Transcript Highlights:

• In speaking with the families, I confirmed what I believe... ...bill possible.
• In speaking with the families, I confirmed what I believe to be true.
• House Bill 3 is just the first step in this process.
• You apply and you go through a grant process. That's right.
• And there's This is a grant process, right? You apply and you go through a grant process.

Bills: HB1, HB2, HB3, HB5, HB20, HB22

Keywords: youth camps, emergency preparedness, safety standards, health regulations, camp licensing, disaster preparedness, emergency management, flooding, mass fatality, mass casualty, fatality tracking, body recovery, autopsy, justice of the peace, medical examiner, county judge, sheriff, mayor, emergency coordinator, emergency manager license

Summary: The House convened in special session with a gubernatorial proclamation adding subjects related to penalties for legislators who absent themselves, ivermectin access, and groundwater study authority. The chamber also handled routine motions, committee scheduling, and first-reading referrals before moving to the main floor calendar focused largely on disaster response and public safety legislation. The central theme throughout the day was the July 4 flooding and related tragedies, with repeated references to families of victims and the need for stronger preparedness and prevention measures. House Bill 1, on youth camp emergency plans and preparedness, was the most emotional and heavily amended measure. Members adopted changes requiring annual emergency plans for resident youth camps, staff training, parent notification, evacuation maps, floodplain-related disclosures, restrictions on sleeping quarters in flood-prone areas, and funding for enforcement. One proposed amendment to require air conditioning or heat in sleeping quarters failed, while another amendment on floodplain restrictions passed after debate over floodplain versus floodway language. HB 1 ultimately passed the House 136-1 on second reading and later 135-1 on final passage. Senate Bill 2 / House Bill 2 on disaster preparedness, response, and recovery also advanced after extensive discussion. The bill creates training for justices of the peace in mass-fatality events, establishes an emergency manager licensing system, sets local succession procedures, creates a statewide volunteer management system, authorizes drone interdiction in disaster zones, expands disaster loan eligibility, and adds review and planning provisions for certain infrastructure and weather-related issues. Members debated the scope of the training, drone impacts on press coverage, volunteer registration, and infrastructure-related amendments; some proposals were adopted and others tabled or withdrawn. SB 2 passed the House 130-4 on third reading and later 132-4 on final passage. The House also passed House Bill 3 creating the Texas Interoperability Council and a grant program for emergency communications equipment, House Bill 20 addressing disaster-related scams and fraudulent charitable solicitations, House Bill 22 expanding allowable uses of the broadband infrastructure fund for emergency communications, and Senate Bill 5 providing supplemental appropriations for disaster relief, including funds for local warning systems and weather monitoring. Each of these bills passed overwhelmingly, with only one or a few dissenting votes, and members repeatedly emphasized the need to improve coordination, communications, funding, and fraud prevention in the wake of recent disasters.

Transcript Highlights:

• Dale, confirm again your title and how long you've been there.
• So explain to me what you know about the procurement process at the fairgrounds.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• appearance rates and make the process appearance rates and make the process more<00:34:24.640>
• <00:45:03.000> officers' process and removing the officers' process and removing the officers
• > is So the legislative process is So the legislative process is not<00:54:42.600> easy
• The process takes hours and parties.
• So I don't think we did the process.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several Senate bills. On SB 2530, relating to campaign contributions, the State Procurement Office suggested clarifying that contractor disclosure information be submitted within 30 days of a fully executed contract, while the Campaign Spending Commission supported the bill but asked that the restriction on contributions by officers be expanded beyond compensated officers. Hawaii Alliance for Progressive Action supported the measure and urged keeping the Senate language, arguing it better addresses contractor influence, while no other testifiers appeared. On SB 2970, relating to standards of conduct, the State Ethics Commission supported the bill and proposed amendments to consolidate the new language into existing Chapter 84 contract provisions and use “department head” instead of “director.” The State Procurement Office supported the measure but recommended closing a perceived loophole by limiting the covered contracts to those under $10,000. No opposition testimony was offered. The committee then heard SB 2919, which would fund one full-time Deputy Public Defender position focused on immigration-related advice under Padilla v. Kentucky. The Office of the Public Defender, Hawaii Coalition for Immigrants’ Rights, and the ACLU of Hawaii supported the bill, explaining that the position would help public defenders advise clients about immigration consequences of criminal cases, not provide immigration representation. Members asked several questions about the scope of the position and whether it could assist with citizenship; testimony clarified that it would not handle civil immigration matters. The bill was also described as creating a statewide consistent resource for the public defender system. Finally, on SB 2446, relating to the judiciary, the Intermediate Court of Appeals supported adding a seventh associate judge position but noted the court has only recently been fully staffed at six judges and has improved output through internal changes. The chair emphasized that the bill authorizes the position without funding and encouraged the judiciary to return later if appropriations are needed. The committee also began hearing SB 2730, a criminal justice reform bill on warrantless arrests and citations. OHA supported reducing unnecessary arrests but objected to making citations visible on criminal records; the Department of the Attorney General opposed the bill, citing law enforcement flexibility, identification concerns, and possible litigation costs; and the Judiciary requested a later implementation date and suggested changes to citation-resolution language. The transcript ends while testimony on SB 2730 was still underway.

