Transcript Highlights:

• probably hear testimony. probably hear testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. Thank you for your testimony.
• for your testimony. Okay. for your testimony. Okay.
• that would like to provide testimony? that would like to provide testimony?
• Any other testimony?

Bills: SF0045, SJ0001

Keywords: pari-mutuel wagering, simulcasting, historic horse racing, HHR terminals, horse racing, gaming commission, Wyoming Gaming Commission, local control, city approval, county approval, municipal approval, permit renewal, gaming permit, wagering regulation, racetrack, live pari-mutuel event, district court appeal, public notice, land use, public safety

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for listening to my testimony.
• Thank you for listening to my testimony. Thank you for listening to my testimony. Thank you.
• thank you for listening to my testimony thank you for listening to my testimony thank<00:37:41.079
• Thank you for your testimony.
• <01:00:12.960> um you thank you for the testimony um you thank you for the testimony um member

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• testimony when you're ready. testimony when you're ready.
• , your final word for these testimonies, your final word for these testimonies, but<00:36:37.440>
• then present your testimony. then present your testimony.
• ,<01:11:32.080> thank expand on the excellent testimony, thank expand on the excellent testimony
• Um and and Senator testimony with us.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And Representative Lawrence, for your testimony, I just know we're laying the bill over.
• Please state your name for the record and begin your testimony.
• State your name for the record and begin your testimony. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• Please state your name for the record and begin your testimony. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• My name testimony. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: House File 1791 was presented as a scholarship/grant program for students in postsecondary technical or career programs offered through their high schools. Representative Scott and Representative Lawrence described it as a way to help students transition into careers or further education by covering costs such as tools, boots, books, and other work-related expenses. The chair noted the bill would be laid over, with limited time for testimony because of a full agenda. Testimony strongly supported the bill. Steve Collina of the Minnesota Precision Manufacturing Association said manufacturing is a major Minnesota industry and that the bill fills a gap by supporting K-12 career pathways; he emphasized the proposal would not cost the state or taxpayers. Trevor Quennell, a Centennial High School graduate now at Dunwoody College, said the bill would have eased the burden of buying expensive tools and balancing work, school, and transportation. Eric Trost, an instructor at St. Francis High School, explained that Saints Manufacturing is a student-run, elective business-style program that teaches estimating, quoting, logistics, welding, machining, and employability skills, and he said the grant portion is especially important because many students go directly into the workforce. Naomi Brasky, a St. Francis student and Army National Guard enlistee, said the program has given her real-world problem-solving and communication experience and that grants would help cover costs not included in tuition. Members responded positively, with one noting broader trends away from four-year college and calling the bill common sense. In closing, Representative Lorentzen credited instructor Eric Trost for originating the idea and thanked an audience member, Mr. Yost, for supporting the program. The chair then laid House File 1791 over.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do have public testimony. We have Ron LaFace with Capio, waiving in support.
• Seeing no questions, we have no public testimony. Members, we're in debate.
• Seeing no question, we do have some public testimony.
• We are now in public testimony.
• Seeing no questions of the sponsor, we do have public testimony.

