Transcript Highlights:

• we focus on worker co-ops, businesses owned and governed by employees, operating on one worker, one vote
• c><00:03:59.320><c> much</c><00:03:59.560><c> they've</c> vote, no matter how much they've vote, no matter
• </c> you get a good vote. you get a good vote.
• Our office is based in New York City, um, but I am full-time remote. Certainly.
• Our office is based in New York City, um, but I am full-time remote.

Committee: Senate Labor

Transcript Highlights:

• That's what we are asking Missourians to vote on.
• That's what we are asking Missourians to vote on.
• By your vote of seven yes and three no, you have voted House Committee Substitute for House Joint Resolution
• By your vote of nine yes and one present, you have voted House Committee Substitute for House Bill 321
• and 3531 be voted do pass.

Committees: House Commerce , House Commerce, Consumer Protection, Energy and the Environment

Transcript Highlights:

• I work remotely. I'm on Hollywood Squares all the time. And so there's some online etiquette.
• I work remotely.<00:21:47.679><c> I'm</c><00:21:47.919><c> on</c><00:21:48.080><c> Hollywood</c><00:21
• :48.559><c> Squares</c><00:21:49.120><c> all</c> remotely.
• I'm on Hollywood Squares all remotely. I'm on Hollywood Squares all the<00:21:49.600><c> time.
• We have Manny, who works remotely, and they're a big Duke basketball fan.

Transcript Highlights:

• By our vote, six ayes, zero nays, one not voting.
• I vote aye, five ayes, two no, zero not voting. Final vote of five ayes, two no, zero not voting.
• Five ayes, two nays, zero not voting. Final vote of five ayes, two no, zero not voting.
• So I vote yes. Six ayes, zero nays, one not voting.
• Four eyes, one nay, two not voting. By your vote of four eyes, one no, two not voting.

Summary: The committee first considered the reappointment of Troy L. Campbell to the Arizona State Liquor Board. Campbell described his nearly 10 years of service, his role as chair since 2019, and his focus on fairness, public safety, and applying the law consistently. He answered questions about the board’s workload and authority, noting it hears roughly 40 to 50 cases a year and does not issue fines. With no public testimony, the committee voted 6-0 to recommend his confirmation to the full Senate. The committee then heard several liquor and consumer-related bills. SB 1478, an annual liquor-policy cleanup bill, made technical changes to liquor statutes, including conforming the definition of cider to federal tax law and clarifying other terminology. The bill drew support from industry stakeholders and neutral testimony from the Department of Liquor Licenses and Control; the committee adopted a clarifying amendment and recommended the bill do pass as amended. SB 1108 would require Swedish rounding of cash transactions when pennies are unavailable, with signage and enforcement provisions; an amendment removed an individual-item exemption and clarified tax calculations, and the bill passed as amended with support from business groups. SB 1205 would regulate private-property vehicle booting by setting signage, notice, fee, and recordkeeping requirements and making violations a misdemeanor; members raised concerns about appeals and signage on non-parking property, but the committee adopted a technical amendment and recommended the bill do pass as amended. The committee also took up SB 1241, which would allow private permitting providers to conduct plan reviews and inspections for single-trade residential projects without municipal or county approval. Supporters argued it would reduce delays and costs for homeowners and help cities focus on higher-priority work, while cities and counties opposed the bill on public-safety and local-control grounds, warning about private incentives and inspection quality. After adopting an amendment granting immunity to municipalities that rely on private providers, the committee recommended the bill do pass as amended by a 5-2 vote, with some members explaining their votes and asking for further stakeholder work. Finally, the committee heard SB 1366, which creates a Public Property Towing and Impound Practices Study Committee to review towing fees, standards, insurance, background checks, and related DPS policies, and to report recommendations by the end of 2026. Supporters said the study would help address inconsistent standards and consumer concerns before permanent changes are made. Some members objected that the study committee did not include minority-party appointments, but the sponsor said that could be addressed later. The committee adopted a strike-everything amendment and recommended the bill do pass as amended. The committee then began SB 1431, a housing-design bill limiting municipal design standards and restrictions on certain shared features, but the transcript cuts off during extended debate and no final action on that bill is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• In accordance with the rules of the Senate, the following members are remote.
• .<00:43:35.160><c> So,</c> remotely.
• So, remotely.
• You have to joining us remotely. You have to introduce<01:30:57.840><c> yourself.
• Vote for it. All right. Mr. Chairman, my name is Tony Pullis.

