Transcript Highlights:

• Pro Tem: It's a Section 2 ruling.
• Pro Tem: The Supreme Court changed section of the Voting Rights Act. Mr.
• Pro Tem: The Supreme Court changed section of the Voting Rights Act.
• <00:14:48.720> 2 changed the interpretation of Section 2 changed the interpretation of Section
• Pro Tem: The change they made to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Mrs.

Bills: HB1

Keywords: HB1, Alabama, elections, primary election, special primary, runoff, congressional districts, redistricting, reapportionment, district boundaries, federal court, injunction, judgment, Governor proclamation, nominee certification, party nominee, general election 2026, election calendar, voting rights, congressional race

Transcript Highlights:

• Let me, let me ask you a question, you, um, Under section 107.104 of the Family code.
• If you look at Section 9.204, and I'm a little confused where Section 2 underneath it comes from, it
• As far as Section 6, again, this section enlarges the scope of relatives who can file a petition for
• The first section that I would like to look at, and I have nobody here.
• The next section, I'm very glad that 11 is gone.

Bills: HB116

Keywords: film industry, incentives, economic development, state funding, media production

Transcript Highlights:

• It actually shouldn't have been deleted; it should have been changed to the correct section, so we've
• It actually shouldn't have been deleted; it should have been changed to the correct section, so we've
• There's a section I referred to in my written testimony.
• There's a section I referred to in my written testimony.
• <01:03:41.480> 54 sections 54 sections 54 b-161<01:03:44.319> or<01:03:44.559> 514

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Consumer Protection and Commerce met on March 12, 2025, and heard testimony on several bills, with most measures drawing support from state boards, agencies, and industry groups. SB 102 (restaurants) had one supportive testifier and no questions. SB 1367 SD1 (installment loans) drew support from DCCA and other boards, but the chair raised concerns about a proposed $5 debit-card convenience fee, saying it seemed high and suggesting it might be amended downward; DCCA said it would check with industry on the likely impact. SB 1373 SD2 (administrative licensure action against sex offenders) received broad support from DCCA and multiple professional licensing boards, including psychology, physical therapy, naturopathic medicine, chiropractic, dentistry, massage therapy, nursing, optometry, barbering and cosmetology, the Hawaii Medical Board, and HPD. The committee then heard SB 1142 SD1 (insurance proceeds), which was supported by DCCA, the Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement, AARP, Hawaiʻi Realtors, and the Hawaiʻi Insurers Council, while State Farm offered comments and the Hawaii Bankers Association opposed. Testimony focused on insurance access after the Lahaina wildfires and the need to address underinsured homeowners. The committee also discussed SB 144 SD2 (stabilization of property insurance), with support from the Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority, AARP, Hawaiʻi Realtors, and the Hawaiʻi Insurers Council, and comments from the Attorney General and DCCA Insurance Division about revising the financing structure and correcting bill language. Opponents and reservationed supporters argued the bill may not help if applicants can still obtain coverage at very high prices, while supporters said it would expand market capacity and provide a safety net as climate-related losses continue. Finally, SB 253 SD2 (condominium reserves) received support from Hawaiʻi Realtors, CI, and several individual testifiers. Supporters said it would enforce existing disclosure requirements under Act 199 and improve reserve funding transparency, while one individual argued stronger enforcement and an ombudsman-style office would be more effective. The chair reminded testifiers to stay on the bill at hand. No votes or final committee actions were taken during the portion of the meeting reflected in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• And you can go to the educational section where we eliminate in-state tuition.
• And you can go to the educational section where we eliminate in-state tuition.
• The chair recognizes Vice Chair Bousson to conduct the public comments section. I'm sorry.
• So is this, if I'm reading this right, because it looks like Section 1 is just illegal entry, Section
• It looks like Section 1 is just illegal entry. Section 2 is with another crime on top of it.

