Transcript Highlights:

• <00:08:40.560> So,<00:08:40.800> the notification requirements.
• So, the notification requirements.
• <00:15:18.800> them in financial trouble by requiring them in financial trouble by requiring
• threshold and a terms of a minimum threshold and a maximum<00:34:36.879> so<00:34:37.119>
• If that's the case, then why are we in a situation where the requirement now is to put guardrails?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee took up several insurance-related bills. Senate Bill 47, concerning health insurance policies related to the birth of the mother, was moved ought to pass with no amendments and was approved on a 6-0 vote. Senate Bill 121, dealing with Medicare Advantage plan notice requirements, was amended to reduce the required notice from 120 days to 90 days and to remove a federal citation; the department said the change was to avoid conflict with federal notice rules. After discussion about the stress caused when carriers leave the Medicare Advantage market, the committee voted ought to pass as amended, 7-0. The committee then heard a detailed explanation of the continuing care retirement communities bill, described by the Insurance Department as a rewrite of a 1989 law to modernize oversight, require quarterly financial reporting as an early warning system, create a bill of rights for residents, and clarify issues such as entrance fees and removal of dangerous residents. A member recalled the bill’s original purpose as protecting solvency because residents pay substantial upfront fees. The bill was moved ought to pass and approved unanimously, 7-0. The final major discussion concerned a pooled risk organizations bill. Members debated whether oversight should remain with the Secretary of State or be moved to the Insurance Department. Supporters of moving it argued the issue is solvency, citing concerns about reserve levels, prior insolvencies, and the Insurance Department’s expertise. Opponents said the Secretary of State’s office had historically overseen the entities and that the bill would fundamentally change how they operate. A straw vote favored an amendment, but the committee ultimately voted to retain the bill for further work, with plans to revisit it later in the session.

Transcript Highlights:

• that Those are all accurate, along with just making it a priority number one, as is and should be required
• Well, that bill, uh, actually required, uh, allowing the current pace of the number of crossings to be
• equilibrium, and then if that Well, that bill actually required allowing the current pace of the number
• that we may still have to take action in certain categories as a state just because there may be minimums
• build a wall that Texas had to step in and take responsibility for over the last months. may be minimums

Summary: The Senate Committee on Border Security met to consider SCR 39, authored by Senator Creighton, which urges the federal government to take immediate action on border security and calls for Texas to be reimbursed for roughly $11 billion spent on border-related efforts. Creighton argued the federal government has failed to secure the border, leading to illegal crossings, fentanyl trafficking, and the need for Texas to step in through Operation Lone Star. A DPS chief financial officer was present as a resource witness, though no public testimony was taken. Several senators spoke in support of the resolution while also noting broader context. Senator Hinojosa of Nueces said border security has been neglected by multiple administrations, not just the Biden administration, but supported the measure and emphasized the need for lawful immigration and border enforcement. Senator Hinojosa of Hidalgo and Senator Flores also supported the resolution, highlighting cartel activity, trade impacts, and Texas’s role in maintaining border integrity. Senator Eckhardt questioned the author about what specific federal actions were meant by “immediate action,” and Creighton pointed to more staffing, better radio interoperability, stronger drug interdiction, and renewed federal responsibility for wall construction and enforcement. After questions and discussion, public testimony was closed. Senator Flores moved that SCR 39 be favorably recommended to the full Senate, and the committee approved the motion by a vote of 4 ayes and 1 nay. The chair then announced that SB 36, creating a border security division within DPS, would be the committee’s primary focus at the next meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are some zoning permits that will be required that will not require building permits, things like
• <00:31:00.399> uh then you have permits that require uh then you have permits that require
• need an SMA determination at a minimum. need an SMA determination at a minimum.
• So that essentially that would require So that essentially that would require renewal<00:53:19.920
• Um, this requires to move forward.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The task force held its first meeting, beginning with roll call and introductions of members and participants in the room and on Zoom. The chair emphasized Sunshine Law transparency, noted the meeting was on September 11, and opened public testimony on the orientation report. No one testified in person or on Zoom, and the chair observed a moment of silence in remembrance of 9/11 before moving into the agenda. The chair then reported on several orientation presentations given statewide between July 18 and September 5, including meetings with transit-oriented development, the Maui Chamber of Commerce, the Kona-Kohala Chamber, the Japanese Chamber of Commerce on Hawaiʻi Island, the Hawaiʻi Island Chamber of Commerce, the Hawaiʻi Island Native Hawaiian Chamber, and the Capo Chamber of Commerce. The main presentation item was a detailed overview from Kauaʻi County on its permitting process. County staff explained that zoning and building permits are handled separately on the outer islands, with zoning focused on form, character, and compatibility, and building permits focused on health and safety. They described a two-tier zoning system: ministerial permits that are automatically approved if not acted on within 30 days, and discretionary permits that go to the planning commission and can become lengthy contested cases if there is intervention. They also discussed special management area review in coastal areas, which can add time, and explained that building permits must conform to what was approved in zoning. Kauaʻi County staff also outlined the building permit process, including online and in-person submission, coordination with planning, engineering, water, wastewater, health, and fire agencies, and the county’s fully electronic review system using ProjectDox and related software. They noted that applicants are encouraged to check zoning, water, wastewater, and floodplain issues before hiring someone to prepare plans, especially for homeowners. The county shared permit and utility statistics and said the public can check permit history through Click2Gov. No votes were taken during the portion of the meeting provided; after the Kauaʻi presentation, the chair opened a question period for members.