Committee: Senate Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• Please note that cities and counties can levy what they need for their budgets, but consequently voting
• Please note that cities and counties can levy what they need for their budgets, but consequently voting
• And with that, uh, we have remote test fires, so, um, cross your fingers.
• We don't have to come back with the remote; go ahead and proceed. I would appreciate it, Chair.
• The last testifier we have remotely is Ryan Logger, BPR Belplane.

Bills: HF957 , HF877

Committee: House Education Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• D.C. voting over and is in Washington, D.C. voting over and over<00:04:18.400><c> again</c><00:04:18.680
• Green votes no. Jones votes no. Rarick votes aye. Green no Green votes no.
• Jones Green no Green votes no.
• </c><00:09:35.560><c> Rarick</c> Jones no Jones votes no. Rarick Jones no Jones votes no.
• ><c> votes</c><00:09:40.000><c> aye.

Transcript Highlights:

• The clerk voted yes. Representative Bean voted yes. Representative Campbell voted no.
• Representative Muns voted yes. Representative Kelly voted yes. Chair Wiler voted yes.
• Representative Edwards voted yes. The clerk voted yes. Representative Bean voted yes.
• </c> have equal access to vote on voting day. have equal access to vote on voting day.
• I I could vote to vote to pass this.

Summary: The committee first considered House Bill 66, a right-to-know measure that would broaden access from “citizen” to “person,” including out-of-state requesters. Members also adopted an amendment removing the current no-filing-fee provision for appeals of unfavorable right-to-know ombudsman rulings, citing budget concerns. The bill was then reported ought to pass as amended on a 16-9 vote, with a minority report requested. House Bill 187, which would let a parent or guardian seek a protective order on behalf of a minor alleging abuse by someone outside the family or household, was described as a narrow fix with little fiscal impact. It passed unanimously, 25-0, and was placed on the consent calendar. House Bill 215, requiring landfill permit applicants to submit a report on potential harms and benefits, was retained because its policy had been folded into House Bill 2; the committee voted 25-0 to retain it. House Bill 219, dealing with renewable portfolio standard changes and lower renewable energy certificate values, drew opposition from members who said it would weaken renewable energy development and raise concerns about energy costs, but the motion to retain was adopted 14-11, allowing the bill to be moved into House Bill 2. The committee then retained House Bills 365, 552, 566, 572, 607, 611, and 624, all by unanimous or near-unanimous votes, generally because the relevant policy or funding had been incorporated into House Bill 2 or because the bills were viewed as technical or low-impact. HB 566 was described as a landfill leach-management bill with a fiscal note under $10,000 annually and was sent to consent. HB 572 and HB 607 were retained because their money components were moved into HB 2, though one member objected that HB 607 represented an unfunded mandate for the Hampton Beach Area Commission. House Bill 511, concerning ICE detainers and county detention practices, generated the most debate. Supporters said the amendment clarified how long counties may hold detainees without a federal contract and compared the detention period to existing bail rules; opponents argued the bill could sanction detention of people not charged with crimes and raised due-process concerns. The committee adopted the amendment 14-11 and then reported the bill ought to pass as amended on another 14-11 vote, with a minority report requested. House Bill 639, involving securities and digital currency issues, was also reported ought to pass after members noted unresolved concerns but said the Secretary of State’s Securities Division was willing to continue working on it in the other body; the vote was 16-10.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Cortese: [vote not clearly captured]. Senator Gonzalez: [vote not clearly captured].
• Senator Choi: [vote not clearly captured]. Senator Cortese: [vote not clearly captured].
• Current vote is four ayes, no noes, with the chair and vice chair voting aye. Senator Choi: Aye.
• Current vote is four ayes, no noes, with the chair and vice chair voting. Senator Choi: Aye.
• Current vote is three ayes, no noes, with the chair voting aye.