Summary: The Senate Appropriations Committee took up SB 2-C, a major immigration enforcement bill sponsored by Senator Gruters and co-introduced by Senator Fine. Gruters described the measure as a broad crackdown on illegal immigration that would replace a single immigration officer with a State Board of Immigration Enforcement, create a $250 million grant program for local law enforcement, fund additional Department of Agriculture interdiction staff and facilities, expand pretrial detention for certain unauthorized immigrants, increase criminal penalties, require more cooperation with ICE, and eliminate in-state tuition eligibility for undocumented students. He and supporters framed the bill as a way to support law enforcement, deter illegal immigration, and align Florida with federal enforcement efforts. Committee questioning focused heavily on the bill’s education, detention, and enforcement provisions. Senators pressed Gruters and Fine on why the bill did not address employer sanctions or E-Verify, whether the tuition changes would affect students who had grown up in Florida, how sanctuary-policy enforcement would work, and whether the bill would create practical burdens for prosecutors, jails, and local officials. Gruters said he was open to working on E-Verify in regular session but not to amending this bill, and Fine argued the tuition repeal would apply to undocumented students who had qualified under existing law. Sheriff Bob Gualtieri testified in support, saying ICE bed capacity was still insufficient and that county jails needed more resources to honor detainers. Mark Schlachman of FSU Law offered historical context, noting prior state-federal cooperation efforts and warning of unintended consequences, while several public witnesses opposed the bill as unconstitutional, costly, and harmful to immigrant families and the economy. Opponents from the Southern Poverty Law Center, ACLU of Florida, Florida Center for Fiscal and Economic Policy, Florida Policy Institute, AFL-CIO, and immigrant advocacy groups argued the bill would invite litigation, encourage racial profiling, harm the workforce and higher education, and punish law-abiding immigrants and their families. They emphasized that immigration is a federal matter, that K-12 education must be provided regardless of status, and that removing in-state tuition would reduce access to college and hurt Florida’s economy. Some speakers urged the committee to grandfather current students if the tuition waiver is repealed. The meeting ended with continued public testimony and no final vote reflected in the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 19 says no ex post facto law, bill of attainder, nor law impairing the obligation of contracts
• President Pro Tem Stewart and members of the Senate: Pursuant to Article 4, Section 5(B)(2) of the New
• President Pro Tem Stewart and members of the Senate: Pursuant to Article 4, Section 5(B)(2) of the New
• President Pro Tem Stewart and members of the Senate: Pursuant to Article 4, Section 5(B)(2) of the New
• President Pro Tem Stewart and members of the Senate: Pursuant to Article 4, Section 5(B)(2) of the New

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I would also say, just to highlight a couple other sections of the bill that are important, section four
• I would also say, just to highlight a couple other sections of the bill that are important, section four
• I would also say, just to highlight a couple other sections of the bill that are important, section four
• I would also say, just to highlight a couple other sections of the bill that are important, section four
• Next is the two repeal sections.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, as Tanner mentioned, each section has principles...
• Those are the three general sections.
• We have a section for the board, a section for the central office, and a section... ...three general
• sections, right?
• We have a section for the board, a section for the central office, a section for the schools, the resources

Keywords: 985, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So what I'm going to do is, does everyone have Section F or access to Section F in the audience?
• But if you can, limit your question to what's in that section.
• Again, we're going to work through this by section.
• Keep your questions and comments limited to that section.
• If you have questions that are not related to that section, hold those until the appropriate section