Transcript Highlights:

• housing projects this measure requires housing projects this measure requires the<00:13:10.680><
• It was noted that a durational requirement, such as requiring residency for a year, has been said to
• though all of this is already required though all of this is already required by<01:11:32.280>
• most that we can expect as a minimum most that we can expect as a minimum standard standard standard
• <01:38:18.400> contents costs it clarifies the required contents costs it clarifies the required

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several housing, land use, and preservation bills. HB 1008 HD2 would require the Department of Land and Natural Resources to complete historic preservation determinations for state affordable housing projects within 90 days and create sensitivity-based review pathways. HHFDC, DLNR’s State Historic Preservation Division, and written testimony from DBEDT supported the bill as an expedited process for projects unlikely to affect significant historic resources. Members asked how the bill would define significant versus non-significant historic properties, how it would interact with Kapakai analysis, and whether burial councils had been consulted; SHPD said the bill would not replace Kapakai review and that burial councils had not been included. Written support also came from OHA, Hawaii Realtors, and the Maui Chamber of Commerce. HB 1093 would clarify the Hawaii Public Housing Authority’s powers relating to housing projects. HPHA supported the measure, saying it would align definitions with prior law and help deconcentrate poverty by allowing mixed-income rebuilding. The director also said the bill was increasingly urgent because of reported federal HUD priorities that could affect public housing and Section 8 funding. HB 1096 HD1 would repeal state low-income housing preferences for disabled veterans and spouses of deceased veterans, with HPHA saying federal veteran programs such as VASH are a better mechanism and that the state preference has not been used in years. HB 1411 would allow HHFDC projects to give sale or lease preferences to applicants who live or work within five miles of a project; HHFDC and the Hawaii Chapter of NAIOP supported it as a way to keep residents connected to their communities, while members raised constitutional concerns about broader local-preference policies. The committee also heard HB 367 HD1, which would create county permit exemptions for certain agricultural and maintenance activities. Written testimony included opposition from the Department of Planning and Permitting and support from the Hawaii Farm Bureau, Grassroot Institute, and others. A public testifier opposed the bill, arguing that permit exemptions could worsen safety and compliance problems. Finally, HB 826 HD1 would allow county planning commissions, by special permit, to authorize residential housing in agricultural districts for agricultural workforce housing, long-term rental, or fee simple ownership under certain conditions. HHFDC supported it as a faster alternative to lengthy state land-use redistricting, but the Department of Agriculture, Land Use Commission, and Office of Planning and Sustainable Development raised concerns about food production impacts, due process, service provision, jurisdictional conflicts, and the use of special permits for what could amount to district boundary changes. Public testimony was mixed, with some support and some opposition. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Play-based K through three should be the bare minimum that we do.
• <00:23:23.919> Um,<00:23:25.200> if<00:23:25.440> my bare minimum that we do
• Um, if my bare minimum that we do.
• to peel school day or look at us trying to peel back<00:35:26.079> some<00:35:26.320> requirements
• <00:35:27.359> in<00:35:27.599> order<00:35:27.760> for back some requirements