Transcript Highlights:

• In section one, it sets forth the process on the determination of high-acuity youth and the process to
• Section one sets forth the process for the determination of high-acuity youth and the process to determine
• Youth and uh sets forth the process Youth and uh sets forth the process where<00:39:58.599> they
• <00:42:03.119> in we get the mental health um process in we get the mental health um process
• And again, I want to confirm Senator Carrol's testimony about the $50 million price tag.

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00:00 Roll Call: 00:00:04 SB 02: 00:01:37 Discussion in Opposition to SB 02: 00:09:49 SB 84: 00:22:19 SB 111: 00:30:35, 958, all

Summary: The committee first considered Senate Bill 2, sponsored by Senator Mike Wilson, which would prohibit incarcerated people from receiving cross-sex hormones or gender-affirming surgeries, while allowing a tapering period if stopping an existing treatment would cause physical harm. Wilson said the bill was needed to prevent the Department of Corrections from providing such care by memo or policy rather than statute, and he argued the care was elective and not medically necessary. Senators Thomas, Neal, Nemes, Styers, and others questioned whether any gender-affirming surgeries had actually occurred in Kentucky, whether the hormone treatments were physician-prescribed, and whether the bill would override medical judgment; Wilson said the department reported no surgeries, that 67 incarcerated people were receiving cross-sex hormone therapy, and that he would only support treatment if it fit the bill’s narrow medical-harm exception. Public testimony on SB 2 was strongly opposed. Chris Hartman of the Fairness Campaign said the bill would deny medically necessary care, violate the Eighth Amendment, and target a very small and vulnerable incarcerated population. Dr. Jack Skilles testified that gender-affirming care is medically necessary and supported by major medical organizations, warning that denying it could worsen mental health and lead to suicidality. Hannah Callahan, a transgender woman, described being denied hormone therapy while incarcerated and said the interruption caused severe physical and mental harm, including suicidal thoughts. Emma Curtis, Lexington’s Fourth District councilwoman, also urged a no vote, framing the issue as a matter of compassion and religious duty. The committee then voted on SB 2. Senator Neal explained his no vote by saying he was not medically trained and deferred to doctors; Senator Nemes said he wanted clarification that the bill would not stop ongoing treatment; and Senator Styers argued the bill was a poor priority and noted there was no fiscal note and that only 67 people were affected. Senator Wheeler moved the bill, Senator Reed seconded, and the committee reported Senate Bill 2 favorably. Afterward, the committee began hearing Senate Bill 84, sponsored by Senator Steve Rawlings, which would limit judicial deference to state agency interpretations and require courts, not agencies, to interpret ambiguous laws, citing the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2024 Loper Bright decision overturning Chevron deference.

Transcript Highlights:

• 00:17:17.880> structures<00:17:18.880> and<00:17:19.480> um<00:17:19.720> confirm
• <00:17:20.400> that uh fee structures and um confirm that uh fee structures and um confirm
• Okay, thanks for confirming that, members. Any other questions?
• 00:34:42.040> okay<00:34:42.159> thanks<00:34:42.320> for<00:34:42.480> confirming
• Taxation data okay thanks for confirming Taxation data okay thanks for confirming that<00:34:43.399