Summary: The committee first adopted revised JBC rules, which staff said were updated to reflect legislation passed in the 2025 session. It then heard a presentation from DFA Secretary Jim Hudson on the governor’s proposed balanced budget for FY27, with no action taken. Hudson said the budget reflects three priorities: limiting state-government growth, continuing investments in education, and advancing income-tax cuts. He highlighted increases for education funding through EFAs, pay-plan costs for Corrections, DPS, and the Attorney General, higher education productivity funding, drug task forces, a Corrections medical contract, the governor’s 1033 initiative, SNAP error-rate reduction efforts, and an additional $100 million set aside for Medicaid sustainability. Committee members questioned the size of the tax cuts, the balance requirement, public education funding, Medicaid trust-fund levels, EFA funding, and the expected impact of new SNAP cost-sharing rules. The Division of Higher Education then presented its productivity-based funding recommendations. Officials said institutions were 2.61% more productive overall, with funding changes driven by a statutory formula that rewards degree production, underserved populations, and high-demand fields. Members asked about declines at UA Little Rock, the formula’s multipliers, the role of the Arkansas Access Act and a new return-on-investment metric, and how two-year colleges are adjusted for size. The committee also reviewed special items and approved two letters: one authorizing 17 net personnel changes across nine institutions, and another adding special language for North Arkansas College’s entry into the University of Arkansas system. The committee then adopted the Higher Education Coordinating Board’s recommendations for all institutions. A lengthy portion of the meeting focused on the University of Arkansas system, especially Fayetteville’s athletics funding and the broader impact of the House/NIL settlement. Chancellor Charles Robinson and system officials explained that the board had waived a longstanding campus transfer and directed the university to provide an additional $6 million to athletics, with some costs likely to be passed through to students but partially offset by existing budget growth. Members debated whether the university should prioritize academics or athletics, how the transfer originated, and whether the athletic changes would affect affordability. The committee also discussed the 1890 extension program at UAPB and the Division of Agriculture’s land-grant funding. UAPB officials said the state match is intended to be one-to-one, that the current recommendation aligns appropriation with actual spending, and that a $2 million set-aside remains available if needed. The Division of Agriculture later clarified that its Smith-Lever extension and Hatch research funds are part of the UA system’s separate budget and that the state matched about $6.2 million in federal extension funding last year. The committee then moved to the Department of Corrections. It approved G1, transferring 51 positions to the secretary’s office to activate a recidivism program, with an estimated cost of about $4 million. Staff then began walking through the department’s FY27 budget, noting an increase of about $8 million for administration and shared services, including a $170,000 sex-offender assessment appropriation moved under Act 723 of 2025 and roughly $6 million more for medical contracts. Questions on the Corrections budget had just begun when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, it's in there now as to the penalties for uh violating this section.
• So you have sections of uh the borders.
• This is just bringing some code sections forward.
• It should all be just bring the code sections forward.
• just bringing some code sections just bringing some code sections forward.<00:36:44.960> Uh

Keywords: Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks - Room 210, 2 February, 2026; 3:00 P.M., 925, all

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 2664, which would amend the lifetime hunting license program so anyone under age 18 could buy the license for a $500 fee. After a brief explanation and no questions, the committee adopted a motion for title sufficient and do pass, and the bill was reported. Members then considered Senate Bill 2436, described as a step toward establishing a black bear hunting season in Mississippi beginning with the 2027-28 season. The bill would require the department to set rules based on black bear population data, use a lottery system for tags, create one annual governor’s tag, delay nonresident tags until at least 2032-33, cap those tags at 10%, and add penalties for violations. The committee again moved title sufficient and do pass with a committee substitute, and the bill was reported. The committee also heard Senate Bill 2420, which would clarify last year’s hunting-season extension so that if a season ends on Friday or Saturday, it would continue through Sunday. That bill received a do-pass motion and was reported. Senate Bill 2659, creating a voluntary lifetime conservation legacy license for Mississippians over 65 for a one-time $250 fee, also passed the committee and was reported. Finally, the committee took up Senate Bill 2660, the catfish bill, with testimony from a guest and department officials. Supporters argued the bill was needed to curb commercial harvesting of trophy catfish from the Mississippi River, protect the resource, and support tourism and events such as the Vicksburg catfish tournament. Department staff said a possible approach would be to prohibit transporting live catfish over 34 inches, which they said could help stop the practice without affecting farm-raised catfish. Members discussed concerns about impacts on local fishermen and clarified that the bill was aimed at Mississippi River waters; the committee did not reach a final vote on this bill in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• of Justice from 2019 to 2022 concerning the repealed criminal statute of Penal Code Section 653.22.
• One of the other topics I just wanted to touch on for this section is at the California Department of
• This concludes the data presentation for this section of the hearing. Thank you.
• So the percentage of people who were either arrested or prosecuted for Penal Code Section 653.22 from
• And as I indicated, our special prosecution section is statewide.

