Stephanie Barnard — Prime sponsor explains her personal connection to midwifery and support for the bill.
Stephanie Barnard — Referenced as the sponsor whose view the witness agrees with regarding removal of the IBCLC credential.
Cynthia Flynn — Cynthia Flynn is introduced as the woman who runs the birth center in the sponsor’s district and is noted as an advocate for midwives. She is then invited to testify, and she begins her testimony by identifying herself as the co-owner of Columbia Birth Center in Richland, Washington, in support of the bill.
Carolee Hall — Listed as a witness signed up to testify on the bill.
Lynette Petty Bone — Testified in support of the bill, describing rural staffing challenges at birth centers and representing midwives and birth centers.
Carly — Expected witness was not present.
Stephanie Hillman — Stephanie Hillman was called to testify in person and then stated that she is the state director for Humane World for Animals, formerly the Humane Society of the United States, speaking in strong support of House Bill 1904.
Leslie Dalzell — Leslie Dalzell was called to the dais and then testified in support of House Bill 1904. She identified herself as the chief executive officer of the Humane Society for Tacoma and Pierce County and vice president of the Washington Federation of Animal Care and Control Agencies.
Greg Hannan — Greg Hannan is called to testify, then begins his remote testimony and identifies himself as representing the Washington State Veterinary Medical Association. He supports the bill but asks for amendments to reduce reporting and recordkeeping burdens.
Greg Hannan — Named as part of the in-person panel to testify.
Greg Hannan — Testified on behalf of the Washington State Veterinary Medical Association in opposition to aspects of House Bill 2247, focusing on the traditional VCPR.
Craig Tebow — Craig Tebow is called to testify and then begins his testimony, identifying himself as a small animal veterinarian practicing in Federal Way, Washington.
Jennifer Conrad — Jennifer Conrad, a Washington-licensed veterinarian and founder/director of the Paw Project, testified in support of House Bill 1904 and against declawing. She argued that declaw bans benefit cats by preventing amputations and related behavioral problems, help the public and shelters by reducing costly intake and euthanasia of cats with behavior issues, and protect pet owners from unintentionally harming their animals. She also said the ban would relieve veterinarians from pressure to perform an ethically troubling procedure, and she urged the committee to pass the ban.
John Heinz — Tacoma City Council member John Heinz testified in support of House Bill 1904, explaining that he helped lead Tacoma’s cat declawing ban, which became the first such ban in Washington. He said the local ordinance was prompted by constituent concerns and family views, and that it passed in 2023. Heinz argued declawing is no longer medically necessary and is not a benign procedure, describing it as permanently disfiguring and harmful to cats’ physical and behavioral health. He added that declawing can create a burden on taxpayers when affected animals end up in public care, and pointed to alternatives such as nail filing, silicone tips, and scratch pads. He concluded by noting that other states have already led on the issue and expressed support for working with the veterinary association and continuing to be a partner on the bill.
Dr. Conrad — Dr. Conrad is referenced as supporting the argument against declawing cats: declawing can lead to more biting and other behaviors that increase the likelihood of surrender, and data from places like Los Angeles and British Columbia suggest that banning declawing has not caused more cats to end up in shelters.
Leah Hauser — Testified as a veterinary practice worker in support of the bill, saying declawing is harmful and increasingly uncommon in Washington.
Tracy Francombe — Tracy Francombe testified in support of House Bill 1904, drawing on a decade of rescue experience to argue that declawed cats often suffer chronic pain and develop behavior problems such as litter box issues and biting, which makes them difficult to rehome and more likely to be returned to shelters. She cited examples from places where declawing is banned, saying shelter intake has not increased, and urged Washington to prohibit declawing because it is a painful, crippling procedure that many veterinarians still perform without adequate warning about its lifelong consequences.
Councilmember Heinz — Referenced as having noted that claws are integral to cats' lives.
HB2247 — House Bill 2247 is introduced and opened for public testimony, then staff explains that it concerns veterinarian-client-patient relationships, defines when that relationship exists, and sets rules for telemedicine, consent, emergency exceptions, food-animal provisions, and prescription limits. The sponsor describes the bill as the result of a long process and final amendments, emphasizing that it is intended to address veterinary access-to-care shortages by allowing telehealth with boundaries rather than replacing in-person care. Public witnesses then testify largely in support, saying the bill clarifies VCPR standards, responsibly expands veterinary telehealth, improves coordination across jurisdictions, and provides a practical tool to reduce harm while preserving professional standards.
Sarah Hawke — Sarah Hawke is called to testify, introduces herself as the executive director of Joint Animal Services in Thurston County and president of the Washington Federation of Animal Care and Control Agencies, and states her strong support for House Bill 2247.
Todd Benisee — Named as part of the in-person panel to testify.
Zara — Named as part of the remote panel to testify.
Zara — Zara is called to begin online testimony and then introduces herself as the program manager and social worker at Seattle Veterinary Outreach, beginning her testimony in support of House Bill 2247.
Dr. Roth — Named as part of the remote panel to testify; transcription is uncertain in the source.
Dr. Overman — Named as part of the remote panel to testify.
Dr. Overman — Referenced as having made a similar point about triage and urgency.
Brittany Benessey — Introduces testimony on behalf of the ASPCA and cites the Veterinary Care Accessibility Project's grade for Washington.