Committee: Senate Education

Summary: The committee heard SB 1067, which would require annual math screening for kindergarten through second grade students beginning in 2028-29 to identify early numeracy difficulties and connect students to evidence-based supports. Senator Weber and supporters, including EdVoice, UC Davis researcher Charles Wilkes, and several education and community advocates, argued that California’s math performance is too low and that early screening would help close gaps before they widen. Opponents, including the California Mathematics Council, county superintendents, and the CTA, said the bill could narrow instruction, overemphasize deficit-based measures, and should instead be paired with stronger investments in teacher training and implementation of the California Mathematics Framework. Committee members generally expressed support for the bill’s goals while discussing how the screener would work and what kinds of follow-up supports would be needed. The committee also heard SB 1110 on child care subsidy administration, which would restructure funding for alternative payment programs and core contracts as the state moves to enrollment-based funding. Supporters said the bill would stabilize child care providers, improve payment timelines, and better reflect the administrative work of enrolling families and managing services; there was no opposition testimony. SB 1374, supported by the CSU and UC systems, would allow public higher education institutions to seek temporary restraining orders when credible threats are directed at a campus rather than a specific person. Supporters described recent campus threats that created safety concerns but did not fit current restraining-order law; there was no opposition. Senator Nilo presented SB 1321, which would direct the State Auditor to review remedial course use and student preparedness at selected UC and CSU campuses after a UC San Diego report showed a sharp decline in incoming students’ math readiness. Supporters argued the audit would help identify gaps in college readiness and the effects of K-12 changes, while some members raised concerns about bypassing the usual legislative audit process; the bill was held on call. The committee then took up SB 1086 on microschools, which would define microschools and direct model ordinances for local land-use regulation. Supporters said it would create a clearer path for small, individualized learning communities, but several members questioned whether the concept was sufficiently defined and whether the state had enough information to draft model ordinances; the bill was also placed on call after a quorum was established. Finally, SB 1181 was presented as a limited pilot program in Central Valley counties to connect schools with regional threat assessment centers when credible safety concerns arise. The author and supporters, including the mother of a student killed in a shooting and several students, said it would improve early intervention and communication; committee members raised privacy and federal-sharing concerns but indicated support, and the bill was moved forward on a vote once quorum was present.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you both for joining us remotely and for all of your work on our committee.
• Testimony, thank you. ...joined us remotely and for all of your work on our committee.
• So I'm sorry, I should say for any members that are joining us remotely, if I think Senator Payano may
• We thank everyone for joining us here, as well as remotely. Thank you.

Committee: Senate Senate Committee on Juvenile and Emerging Adult Justice

Transcript Highlights:

• Our first testifier is joining us remotely. Um, it looks like Sarah Florky is with us.
• Our first testifier is<00:02:23.120><c> joining</c><00:02:23.480><c> us</c><00:02:23.720><c> remotely
• </c><00:02:24.960><c> Um,</c><00:02:25.440><c> it</c><00:02:25.640><c> looks</c> is joining us remotely
• Um, it looks is joining us remotely.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because it does sound, it's a little bit of a quirk of that article, I think, where people are voting
• I think, what you are getting at, which is maybe there are some things that shouldn't be left to a vote
• You know, everybody votes for their own reasons, and they vote based on the best information they have
• Our next speaker, I believe, is remote. Our next speaker, I believe, is remote: Jean Kempthorne.
• That we saw the voters, and you had mentioned 71, 72 percent of voters voted for this law.

Summary: The subcommittee hearing focused on whether the Office of the State Auditor may constitutionally audit the Massachusetts Legislature under Chapter 250 of the Acts of 2024 and what such an audit could include under generally accepted government auditing standards. Chair Cindy Friedman opened by explaining the background: voters approved Ballot Question 1 in November 2024, the law took effect in January 2025, and the Auditor then initiated audits of both chambers. The chair said the subcommittee was seeking expert testimony because the proposed audit scope, constitutionality, and possible bias concerns remained unresolved. Public testimony was invited, but no members of the public pre-registered; written testimony remained open for a short period after the hearing. The hearing then proceeded with invited experts on constitutional law/state government and auditing-related issues. Professor Lawrence Friedman testified that the ballot initiative’s approval by the Attorney General and by voters did not resolve constitutional questions, and he argued Chapter 250 violates the Massachusetts Constitution. He said the Legislature has constitutional authority to set its own rules and manage its proceedings, and that an executive-branch audit would intrude on legislative deliberation, speech and debate protections, and separation of powers. He also warned that even audits of supposedly administrative matters could become a vehicle for repeated document demands and litigation that would indirectly burden legislative functioning. In questioning, senators pressed him on the line between administrative and deliberative functions, the role of the Attorney General versus the courts, the possibility of retroactive audit scope, and whether prior legislative consent to audits mattered; he said prior consent would not bind future legislatures and that constitutionality is ultimately for the courts. Professor Ray La Raja also opposed the audit, framing it as a threat to institutional independence and representative democracy. He argued that allowing an executive-branch official to audit the Legislature without consent would upset separation of powers, chill internal debate, and create a precedent for broader executive intrusion. He said voters often support “transparency” reforms without fully appreciating institutional consequences, and that legislatures should defend their autonomy, especially amid what he described as broader executive overreach nationally. Senators asked about chilling effects, the practical distinction between administrative and core legislative functions, and whether the courts or the Legislature should resolve the issue; he said the courts would ultimately adjudicate disputes, but the Legislature should not waive its constitutional authority lightly. Jean Kempthorne took the opposite view, arguing the audit is permissible and should proceed. She said the state auditor is a constitutional officer accountable directly to the people, that the audit power can be expanded by statute, and that separation of powers does not require watertight compartments. She contended the audit would not displace core legislative powers because the auditor can only evaluate operations, report findings, and make recommendations. She also argued the Legislature itself already conducts audits of other branches, so it is inconsistent to claim an audit of the Legislature is unconstitutional. In response to senators’ questions, she said there are guardrails against truly intrusive requests, but that the administrative-versus-legislative distinction is not a workable bright line; she suggested disputes should be handled case by case, with objections, negotiation, or litigation if specific requests go too far. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• I urge you all to please vote no on this bill. Thank you.
• So I really hope you will all vote no on this.
• I believe I'll be voting yes on that. Thank you. Right.
• And that's why I ask you to vote in favor of this bill.
• know who voted yes or no on what they voted.