Summary: The Assembly Standing Committee on Public Safety held an informational hearing in Pomona on sex work-related crimes and efforts to combat human trafficking. The chair and Assembly Member Michelle Rodriguez framed the issue as a major public safety and victim-protection concern, referencing the repeal of the loitering law in SB 357 and the recent enactment of AB 379, which targets buyers of sex rather than sex workers. The hearing was organized into three panels: data and research, policing and anti-trafficking efforts, and courtroom/prosecution impacts. In the first panel, the California Department of Justice presented arrest and conviction data for the repealed loitering statute, noting overall declines from 2019 to 2022 but also explaining that the data did not distinguish clearly between people selling sex, people loitering to sell, and people purchasing sex. USC law professor Hannah Gary summarized a 2021 report finding that law enforcement stings and raids often lack transparency, disproportionately harm Black women, minors, LGBTQ+ people, and undocumented migrants, and rarely achieve the stated goals of protecting victims, prosecuting traffickers, or preventing trafficking. The ACLU of Southern California argued that criminalization of sex work is discriminatory and historically used to police women and people of color, and that laws aimed at buyers still harm sex workers and can increase immigration consequences. Committee members asked about data collection, racial disparities, and whether the new law could worsen profiling; the panelists urged public health approaches, better data, and more survivor services. The second panel featured the California DOJ human trafficking coordinator, Pomona Police Chief Mike Ellis, and survivor advocate Jess Torres of Rising Worldwide. DOJ described its regional trafficking teams, task forces, victim services, and prosecutions, emphasizing a victim-centered and trauma-informed approach. Chief Ellis said SB 357 limited police intervention and contributed to visible open-air prostitution near schools and other sensitive locations, citing complaints from residents and a reported drop in juvenile rescues in Pomona after the law changed; he supported AB 63-style enforcement with safeguards and service referrals. Torres, speaking as a survivor, argued that anti-trafficking policy must be survivor-led, that many youth in the sex trade are boys or LGBTQ youth, and that criminalization and street enforcement often worsen harm and displacement rather than solving the underlying problems. In the final panel, a Riverside County deputy district attorney said AB 63 could help law enforcement make earlier contact with potential victims and identify traffickers, while stressing the need for training, documentation, and oversight. A Los Angeles County public defender argued that prosecuting trafficked people reinforces traffickers’ control, creates lifelong barriers, and retraumatizes survivors, and pointed to diversion programs as a better model. The Coalition to Abolish Slavery and Trafficking began its testimony by describing its survivor services and crisis response work. The hearing ended without any vote or formal action, but with committee members and witnesses continuing to debate the balance between enforcement, data collection, and survivor-centered services.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now, you said that your C-section prediction tool, The C-section prediction tool can predict with 90%
• accuracy whether a C-section will be needed.
• because the tool outputted a C-section prediction.
• And having had incredible care, I was on the verge of a C-section with my first.
• Sections. So can you talk a little bit about that? Yeah, it's a great point.

