Transcript Highlights:

• in utility rate cases.
• return on equity in utility rate cases. return on equity in utility rate cases.
• And there's also an issue recruiting private attorneys who take conflict cases and cases that the public
• And there's also an issue recruiting private attorneys who take conflict cases and cases that the public
• And there's also an issue recruiting private attorneys who take conflict cases and cases that the public

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Fiscal Committee met on Friday, November 21st and first approved the October 17th minutes, with one member abstaining because she was not present. The committee then adopted the remainder of the consent calendar after removing two items for separate consideration. On tab four, members discussed item 25282 with the Commissioner of Administrative Services and Public Works staff; the project had been delayed after testing revealed design errors and flaws, and the committee was told the work would restart with test piles the following week and was projected for completion in fall 2027. The item was approved. On tab five, item 25279 concerned a Health and Human Services facility project and a federally required element added late in the process. Commissioners explained that the project had originally been funded at $21 million, later required additional financing, and that the legislature had recently lifted a restriction so non-ARPA funds could be used. They also said the sale of the existing Manchester property would not be needed to complete the build, that a broker RFP was about to be issued, and that any sale would require further approvals. The committee approved the item. The committee then approved item 25280 after a brief exchange about rainy day fund estimates and prior budget assumptions, and approved item 25278 without discussion. Item 25272 drew questions about the consumer advocate’s RFP for outside utility-rate-case assistance; the office said it eliminated proposals focused only on return on equity work after the Eversource decision, selected a Michigan firm for spreadsheet and operating-cost analysis, and noted there were no in-state firms doing this specialized work. The committee approved the item, with one member recorded in opposition. On tab nine, item 25261 concerned a new judicial council budget obligation tied to legislation and public defense staffing needs. The presenter said the request reflected a late-added obligation from the judicial branch, that more requests may still be needed, and that public defense staffing was strained by vacancies and competition from Massachusetts. The committee approved the item. Under informational items, members received an update on 529 plan distributions and on interest and dividends tax refunds, with Revenue Administration saying roughly $21 million more in refunds remained and that the repeal-related refunds were nearly finished. The committee also noted an environmental services item for which questions would be submitted separately. The next meeting was set for December 19th at 11:00 a.m., and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• in civil cases to dollar...
• I don't know how many cases.
• They're very complex cases.
• on the case and also the size and complexity of the new case.
• and throughout their case.

Bills: SB 1

Keywords: campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee held its first hearing of the 89th regular session, adopted nearly identical committee rules from the previous legislature by a 15-0 vote, and began review of Senate Bill 1, the state budget for fiscal years 2026-27. Chair Huffman outlined the budget framework, emphasizing conservative spending, a $332.9 billion all-funds budget, and major priorities including property tax relief, public education, border security, health and human services, transportation, energy, and water infrastructure. She also introduced committee and leadership staff and described the hearing schedule and public testimony procedures. Comptroller Glenn Hager presented the biennial revenue estimate, saying the state has $194.6 billion available for general-purpose spending, including a $23.8 billion ending balance, but warned that revenue growth is returning to more normal levels and that lawmakers should avoid using temporary spikes for ongoing commitments. Senators questioned him extensively about the Economic Stabilization Fund cap, sales tax trends, inflation, and whether the state should consider raising the cap or using severance-tax revenues differently. Hager said the Rainy Day Fund is expected to hit its cap, which would leave more severance-tax revenue in general revenue, and he stressed that infrastructure needs remain significant. The Legislative Budget Board then gave a detailed overview of SB 1 and the budget’s major components. LBB staff explained that the bill includes continued funding for the Foundation School Program, $850 million for the Texas State Technical College endowment, $1.3 billion for the Texas University Fund, $6.5 billion for border security, salary increases for correctional officers and state troopers, $3 billion for dementia research, higher community attendant wages, expanded community-based care, $5 billion for the Texas Energy Fund, and funding to clear volunteer fire department grant backlogs. They also outlined supplemental priorities such as water infrastructure, retirement legacy payments, rail grade separations, wildfire aircraft, and emergency facilities, and said the current controlling budget limit is the tax spending limit. A major portion of the hearing focused on property tax relief. LBB explained that prior-session relief grew from an expected $18 billion to $22.7 billion because of higher-than-anticipated property values and interactions among hold-harmless provisions, and that SB 1 continues and expands relief with $51 billion in total property tax relief, including $3 billion more for compression, $3 billion to raise the homestead exemption from $100,000 to $140,000, and a $500 million placeholder for business tax relief. Senators discussed the automatic nature of some of these costs, the effect of the non-homestead circuit breaker, the role of federal COVID funds, and the need to maintain school finance commitments if the state continues to compress school tax rates.