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Summary: The Committee of Conference on Senate Bill 578 met to reconcile differences in a bill concerning recess times for children and related early learning provisions. The Senate sponsor described two compromise amendments, both based on the Senate version, that would restore play-based learning through third grade and replace guided reading with interactive shared reading; the only difference between the two was whether recess would extend through fifth grade or eighth grade. The sponsor argued the changes were supported by studies, existing state investment in play-based learning, and examples from schools using recess to improve attendance and behavior. House members opposed the amendments, saying they were concerned about creating an expensive or unfunded mandate and about limiting local control over curriculum decisions. One House member said the state lacked enough fiscal support and implementation time for districts, and another said the proposal should perhaps be studied further before expanding it beyond kindergarten. Supporters countered that the state had already invested in training, that the proposal was a teaching method rather than a new curriculum, and that play-based learning and recess improve mental health, classroom behavior, and student engagement. The committee voted on the 2084S amendment, and it failed on a divided vote. After further discussion, the House reiterated that it would stick with its position and oppose the Senate amendments. The chair then stated that the committee was at an impasse and that the bill was effectively dead, with no further action taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think the requirements that I was trying to understand were what requirements would be different Than
• There's other requirements. They focus on only Certain types of funding, right?
• As you have heard, clinical hours are required by many or most health care programs.
• Some of the special, more in-depth specialties do require longer preceptorships.
• And I would note That's a floor, so that's a minimum. It could be much more than that.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• that Minnesota statute only requires that Minnesota statute only requires firearms<00:03:00.560>
• requires your urgent attention to close. requires your urgent attention to close.
• So, we're supportive of requiring serial numbers, as other firearms lawfully possessed are required to
• So, we're supportive of requiring serial numbers, as other firearms lawfully possessed are required to
• <00:42:11.760> that on it is the absolute bare minimum that on it is the absolute bare minimum

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee heard House File 3407, authored by Chair Pinto, which would restore Minnesota’s prior serial-number requirement for firearms after a recent Minnesota Supreme Court decision narrowed the existing law, while also creating a method to serialize firearms that do not already have serial numbers. Supporters said the bill is needed to close a loophole involving ghost guns and to aid investigations, background checks, and trafficking enforcement. Attorney General Keith Ellison, Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara, and former ATF official Mariana Mitchum testified in favor, citing increases in unserialized gun recoveries, the difficulty of tracing such weapons, and examples of crimes where serial numbers helped identify traffickers. Opponents argued the bill conflates different categories of firearms and could burden lawful gun owners. Mariah Day of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, Anna Ley of the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, and Brian Gosh of the NRA said privately made firearms are distinct from illegally altered guns, warned about vague definitions and possible First Amendment issues, and said the bill could criminalize lawful conduct or create confusion for owners who modify firearms. They urged a no vote. Representative Bliss offered a DE1 amendment to replace the bill’s serialization approach with increased penalties for people who use guns in crimes. Chair Pinto and others opposed it, saying it would remove the bill’s public-safety benefits and likely create a fiscal impact. The committee took a roll call and rejected the DE1 amendment, 8-9. Afterward, members discussed the bill further, including questions about the difference between unserialized guns and guns with removed serial numbers and comments both supporting and criticizing the proposal.

Transcript Highlights:

• I have a motion to pass, or it only requires review, but since you made the motion, motion to review.
• on to the captive insurance programs rates for the '26-'27 year, we are proposing no change to the minimum
• We are proposing no change to the minimum deductibles for participants.
• Obviously, those are minimums, so if any particular entity wanted to go above that, they absolutely can
• This item does require approval, so I would entertain a motion. Motion to approve. Have a second.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• minimum competence.
• It requires a background check that's not required today for those to carry openly.
• It requires training.
• It requires a background check that's not required today for those to carry openly.
• It requires training.