Summary: The joint informational hearing of the Assembly Health and Privacy Committees focused on generative AI in health care, with opening remarks emphasizing both its potential to improve care and its risks around privacy, bias, liability, workforce impacts, and unequal access. Chair Bauer-Kahan and Chair Bonta framed the discussion around how California can encourage beneficial innovation while protecting patients, especially given the sensitivity of health data and the possibility that AI could worsen existing disparities if not carefully governed. The first panel featured representatives from Cedars-Sinai, Kaiser Permanente, Penguin AI, and Google, who described current uses of AI such as ambient clinical scribes, nursing documentation tools, imaging triage, maternal-fetal risk prediction, and administrative automation. Speakers said these tools can reduce clinician burden, improve patient experience, speed treatment, and in some cases improve outcomes, including a reported mortality benefit from a Kaiser predictive model and faster thrombectomy times at Cedars-Sinai. Members raised concerns about accuracy with accents and multilingual visits, whether predictive tools could reinforce bias or lead to more interventions such as C-sections, and how to ensure a human remains in the loop for important decisions. The second panel, including representatives from the California Health Care Foundation, UC Berkeley, and Stanford, focused on policy and governance challenges. Testimony highlighted examples of AI supporting homelessness outreach and community health work, but also warned that biased algorithms can encode inequities, especially when trained on data that reflect under-treatment of Black, rural, or low-income patients. Witnesses urged clearer standards for trustworthy AI, stronger monitoring and governance structures, better data access for accountability, and attention to the safety net’s limited resources. Several speakers argued that states should require health systems to have AI governance processes, clarify liability between developers and deployers, and regulate downstream uses of AI while preserving access to data for lifesaving research and oversight.

Transcript Highlights:

• . been voluntarily terminated, that section is A through U.
• And there's a section called Section O, which provides that agent. child's parents' rights can be terminated
• Dutton, is this section that you're going to take out, is this the section that the Chief Justice stood
• Under Rule 11, Section 2, on the grounds that the amendment is not germane to the bill.
• Consideration of House Bill Number 2001 under the Caption Rule, Rule 8, Section 1.

Bills: HB29, HB 125, HB145, HB171, HB255, HB50, HB796, HB363, HB 116, HB491, HB589, HB1495, HB368, HB 1285, HB1905, HB1360, HB2002, HB917, HB2723, HB2067, HB 1238, HB2337, HB745, HB 1188, HB1606, HB2003, HB2147, HB2391, HB2355, HB2546, HB2495, HB2818, HB2249, HB1749, HB3109, HB3228, HB3240, HB1507, HB658, HB1748, HB1851, HB1922, HB2001, HB2798, HB 107, HCR29, SB5, SB262, HB 11, HJR72, HB 106, HB18, HB48, HB27, HB37, HB1481, HB581, HB1696, HB2216, HB 1035, HB1633, HB742, HB754, HB1689, HB1690, HB2669, HB391, HB517, HB 1024, HB1607, HB252, HB1716, HB1562, HB4116, HB1866, HB1741, HB2103, HB2637, HB2884, HB503, HB 1089, HB2986, HB972, HB502, HB29, HB 125, HB145, HB171, HB255, HB50, HB796, HB363, HB 116, HB491, HB589, HB1495, HB368, HB 1285, HB1905, HB1360, HB2002, HB917, HB2723, HB2067, HB 1238, HB2337, HB745, HB 1188, HB1606, HB2003, HB2147, HB2391, HB2355, HB2546, HB2495, HB2818, HB2249, HB1749, HB3109, HB3228, HB3240, HB1507, HB658, HB1748, HB1851, HB1922, HB2001, HB2798, HB 107, HCR29

Keywords: water audit, water loss, water loss mitigation plan, municipally owned utility, municipal utility, water conservation, Texas Water Development Board, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, water leakage, leak detection, billing data accuracy, utility validation, water audit validation, water scarcity, water management, infrastructure, public utility, conservation plan, administrative penalty

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 1 is Representative Robbins' House File 2371, describing circumstances in which sensitive exams
• Sections 2 and 3 are the base bill that's being amended.
• These make technical changes to two sections on Environmental Laboratories.
• Article 1, Section 4 is Representative Lings' House File 1429.
• > 1<00:01:57.880> Section<00:01:58.320> 4 Laboratories Article 1 Section 4 Laboratories

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• He said the question is what the intent was around that section.
• Cassie Aaki on the language for that specific section.
• She gave similar testimony last year about why this section was important in 417, so I will defer to
• Cassie Aaki on the language for that specific section.
• Cassie Aaki on the language for that specific section.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , through some of the sections, through some of the sections, um<00:00:59.560> and<00:00:59.680
• Much of the rest of section two, plus sections three through 11, is simply changing the name that exists
• Let's talk about the merger study committees, which begin in section 13.
• Much of the rest of section two, plus sections three through 11, is simply changing the name that exists
• Um, in section maybe a technical one.

