Transcript Highlights:

• Great, then we will proceed to testimony.
• Thank you so much for your very valuable testimony here today.
• You may proceed with your testimony. Thank you so much.
• OK, we will proceed with testimony. Chair calls up Brandon Logan.
• OK, we will start testimony. Thank you. Thank you. The chair calls.

Bills: HB 451, HB 645, HB 1041, HB 1151, HB 1155, HB 1536, HCR 12

Keywords: commercial sexual exploitation, child sex trafficking, human trafficking, child welfare, foster care, DFPS, Department of Family and Protective Services, juvenile probation, risk assessment, needs assessment, trauma screening, child abuse prevention, exploitation screening, validated screening tool, evidence-informed tool, conservatorship, juvenile justice, at-risk youth, trafficking prevention, Child Sex Trafficking Prevention Unit

Transcript Highlights:

• And I believe we have 3 testimony.
• testimony. Thank you. testimony. Thank you.
• with your testimony. with your testimony.
• for your work and your testimony. for your work and your testimony.
• with us, and thanks for your testimony. with us, and thanks for your testimony.

Bills: HF4477

Keywords: Minnesota business recovery loan program, small business loan, zero-interest loan, forgivable loan, business recovery, economic development, small business emergency loan account, Minnesota Initiative Foundations, nonprofit lenders, greater Minnesota, Twin Cities metro, seven-county metropolitan area, immigration enforcement, business interruption, revenue loss, job preservation, business stabilization, state appropriation, forward fund, loan forgiveness

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:01:39.520> and quiet and listen to the testimony and quiet and listen to the testimony
• Uh, I will read their testimony first, their written testimony.
• Uh, I will read their testimony first, their written testimony.
• . testimony. testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. >> All right. Thank you for your testimony.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• So basically your testimony and I sat with her and your testimony and I sat with her and and I'm impressed
• testimony? testimony?
• I think my testimony is pretty credible. I think my testimony is pretty credible.
• <00:43:33.040> that seriously the negative testimony that seriously the negative testimony
• Um I've of their of their testimony.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard testimony on Governor’s Message 767, the nomination of Kanoi AD Jackson to serve as circuit court judge for the Third Circuit. The chair announced that the committee would not vote on the governor’s message or two judge nominations until Tuesday, April 15, but planned to vote that day on two Defender Council items. Testimony on Jackson’s nomination was limited to two minutes per speaker, and the hearing was conducted partly by Zoom. Supporters emphasized Jackson’s qualifications, work ethic, judicial temperament, and community ties. Testifiers included the West Hawaii Bar Association, family members, a retired teacher, retired Judge Robert Kim, and the Hawaii State Bar Association. The West Hawaii Bar Association said Jackson received high marks from its review process and that the Third Circuit needed a permanent judge for stability. Judge Kim and others praised her preparation, intelligence, humility, and experience as a prosecutor and litigator. Jackson also spoke in her own behalf, acknowledging that her background is primarily criminal rather than civil, but saying she is committed to learning the civil docket and serving the community if confirmed. Members questioned the Hawaii State Bar Association about the basis for its support, including how many members responded and whether concerns were raised about Jackson’s lack of civil experience. HSBA said it uses a confidential review process, receives both positive and negative comments, and does not track votes or percentages, but its board voted to support her. Judge Kim responded that judges can learn new areas of law, that civil dockets can be managed with benchbooks and help from other judges, and that Jackson’s trial experience would serve her well. No vote was taken on Jackson’s nomination during this hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• you but he is submitting this testimony you but he is submitting this testimony in<01:31:16.400>
• director uh Karen Herbert's testimony director uh Karen Herbert's testimony covered<02:10:35.360
• Thank you for your testimony.
• with that let me end my formal testimony with that let me end my formal testimony and<03:56:33.640
• Previous testimony has really covered that very well.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• so it h we've had previous testimony so it h we've had previous testimony that<00:20:49.280>
• So, appreciate y'all's testimony.
• So, appreciate y'all's testimony. I So, appreciate y'all's testimony.
• But um from based upon the testimony But um from based upon the testimony today,<01:15:38.640>
• ,<01:18:52.719> I light of our previous testimony, I light of our previous testimony, I didn't