Keywords: The live stream for the House Chambers was interrupted and this version was recovered from backups and should contain the complete Legislative Session. Convene 00:00:00 Senate Message 00:04:40 Calendar/2nd Readings 00:05:38 Orders of the Day 00:06:14 HB 312 00:06:42 Motions, Petitions, and Communications 01:11:07 Introduction of New Bills and Resolutions 01:13:24 Recess for ConC and Rules Meeting 01:14:30 ConC/Rules Report 01:19:42 Adjournment 01:21:18, 958, all

Summary: The House convened, received the invocation and Pledge of Allegiance, established a quorum with 89 members present, excused absent members, and suspended rules to allow co-sponsorships and vote modifications. The chamber approved the prior day’s journal and received notice that the Senate had passed SB 13, 22, 46, 51, and 90 and requested concurrence. On second reading, HB 134 (sexual assault nurse examiners), HB 168 with HCS 1 (voting under the influence), and HR 7 (recognizing guiding principles of elections in Kentucky) were reported. The House also recommitted HB 258 to the Transportation Committee and took up HB 312 for third reading and passage. HB 312, relating to concealed firearms and deadly weapons, drew the bulk of the debate. The sponsor argued the bill would allow law-abiding 18- to 20-year-olds to obtain a provisional concealed carry license, saying they are adults in other respects, the Second Amendment protects their right to bear arms, and Kentucky should align with other states. Supporters framed the measure as a constitutional rights issue and cited defensive gun use statistics, while one member argued the root problem is family upbringing rather than guns. Opponents said the bill would increase risks in schools and public spaces, pointed to concerns from school district police and SROs, and cited research linking younger age groups and loosened carry laws to higher firearm violence; they also argued the bill would make communities less safe and that no one’s rights would be taken away by voting no. The sponsor said no stakeholder had expressed opposition and clarified the bill would not change where firearms are permitted. The transcript provided does not include the final vote on HB 312.

Transcript Highlights:

• requirement that OHA receive a minimum requirement that OHA receive a minimum of<00:29:42.399>
• So there should be no hesitancy to provide your required minimum 20% to kanakami. Mahalo.
• So there should be no hesitancy to provide your required minimum 20% to kanakami. Mahalo.
• So there should be no hesitancy to provide your required minimum 20% to kanakami.
• <01:06:24.640> 20%<01:06:25.359> requirement, you have that minimum 20% requirement

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 2046, which would establish and fund an Olo Hawaii Commission to coordinate and promote initiatives supporting the use of Olo Hawaii. The Attorney General suggested adding an end date because the bill creates a temporary commission, and several supporters from the University of Hawaii, Office of Hawaiian Affairs, and the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission said the commission could improve coordination, funding decisions, and consistency across agencies. Members discussed whether the commission should include broader representation, including expertise on Niihau dialect speakers and other stakeholders, and the bill was then set aside as the committee moved to the next measure. The committee next considered House Bill 2438, creating the Hawaii Cultural Trust within DBEDT, authorizing an income tax credit for contributions to the trust and qualified cultural organizations, and creating a special license plate to support the trust. DBEDT said it would need additional resources, including staff, to administer the program. The Department of Taxation recommended changing the effective date to 2026 to allow time for implementation and adding a requirement that credits be claimed within one year. OHA supported the bill but objected to language that would require it to maintain a prequalified list of organizations, saying that could limit applicants and conflict with its grant process. The Tax Foundation said it supported cultural funding but preferred direct appropriations and grants over a trust fund and tax credit structure. The final measure discussed was House Bill 2584, which would temporarily increase public land trust revenues transferred to OHA while reaffirming the state’s obligation to the 20% pro rata share, with a repeal date of June 30, 2028. The Attorney General recommended deleting the bill’s requirement that OHA receive a minimum amount equal to the 20% share, arguing the constitution and Admission Act do not specify a precise dollar amount and that the legislature must determine allocation. OHA strongly supported the bill, arguing the state currently pays only about 5% and that historical records show much higher amounts are owed; OHA also pointed to a carry-forward account it said held about $55 million. DLNR opposed the bill because the fiscal impact was unspecified and could affect land management and special fund budgets. Several OHA trustees and supporters urged the committee to pass the bill, and one testifier criticized the state for underfunding Native Hawaiian obligations. No votes were taken in the portion provided, and the committee continued hearing testimony on HB 2584.