Transcript Highlights:

• If a case is not substantiated, child protective services involvement in the case as an official matter
• In some cases, we've aligned them; in most cases, we haven't.
• And when we've done longitudinal case analysis with de-identified cases, we found, you know, the long-term
• In cases where abuse or neglect is not substantiated, the state would typically close the case and suggest
• I've read the Kevin case.

Transcript Highlights:

• weapon cases, and then possession and delivery cases as well.
• weapon cases, and then possession and delivery cases as well. deadly weapon cases, and then possession
• cases... ...in lieu of prosecution of a case to try and, again, get those cases down that really aren't
• cases?
• , that landmark case.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Deputy General Counsel Porter referred before to court cases, you know, related court cases.
• So in the case, I guess it was Mahajan, or was that Agent? It's M-H-J-A-N in that case from 2013.
• Governed by past cases and the precedent of those past cases, right? Correct. All questions?
• I think the role of the Attorney General in that case, that in that case, since they're...
• And so that case-by-case interpretation, you know, can be subjective from a proponent.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight held an oversight hearing on draft regulations implementing Article 97 of the Massachusetts Constitution under Chapter 274 of the Acts of 2022, the Open Space Act. Chairs Cabral and Collins framed the hearing as a review of how the new process for dispositions or changes in use of Article 97 land would work, including public notice, environmental justice protections, replacement land, appraisals, and the role of the legislature. Under Secretary Stephanie Cooper and Commissioner Adam Bakke testified for EEA/DCAM, followed later by Deputy Inspector General O’Neill and Deputy Inspector General Giles on appraisal review. Much of the discussion focused on how the draft regulations would operate in practice. EEA said the regulations would require advance public notice, define “comparable location” for replacement land, and allow the Secretary to make findings on whether an action would adversely affect environmental justice communities. Members pressed for longer public comment periods, clearer notice to local officials, more frequent updates to the site evaluation tool, and a clearer definition of terms such as “limited duration” for permits and licenses. EEA said the regulations are intended to standardize a process that has been handled through policy and case-by-case review, and that the legislature still retains the final authority to approve any Article 97 disposition. Committee members also questioned whether the draft rules shift too much discretion to the Secretary and whether the proposed “proponent” process could allow private entities to drive Article 97 actions. EEA responded that non-public proponents would still need municipal support and legislative sponsorship, and that the regulations do not create a new avenue to bypass the existing home rule and legislative process. Members raised concerns about the current policy’s unanimous-vote requirements for municipal commissions, the proposed waiver provisions, whether MEPA applies, and the lack of explicit enforcement or penalty language in the act or regulations. EEA and DCAM said the act does not provide an enforcement mechanism and that disputes would generally be handled through the courts or the Attorney General. The Inspector General’s office explained its role in reviewing appraisals for special legislation, including Article 97 matters, to ensure compliance with USPAP standards and to forward its review to DCAM. The hearing did not include any votes or formal committee action; members indicated that the committee may later issue recommendations to the executive agencies based on the testimony and questions raised.

Transcript Highlights:

• case team to IRP.
• And it's about 30 staff approximately per rate case. So this would be for Edison’s rate case.
• PG&E's rate case, San Diego Gas & Electric's rate case, for example.
• the rate case.
• The rate case.

