTQ-related data.

Transcript Highlights:

• AJR 29 rejects that disinformation and it truly affirms the truth.
• the adoption of our original state constitution, California voters, on three separate occasions, rejected
• the state of California are issuing layoff notices, the Governor is withholding $5.6 billion in Proposition
• He's trying to protect the non-Proposition 98 side of the budget by withholding $5.6 billion in Proposition
• Part of the promise of Proposition 64 was creating a legal cannabis market where products are sold safely

Summary: The Assembly met in session after a quorum call and opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a ceremonial observance for Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month. Members from multiple caucuses spoke in support of House Resolution 107, which designates May as AAPI Heritage Month, emphasizing the community’s contributions, resilience, and the need to confront discrimination and hate. The resolution was adopted, and the chamber then recognized 13 honorees for the 2026 AAPI Heritage Month celebration, highlighting leaders in education, business, labor, media, cultural preservation, and public service. After guest introductions, the Assembly took up a series of bills. Measures discussed included HOA reserve funding for common interest developments (AB 2050), professional review requirements for lawsuits against design professionals (AB 2106), direct home delivery of enteral formula (AB 1794), expanded CalWORKs-related support for student parents (AB 1829), longer insurance moratoriums for wildfire survivors (AB 2038), election cybersecurity (AB 2281), medical privacy protections for reproductive and gender-affirming care (AB 2448), water district board compensation (AB 2568), county public contract change-order authority (AB 1658), and several other education, health, and licensing bills. Most measures passed with broad support; AB 2050 passed 44-6, AB 2038 passed 45-8, AB 2448 passed 49-13, and AB 1658 passed 61-2, while several others passed unanimously or near-unanimously. The Assembly also adopted AJR 29, a resolution opposing a federal executive order affecting vote-by-mail and affirming California’s mail voting system. The resolution prompted extended debate over election integrity, voter access, and federal versus state authority, with supporters arguing mail voting is secure and accessible and opponents calling for stronger voter list maintenance and verification. The resolution passed 47-13. In addition, ACR 141 and ACR 123 were adopted by voice vote after co-author roll calls, and the chamber continued or passed on numerous other file items as it worked through the daily file.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we are recommending rejecting this proposal.
• In terms of our rationale for recommending rejection, there are a couple of different pieces.
• So again, we're recommending rejecting the proposal.
• I agree with the LAO's recommendation that this is a proposal that we should reject.
• We urge you to reject this unnecessary proposal. Thank you. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair.

Summary: The committee hearing focused heavily on CARB’s broad trailer bill request for regulatory fee authority. Finance and CARB argued the proposal would let CARB develop fees to recover reasonable costs for implementing and enforcing regulations, while the LAO recommended rejection because the authority was too broad, could apply to an entire division of code, and would delegate core legislative taxing/fee-setting power without enough guardrails. Members from both parties raised concerns about the breadth of the authority, accountability, affordability impacts, and whether the Legislature would be put in an up-or-down position after CARB had already developed regulations. CARB responded that fees would still go through a budget change proposal and legislative approval before collection, and cited existing examples such as transport refrigeration units and commercial harborcraft fees. The committee then reviewed CARB’s request for permanent resources to implement SB 905 on carbon capture, utilization, storage, and carbon dioxide removal. CARB said the Legislature had previously authorized limited-term positions and funding, but it had struggled to recruit and retain staff with specialized regulatory and technical expertise, and that the work had included pre-rulemaking contracts, technology review, and permit-related preparation. Members questioned the pace of work, the use of limited-term positions, and whether additional permitting authority would be needed. CARB said it hoped to begin rulemaking later in the year if permanent resources were approved. Members also discussed the cap-and-trade spending plan, noting lower-than-expected auction revenues but higher interest earnings, and the need to monitor the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and possible May Revision changes. The committee then heard overviews of the zero-emission vehicle package, the Community Air Protection Program, demand-side grid support, and e-bike incentives. CARB described ongoing investments in community-based transportation equity, drayage trucks, harbor craft, and other clean technology demonstrations, while members pressed on affordability, program duplication, and whether enough funding was being directed to incentive programs. No formal votes were taken during the portion provided, and the chair repeatedly indicated that the hearing was intended to surface concerns for later budget negotiations.