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Discussion of the KentuckyWired Network 00:00:55 Discussion of the Water Resource Information System 00:35.40 Discussion of Geographic Information Systems 00:52:30 Discussion of Committee Report to LRC 01:15:05, 958, all

Summary: The Information Technology Oversight Committee met with a quorum, approved the prior meeting minutes, and then heard a presentation from Leadcore representatives Jimmy Bird, Mike Murray, and Rebecca Moss on the Kentucky Wired network. Leadcore described its role as the design-builder and service provider under the KCNA contract, saying the network was built with roughly 13,200 feet of fiber, mostly aerial, and that the use of non-armored cable was a Kentucky-side decision made to reduce cost. They also said aerial construction and non-armored cable increase maintenance challenges, including storm damage and squirrel-related damage, and reported FY25 service activity of 104 break-fix events, 30 maintenance replacements, 64 storm-damage events, and nearly 13,000 feet of fiber replaced to date. Committee members questioned whether the original project anticipated this level of replacement and whether any forecast existed for maintenance under non-armored cable. Leadcore said it did not do a formal forecast and could not say whether the replacement rate was above or below norms, though it acknowledged the decision not to use armored cable came from the Kentucky side of the contract. Members also asked about whether replacements caused network degradation; Leadcore said it tries to replace cable at existing splice points to avoid degradation and, where needed, uses armored cable for replacement sections going forward. The committee then explored Leadcore’s relationship with Excel and KCNA. Leadcore said it has a service-level agreement for KCNA-related fibers but not for dark fibers used by Excel, and that Kentucky Wired fibers get priority on service requests. It said outages are reported through a 1-800 number and that it was not aware of any access problems to the huts. On the tech refresh, Leadcore said its understanding is that maintaining the network is its responsibility, but the technology refresh is not; it said only a very limited amount of refresh has occurred and that this did not match the original contract intent. Leadcore also said it had not been asked to defer maintenance. The chair closed by saying the testimony would inform a committee report and that he intended to recommend clawing back or withholding some previously authorized Kentucky Wired and refresh funding until an audit is complete, with the committee to vote on a report later.

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you please present your bill, and then we'll get into testimony? Oh, excuse me.
• If you please provide your testimony, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair and members.
• If you please provide your testimony, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair and members.
• Thank you for your testimony, Mr.
• and I apologize we do have testimony and I apologize we do have Mark<01:05:27.279> testimony<

Bills: HF837

Keywords: health insurance, premium security plan, federal funding, state innovation waiver, Minnesota, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The committee will start out in public testimony.
• We will now go into public testimony regarding Senate Bill 1002.
• We will now go into public testimony regarding Senate Bill 1002.
• Thank you for your testimony for being here. We really appreciate that.
• So I want to thank you for your testimony.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Children and Families heard public testimony on Senate Bill 1002, which would move St. Charles County school board elections and school levy/bond questions to the November general election, extend school board terms to four years, and allow candidates to voluntarily list party affiliation. The bill sponsor argued the change would increase turnout, broaden parent and taxpayer participation, and better align school board decisions with the broader electorate. Supporters echoed those points, saying April elections have low turnout, campaigning is difficult in winter, and November voting would give more residents a voice. Opponents, including school board members, parents, and the Missouri School Boards’ Association, argued the bill unnecessarily singles out St. Charles County, could politicize school board races, and might bury local issues on crowded November ballots. Several witnesses said school boards should remain nonpartisan and warned that four-year terms and the loss of staggered elections could reduce continuity and institutional knowledge. Others said limiting levy and bond questions to November could delay urgent district needs and reduce local flexibility. Some supporters and opponents also debated whether the bill should be statewide rather than county-specific. After testimony, the committee moved into executive session and voted Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 1002 “do pass” by a vote of 10 aye, 5 no, and 1 present. The committee also voted Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 1135 “do pass” by the same 10 aye, 5 no, and 1 present margin.

Transcript Highlights:

• Members of the public may provide testimony and, very...
• And we will move to testimony in opposition of Assembly Bill 204.
• And listening to some of the testimony, I can understand where this...
• Okay, so we'll welcome any testimony in neutral on Assembly Bill 414.
• With that, we will move to testimony in opposition of Assembly Bill 504.