Committee: House Judiciary, Rules and Administration

Transcript Highlights:

• The oil and gas industry has been very interested in using microreactors for remote applications.
• And so you look at microreactors: great for remote application, great Past.
• I did speak to a subset of this group back last fall remotely.
• A number of them testified against this, but they approved it on a 10-to-nothing vote because we, the
• Japan is considering three different sites right now, and one of them is an island quite remote in the

Committee: Joint Advanced Nuclear Energy Committee

Summary: The committee met to hear a series of presentations on advanced nuclear economics, workforce, community impacts, and financing. Nucleon Energy’s William Bridge presented a report estimating the economic impacts of hypothetical 200-megawatt and 600-megawatt SMRs, including construction and operating jobs, local spending, tax revenue, and the private-sector conditions needed to attract investment. He said the report used nth-of-a-kind cost assumptions, discussed security and water siting considerations, and argued that early community engagement and permitting work should be timed to when projects are closer to being economic. Committee members questioned cost assumptions, security staffing, transmission and water siting, and whether large reactors or SMRs are more likely to be financed in the near term. Lori Brady of the Nuclear Energy Institute then outlined national nuclear workforce needs and NEI’s strategic workforce planning. She described declining labor-force demographics, the need for hundreds of thousands of new energy workers by 2050, and six workforce priorities: career awareness, pipelines, training and qualification, policy support, retention, and non-traditional pipelines. She highlighted the Nuclear Works career website, the Nuclear Energy Academic Roadmap, the new federal Energy and Natural Resources career cluster, and the Nuclear Uniform Curriculum Program for community colleges. Members asked about AI, robotics, and when training should begin relative to future plant construction; Brady said AI is not expected to replace workers broadly and that training timelines depend on the specific project and staffing plan. Red Wing, Minnesota Mayor Gary Yako described hosting the Prairie Island nuclear generating facility. He said the plant provides a large share of the city’s property tax base, supports well-paid jobs, contributes to local emergency preparedness, and is a strong community partner through donations and employee involvement. He said the city supports relicensing, has regular emergency drills, and has had no issues with dry cask storage. The committee also heard from NEI’s Benton Arnett, who reviewed the current financing landscape, including federal tax credits, DOE loan authority, offtake agreements, and the shift toward project developers and special-purpose vehicles. He said early projects face high first-of-a-kind costs, but federal support and long-term power purchase agreements are helping make projects financeable. Finally, DOE’s Julie Kazeraki described the Office of Energy Dominance Financing and its role in supporting new nuclear, restarts, uprates, and supply chain investments, emphasizing that federal loan and tax-credit tools are intended to reduce upfront risk and improve project affordability.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I’ll vote for it today. Thank you.
• I respectfully urge a yes vote on SB 1364.
• I respectfully urge a yes vote on SB 1364.
• We respectfully urge a no vote. Thank you. No vote, thank you. Thank you.
• Dixon, not voting, too. This is SB 1371, Durazo. Dixon, not voting, too. Okay.