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Higher Education met on January 31 and heard six bills. The chair opened by outlining committee practices, including giving at least 72 hours’ notice for hearings, releasing testimony by 5:00 p.m. the day before hearings, and deferring bills needing substantive HT1 changes so members would not vote “blind.” Members briefly thanked the chair for the transparency approach before moving to the agenda. HB 223 would create a Daniel K. Inouye College of Pharmacy special fund and workforce assessment fee to support a pharmacy center. Testimony from the Board of Pharmacy, the Hawaii Pharmacists Association, the University of Hawaiʻi Hilo College of Pharmacy, Mokai Drugs, and others generally supported the measure, emphasizing workforce data, rural access, student loan repayment, and retention. The committee later advanced HB 223 with amendments, including leaving fee amounts blank for further discussion and inserting a defective date, and the motion passed unanimously. HB 940 would appropriate funds for the rat lungworm lab at UH Hilo; HB 546 would establish the Aloha Intelligence Institute at UH to advance AI; HB 549 would create an early learning apprenticeship grant program; HB 1172 would add the Department of Taxation to the Statewide Longitudinal Data System for wage-data sharing; and HB 1320 would require UH to collect and publicly report graduate outcome data and create a dashboard. Testimony on these bills was largely supportive, with some privacy concerns raised on HB 1172 and a request to protect taxpayer confidentiality. In decision-making, the committee passed all five bills with amendments, generally deleting or blanking appropriations and FTEs for Finance Committee review, adding defective dates for further discussion, and in HB 549 adding a statement that the program is a matter of statewide concern. The committee recessed briefly for decision-making and then adopted the chair’s recommendations on each bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• This manufacturing and processing facilities...
• A couple of things about the due process.
• It is a very simple process that we...
• We knew. not to process that crop.
• During the processing, it's processed into CBD.

Bills: HB5

Keywords: hemp, cannabinoids, regulation, occupational licenses, consumable products, marketing, criminal offenses, labeling requirements, health and safety, 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This process has been in place for 15 years.
• We have a process for that.
• The current process regarding when compensation is addressed...
• Yes, it is part of the process.
• However, the compensation is still a part of the process.

Bills: SB863, SB1190, SB1261, SB1413, SB1624, SB1662, SB1663, SB1855, SB1967, SB2124, SB2204, SB1623

Keywords: Edwards Aquifer, water conservation, reclaimed water, aquifer storage, environmental protection, water loss, municipally owned utilities, Texas Water Development Board, administrative penalties, water audit, water infrastructure, water supply, state water plan, water management strategies, water financing, municipal bonds, revenue bonds, public debt, obligations, TWDB

Transcript Highlights:

• We subject them to the same budget process that everyone goes through.
• process that everyone goes through. process that everyone goes through.
• regular bill process, I think. Yeah. regular bill process, I think. Yeah.
• Just confirming that.
• We're just confirming that with Yeah. We're just confirming that with you.<08:18:35.040> Yep.

Keywords: 10am HB 1 & HB 2, 928, house, all

Summary: The committee of conference for HB 1 and HB 2 reviewed the side-by-side budget comparison and began working through agreed and disputed items. Members first confirmed that grayed-out items were already settled and discussed a process for making later technical and intent changes, especially to true up abolished positions after additional decisions were made. They then moved through several budget sections, including judicial branch reductions, retirement systems, the Department of Justice, the Human Rights Commission, liquor enforcement, corrections, and the Department of Information Technology. Several items were agreed to or treated as settled package items, including the judicial branch position, the Department of Justice reduction, the Human Rights Commission item being held until related HB 2 language is finalized, the Housing Appeals Board being moved into the Board of Tax and Land Appeals, and the Office of Child Advocate. The committee also agreed to update the House bill language as needed based on HB 2 decisions, and to keep certain IT support rows in place unless related boards and commissions are eliminated. The effective date remained July 1, 2025, with no change. The main unresolved discussion centered on the retirement systems budget, where the Senate defended a large increase for deferred IT security and investment-function improvements, while the House argued the increase was too large and favored a back-of-the-budget cut. The Senate said the funds would support strategic IT and investment changes and would remain in the trust if cut, while the House emphasized the size of the increase and suggested a compromise. The committee ultimately retained the Senate position on retirement systems for the moment and said it would return to the issue later. On corrections and liquor enforcement, the committee described a negotiated back-of-the-budget cut structure, including a $10 million cut for corrections with some restoration of POS offices and administrative aides, and a liquor enforcement cut that was treated as part of a broader package. The Department of Safety item related to commercial enforcement and motor vehicle inspections was held for later discussion. The meeting ended with several items agreed, several held for coordination with HB 2, and some major budget questions still open.