Keywords: 909, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Your testimony. City Jenkins followed by Beth Young.
• Thank you for your testimony. >> Christine Griner fall by Bob Johnson.
• Thank you for your testimony. Johnson, you're recognized. >> Good morning.
• Thank you for your testimony. Susan Clark, you are recognized. >> Thank you.
• Thank you for your testimony. >> Augustus Tirico Bill.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:02:16.480> right I'm not going to limit testimony right I'm not going to limit testimony
• . testimony. testimony.
• My<01:54:49.280> testimony My testimony My testimony was<01:54:51.440> instrumental
• I have copies of testimony to share. I have copies of testimony to share.
• testimony and considering the evidence. testimony and considering the evidence.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think the most compelling testimony that I heard of everyone that gave testimony on this came from
• I think the most compelling testimony that I heard of everyone that gave testimony on this came from
• I think the most compelling testimony I think the most compelling testimony<00:26:46.840> that
• /c><00:26:50.559> from that gave testimony on this came from that gave testimony on this came
• <01:15:49.400> that that you did in your last testimony that that you did in your last testimony

Keywords: 00:00:00 Call to Order/Roll Call 00:01:37 Discussion of 25RS HB 392 00:03:10 Roll Call Vote on 25RS HB 392 00:04:20 Discussion of 25RS HB 580 00:13:28 Roll Call Vote on 25RS HB 580 00:14:54 Discussion of 25RS HB 688 00:18:40 Roll Call Vote on 25RS HB 688 00:21:40 Discussion of 25RS HB 16 01:19:44 Roll Call Vote on 25RS HB 16 01:27:32 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 392, sponsored by Representative Proctor, which would help the Department for Behavioral Health, Developmental and Intellectual Disabilities pay for emergency medical and psychiatric services provided to patients outside state facilities when those facilities cannot meet their needs. Proctor described it as a continuing improvement bill to address payment issues for services delivered at community-based facilities. The bill received no substantive opposition in the meeting and passed the committee with favorable expression by a vote of 15 yes, 0 no, and 1 pass. The committee then considered House Bill 580, presented by Representative Kim Moser and Elena Sweezy, which tightens oversight of peer support specialists. The bill was described as building on House Bill 505 from the prior year by reinstating supervision requirements, adding parameters around group sizes, creating a pathway for temporary peer support specialists to become fully registered after nine months, and addressing Medicaid reimbursement and accountability concerns. Members asked about reimbursement; the sponsor said Medicaid was okay with the bill and that commercial insurance coverage would be up to insurers. Representative Fleming emphasized the need for stronger financial oversight of the peer support code. The committee adopted a substitute and title amendment, then passed the bill with favorable expression. House Bill 688 was then heard, with Representative Bratcher explaining that it addresses two issues: preventing fraud in nurse licensure by giving the Kentucky Board of Nursing more discretion to review out-of-state credentials, and expanding school authority to administer certain emergency medications. He said the bill changes the board’s authority from “shall” to “may” so it can verify transcripts, curricula, accreditation, and exam passage. During discussion, Representative Sharp explained his yes vote by noting the bill also adds rescue medications such as glucagon and Solu-Cortef and allows prescribed emergency medications for known conditions in schools. The committee passed the bill with favorable expression. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 16, which would leave decisions about adding fluoride to drinking water to local governing bodies rather than maintaining a state mandate. Supporters, including Representative David Hale, Dr. Jack Call, and Cindy Batson, argued that fluoridation should be a local choice and raised concerns about cost, potential health risks, and the precautionary principle. Opponents, including Dr. Steve Robertson of the Kentucky Dental Association, defended fluoridation as beneficial for preventing tooth decay and warned that local removal decisions could increase Medicaid costs and may not reflect the broader public interest. The transcript provided does not show a final committee vote on House Bill 16 in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• The department stands on his written testimony and support of this measure.
• Thank you. hearings we will be limiting testimony hearings we will be limiting testimony to<00:01:17.080
• The department stands on its written testimony, and we appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony
• The department stands on its written testimony, and we appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony
• They're all written testimony. Pardon, one in opposition?