Transcript Highlights:

• We should require things. I think that's fair.
• We should require things. I think that's fair.
• I think that's the bare minimum we should ask.
• We punched down on minimum wage We punched down on minimum wage workers.
• So I can vote independently when it comes to minimum wage and benefits.

Bills: LR509, LR510, LR511

Keywords: congratulations, Nebraska Sandhills Cowboy Hall of Fame, Deloris Marshall Adamson, recognition, achievement, service, retirement, Nebraska Legislature, public service, legislature, Nebraska, 956, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, that would require me to remember to go back and recheck what the sources are.
• We said, at minimum, cities anticipate reductions, because there's going to be other reductions also.
• And so just pointing out that that's the minimum and it's not the only thing we're basing the losses
• The legislature, of course, does not require seconds. A lot of others require seconds.
• You're not required to be present for that, but if there are any of those comments, we'll have a chance

Keywords: 907, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill requires that when the aggregate cap is exceeded, all tax credits will be prorated so that the
• <00:18:53.919> an<00:18:54.200> aggre<00:18:54.760> requires<00:18:55.200>
• > that the bill requires an aggre requires that the bill requires an aggre requires that when<00:
• We also recommend that the threshold for minimum eligibility for producers be reduced so that more local
• eligibility for producers be minimum eligibility for producers be reduced<00:20:16.240> so<00

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Economic Development and Technology heard testimony on HB 976, a measure related to incentives for renewable fuels, including renewable diesel and sustainable aviation fuel. Supporters said the bill would help close the cost gap between renewable and conventional fuels, strengthen Hawaii’s energy security, support climate goals, and encourage local economic development. Testifiers from Pono Pacific, PAR Hawaii, Hawaiian Electric, Hawaiian Airlines/Alaska Airlines, the Hawaii Department of Transportation, Pacific Biodiesel, Aloha Carbon, and others described ongoing or planned projects, local feedstock development, and potential benefits for agriculture, waste diversion, and emissions reductions. Several testifiers also discussed proposed amendments. The Hawaii Renewable Fuels Coalition said it wanted to remove the import tax credit, eliminate the aggregate cap increase to avoid additional state funding, and revise local-production language to rely on a carbon-intensity threshold rather than location-based preferences. The Tax Foundation of Hawaii raised technical concerns about the bill’s administration, including prorating credits if the cap is exceeded and the feasibility of a 30-day filing window. Some supporters urged keeping solid waste, including construction and demolition debris, as eligible feedstock, while Energy Justice Network opposed that approach and also urged removing GMO-related language and waste-based feedstocks because of environmental and toxic emissions concerns. Opposition testimony focused on the bill’s cost and feasibility. Energy Justice Network and Ted Metros argued the measure could become a large subsidy for a refinery and questioned whether Hawaii has enough land and water to produce meaningful quantities of biofuel locally. Metros also criticized the refundable credit structure and said the state should not bear the cost for what he described as a benefit largely tied to tourism and imported fuel. No vote was taken during the portion of the hearing provided; the chair later noted the committee had received 13 testimonies in support, 18 in opposition, and seven comments, and then invited further discussion on cost allocation and lowering caps to broaden participation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Lastly, the bill outlines presumptions, reporting requirements, fact-testing, and disclosure requirements
• Additionally, that would then require a lot more funding, and then it requires a three-year look-back
• That doesn't require an answer.
• Beyond statutory requirements, city policy requires that each project provide measurable public benefits
• But the fact is that it is a minimum.

Bills: SB1090, SB1293, SB1414, SB1429, SB1503, SB1536, SB1633, SB1724, SB1764

Keywords: savings and loan, technical correction, Arizona Revised Statutes, financial institutions, prohibitions, GPLET, abatement, tax incentives, local government, property improvement, central business district, insurance, settlement demands, time limits, third-party claims, regulatory compliance, initiative, referendum, ballot measures, petition circulators

Transcript Highlights:

• , and sometimes it's actually regulatory requirements.
• It requires a skilled and trained workforce for applicable trades.
• And the bill also requires reporting to the Legislature.
• We're not reducing what is required.
• We are simply shifting what is required, or allowing that to be shifted. Data can support.