Summary: The committee heard several bills. SB 911, by Senator Becker, would require notification and verification of defensible-space compliance when homes in high wildfire severity zones are transferred, using the preliminary change of ownership report; supporters said it would improve wildfire resilience and insurance availability, while county assessors opposed the use of the PCOR and urged a different recorded document. Members generally supported the bill but raised concerns about the 12-month compliance window and the need to keep working with assessors; the bill was held pending a quorum and later placed on call. SB 1016, by Senator Blakespear, would create a pathway for a higher-level mental health evaluation when a Care Court petition is dismissed because the person is too ill to participate or otherwise needs more intensive care. Supporters, including psychiatrists, family members, and local officials, said Care Court is leaving many severely ill people untreated and that the bill would connect them to existing LPS processes. Opponents, including Disability Rights California, county behavioral health directors, counties, and other advocacy groups, argued it would expand involuntary detention, bypass existing pre-petition screening safeguards, and undermine Care Court’s voluntary nature. The bill passed the committee on a roll call vote and was placed on call. SB 1112, by Senator Archuleta, would create a faster court process for victims of illegal or excessive “bandit towing” to recover their vehicles by posting a bond and obtaining a release certificate. Support came from Enterprise Mobility and the author, who said the bill targets bad actors and helps equalize leverage for vehicle owners; the California Auto Body Association sought an amendment to exclude auto repair shops. The committee passed the bill as amended to Appropriations and placed it on call. SB 1119, by Senator Padilla, would impose child-safety requirements on AI chatbots, including risk assessments, crisis-response protocols, parental controls, limits on time and data use, reporting, audits, and a private right of action. The bill was driven by testimony from the mother of a teenager who died by suicide after prolonged chatbot interactions; industry and business groups opposed or sought amendments, citing overlap with recent law, vague standards, and prescriptive design mandates. Members expressed strong support for the bill’s goals while urging tighter definitions, and the bill was moved on a roll call vote and placed on call.

Transcript Highlights:

• Pacheco, I think, was not voting. Pappin? Pappin, aye. Sanchez? I had a not voting. Not voting?
• And Tangapaw was not voting still. I voted on 8802 already. I vote not voting. That's okay.
• I had a not voting. Not voting? Not voting. Stephanie? Aye. Stephanie was an aye.
• And Tangapaw was not voting still. I voted on 8802 already. I vote not voting. That's okay.
• Not voting to no. Not voting to no. Other one? AB 866. Okay, AB 866 vote change, Sanchez.

Summary: The committee heard several bills, beginning with AB 2, which would create enhanced civil penalties for large social media companies when negligence proven in court causes harm to children and teens. The author and supporters argued the bill is needed to address addictive algorithms and harmful content, while opponents warned it was vague, could chill speech, and might be preempted by federal law. Members largely focused on whether the bill changed the standard of care or burden of proof; the bill passed out of committee on a roll call vote, with some members noting concerns but supporting it to continue the discussion. AB 282, dealing with housing vouchers and source-of-income discrimination, would clarify that housing providers may prioritize applicants who qualify for rental assistance without violating fair housing law. Supporters from housing authorities, local governments, and advocacy groups said it would help voucher holders find units and improve use of housing funds. There was no opposition, and the bill passed to Appropriations on a roll call vote, with two no votes. The committee also considered AB 882 on court reporter availability and electronic recording in certain cases when a court reporter is unavailable. Supporters said the bill is a temporary, narrowly tailored response to a shortage of reporters and would preserve access to accurate records, while opponents argued it was too narrow, raised access-to-justice concerns, and should be broadened. Members from both sides emphasized the importance of court reporters and electronic recording as a backup; the bill passed with an urgency clause and was sent to Appropriations. The committee then heard AB 325 on algorithmic price fixing, AB 935 on civil rights data clarity, AB 1414 on tenant choice of internet service provider, and AB 67 on Attorney General enforcement of the Reproductive Privacy Act; each drew support from sponsors and advocacy groups, opposition centered on overbreadth or policy concerns, and each advanced on committee votes, with several members requesting further amendments or clarification.

Transcript Highlights:

• It was voted down at the time to not be in the special session because that was decided to be a very
• And just to remind me, is the state superintendent a voting member on this board?
• I'm not certain that having that person be a voting member of that board would be required to move the
• We do have a fully remote workforce. Our teachers and staff are scattered throughout the state.
• We continued to expand the use of remote electronic appearances.