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The meeting was a caucus of the whole on House Bill 955, described by House Education Chair Rep. Peter Conlin as the year’s education transformation bill. He said the bill is still evolving and must still go through Ways and Means, Appropriations, and the Senate. Conlin framed the bill as a response to declining enrollment, school building needs, future funding changes, and equity concerns, drawing on prior commission work, testimony, surveys, emails, and committee input. Conlin said H. 955 has two major structural pieces: it creates seven mandatory Cooperative Education Service Areas (CESAs) to provide shared services more efficiently at larger scale, and it requires merger study committees in all parts of the state to examine whether districts should voluntarily merge into pre-K through 12 union school districts. He emphasized that CESAs are service providers, not governing bodies, and that merger study committees are required to study merger but not to merge. He also said the bill includes startup grants for CESAs, fee-for-service funding, a guidance map for facilitator work, deadlines culminating in merger votes on November 7, 2028, and reporting requirements back to the General Assembly. Members asked about whether CESAs duplicate supervisory unions, how representation would work, whether the bill affects academic standards, what happens to articles of agreement, why some study groupings include only one district, how the process would work in practice, and what support facilitators would have. Conlin responded that CESAs are intended to add scale for specialized services rather than replace supervisory unions, that they do not govern schools, and that representation and structure could be adjusted as the bill moves forward. He said the bill does not change what is taught in schools, only governance and funding, and that any merger would still require new articles of agreement and voter approval. He also said the facilitator system would be supported by a lead facilitator and the existing CESA structure, and that some groupings may be revised based on local conditions. The committee also discussed cost savings and timing. Conlin said the bill is intended to reduce costs through shared services and larger-scale districts, and that the proposed delay in implementing a foundation formula is meant to allow time for mergers and related administrative work, including bargaining, records, and district consolidation. He cited the existing Vermont Learning Collaborative in southeastern Vermont as an example of a CESA already providing specialized services and saving member districts money.

Transcript Highlights:

• Under the current section 2518 C of the tax code any tax unit including a school district can already
• Section 6.05, parentheses 1, to require Appraisal District Board of Directors to adopt a reappraisal
• This must be done by January 1st, but the problem is the other section. something that says appraisal
• And I'm speaking against the proposed changes to section 42.29 of the tax code.
• Let me start by saying section 4229 needs to be changed.

Bills: HB1952, HB3258, HB3524, HB3851, HB4478, HB4613, HB4703, HB4742, HB4744, HB4809, HB4864

Keywords: county appraisal district, board of directors, governance, taxing units, public representation, penalty, property report, taxation, timely filing, chief appraiser, appraisal district, ad valorem tax, property appraisal, tax protests, unequal appraisal, property rights, property tax, public employees, protest leave, appraisal review board

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, this is required by Century Code Section 54-27-27.
• Chairman, members of the Budget Section Committee.
• Chairman, we have a request for the Budget Section.
• Good morning, Chairman Vigesaa, members of the Budget Section.
• Chairman and members of the Budget Section.