Summary: The committee heard eight bills, mostly on local government, housing, and public agency contracting. AB 1658 would make permanent higher change-order authority for Santa Clara and Los Angeles counties on large construction projects; supporters said it would reduce delays and save money on major projects, and the bill passed 6-0. AB 2263 would authorize the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority to develop employee-preference affordable housing; supporters said it would help with workforce retention and long commutes, and it also passed 6-0. AB 2134 would require city councils to allow parental leave without forcing members to seek public approval or risk losing their seats; supporters described the bill as necessary to protect new parents in local office, and it passed 6-0. AB 2188 would raise Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District’s contracting authority to $250,000, with supporters citing administrative savings and faster project delivery; after committee amendments, it passed 6-0. AB 2033 would let general law cities use job order contracting for repair and maintenance work, with safeguards against employee displacement; supporters called it an efficiency tool, while AFSCME opposed it over workforce impacts, and it passed 8-0 after amendments. AB 1768 would authorize Los Angeles County and Contra Costa County to ask voters to approve a temporary transactions and use tax to help offset major federal health care cuts and preserve clinics and public health services. Supporters from community clinics, Planned Parenthood, labor groups, counties, and health organizations said the measure would let voters decide how to respond to funding losses; opponents, including CalTax and some cities, raised affordability and tax-burden concerns. Members also discussed equity concerns within Los Angeles County and the importance of local control. The bill was moved out on a 5-2 vote and left on call. AB 2415 would allow the city of Folsom to shift housing obligations away from its historic district and toward other transit-oriented sites; supporters said it would preserve the historic district while still meeting housing goals, and it passed 10-0. AB 2741, heard at the end of the meeting, would give cities a grace period to fix housing elements that were certified by HCD but later found noncompliant by a court, especially where cities relied on overlay zones. Supporters from the League of California Cities, Redondo Beach, and real estate groups said cities acted in good faith and should not be immediately subjected to builder’s remedy; opponents from California YIMBY and legal aid groups argued the bill would weaken housing accountability and reward noncompliance. The transcript ends during testimony on AB 2741, before a final vote is recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill requires the local education agency and their pre-apprenticeship or apprenticeship training
• It requires that course syllabi be posted at least 10 days before the term begins.
• They’re always, at minimum, going to need to have at least three or more. Is that correct?
• One of the things I’m concerned about is the minimum of three candidates.
• One of the things I'm concerned about is the minimum of three candidates.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Higher Education heard and approved two bills before moving into confirmation hearings for several university and college board nominees. CS/SB 1458 on apprenticeships and pre-apprenticeships was presented as a measure to improve consistency and transparency in local education agency partnerships, cap LEA administrative funding at 10% when applicable, and require public meetings and work papers for workforce funding model decisions. Support was noted from Associated Builders and Contractors, the Florida Chamber of Commerce, Foundations for Florida Futures, and Independent Electrical Contractors. The bill passed unanimously and was reported favorably. The committee then considered CS/CS/SB 1726 on higher education governance and presidential searches after adopting a delete-all amendment and a late-filed amendment defining the final group of presidential applicants as no fewer than three. The amended bill added provisions on trustee citizenship and residency/alumni eligibility, interim president succession planning, longer presidential contract renewals, limits on candidate polling by universities, syllabus posting, textbook/open-access material lists, and other governance and academic policy changes. Senators raised concerns about the minimum-three finalist requirement, interim president selection, trustee eligibility, and polling restrictions, while supporters said the bill would depoliticize leadership selection and improve transparency. The bill was reported favorably after the amendments were adopted. The committee then heard confirmation testimony from multiple appointees and reappointees, including nominees for FAMU, UNF, Pensacola State College, UWF, and UF. Most nominees emphasized ties to their institutions, student success, workforce development, military connections, and institutional growth. Several UWF nominees were questioned extensively about their votes for former chair Scott Yenner and his controversial comments about women and other groups; some said they were unaware of those remarks at the time of the vote and would not have supported him with that knowledge. Public testimony on UWF expressed concern about the nominees’ lack of higher education experience, their ties to the region, and the impact of Yenner’s views. The committee later voted to recommend a block of non-UWF nominees favorably, and it agreed to vote on the UWF nominees individually, with some remaining nominees deferred to a later hearing due to time.