Summary: The committee first heard Issue 1 on trailer bill language to redirect funding for emergency demand-response programs. The Department of Finance proposed using about $26.9 million in General Fund originally set aside for the Distributed Energy Backup Assets program to bolster the Demand-Side Grid Support Program for summer 2026, and using about $70 million in CalCHAP interest to support ratepayer-funded demand response in summers 2027 and 2028. The CEC and CPUC said they are working on a transition from DSGS to ELRP or a successor program, while the LAO noted the General Fund money would otherwise revert to savings. Members pressed the administration on whether demand response remains important, whether DSGS has been successful, and whether the state should keep funding it through the CEC rather than shifting to a ratepayer-funded CPUC program. The CEC and CPUC said the programs are not directly comparable, emphasized different cost structures and enrollment metrics, and said a CPUC rulemaking is underway with a proposed decision expected in Q3 2026. No vote was taken in the transcript. The committee then took up Issue 2, a budget proposal tied to SB 254 and the new transmission accelerator. GoBiz and the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank described a five-year, roughly $26 million request to staff and administer the accelerator and manage Proposition 4 and AB 1207 funds for transmission financing. Members asked about state liability, ownership of financed lines, FERC revenue requirements, and whether the program would help underserved regions and offshore wind development. Staff explained that the accelerator would only consider projects already identified through CAISO’s competitive transmission planning process, and that state financing would be a small portion of large projects intended to lower overall costs to ratepayers. The LAO said it had no specific concerns but urged the Legislature to ensure the final language matches its intent. The committee also heard Issue 3 on petroleum market oversight. The CEC and its Division of Petroleum Market Oversight requested additional positions and funding to implement ABX2-1 and continue work on supply stabilization, refinery monitoring, and transportation fuels analysis. Members questioned why the work was funded through the Energy Resources Programs Account, whether existing staff from the paused price-gouging work could be reassigned, and whether the program had produced evidence of price gouging or improved supply conditions. CEC and Finance said the new positions are needed because the workload has expanded, while some existing staff remain on related analysis and reporting duties. The discussion ended without a vote in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• In Orleans Parish, in 2025, there were 4,237 criminal court cases and zero traffic cases.
• Criminal court cases and zero traffic cases. And there are currently 12 judges there.
• traffic cases filed, because they handled both criminal and traffic cases.
• Do you have the number of cases per judge? Cases per judge? Well, I don't believe it's cases.
• Again, the docketed cases that we did in 2025 are 14,908 docketed cases.

Bills: HCR11, HB153, HB278, HB424, HB454, HB455, HB687, HB816, HB833, HB942, HB1053, HB1097, HB1147, HB1148, HB1190, SB75, SB85, SB197, SB200, SB217

Keywords: Camp Beauregard, Louisiana National Guard, Youth Challenge Program, military affairs, Pineville, National Guard training, emergency response, youth development, alternative education, high school equivalency, GED, at-risk youth, leadership training, job skills, citizenship, veterans, state military operations, mobilization, logistics staging area, public service

Transcript Highlights:

• So it, it can impact the case.
• Case by cases getting dismissed or cases waiting in the backlog in fear of a statute of limitations running
• These cases, I'm sorry, these ones for declined cases, they just don't go into the database at all.
• Case was. Gone away.
• You're talking about losing cases because the statute of limitations cases being dismissed.

Transcript Highlights:

• . case. case.
• in those cases. in those cases.
• . case-by-case. case-by-case.
• in my individual case. in my individual case.
• one individual case. one individual case.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Assigned counsel systems, where private attorneys are appointed and paid by the court on a rotating case-by-case
• An attorney in Tarrant County was paid for 809 cases, which included 351 adult felony cases. 109 cases
• , which included 351 adult felony cases and 458 adult misdemeanor cases.
• And we are seeing more and more arson cases, burglary of a habitation cases, financial crimes against
• Like one example that I can give you that was an actual case of ours was a dating violence case.

Bills: HB115

Keywords: public funds, lobbying, political subdivision, government spending, transparency, HB 115, taxpayer-funded lobbying, local government lobbying, county association dues, municipal lobbying, lobbyist registration, Chapter 305, Government Code Section 556.0056, Local Government Code Section 89.002, county government, city government, injunctive relief, attorney's fees, state association of counties, sheriffs association

Summary: The Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence reconvened with a quorum present and announced it would likely not vote that night because of confusion over the bill list; members were told a definitive list would be circulated the next morning and a formal meeting would be scheduled later. The chair then heard a series of bills, generally taking testimony and leaving each pending without action. House Bill 1847 would set maximum caseload standards for private attorneys handling indigent criminal appointments through the Texas Indigent Defense Commission; House Bill 2417 would expand compensation eligibility for some wrongfully imprisoned people; House Bill 2813 would require earlier and more specific victim notice of scheduled court proceedings; and House Bill 2309 would expand state and local authority in certain civil asset forfeiture cases involving human trafficking, health care fraud, and organized crime. Each bill was laid out by its author or a member, with no opposition witnesses registered, and each was left pending. The committee also heard House Bill 4733, which would require sealing records for people acquitted of charges when they were not convicted on the related allegation; House Bill 2328, which would modernize expunction service by encouraging electronic notice, setting a standardized fee when electronic service is unavailable, extending clerk retention of expunction orders, and preserving certain mental health commitment orders; and House Bill 115, which would revise Texas’s “junk science” post-conviction writ law by providing counsel, changing the relief standard, requiring written decisions, and easing procedural barriers. Testimony on HB 2328 was mixed: county clerks supported the bill as a cost-saving modernization, while legal advocates warned that permanent retention of expunction orders could undermine true expunction and create privacy risks. HB 115 drew support from innocence and defense organizations, with some concern about a provision affecting subsequent writs. All were left pending after testimony. Later, the committee heard House Bill 2046, which would allow affirmative family-violence findings for any Penal Code offense rather than only Title V offenses; testimony from a Dallas County prosecutor and a committee member emphasized that family violence can involve arson, burglary, fraud, and other non-Title V conduct, and the bill was left pending. House Bill 1765 would tighten restrictions on no-knock warrants by requiring higher-level approval, judicial review, and identifiable officers; members discussed the dangers highlighted by the Harding Street raid and similar incidents, and the bill was also left pending. The meeting ended with the chair noting that some bills had been removed from the agenda at the author’s request and that members should be prepared to finalize the vote list the next day.