Summary: The Health and Human Services Committee heard and passed several bills. HB 293 would codify the Office of Faith and Community in the Executive Office of the Governor, create a liaison and advisory council, and was supported by faith-based and nonprofit groups; some members questioned possible duplication with existing services and the source of any future funding, but the bill passed 24-0. CS/HB 547 would create an exception to the 30-day notice requirement before hospitals and ambulatory surgical centers sell medical debt when the debt buyer agrees not to use interest, fees, or extraordinary collection actions and must return charity-care-eligible debt; it passed unanimously after brief support testimony. CS/HB 1553 would require reporting of uterine fibroid data to the Department of Health to create a de-identified public database and reauthorize funding for implementation; it also passed 24-0, with members noting the earlier database mandate had not been carried out. The committee then took up CS/HB 1195, “Gage’s Law,” which would require hospitals and hospital-based emergency departments to test for fentanyl in urine drug screens for suspected overdose or poisoning cases. The bill was presented as a response to overdose deaths and the need to better detect fentanyl, and emotional testimony from a parent described a son’s death after a hospital did not test for fentanyl. Members from both parties spoke in strong support, emphasizing stigma, the need for better treatment and data, and the potential to save lives; the bill passed 24-0. CS/HB 47 on child care and early learning providers would streamline inspections, speed background screening, offer free online training/testing, update definitions, protect certain family child care homes from insurance issues, and create a license-exempt category for employer-provided child care; after questions about parent notice, database listing, background checks, and insurance, an amendment was adopted and the bill passed 24-0 as amended. Finally, CS/HB 647 would allow advanced practice registered nurses to sign death certificates in hospice settings, addressing delays that can leave families waiting to complete burial arrangements. Support testimony came from advocacy and hospice groups, and members cited the bill’s importance for families and religious burial timelines. The bill passed 23-0. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for your testimony.
• State your name for the record and provide your two minutes of testimony.
• <00:37:25.520> all us your two minutes of testimony all us your two minutes of testimony all
• Sovereign and the executive director or their team can work on the details. of testimony of testimony
• And I'd like for him to provide his two minutes of testimony.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I've distributed copies of my written testimony, and this oral testimony is an abbreviated version of
• the written testimony.
• Uh, that concludes my testimony. it. Uh, that concludes my testimony.
• . testimony. testimony.
• <01:02:40.799> In testimony to the um committee. In testimony to the um committee.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Vice Chair Culture will now proceed to testimony on House File 4362.
• Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony. >> Thank you, Chair.
• Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony. >> Thank you.
• Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.
• Thank you very much for your testimony.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 4362, which would allow Minnesota public colleges and universities to prohibit visitors from carrying firearms on campus, similar to existing policies that already apply to students and employees. The bill’s author argued it was a modest step to help campuses protect staff and students from gun violence, citing the long history of school shootings and saying the decision should be left to each institution. Supporters, including representatives of the Inter Faculty Organization and Minnesota State College Faculty, said the current law leaves a loophole because campuses can restrict students and employees but not visitors, and they pointed to data and incidents suggesting many campus shootings involve non-affiliated individuals. Opponents, including the NRA Minnesota state director and the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, argued the bill would create ineffective gun-free zones, disarm lawful permit holders, and expand firearm restrictions across large and sometimes unclear areas of public property. They also raised concerns about notice, due process, and the claim that criminals would ignore the restrictions. In member discussion, supporters emphasized campus safety, institutional discretion, and the responsibility to protect students, while opponents stressed Second Amendment rights and existing campus carry trends in other states. After discussion, the chair announced a roll call vote on the motion to refer House File 4362 to the Public Safety Committee. The motion failed on a 7-7 tie, and the bill was not referred onward.

Transcript Highlights:

• With that, we will open public testimony.
• We'll close public testimony. Thank you, Senator Hinojosa.
• We'll open public testimony.
• They're resource only, so we'll close public testimony.
• We'll open public testimony. I don't have any public cards.

Bills: SB1211, SB1574, SB2774, SB2873, SB2900, HJR4

Keywords: hydraulic fracturing, sales tax exemption, oil and gas, environmental impact, water reuse, justice, judicial council, centers of excellence, court operations, recognition program, franchise tax, retail trade, tax classification, business regulation, economic impact, SB 2873, Texas Tax Code, electronic filing, e-filing, tax reports

Transcript Highlights:

• If you have written testimony and also wish to speak, please bring your written testimony forward when
• You should also send a digital copy of your testimony to the clerk at the committee.
• We'll be using a panel format for testimony and each witness will be given two minutes.
• All right members, we'll now move to public testimony and we have no one registered.
• Public testimony. The chair calls Jordan Vexler. Thank you.

Bills: SB2122, SB2050, HB16

Keywords: oil and gas waste, application fees, permit amendments, environmental regulation, Texas natural resources, battery recycling, battery disposal, consumer batteries, energy storage modules, electrochemical devices, lithium-ion battery, household hazardous waste, solid waste, municipal recycling, waste management, battery stewardship, producer responsibility, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, recycling program

Transcript Highlights:

• per testimony.
• I'm asking a question in terms of your testimony.
• We heard testimony this morning.
• I've included in my testimony a photograph of an artwork.
• I appreciate your testimony.

Bills: SB 37

Keywords: fetal development, education, public health curriculum, middle school, age-appropriate instruction, 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to do a walkthrough of the DE2 amendment and take testimony to the DE2 amendment.
• their testimony to actually what<00:02:44.640> is<00:02:44.879> actually<00:02:45.200>
• Please introduce yourself and begin your testimony.
• Please introduce yourself and begin<00:29:36.559> your<00:29:36.720> testimony.
• <00:39:57.680> we presented to us and the testimony we presented to us and the testimony we

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Please introduce yourself for the record and present your testimony. Mr.
• Seeing no one, public testimony has closed. Representative Nor, thank you, Mr. Chair.
• Please state your name for the record and present your testimony. Thank you, Mr.
• Seeing no one, public testimony is now closed.
• record and if you have any testimony record and if you have any testimony otherwise<00:24:20.880

Bills: HF958, HF688, HF702

Keywords: mental health, behavioral health, psychiatric care, collaborative care model, healthcare funding, service dog, service animal, service dog in training, assistance dog, guide dog, disability rights, housing accommodations, fair housing, landlord, rental housing, homeowners association, HOA, Minnesota human services, accessible housing, reasonable accommodation

Transcript Highlights:

• your testimony. Excuse me. Sorry. your testimony. Excuse me. Sorry.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• >> all right thank you for your testimony >> all right thank you for your testimony >&
• >> Thank you for your testimony. >> Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. your time. Thank you for your testimony.