Transcript Highlights:

• Announced the first confirmed COVID-19 cases in the state.
• It's part of my healing process.
• But what I've noticed, I think this wonderful Research project kind of confirms what I've kind of always
• We don't tax feed, and we don't tax seed, and we don't tax things that are processed here, and we don't
• at every single project that I have funded through capital outlay, where it is in the completion process

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, we just try to streamline the process.
• It streamlines the process of eviction.
• I understand the process is lengthy and cumbersome.
• Establishing a structured and robust grievance process. Mr.
• And I will ask the bill author, and he will confirm we have now gotten confirmation that you are now

Summary: The House convened, established a quorum, heard an invocation and pledges, and approved several routine motions, including excuses for absent members, permission for committees to meet while the House was in session, and postponements of some bills. The chamber also received a Senate message listing measures passed by the Senate and adopted a memorial resolution honoring the 21 victims of the Robb Elementary School shooting in Uvalde, with remarks entered into the House Journal after a moment of silence. The House then took up a long third-reading calendar and passed a series of Senate bills on topics including criminal justice and corrections sunset provisions (SB 2405, 2406, 2407), election equipment testing (SB 2166), electric grid reliability and attack-preparedness exercises (SB 2148), firefighter collective bargaining (SB 777), DFPS and foster care procedures (SB 1141 and SB 1398), Medicare durable medical equipment billing (SB 1330), property tax administration (SB 1453), probate cleanup and record transfers (SB 1448 and SB 1839), mental health filing procedures (SB 53), school residency for children in safety placements (SB 226), diabetes-related amputation study (SB 1677), rapid DNA analysis (SB 1723), utility rate transparency and capacity cost recovery (SB 1664 and SB 1856), community supervision eligibility (SB 552 postponed), and other measures. Several bills passed with broad support, while others drew notable opposition and narrower margins, including SB 777, SB 2137, SB 2111, SB 1677, SB 1936, SB 1453, and SB 38. Two bills drew especially extensive debate. SB 2148, dealing with electricity supply chain reliability and tabletop exercises for critical facilities, was discussed as a grid-security measure aimed at coordinating utilities, law enforcement, ERCOT, and the PUC in the event of physical attacks; it passed unanimously. SB 1936, changing how LSD is measured for criminal prosecution from dosage-based to weight-based calculations, prompted extended discussion about lab consistency, carrier mediums, and fairness in charging, with supporters saying it would help crime labs and law enforcement and opponents warning it could distort penalties depending on the medium used; it passed 108-26. The House also passed SB 36, creating a Homeland Security Division within DPS, after questions about overlap with TDEM and the cost of adding personnel. Late in the day, the House debated SB 38 on eviction procedures, with supporters saying it targeted squatters and streamlined removal of unauthorized occupants, and opponents arguing it would make evictions too easy and worsen homelessness; it passed 85-44. The chamber also began debate on SB 37, a major higher-education governance bill that would expand governing-board oversight of curriculum, hiring, and faculty senates; members raised concerns about academic freedom, faculty governance, and the impact on humanities programs, and debate was still underway at the end of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• The scope of the audit is limited to the first part of the process, where insurance companies must report
• It does not address the second part of the process, where the state becomes aware...
• It does not address the second part of the process, where the state becomes aware of funds and places
• The Department of Social and Health Services already has a process in place for establishing liens and
• This is an audit conducted by insurance regulators to confirm an insurer is complying with insurance

Summary: At the June 4, 2025 JLARC I-900 Subcommittee hearing, the State Auditor’s Office presented a performance audit on Washington’s child support insurance intercept law. The audit reviewed the mandatory reporting system for insurance claims tied to past-due child support, noting that collections increased after the law took effect in 2022, but that some eligible claims still are not being reported. Auditors said DCS learns about roughly 1 in 10 claims through other channels, and that insurers may miss reporting because they are unaware of the law, make administrative errors, or misunderstand the $500 threshold and timing requirements. The audit recommended that the Office of the Insurance Commissioner help educate insurers by adding information to its website and sharing insurer contact contacts with DCS, and also recommended that the Legislature amend the law to create monitoring and enforcement authority. The auditor said neither DCS nor OIC currently has authority to monitor compliance or take action against noncompliant insurers, though other states use insurance regulators or market conduct exams for this purpose. Committee members asked about possible coordinated enforcement between DSHS and OIC, which the auditor said was beyond the scope of the audit but could be considered by the Legislature. An OIC representative said the commissioner is willing to help educate insurers, post information on the OIC website, and share contact information with DSHS, and that the agency is open to further discussion. No public testimony was offered, and no votes or formal committee actions were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are several other states that are in the process of setting it up.
• There are several other states that are in the process of setting it up.
• I cannot confirm that, quite frankly. Well, he is.
• SB 399 imposes yet another state approval process on top of that system.
• As you know, this is a process, and this amendment is part of the sausage making.