Transcript Highlights:

• The case has not been reclassified as a criminal case in any shape or form.
• The case has not been reclassified as a criminal case in any shape or form.
• Miss Kingsbury's case versus Josh Gimon's case.
• Jeff Casee: Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. My name is Jeff Casee.
• including pending cases for all cases including pending cases simply<01:25:00.600> by<01:25:00.760

Bills: HF2233, HF1524, HF1893, HF1396, HF2456, HF2959, HF2300, HF2412, HF3022, HF2825, HF1862, HF1373, HF1039, HF3070

Keywords: Uniform Special Deposits Act, special deposit, banking law, financial institutions, escrow, escrow account, trust account, security deposit, beneficiary, depositor, creditor process, garnishment, attachment, levy, setoff, recoupment, financial market infrastructure, retirement benefits, compensation, earnest money

Transcript Highlights:

• After this Fortune case came out, there were at least four cases that were pending that I know had to
• Not the case at all.
• /c><00:45:16.559> all buried with cases not the case at all buried with cases not the case at
• > meet<00:45:31.400> the of those good cases you do meet the of those good cases you do
• I am litigating a case right now. It is a DNA case.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• cases.
• Those are child abuse cases, deprived cases, and delinquent cases.
• or a child sex assault case.
• of 3,655 for delinquent cases.
• case.

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• and then you have a pretty complicated case, and judges in that case, especially given their caseloads
• You know, it will happen, and remember there are cases, and this happens most often in cases with an
• <00:31:59.200> Obviously, in all cases is problematic.
• Obviously, in all cases is problematic.
• > or<00:32:44.480> and often in cases with an elderly or and often in cases with an elderly

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Case for go ahead.
• He off of cases like this.
• One 19, our records become public and disciplinary cases after either a case is closed without a probable
• Article 5 Section 15 in the case. Law of the U.S. Constitution. Article 5 Section 15 in the case.
• in Case B and therefore our the citizen members different from case to case or are you appointed to

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Because there was a case called, many of you probably heard of it, the Rebecca Furley case, where, as
• The case file search will give the judiciary multiple options on how to search for cases, whether it's
• It will show you the total of cases.
• The case will show who the guardians are, whether they are plenary or limited, their address, the case
• So the first case happened then, which included several active cases.