Summary: The Budget Section met to approve prior minutes and receive a series of budget, revenue, and program updates from OMB, the Tax Department, DOT, DMR, and DPI. OMB reported that general fund revenues through May were about $76 million below the legislative forecast, driven mainly by individual income tax and sales tax shortfalls, though the biennium is still projected to end with a positive balance. OMB also reviewed oil price and production assumptions, the budget stabilization fund transfer above its cap, Legacy Fund performance, federal grant applications, fiscal irregularities, tobacco settlement proceeds, budget guidelines for agencies, vacancy savings, and the DAPL settlement, noting that most of the settlement funds had been deposited but a small amount of accrued interest would require a future deficiency request. The committee then considered Emergency Commission requests. It approved requests for Public Service Commission abandoned mine lands federal authority, an Attorney General FTE and related funding for criminal investigator work tied to the Office of Guardianship and Conservatorship, and a DPI transfer for bridge software costs. After discussion, the committee also approved DPI’s request for a $500,000 transfer for the food vendor program, despite questions about the program’s savings and cash-flow structure. Later, the Tax Commissioner presented the primary residence credit program, reporting that current biennium costs are expected to exceed the appropriation by about $22 million and explaining how the credit interacts with homestead and disabled veteran credits and the 3% property tax levy cap. The Legacy and Budget Stabilization Fund Advisory Board reported strong returns for both funds, and DOT sought and received approval for two flexible fund highway projects on ND 49 and ND 31. DOT also updated members on Highway 85 construction and said remaining flex fund dollars were essentially fully allocated. DMR reported on the abandoned well plugging and site reclamation fund, noting North Dakota’s relatively small orphan well inventory, current and projected fund balances, rising remediation costs, and a possible need to adjust the fund cap in future sessions. Finally, DPI outlined the new integrated formula gap funding program, explaining that it compensates school districts that cannot reach the assumed 60-mill local contribution because of the 3% levy cap; the first year’s gap funding totaled about $1.8 million, with future costs expected to grow.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, there's three other sections. There's a statute of limitation section.
• The second uh section deals with seven.
• Um there's three other<00:04:11.920> sections.
• There's a uh statute of other sections. There's a uh statute of limitation<00:04:15.519> section.
• This deals with limitation section.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Senate Judiciary Committee heard and advanced several bills. Senate Bill 198, relating to operations of the Office of the Attorney General, was described as a cleanup measure with seven changes, including allowing the AG’s office to handle child support employee background checks and fingerprinting, updating child support guideline commission references, clarifying control of constitutional officers’ records in multistate litigation, setting a 10-year statute of limitations for certain consumer protection matters, streamlining administrative hearing appeals, and changing representation of the professional geologist board. After questions about the administrative hearing appeal language, the committee passed the bill 9-0. The committee then passed Senate Bill 323, which would require subpoenas for medical records to be served at least 14 days before production. President Stivers said the bill is intended to give health care providers reasonable time to comply with HIPAA, redact records, and avoid motions to quash when subpoenas are served on short notice. A question about appeal deadlines was answered by noting the bill would not affect the common 10-day motion-to-reconsider rule. The bill passed 9-0. Senate Bill 66, as amended by committee substitute, was also passed 9-0. The substitute addressed DUI-related issues, including preserving certain driving records for 10 years, removing urine screens from the bill, adding fentanyl and other substances to the per se controlled-substances DUI list, and clarifying that a preliminary breath test may be refused and that officers should advise drivers of that right. The committee also passed Senate Bill 221, a model-law bill making the knowing purchase, sale, transfer, or offer to sell human remains for consideration a Class D felony; members asked about whether it could affect older medical specimens or fetal remains, and sponsors said the bill is aimed at remains authorized for final disposition through cremation or burial. That bill passed 8-0. Finally, Senate Bill 312, concerning court-ordered transports in mental health cases, was presented by court security and sheriff’s association representatives. They said the bill clarifies that sheriffs may use court security staff to monitor and transport individuals undergoing 202A mental health evaluations, addressing staffing shortages and existing practice. The committee passed the bill 8-0. The committee then began hearing Senate Bill 333 on body armor grants, with the Attorney General’s office testifying that the bill would transfer administration of the Law Enforcement Protection Program to the AG and align it with the office’s existing body armor grant program, but the transcript cuts off before any vote on that measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• For those that haven't, this brings forward all the code sections on the different funds that we utilize
• is bringing those code sections forward, um, as that will need to be addressed in the statutes.
• is bringing those code sections forward, um, as that will need to be addressed in the statutes.
• It's a whole section, too." "360. Yeah.
• Just like any other repealer, we filed the code sections and the bills to address the repealers.