Bills: HR171, HCR49, HB632, HB1084, SB310, SB351, SB399

Keywords: HR171, House Resolution 171, M.J. Foster Promise Program, TOPS-Tech, TOPS Tech Award, Board of Regents, Louisiana Works, Louisiana Community and Technical College System, LCATCS, financial aid, scholarship, workforce development, career training, technical education, vocational education, postsecondary credential, associate degree, industry-based credential, high-demand jobs, high-wage occupations

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to just confirm Senator Dibble.
• has been part of the process has been part of the process and<01:21:14.320> this<01:21:14.640
• that I understand the divisional process that I understand the divisional process that<02:34:39.040
• that process. that process.
• but they know that it's in the process but they know that it's in the process and<04:07:29.120><

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Through this process, the CPUC has been regulating TNCs for over a decade.
• If you can just walk us through that process.
• That decision was then appealed through the Commission's rehearing process.
• And so a lot of incidents are still going through that claims process.
• And so a lot of incidents are still going through that claims process.

Summary: The hearing focused on transportation network companies in California, with the chair framing it as an informational hearing on the history, regulation, safety, climate, accessibility, and data issues surrounding Uber, Lyft, and smaller or autonomous TNC services. The CPUC described its decade-long regulatory role, including safety rules, background checks, insurance requirements, reporting obligations, and two major legislative programs from 2018: the Clean Miles Standard and the Access for All program. Members asked about complaint trends, data collection and disclosure, program implementation, and how the CPUC uses annual reports for policymaking, compliance, and program oversight. Uber and Lyft said the statewide framework has supported growth while providing safety and access benefits, but both companies emphasized that insurance is a major cost driver and argued that California’s UM/UIM requirement is unusually high compared with other vehicles. They said the Clean Miles Standard is pushing electrification but faces headwinds from EV affordability and charging infrastructure, while Access for All has expanded wheelchair-accessible service but still needs continued support. They also discussed transit partnerships, wildfire response, and the potential role of autonomous vehicles, with both companies saying human drivers will remain important and that future regulation should account for new technology. The final panel, including the San Francisco County Transportation Authority and UC Berkeley researchers, presented evidence that TNCs have increased congestion and reduced transit ridership, especially in dense urban areas. They described prior research showing TNCs contributed to congestion growth in San Francisco and noted that this work helped spur local taxes on ride-hailing trips to fund safety and transit improvements. The panel also discussed the CPUC’s evolving data-disclosure decisions, arguing that public access to TNC trip data is important for understanding transportation impacts and informing local policy.

Transcript Highlights:

• On Senate File 1552, I appreciate your confirmation that the intent is to keep the Senate language, and
• I just figured since the bill author was here, make see if we could confirm with Representative Anderson
• out where they brought in DEED to ask about Paid Family and Medical Leave implementation, and DEED confirmed

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• process of getting to that point. process of getting to that point.
• <00:08:20.960> So while they're doing this process. So while they're doing this process.
• <00:09:06.720> that that's been part of the process that that's been part of the process that
• <00:09:22.720> an correctly, then they can't process an correctly, then they can't process
• this transition process this transition process is,<00:10:05.120> uh,<00:10:05.760> one