Bills: HF3661, HF2380, HF3468, HF3483

Keywords: facial recognition, privacy, government surveillance, public safety, data protection, civil liberties, disability rights, discrimination, accommodations, employment, housing, public services, education, civil action, failure to render aid, damages, Minnesota Statutes, legal liability, trespass, civil immigration enforcement

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from February 24 and February 26. It then took up House File 3661, a bill originally authored by Representative Gomez and presented by Representative Feist, which would ban government use of facial recognition technology and be re-referred to the Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee. The committee adopted the A1 amendment, described as a technical amendment based on House Research recommendations, before hearing testimony on the bill. Representative Feist said the bill is aimed at preventing serious privacy and civil-liberties harms, including secretive surveillance, racial and gender bias, and the lack of statewide rules governing government use of facial recognition. Supportive testimony came from Chad Marlo of the ACLU, who argued the issue is bipartisan, the technology has accuracy problems, and government use is expanding against vulnerable groups. Chris Wayland of Restore the Fourth Minnesota also supported a ban, emphasizing the inability to opt out of facial recognition and the lack of standards, disclosure, and community input. Rich Newmeister urged stronger transparency measures, including agency policies and public notice in buildings using the technology. Major Spencer Baky of the Hennepin County Sheriff's Office opposed an outright ban, saying facial recognition is used only as an investigative lead, not for positive identification or real-time surveillance, and that results are corroborated before use. He said the office has used the tool in hundreds of investigations and supports a statutory framework with safeguards instead of a ban. In member discussion, Representative Hudson argued a blanket ban was too broad and suggested a more targeted evidentiary approach, while Representative Moller and Representative Kurr expressed concern about misuse and the federal government's use of the technology. Representative Durant asked whether there was a current Minnesota problem and whether stakeholders and law enforcement had been involved in drafting the bill. No final vote on the bill was taken in the portion provided, beyond adoption of the amendment and the committee’s continued consideration of HF 3661.

Transcript Highlights:

• testimony. It's not your fault. It was testimony. It's not your fault.
• There's your written testimony. Is that your written testimony?
• So I think that's my testimony.
• Any questions from the testimony.
• report you'll see in my testimony here. report you'll see in my testimony here.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And thank you for your testimony, and especially for sharing your experiences.
• We're going to be able to take written testimony and public testimony on different topics, and they're
• Thank you for all that amazing testimony.
• Thank you for all that amazing testimony.
• Thank you for all that amazing testimony.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Racial Equity, Civil Rights, and Inclusion held an informational hearing on “Protecting Equity in Higher Education” and emphasized that no bills were being heard. Members and witnesses focused on the effects of recent federal actions on DEI, admissions, financial aid, student loans, international students, and campus equity efforts in Massachusetts. Opening remarks from the co-chairs and the chair of Higher Education highlighted Massachusetts’ investments in free community college, expanded financial aid, and early college programs, while warning that federal policy changes could undermine those gains. Testimony from BU law professor Jonathan Feingold argued that many DEI practices remain legally defensible after Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, and that the decision did not end all race-conscious or equity-oriented efforts. He said the Trump administration’s anti-DEI actions and funding threats were legally suspect and had created confusion and a chilling effect. Bahar Akman-in-Boden of the Hildreth Institute testified that proposed federal cuts to TRIO, Gear Up, Pell Grants, SEOG, work-study, and student loan programs would disproportionately harm low-income, first-generation, Black, Latino, and other underserved students, and urged the state to prepare hold-harmless and advising supports using Fair Share revenue. Commissioner Noe Ortega described Massachusetts’ long history of equity in higher education and said the state has expanded aid, success programs, and early college, but still has work to do on attainment and completion. He said the state responded to SFFA by creating ACARE and continuing to defend equity practices, while also warning that federal disruptions and “dear colleague” letters have created uncertainty. In the second panel, state university leaders and campus officials said federal threats to Pell, DEI grants, Medicaid, and international student policies could affect access, campus operations, and the economy; they stressed that most state university graduates stay in Massachusetts and that institutions are continuing their equity practices despite federal pressure. Roxbury Community College’s president said RCC remains committed to open access and inclusion, noted enrollment growth, and said executive orders do not change existing law or the college’s obligations.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are in support to submit testimony.
• <00:19:01.360> and stand on our written testimony and stand on our written testimony and support
• Um, you have our testimony. Uh, Clinic. Um, you have our testimony.
• You have our written testimony.
• So, your testimony, let's see, I should have pulled this up first, but anyway, uh, your testimony said