Transcript Highlights:

• IT ALSO REQUIRES DBA EVALUATE THE HEALTH LITERACY OF VETERANS IN OUR STATE AND PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS
• THIS REQUIRES THE PLAN TO ESTABLISH HEALTHCARE FACILITIES ACROSS THE STATE TO SERVE VETERANS AND THEIR
• SENATE BILL ONE ONE SIX AND FINALLY REQUIRED THE DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS TO CONDUCT A STUDY THAT
• THE NATIONAL GUARD IS THE ONLY MILITARY COMPONENT THAT IS FEDERAL AND STATE MISSION REQUIREMENTS.
• WE DESERVE AND NEED THE MINIMUM AND I KNOW THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• workers, employers avoid paying minimum workers, employers avoid paying minimum wage,<00:03:22.160
• required cost. required cost.
• premiums required by law. premiums required by law.
• One, DEED does this as a requirement of federal law. They have to audit the UI.
• Because of this requirement, we are preparing to replicate the report.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy Committee met to discuss worker misclassification, beginning with approval of the March 4, 2026 minutes and a note that a late-posted bill would not be heard at this time. Chair Pinto opened the hearing by framing misclassification as timely and invited Lea Takapu of the Attorney General’s office to explain the issue. Takapu described misclassification as labeling workers as independent contractors when they are really employees, which can deprive workers of minimum wage, overtime, unemployment insurance, workers’ compensation, and other protections while also reducing tax revenue. She said the Attorney General’s office and the MEAP partnership have been working on the issue and cited estimates that Minnesota workers lose billions annually and the state loses hundreds of millions to over a billion dollars in revenue, while noting that legitimate independent contracting is not the target. Members questioned how the committee could rely on estimates when the exact number of misclassified workers is unknown. Takapu responded that the figures were based on studies and complaint data, and that underground or undocumented work makes exact counts difficult. Chair Pinto noted the numbers were estimates and referenced a 2024 Legislative Auditor finding that Minnesota lacked an adequate, coordinated approach to proper worker classification, while saying progress had been made since then. Several industry witnesses then testified in support of stronger enforcement. Kevin Pranis of LiUNA said misclassification remains rampant in parts of construction, especially drywall, stucco, thin stone, and broadband installation, and argued it is tax, unemployment insurance, and workers’ compensation fraud that harms law-abiding contractors and taxpayers. Matt Wollers of Braxton and Sons said his company loses bids to competitors that misclassify workers, creating a labor-cost advantage of 30% or more, and asked for meaningful enforcement rather than new legislation, including regular unannounced jobsite visits. Jesse Madison of Purple Tally Productions said misclassification is anti-competition and described examples from live events and entertainment, urging front-end checks on workers’ compensation, unemployment coverage, and W-2 versus 1099 status before work begins. The next testifier, Ben Ballou of the Minnesota Nurses Association, began his remarks as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• They require some documentation.
• Madam Chair, Representative Hall, so that's one of the reasons that this bill sets minimum requirements
• This sets minimums.
• requirement.
• The first is the training requirement.

Bills: HJR6, HJR7, HB120, HB60, HB151, HR1, HM13, SB40, SB104

Keywords: constitutional amendment, legislative sessions, veto override, New Mexico legislature, session length, legislative session, even-numbered years, New Mexico Constitution, student behavior, physical restraint, seclusion, public schools, training, de-escalation, student safety, behavior interventions, criminal offenses, peace officer, Victims of Crime Act, law enforcement

Transcript Highlights:

• If you require assistance with the registration or the testimony process, please consult with the committee
• They would be required to take the training that DPS provides. ...offers. Good.
• This requires a unified real-time intelligence framework capable of linking digital, financial, criminal
• So, Texas does not yet possess the infrastructure required to operationalize this intelligence at scale
• There's no requirement for intent, concealment, or financial gain elements we usually associate with

Bills: SB659, SB1585, SB2201, SB2514, SB2569

Keywords: smuggling, human trafficking, criminal penalties, felony offenses, law enforcement, foreign adversary, foreign-owned company, scrutinized company, China, national security, cybersecurity, information technology, communications technology, ICT, critical infrastructure, state contracts, government procurement, vendor certification, debarment, civil penalty