Summary: The Human Services Subcommittee met to receive updates on implementation of House Bill 1349, which created guardianship transparency measures, and on the Department of Elder Affairs’ Office of Public and Professional Guardians (OPPG). The Clerk of Courts Operations Corporation described the statewide guardianship database for judges and a public-facing website, noting the system went live in March 2025 after a soft launch in 2024. Officials said the database now includes information from all 67 clerks, with 388 users, about 6,400 wards, and 518 professional guardians. Members asked about unique identifiers, data duplication, training, and how the system is being used; CCOC said it is working to use registration numbers as identifiers, improve search functions, expand training, and seek continued funding. Secretary Michelle Branham then outlined OPPG’s implementation of HB 1349 and its broader oversight role. She said the department has doubled education requirements, expanded transparency through the Sentry system, and brought investigations fully in-house in August 2024. She described the complaint and investigation process, including legal sufficiency review, regional investigators, mandatory in-person interviews, and possible outcomes ranging from corrective training and fines to suspension or revocation. Members asked about complaint categories, disciplinary actions, whether guardians can be suspended during investigations, and how older cases are handled; the secretary said most complaints are administrative/technical, serious allegations are referred to law enforcement, and one older case discussed remained ongoing. The Auditor General’s office presented its operational audit of OPPG, covering July 2022 through January 2024 and follow-up on prior findings. The audit identified problems with monitoring private professional guardians and public guardian offices, complaint processing timeliness, incomplete public profile information, late registration renewals, failure to assess contract penalties, weak collection safeguards, missing follow-up on required public guardian reports, lack of needed rules, and Sentry system access/security controls. In response, Secretary Branham said the department does not dispute the findings and has already taken corrective steps, including launching Sentry, hiring additional monitors, moving investigations in-house, adding automated renewal reminders, updating forms, and drafting new rules. She also said the department plans to seek subpoena power and stronger fines in the next legislative session. The subcommittee took no formal vote and adjourned after members’ questions were completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um where the judiciary is able to look at cases on a case-by-case basis and make those decisions.
• So, I do really favor<00:30:14.080> our<00:30:14.400> case-by-case favor our case-by-case
• we see so much more of the severe cases. we see so much more of the severe cases.
• difficult to prosecute these cases? difficult to prosecute these cases?
• have to decide on that case-by-case have to decide on that case-by-case basis.<00:51:04.880>

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00:00 Roll Call: 00:00:09 State of the Judiciary: 00:02:33 The Corrections - KCTCS Reentry Program: 00:49:44 Update on 2022 RS SB 90: 01:27:49, 958, all

Summary: The Juvenile Justice Oversight Council met with a quorum, approved the October 8, 2025 minutes, and welcomed guests including Marshall County Attorney Jason Darnall. The main topic was juvenile interrogation, with a presentation from Kentucky Youth Advocates by Courtney Downs and Shannon Moody. They said their organization is supporting a 2026 Blueprint priority requiring children to consult with an attorney before waiving Miranda rights, and they emphasized research on adolescent brain development, susceptibility to peer pressure and impulsive decision-making, and the risk of false confessions. They cited National Registry of Exonerations data showing high rates of false confessions among exonerated youth, especially younger children, and described approaches in other states such as Maryland’s Child Interrogation Protection Act, Indiana’s statute allowing certain adults to waive rights in some circumstances, and laws in other states requiring recording of interrogations or limiting deceptive tactics. Members asked about trauma and adverse childhood experiences, whether the proposal would require attorney consultation in every juvenile interview, whether parents could instead be the ones consulted, and how such a rule would affect law enforcement investigations and juvenile accountability. Senator Carroll and others raised concerns about feasibility, delays, and whether juveniles might avoid accountability if attorneys are required before questioning. The presenters responded that they were focused on ensuring children understand their legal rights, that some states use age- or offense-based limits, and that parent consultation is another model used elsewhere, though they said a lawyer is best suited to explain legal rights and process. Members also discussed the role of the Department of Public Advocacy and whether legislative action or court decisions should address the issue. The council did not take final action on the policy, but requested additional materials, including the text of laws from Maryland, Indiana, and North Carolina, for further review.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:08:20.159> um the prosecutor is dismissing a case um the prosecutor is dismissing a case
• was when there was a high-profile case was when there was a high-profile case with<01:03:34.000>
• > cannot prove the case Beyond a cannot prove the case Beyond a reasonable<01:14:04.280> doubt
• There's 98,000 cases to go through. That's a lot of cases.
• /c><01:35:06.560> that<01:35:06.639> are cases are cases of people that are cases are cases

Bills: HF7

Keywords: public safety, criminal justice, sentencing guidelines, Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission, public sentencing database, felony dismissals, prosecutor reporting, bail notice, bond posting, law enforcement data, arrest data, public records, sex trafficking, human trafficking, mandatory minimum sentence, peace officer assault, police assault, fleeing police, vehicular flight, stolen motor vehicle

Transcript Highlights:

• fortune came out, that case went away. fortune came out, that case went away.
• cases uh should it be legally possible. cases uh should it be legally possible.
• cases may be able to be resurrected. cases may be able to be resurrected.
• work the case. They work it backwards. work the case. They work it backwards.
• Unfortunately, many of those cases are what we call death-resulting cases.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, another case that we tried after that this month was a 2006 case of a 53-year-old old woman, and
• our cases to get dismissed, and because of that, then cases are sitting 345 years until that testing
• Case by cases getting dismissed or cases waiting in the backlog in fear of a statute of limitations running
• Case was. Gone away.
• You're talking about losing cases because the statute of limitations cases being dismissed.