Bills: SB2040, SB2248, SB2530, SB2732, SB2871, SB2919, SB3076, SB3300, SB3301

Keywords: freedom of speech, elections, campaign finance, non-natural persons, regulated participation, constitutional amendment, financial disclosures, government transparency, public confidence, Senate confirmation, conflicts of interest, state ethics commission, campaign contributions, state contracts, transparency, conflict of interest, government ethics, pretrial release, bail reform, financial ability

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard testimony on several bills. SB 2248 would expand financial disclosure requirements to certain gubernatorial nominees subject to Senate confirmation. The State Ethics Commission supported the measure, saying disclosures should be filed before confirmation so the public and interested parties can review them in advance. Testimony was overwhelmingly in support, with 22 supporters, no opposition, and one comment. SB 2530 would broaden Hawaii’s campaign contribution ban for state and county contractors to include officers and immediate family members, and would extend the ban to certain grantees and their officers and family members, with specified contract thresholds. The Campaign Spending Commission said the bill is its own proposal and would align the thresholds with procurement guidelines. Testimony was entirely favorable, with 30 in support, no opposition, and two comments. Members asked about conforming amendments and how the existing prohibition on soliciting contributions applies; CSC said the calendar-day language clarifies current practice and that the solicitation ban already applies to contractors, with the bill extending the same standard to officers and immediate family members. SB 2732 would require courts to consider a defendant’s ability to pay when setting bail, including excluding public benefits from income calculations and clarifying the 40-hour affordability benchmark for those above 150% of the federal poverty level. The Office of the Public Defender, the Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission, and the ACLU of Hawaii supported the bill, arguing that unaffordable bail creates wealth-based disparities, contributes to jail overcrowding, and can cause severe collateral consequences for people not yet convicted. There was one opposition testimony and 18 supporters. Committee discussion focused on when the 40-hour period should begin, how income would be verified, and whether misrepresentation could affect bail; the Public Defender said the measure should be read to start from initial appearance and that judges could address false statements through existing remedies. SB 2871 would prohibit discrimination based on perceived characteristics, association with someone who has or is perceived to have protected characteristics, and intersectional combinations of characteristics. The Department of Education supported the intent but asked for clear definitions, while the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission said the bill does not add new protected classes and simply codifies the Lamb v. University of Hawaii decision on intersectional discrimination. LGBTQ+, civil rights, ACLU, and other advocacy groups testified in support, with one opposition testimony and a total of 27 in support, two opposed, and one comment. The committee then heard SB 2919, which appropriates funds for one full-time public deputy public defender position. The Public Defender’s Office said the position would provide statewide legal support and a centralized resource on constitutional, appellate, and immigration-related issues; several advocacy groups supported the measure, and committee questions focused on how the new position would complement existing training and keep staff updated on changing law.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you very much, sir, for your testimony today.
• Thank you, sir, for your testimony.
• Gentlemen, thank you both for your testimony.
• Gentlemen, thank you both for your testimony.
• Well, thank you very much for your testimony.