Committee: Joint Legislative Task Force on Government Efficiency

Summary: The task force met with a quorum and first reviewed a memorandum summarizing a survey of state agencies on possible statute revisions. Levi reported that 20 agencies submitted 70 proposals, with about 33 potentially becoming agency pre-file bills. Common themes included procurement, concessions, architect/engineering services, liability limits, and IT-related efficiencies. Members asked about sharing the survey results more broadly and about cross-agency coordination, especially with higher education and ITD-related issues. OMB then presented three topics from its survey responses: concessions, pre-qualification of architects/engineers/construction managers/land surveyors, and publication of legal notices. OMB said the current concessions law is too rigid because it requires award to the highest responsible bidder and does not fit newer concession models, and it suggested a best-value approach, a higher threshold, and standardized templates. On architect/engineering pre-qualification, OMB said the law is fragmented across several statutes and should be consolidated and expanded for broader use. On legal notices, OMB described the current rate-setting and publication process, noted rising costs and shrinking newspaper availability, and proposed a collaborative effort to modernize notice delivery, improve accessibility, and explore online options. The task force discussed how to move these ideas forward, and a motion passed directing OMB to implement its suggestions and report back at the next meeting. The University of North Dakota then presented several proposed revisions focused on public buildings and procurement. UND recommended raising the threshold for treating routine maintenance and one-for-one replacements as construction, arguing that the current $250,000 threshold forces unnecessary architect/engineer involvement and adds cost. It also proposed changes to bid advertisement language to reflect electronic bidding, revisions to construction manager-at-risk selection criteria, changes to architect/engineer procurement criteria, a higher direct-hire threshold for design services, and an increase in the legislative approval threshold for privately funded projects. Members discussed the need for data, risk and complexity considerations, and collaboration with counsel and industry groups. A motion passed directing Levi and counsel to work with UND on bill drafts based on its proposals for a future meeting. DPI followed with a shorter presentation on credentialing and statutory cleanup. It suggested reviewing the department’s 23 credential categories for relevance, and said DPI and the Education Standards and Practices Board have discussed transferring some credentialing authority to ESPB. DPI also recommended removing outdated school safety patrol language, cleaning up waiver provisions, and updating dyslexia screening reporting requirements so districts are not burdened by obsolete reporting mandates. Members agreed the screening itself should remain in place, while the reporting requirement could be reconsidered. The committee then recessed until the afternoon session.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> members to vote members to vote no<00:15:48.600><c> thank</c><00:15:48.759><c> you</c><00:15:48.880
• </c><00:16:50.759><c> I</c> representative Lawrence votes I representative Lawrence votes I representative
• So I will be voting no, and I encourage the committee to vote no. Thank you, Madam Chair.
• So I will be voting no, and I encourage the committee to vote no. Thank you, Madam Chair.
• I'll stop. vote Yes chair Anderson we're on the the vote Yes chair Anderson we're on the the de3<00:56

Bills: HF1704 , HF2052

Committee: House Agriculture Finance and Policy

Keywords: Minnesota agriculture budget, Department of Agriculture appropriation, Board of Animal Health, Agricultural Utilization Research Institute, Office of Broadband Development, farm bill, rural development, agricultural grants, soil health, livestock compensation, crop damage, meat inspection, poultry inspection, county agricultural inspectors, biofertilizer, nitrogen management, commercial nitrogen fertilizer, water quality, farm down payment assistance, beginning farmers

Transcript Highlights:

• determines the total available funding. important number that takes place in a tier one county, and only votes
• It's a vote before the vote that could lead to higher rates.
• I think the voting in person accomplishes that.
• You know, a lot of the times they're voting remotely and...
• So that's what's... determined and voted on every year, that PML.

Bills: SB1468 , SB1612 , SB1789 , SB2530 , SB2571 , SB2717 , SB2967

Committee: Senate Business & Commerce

Transcript Highlights:

• remotely. >> Mmani Hilsley, I. >> Mmani Hilsley votes I.
• &gt;&gt; Mmani Hilsley votes I. &gt;&gt; Mmani Hilsley votes I.
• </c> this vote. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. this vote. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
• So, when we vote for this bill today, if you choose to vote in the affirmative, I will expect to see
• The clerk will call the name of the member voting remotely. >> Mani Hilsley. >> [clears throat] >> Mmani