Dr. Lauren Overman — Washington-licensed veterinarian and former shelter veterinarian; testifies in support of House Bill 2247.
HB2247 — HB 2247 receives sustained supportive testimony. Speakers endorse the bill as a move toward virtual VCPR with strong guardrails, arguing it will improve access to veterinary care, help pet owners determine when issues are emergencies, and benefit low-income families, pets, and veterinary clinics. The discussion emphasizes that the bill’s framework and guardrails make telehealth workable and beneficial, and public testimony on the bill is eventually closed.
Dr. Donna de Bonas — Veterinarian from Oak Harbor on Whidbey Island; testifies in support of the bill and virtual VCPR.
Dr. Stonequist — The chair calls on Dr. Stonequist to proceed with testimony.
Dr. Jen Stonequist — Dr. Jen Stonequist, executive director of programs and services at Kitsap Humane Society, testifies in support of HB 2247. She explains that the organization serves low-income families and views the bill as an important next step to expand access to veterinary care.
Dr. Parsley — The speaker offers a closing expression of thanks to Dr. Parsley for her support of the bill and for helping push it through.
Dr. Carey Malayo — Introduces herself as a Washington-licensed veterinarian and board-certified medical and radiation oncologist who has provided tele-advice for years.
shelter veterinarians — Referenced as an important perspective showing the breadth of families the bill could serve.
Mark Cushing — Mark Cushing introduces himself as an attorney and founder/CEO of the Animal Policy Group, then testifies in support of veterinary telemedicine. He says he has spent years promoting it nationwide, emphasizes that it should be conducted by video rather than email or text, and points to Ontario as a model where telemedicine with guardrails has operated for years without harm to pets. He argues that telemedicine works in human health care and should also work for pets, and notes that participation is optional for both veterinarians and clients.
Andrew Barkis — Referenced as having worked on practical amendments; likely the intended member name is uncertain in the transcript.
Connie — Named as part of the in-person panel to come forward.
Emily — Named as part of the in-person panel to come forward.
Jeremy — Named as part of the in-person panel to come forward.
Connie Gilflin — Testified on behalf of Meals on Wheels People and the statewide medically tailored meals coalition.
HB2211 — HB 2211 is presented as a bill to establish consistent statewide guidelines for medically tailored meal services without requiring new appropriations. Speakers support it as a way to implement medically tailored meals effectively while strengthening local procurement, creating jobs, and keeping Washington dollars in-state. They emphasize that the bill would benefit patients receiving medically tailored meals, local distributors, producers, and the regional economy, and urge support for the measure as a community-centered, locally rooted food program.
Jeremy Vrablich — Testified as owner of Cascadia Produce and described statewide food distribution work.
Unnamed witness — The witness explained that meal production can be difficult because of limited resources and that nonprofits often rely on grant funding for capacity building, such as expanding building ownership, infrastructure, and service footprint to reach more people. They added that this kind of funding is important alongside medically tailored meal contract funding, and began illustrating the point with an example from their own small food box program, which initially started with just two employees.
Jeremy Vrablich (mentioned) — Referenced as having described how local funding and prior program support helped organizations grow and expand infrastructure.
Emily Hanning — Emily Hanning, Vice President of Food and Nutrition for Lifelong’s Chicken Soup Brigade and a member of the medically tailored meals coalition, testified about the organization’s history and current work delivering medically tailored meals, healthy groceries, and nutrition education/counseling. She described the Seattle kitchen and warehouse, regional offices, and the organization’s broader support services, noting its staffing and the volume of meals delivered across multiple Washington counties. She also responded to a capacity-building question, highlighted the role of local delivery staff and volunteers in reducing isolation and helping clients with access barriers, and connected the testimony to the importance of HB 2211 before urging the committee to support the bill.
Jillian Moore — Jillian Moore, co-owner of local farms in the Sumner Valley, testified in support of a structured program that directs more business to local farmers. She explained that her farm produces highly nutritious microgreens and that programs like We Feed WA help introduce new buyers to local food, create ongoing commerce and education pathways, and expand public awareness of healthy local foods available year-round. She argued that these programs help local farms stay in business amid funding losses and economic pressures, and that supporting local farms strengthens community food access and resilience during supply-chain disruptions or emergencies.
Leanna (likely Lana Olds) — The chair called on the next witness, referred to as Leanna, likely meaning Lana Olds.
Lana Olds — Lana Olds, deputy director of the Emergency Food Network of Pierce County, described EFN’s role as a regional food distributor serving more than 75 food pantries and its direct-service produce box program that reaches over 550 households each month, including seniors, families, and people with chronic illness. She then explained that EFN partners with Virginia Mason-Franciscan Health to provide medically tailored food boxes for people managing diabetes and heart disease, emphasizing that these are not frozen meals but home-delivered boxes of locally grown fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and proteins for people who can cook but cannot afford healthy food.
Unidentified witness (continuing testimony) — The witness continued describing the medically tailored meal pilot as a test of whether food can function as medicine. They reported early positive outcomes, including improvements in diabetes and blood lipid levels, and said the program has served more than 200 patients over three years. The witness emphasized that reliable access to the right food has helped patients achieve greater stability, dignity, and better illness management.