Summary: The committee heard several public safety bills, with testimony split between supporters who framed the measures as targeted fixes and opponents who warned about overcriminalization and unintended consequences. SB 701, by Senator Wahab, drew support from law enforcement and local government groups, who said state law lacks a tool to address the conduct at issue; the ACLU opposed it as duplicative of existing law, while public defenders said they may withdraw opposition after amendments. Because there was no quorum at that point, the bill was held open without a vote. SB 834, by Senator DeRazzo, was presented as a technical cleanup bill to improve California’s automatic record clearance system by preventing outdated “pending” charges from blocking relief, requiring local court records to match DOJ records, and creating a way for people to obtain proof of relief. It received broad support from criminal justice reform and defense organizations, with no opposition, and the chair indicated support, but no final action was taken during the hearing. SB 248, by Senator Rubio, would require DOJ to send new gun purchasers educational materials during the waiting period about safe storage, suicide prevention, domestic violence, and related resources; supporters called it common-sense education, while one opponent argued the information is already available. The committee voted the bill out on a due-pass motion to Appropriations, but it remained on call pending one additional vote. Senator Rubio’s SB 19, the Safe Schools and Places of Worship Act, would create a new offense for credible threats against schools or houses of worship even when no specific individual is named. Supporters, including law enforcement and Jewish community advocates, said current law leaves a loophole and that the bill would help prevent panic and resource-draining lockdowns; opponents from civil liberties and youth justice groups argued existing law already covers threats and that the bill would worsen the school-to-prison pipeline. After a motion and second, the committee voted due pass to Appropriations, with the measure also left on call. Later, SB 759 by Senator Archuleta, prompted by the killing of Whittier Officer Keith Boyer, would require a court hearing after a third supervision violation or new offense for people on post-release community supervision; supporters said it adds accountability, while opponents said it removes probation discretion and could increase jail and court burdens. The bill passed due pass to Appropriations and was reported as passing. The committee also heard SB 6 by Senator Ashby, which would schedule xylazine as a controlled substance while preserving veterinary use. Supporters, including veterinarians, law enforcement, and a parent who lost a son to a drug-related death, said the drug is increasingly present in fentanyl mixtures and needs to be controlled; opponents from drug policy and civil liberties groups argued scheduling would criminalize users, hinder research, and repeat failed drug-war policies. After extensive debate, the committee voted the bill out due pass to Appropriations, and it passed. Finally, SB 11, the AI Abuse Protection Act, was introduced to regulate AI-generated voice, image, and video replicas, with supporters emphasizing protection against deepfakes and nonconsensual images; the California Chamber of Commerce opposed unless amended, seeking narrower definitions and limits on consumer warnings. The hearing ended while SB 11 was still under discussion, with no final vote reflected in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do limit testimony to two minutes each.
• And then after that, we'll move to the testimony on House 514 and Senate 418.
• Appreciate your testimony. All right, next I think we have a panel.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you so much for your testimony. Senator, appreciate your leadership on this bill.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education held a public hearing on a large slate of bills, with most testimony focused on two main topics: improving access to augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) for students with disabilities, and raising educator pay statewide. On the AAC bills (House 514/Senate 418), parents, advocates, and attorneys described how AAC devices and communication books help nonverbal or minimally verbal children communicate, participate in class, and reduce frustration and behavioral issues. Testimony emphasized that while districts are generally required to provide devices, many teachers and school staff lack training to use them effectively; the bill would direct DESE to update licensure and training requirements so newly licensed teachers are prepared to support AAC users. Committee members asked about current teacher-prep practices, implementation, and whether DESE could act without legislation, and witnesses said the proposal was intended as a long-term solution and had previously received some support and compromise language. The committee also heard extensive testimony on House 733/Senate 370, which would set a statewide minimum salary of $70,000 for teachers and $55,000 for education support professionals (ESPs/paras), with inflation adjustments and a phase-in structure that would shift costs over time from the state to municipalities. Supporters, including the bill sponsor, MTA leaders, and school employees from several districts, argued that current pay is not a living wage, contributes to staffing shortages and turnover, and forces many educators to work multiple jobs or rely on public assistance. They said the bill would help recruit and retain staff and better reflect the importance of the work. Committee members raised questions about how the state would fund the mandate, how it would interact with Chapter 70 school aid and local budgets, whether other states have similar mechanisms, and whether the proposal could create disincentives for districts already paying above the floor. Witnesses pointed to the Student Opportunity Act, the Fair Share Amendment, and the need for a broader school funding formula review as possible parts of the solution. The committee also briefly heard and discussed Senate Bill 435/House Bill 736, which would require de-escalation training for school bus operators, with the training paid for by employers. The sponsor and a parent advocate said the bill was prompted by a school bus incident involving a child with cerebral palsy and epilepsy and would improve safety and reduce reliance on law enforcement. Members asked whether the bill should also cover bus monitors and other transportation staff, and whether private contractors and public operators currently provide similar training. At the end of the hearing, the chairs closed testimony on the full list of bills and adjourned the hearing without taking any votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• I appreciate your testimony.
• Thank you. testimony. Um, am I correct that we're testimony.
• testimony then. testimony then.
• Thank you for your testimony. We'll now close public testimony, committee. What is your pleasure?
• further public testimony in the room? further public testimony in the room?

Bills: SF0014, SF0053

Keywords: literacy, education, reading assessment, intervention program, public school funding, department of education, amateur status, high school athletics, student eligibility, sports regulation, monetary compensation, 916, all