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first heard an update from representatives of the Kentucky County Clerk’s Association on the transition to electronic recording and land records modernization. They reviewed the 2021 task force work, the legislation and budget funding that followed, and the requirements for county clerks to provide online search portals and complete 30-year property record searches, with a 60-year standard expected next summer. Speakers said most counties are still working through scanning and verification, with only a small number fully complete, and emphasized that verification of records is the main bottleneck because it requires staff time and careful matching of indexes to deeds. They also noted limited vendor availability, differences among counties in what records are already digitized, and that the association and land title attorneys are now working more closely on future “continuous improvement” legislation. The clerks also raised related issues, including concerns about deed fraud as more records become searchable online. They said some counties already offer notification services that alert property owners when a document is recorded, which can help owners respond quickly to suspicious filings. They also discussed the filing document storage fee and KDLA digitization grants, saying the funding structure has generally worked but that two grant cycles have been missed. Another topic was whether, once records are fully digitized and searchable, some permanent records should remain publicly accessible or be moved to a safer archive. In response to committee questions, the witnesses said the remaining delays are less about money than staffing shortages and the need for more manpower to complete verification, and they said they would follow up on the balance in the KDLA fund and other details. The committee then received a presentation from an Area Development District representative, who described the districts as regional, nonpartisan service organizations that help cities and counties pool resources, provide technical assistance, and leverage public and private partnerships. He highlighted examples of regional cooperation, including veterans-directed care and other shared programs, and argued that the districts create efficiencies and economies of scale for local governments and the state. No votes or formal actions were taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• and his wife works for the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board as a licensing specialist, processing
• And his wife works for the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board as a licensing specialist, processing
• closely with at the legislature, or for gubernatorial appointments where the Senate will be asked to confirm

Summary: The board approved the October 15 meeting minutes and then reviewed three employment disclosure forms involving staff or spouses employed by the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board and the Department of Corrections. The disclosures were approved unanimously. The board also adopted a proposed rule change to conform board rules to a prior statutory amendment that separated fines from costs. Members then discussed a draft advisory opinion interpreting the phrase “letter of recommendation” under the ethics statute. The draft would read the term broadly, allow legislators to decide when to write such letters when requested by a constituent, and reaffirm that it remains appropriate to use state resources for job references or scholarships for individuals the legislator has supervised or worked closely with at the legislature, as well as for certain gubernatorial appointments. Members generally supported the draft, but asked for possible clarification of the phrase “work closely with,” and approved the opinion as drafted with that caveat. The board also reviewed proposed future meeting dates, noting a concern that January 19 falls on Martin Luther King Jr. Day and may need to be changed. No final action was taken on the dates during the public portion. The meeting then moved toward executive session after adjourning the public portion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Clerk, to confirm it’s eight ayes and three nays, correct? Eight ayes, three nays.
• for witnesses appearing before the legislature, ensuring that they have legal guidance during the process
• counsel for witnesses appearing for the legislature ensuring this they have legal guidance during the process

Bills: SB2, SB3, SB5, SB9, SB10, SB14, SB16, SB34, SB18

Keywords: flooding, public safety, outdoor warning sirens, disaster preparedness, emergency response, flood warning, outdoor sirens, local government, safety measures, flood management, emergency preparedness, municipal safety, disaster response, disaster relief, emergency funding, Meteorological forecasting, local government assistance, training facilities, hemp regulation, consumable products