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• She gave me her testimony.
• She gave me her testimony.
• She gave me her testimony.
• You have two minutes of testimony.
• Thank you for that testimony.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Banking and Finance Committee met and first approved the consent calendar, sending AB 2028, AB 2425, and AB 2795 to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. The committee also announced that AB 2558 and AB 2746 had been pulled from the agenda. The chair reviewed committee rules on written testimony and decorum before proceeding through the file order. AB 2116, which would regulate merchant cash advance and related small-business financing products under the California Consumer Financial Protection Law, drew strong support from the author and advocates who said it would close oversight gaps, require registration, prohibit confessions of judgment and power-of-attorney provisions before default, and improve transparency for small businesses. Supporters included small business advocates, consumer groups, local officials, and community organizations. Opposition from the Revenue-Based Finance Coalition argued the bill mixed consumer and commercial regulation, used inconsistent definitions of small business, and could restrict access to capital; they said amendments were being discussed. The committee passed AB 2116 to Appropriations. AB 2243, by Assembly Member Haney, would create a state bank commission to study whether California should establish a state bank or other public financing tools. Supporters said the state pays billions in interest to private lenders and could better use public funds for housing, infrastructure, climate, and small business lending. Opponents from the banking and credit union sectors raised concerns about taxpayer exposure, deposit guarantees, use of public funds, and the bill’s implications for existing financing structures. After discussion, the committee passed AB 2243 to Appropriations on a roll call vote, with some members voting no. AB 2350, as amended, would set guardrails on rent-now-pay-later products tied to rental housing to prevent predatory fees, high interest, and eviction risk for renters. The author and supporters emphasized the bill’s consumer protection goals, while industry representatives opposed it unless amended, saying they had not seen final language and wanted the bill narrowed to avoid broader impacts on the financial services sector. The committee passed AB 2350 as amended to Appropriations. At the end of the meeting, the committee completed roll calls for absent members and then adjourned.

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 of the committee.
• We'll be using a panel format for testimony, and each witness will be given 2 minutes.
• We'll now move to, uh, public testimony. And we have no one registered. All right.
• So is there anyone wishing to provide public testimony on for against Senate Bill 2122?

Bills: HB16

Keywords: judicial administration, court reform, juvenile diversion, court security, mental health services, drug offenses, constitutional amendments

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for your testimony and for your work.
• This concludes public testimony on this bill, and public testimony is now closed.
• The floor is now open for public testimony.
• At this time, that concludes public testimony on this bill, and public testimony is closed.
• Senate Bill 1122, the floor is now open for public testimony.

Bills: SB502, SB513, SB622, SB670, SB731, SB732, SB916, SB961, SB1122

Keywords: SB 502, Texas peace officers, Health and Human Services Commission, HHSC Office of Inspector General, OIG investigators, law enforcement classification, Schedule C, state employee benefits, injury benefits, peace officer status, commissioned officers, state auditor classification, Government Code, Code of Criminal Procedure, human services, health and human services, law enforcement compensation, public employee benefits, Texas state law enforcement, child welfare

Transcript Highlights:

• so much for your testimony. so much for your testimony.
• Pippenberg, for your testimony<00:13:39.920> today. testimony today. testimony today.
• appreciate your testimony today. appreciate your testimony today.
• Appreciate your testimony. Appreciate your testimony.
• Appreciate your testimony today. That ends our testimony to member questions.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The testimony that you've given is testimony that needs to be heard.
• These testimonies and real-life testimony continue to happen.
• Thank you so much for that testimony.
• So I want to thank you for your testimony in being here.
• Thank you so much for your testimony.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on the Missing and Murdered Indigenous People (MMIP) crisis in California, with opening remarks emphasizing the need for sustained funding, better coordination, and recognition that foster care, jurisdictional gaps, and public safety systems are all connected to the crisis. Members and tribal leaders described the issue as longstanding and systemic, and several speakers noted progress in recent years, including the Feather Alert, state grant funding, DOJ coordination, and MMIP summits, while stressing that much more remains to be done. The first panel featured tribal leaders from Southern, Central, and Northern California who described how overlapping tribal, county, state, and federal jurisdictions delay investigations and leave families without answers. They called for real-time regional response agreements, better data sharing and transparency, stronger tribal law enforcement capacity, and ongoing rather than one-time funding. Several leaders shared personal stories of missing or murdered relatives and said the state must treat tribal cases with the same urgency as others. Committee members asked about next steps, including training for law enforcement on Public Law 280, improving local relationships, and ensuring tribal courts and protection orders are not overlooked. The second panel focused on strengthening systems and services. The California Highway Patrol commissioner reported that Feather Alert implementation has improved after prior criticism, with more alerts activated and a higher recovery rate, and said CHP has expanded outreach, training, and tribal liaison work. The Department of Justice’s Office of Native American Affairs described work under AB 3099 and AB 1334, including a Public Law 280 advisory council, improved crime reporting, a tribal police pilot program, and outreach on Feather Alert and other resources. A Coyote Valley council member described a local MMIP program that supports prevention and family outreach. Members and panelists also discussed the need for better training, clearer jurisdictional authority, and stronger support for tribal justice systems. The final panel addressed foster youth and the MMIP crisis, arguing that Native children in foster care are at heightened risk of going missing or being exploited. Speakers said Native children are disproportionately represented in foster care, that many MMIP cases begin with child welfare system failures, and that social workers and attorneys often do not know or use Feather Alert procedures quickly enough. They urged stronger ICWA implementation, culturally grounded prevention and healing services, housing and mental health support, and immediate coordination among tribes, families, and agencies when a child is missing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so the testimony that you've given is testimony that needs to be heard.
• These testimonies and real-life testimony continue to happen.
• Thank you so much for that testimony.
• Thank you so much for that testimony.
• Thank you so much for all of your testimony on this topic, and really... ...for all of your testimony

Summary: The Select Committee on Native American Affairs held an informational hearing on the state’s response to the missing and murdered Indigenous people (MMIP) crisis, with an added focus on foster youth and child welfare. Opening remarks from the chair and members emphasized that California has made some progress through the Feather Alert, DOJ coordination, grant funding, and MMIP summits, but that the crisis remains severe and requires ongoing, not one-time, investment. Members repeatedly noted the need for stronger statewide coordination, better data, and more consistent attention to tribal communities and foster youth. Tribal leaders described the crisis as rooted in jurisdictional gaps, poor data collection, and lack of urgency from law enforcement. Witnesses from Hamul, Chachancey, Tahon, Yurok, and Hoopa tribes shared personal accounts of missing and murdered relatives, criticized inconsistent responses, and called for regional response agreements, direct tribal access to data, sustained funding, and clearer law enforcement protocols in Public Law 280 settings. Several leaders said Feather Alert and state grants have helped build infrastructure and partnerships, but stressed that trust-building, training, and accountability are still uneven across the state. The second panel featured the California Highway Patrol and the Department of Justice’s Office of Native American Affairs, both of which reported on implementation improvements. CHP said it has tightened Feather Alert practices, increased activations, improved outreach and training, appointed a tribal liaison, and expanded human trafficking training. DOJ described work under AB 3099 and AB 1334, including a Public Law 280 advisory council, improved crime reporting and data systems, MMIP outreach, and a tribal police pilot program with the Yurok Tribe. Members also raised the need to better support tribal courts and ensure protection orders are enforced. The final panel focused on foster youth as part of the MMIP crisis. Advocates from Pitt River, the California Tribal Families Coalition, and Coyote Valley said Native children are disproportionately represented in foster care and are at heightened risk of going missing or being exploited. They argued that foster care, trafficking, poverty, housing instability, and historical trauma are all connected to MMIP, and called for stronger ICWA implementation, culturally grounded services, better coordination with social workers and law enforcement, and immediate use of Feather Alert when Native children are missing. No formal votes were taken; the hearing was informational and ended with continued calls for legislative, budgetary, and policy action.

Transcript Highlights:

• My name is Ivan Kwong, and I provided written testimony on behalf of the Waikiki Beach Special Improvement
• written testimony on behalf of<00:07:24.640> the<00:07:24.760> Waikiki<00:07:25.360>
• to provide testimony, and uh we<00:09:54.040> really<00:09:54.400> commend<00:09:54.960
• Thank you for your testimony. You're welcome.
• We did receive testimonies in support by DLNR, DBEDT, and the Land Use Research Foundation of Hawaii.

Bills: SCR159

Keywords: Waikiki, beach restoration, shoreline management, public access, environmental protection, coastal resources, tourism, economic development, traditional practices, 910, house, all