Keywords: Appropriations - Room 216, 2 February, 2026; 1:30 PM, 925, all

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 2189, described as a transfer bill that brings forward code sections tied to the various funds used to compose the budget. With no questions, the committee adopted a title sufficient do pass motion and reported the bill. The committee then considered Senate Bill 2190, which would raise Mississippi’s rainy day fund cap from 10% to 15% of general fund revenue. The chair explained that the change would gradually build the reserve over time to a little over $1 billion, and clarified in response to questions that the figure did not include money being used for PERS or capex. The bill received a title sufficient do pass recommendation. Next, Senate Bill 2717 was presented as a modernization of the My Kids youth court information system, which was described as 35 to 40 years old and antiquated. Senator Wiggins said the bill follows an audit and would support an $8 million replacement effort, with a three-year implementation and training period, and that the new system would be cloud-based and allow better data sharing among youth court-related agencies while preserving county-level protections. Senators raised concerns about prior ARPA funding, disclosure of youth court records, and the effect of a repealer in current law; Wiggins and others said related disclosure issues were being addressed in separate Judiciary A bills. The committee then voted title sufficient do pass. The committee also advanced Senate Bill 2896, a DPS-requested measure tied to pay increases for highway patrol, Bureau of Narcotics, and Bureau of Investigation personnel, with the chair saying the proposal would keep the bill alive through a reverse repealer in the committee substitute. Finally, the committee considered companion bills Senate Bills 2898 and 2924 to provide $20 million to MEMA’s Disaster Assistance Trust Fund in response to the recent ice storm and to cover state disaster expenses. Members discussed federal disaster reimbursement rules, the distinction between individual assistance and public assistance, insurance requirements, and the need for local governments to document eligible expenses. Both bills were adopted by title sufficient do pass, and the committee also passed Senate Bill 2917, which changes Mississippi Valley State University’s request from a new residence hall to repair and renovation of existing residence halls. The chair then set remaining bills aside for a later meeting and the committee rose and reported.

Transcript Highlights:

• or two and three the cross out section or two and three line.<00:40:54.400> Yep.
• Why don't we move Rule 3, page 4, under the definitions section? Pardon? Say that again.
• And sections two and three are coming out. We're already out. Okay, perfect.
• But the reference to the probate court would be on page four, section one, two.
• um 18, section one, two. um 18, section one, two.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee work session focused on SB 148 and competing amendments dealing with forfeiture and civil recovery in murder cases. Members compared the “Lynn” and “Burge” amendments and narrowed the remaining disputes to two issues: whether the bill should apply only to first-degree murder or also to second-degree murder and related federal offenses, and whether any civil action could be brought before criminal charges or conviction. The group concluded that the pre-conviction approach created serious practical and constitutional problems, including Fifth Amendment concerns and uncertainty over how a civil case would proceed while a criminal investigation was pending. The discussion then shifted toward limiting the bill to post-conviction remedies. Members agreed that the Department of Justice pre-charge stay language should be removed, that the bill should not try to define “victim” in a way that included the person convicted of the murder, and that the definition should be revised to mean the estate of the victim or the victim’s immediate family, excluding the convicted person. They also agreed to delete language about “after right to appeal has been exhausted,” to correct a typo on page one, and to remove a section dealing with pre-conviction probate-style procedures and third-party notice issues. The committee also discussed how to handle third parties such as insurers, publishers, and innocent purchasers. Members concluded that third parties acting in good faith should not be liable if they make payments or transfer property without notice, but if they receive notice they should not disburse funds. They noted that existing post-conviction civil recovery language already allows victims to sue within three years, making the earlier pre-conviction mechanism unnecessary. The meeting ended with the members saying they had reached a deal on the revised language and would bring the updated amendment forward for further processing.