Summary: The Senate Committee on Finance met in the second special session and considered a series of bills, mostly related to flood response, water infrastructure, taxation, school accountability, property fraud, and legislative procedure. Senator Zaffirini presented SB 18 on TCEQ permit exemptions for certain erosion, floodwater, and sediment control dams or reservoirs; Senator Perry presented SB 2 on flood relief preparedness, SB 14 on credit impact fees and water supply/conservation incentives, and SB 5 on Hill Country relief funding; Senator Bettencourt presented SB 3 on early warning flood sirens, SB 9 on replacing STAAR with three annual tests and strengthening A-F accountability, and SB 10 on lowering the rollback tax rate from 3.5% to 2.5%; Senator West presented SB 16 on property transaction ID requirements and new real property theft/fraud offenses; and Chair Huffman laid out SB 34, which changes legislative witness immunity rules from transactional immunity to testimonial immunity consistent with federal law. The committee also heard brief explanations that several bills were the same as versions previously passed by the Senate or committee, and there was limited public testimony, with no witnesses on most bills and only position cards on SB 16. Senator West raised a concern on SB 10 about a possible carve-out for police pay raises, but Senator Bettencourt said no change would be made at that time. For SB 34, Chair Huffman explained the bill would still allow compelled testimony before the legislature but would no longer provide blanket immunity, while preserving the right to counsel. The committee voted favorably on all bills considered. SB 18, SB 2, SB 14, SB 3, SB 16, SB 5, and SB 34 were reported out unanimously or near-unanimously, while SB 9 passed 10-1 and SB 10 passed 8-3. At the end of the meeting, Senator West requested to be shown voting nay on SB 9, and the chair granted unanimous consent. The committee then recessed subject to the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• , through the public regulatory process, through the public regulatory process, which<00:03:54.400
• General confirmed that the OEBC exam General confirmed that the OEBC exam option<00:08:44.760> was
• <00:09:06.760> concerns constitutional and due process concerns constitutional and due process
• and the formal administrative process. and the formal administrative process.
• administrative process. administrative process.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The subcommittee considered an emergency regulation from the Kentucky Board of Optometric Examiners, 201 KAR 5021E, along with a staff amendment to conform the text to KRS Chapter 13A. The regulation was described as implementing an Attorney General opinion and a review of optometrists licensed during the 2020–2023 period when alternative testing and waivers were used during the COVID-19 era. The board explained that the rule requires affected licensees to complete specified examinations or an alternative certification before renewing in 2027, and that it now removes the OEBC Canadian exam as a future pathway while preserving recognition of OEBC results submitted during the period when that option was in effect. The staff amendment was approved without objection. Testimony was sharply divided. Board representatives and the Attorney General’s office said the regulation is needed to protect public health and to bring the licensure review into the formal administrative process. They said the NBEO Part 3 exam is the nationally recognized hands-on clinical licensure test, while the American Board of Optometry certification is a post-licensure credential for already licensed practitioners and is not a substitute for initial licensure testing. They also said no other state uses the ABOC certification for licensure, and that the board’s approach balances fairness, due process, and public protection. Opponents argued the regulation would allow individuals who were improperly licensed to continue practicing without meeting the same standards as other Kentucky optometrists. A representative from the Kentucky School for the Blind Charitable Foundation described cases of alleged inadequate care and urged the committee to require full national board passage before independent practice. Representatives from ARBO and NBEO said the emergency regulation is not justified as an emergency, does not adequately address public safety or fiscal impacts, and exceeds the board’s authority by creating a renewal path for licensees whose initial licensure was challenged. They emphasized that NBEO Part 3 is a practical, hands-on exam and that the ABOC certification is not designed or validated for initial licensure. The committee asked several questions about the differences between the exams, and no final vote on the regulation itself was described in the transcript beyond approval of the staff amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• budgeting and its benefits processes. budgeting and its benefits processes.
• <01:01:04.319> is process is process is where<01:01:06.480> you<01:01:06.720> don't<
• <01:02:53.599> and was a relatively formal process and was a relatively formal process and
• . process. process.
• a<01:13:16.159> finalized confirmed course load, a finalized confirmed course load, a

Bills: HF4479, HF4368, HF4889

Keywords: higher education, public university, college campus, postsecondary institution, Minnesota State Colleges and Universities, University of Minnesota, town hall, town hall meeting, elected official, legislator, public forum, constituent meeting, campus access, free meeting space, parking fees, civic engagement, public outreach, chapter 135A, HF4368, Minnesota State

Summary: The committee approved the April 9 minutes and then took up House File 4479, which would require public postsecondary institutions to make space available for town halls and similar official events by elected officials, with limits intended to keep the events on the official side and not campaign-related. Representative Frederick said the bill is meant to prevent universities from creating barriers such as fees or parking charges and to ensure a neutral, accessible venue for community conversations. The bill was laid over for possible later action. The committee heard supportive testimony from Jim Dimmick of Minnesota State University, Mankato, who argued that town halls should be public, open, moderated, and dialogic rather than speeches, and said universities should be centers for public discourse. He also said charging fees can undermine neutrality and that using partisan student groups to sponsor events can create the appearance of bias. Minnesota State official Mr. Omen said campuses often host these events, fees are set locally to cover costs, and student government sponsorship can sometimes avoid charges; he also noted the fee at Mankato is discounted and depends on room size. Several members raised concerns about the bill. Representative Scott, Chair Robbins, Representative Schwarz, Representative Allen, and others argued that campuses should not be required by statute to give legislators special treatment, that fees and parking costs cover real expenses, and that universities should remain focused on education rather than political events. Questions also focused on who would decide what room size is reasonable, how disputes would be handled, and who would pay for security if protests or safety issues arose. Representative Frederick responded that room selection would be a good-faith partnership with the university, that the bill does not require a town hall or guarantee a specific room, and that security funding is not spelled out in the bill.