Transcript Highlights:

• We have two bills to address today. We have two bills to address today.
• But when you originally drafted the bill, did you...
• But when you originally drafted the bill, did you intend to include funding for the supervisors of elections
• Now we're back in questions on the bill. Not on this bill.
• And I know just because we've all drafted bills, we know that just because you put pen to paper or actually

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• OS is working on getting an official House bill drafted. All right.
• of the trailer bill by February 15th, so typically we wouldn’t even see a draft for a couple weeks and
• of the trailer bill by February 15th, so typically we wouldn’t even see a draft for a couple weeks and
• of the trailer bill by February 15th, so typically we wouldn’t even see a draft for a couple of weeks
• Senate bill and a house bill out there a Senate bill and a house bill relative<03:31:29.920> to

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up HB 129, which would redefine “evidence-based” in public education. Department of Education testimony said the bill’s definition would conflict with the federal definition and be unusually restrictive, potentially affecting curriculum, educator training, and many existing state requirements. The department said it could force a broad overhaul of school programs and create a need for at least one new state position, with local districts likely facing significant unbudgeted costs. Members raised concerns about impacts on federal pass-through funding, curriculum materials, and whether the bill was workable at all. Several members said the proposal would be too costly and difficult to implement, especially during a tight budget cycle. Representative Papovich moved to retain HB 129, and the motion passed 7-0. Members who supported retention said they wanted to set the bill aside because of the scale of the concerns, while also stating they did not support the bill as written. The committee then opened HB 133, dealing with DMV follow-up on residency and licensing issues tied to voting and other interactions. Department of Safety/DMV officials said the bill would require a $40,000 technology update plus a full-time position to handle manual correspondence and review of possible matches, and that postage was not included in the fiscal note. They said the bill’s 60-day residency trigger is vague, that the DMV would be acting outside its normal role by investigating status after the fact, and that the measure could create privacy and operational problems. Members questioned whether the bill would effectively force people to buy a driver’s license to vote, whether non-driver and voter ID options would avoid that concern, and whether the Secretary of State rather than DMV would be the more appropriate agency to handle any follow-up.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to be bringing the bill back, and we're going to work on some things.
• Chairman, I move that we reconsider our action whereby Senate Bill 2003 was passed.
• All right, committee, we have the bill back before us.
• So, Alex, that will be struck from the bill. Okay.
• Committee, we're going to work on Department of Commerce, Senate Bill 2018.

Bills: SB2003

Keywords: higher education, student loans, scholarships, capital projects, workforce development, funding, North Dakota university system, 908, all

Summary: The committee first reconsidered Senate Bill 2003 in the higher education budget and adopted several changes. It removed $3 million for enterprise resource planning, struck $2 million for a grant program for students who are pregnant or recently gave birth, and then added $3 million back into workforce education and innovative grants, restoring that line to $12 million. Members also discussed a possible purchase of the 19th Avenue building in Fargo for the State School of Science, but the motion was withdrawn for later consideration. Other higher ed items were briefly noted, including tribally controlled community colleges and a state magazine funding line, but no final action was taken on the building proposal during this segment. The committee then moved to Senate Bill 2018, the Commerce budget, and reviewed a long list of funding items. It restored a vacant workforce FTE, increased tourism marketing to $10 million and Find the Good Life to $5 million, raised Operation Intern by $1 million, removed a $100,000 infrastructure study, increased autonomous agriculture grants to $15 million, and set the Regional Workforce Impact Program at $10 million. It also kept or adjusted several other items, including the uncrewed aerial vehicle replacement program, the global talent office, tribally controlled community colleges, Native American small business grants, and technical skills training grants. A major new provision would transfer $50 million total, split between SIF and Bank of North Dakota profits, to the Theodore Roosevelt Library Museum Endowment Fund, matching a private fundraising challenge; members expressed both support and concern, and said they would revisit it later. The committee also discussed language to allow commercialization of Vantis and to permit the Turtle Mountain gaming compact proposal to move forward with required federal approvals, while clarifying that a previously discussed $100,000 study had been removed. Commerce officials said the workforce language was intended to centralize data and strategy, and they noted Operation Intern would need an emergency clause because applications begin in May. No final vote on the Commerce budget was taken in this segment, and the chair said the committee would return later to finish both budgets.

Transcript Highlights:

• First up, we have Senate Bill 1092, relating to transportation demand management.
• secondly the question is um part<00:03:43.640> of<00:03:43.760> the<00:03:43.920> bill
• <00:03:44.480> says<00:03:45.319> employees<00:03:45.920> who part of the bill
• We have drafted some cost estimates, but not a down-to-the-details plan.
• So first one, Senate Bill 1092.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint hearing of the Government Operations and Transportation, Culture and the Arts committees considered three bills. SB 1092 would establish a transportation demand management program for state employees, including a parking cash-out option. Testimony was largely in support, including from state planning, energy, labor, and several individuals, while committee members raised concerns about whether the program was mandatory and whether there was a full implementation plan. The bill’s proponents said it was voluntary and intended to reduce long parking waitlists by incentivizing employees to opt out of parking. The committees ultimately recommended SB 1092 be passed with amendments, and the measure was adopted in both committees. SB 1093 would create a parking demand management program and require DAGS to transition state employees from monthly parking to daily-rate parking. Testimony included strong opposition from most individuals and several agencies, with one supporter. A committee question focused on the loss of pre-tax payroll deductions under a daily-rate system, and the Deputy Attorney General explained that the current monthly arrangement allows deductions from gross pay, which would not work the same way with daily payments. Given the opposition and concerns, the committees recommended deferral indefinitely. SB 1121 would establish a procurement preference, beginning in 2027, for construction companies with electric vehicles. Testimony included comments from DAGS, the Department of Transportation, and others, with opposition noted from DOT. Committee members questioned charging infrastructure and battery disposal for electric vehicles used in construction. After discussion, the committees concluded it was in the best interest to defer the measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• However, the insurance division does have major concerns that, as drafted, the bill actually has language
• considering this bill. considering this bill. Thank<00:38:53.720> you.
• a lot of what's proposed in this bill. a lot of what's proposed in this bill.
• Aloha for the pass this bill.
• why we need this bill though to clarify? why we need this bill though to clarify?

Bills: SB2960, SB2347, SB2272, SB3137, SB3132, SB2271, SB2804, SB2175, SB2487

Keywords: homeowners insurance, disaster recovery, replacement cost value, state of emergency, policyholder rights, insurance extensions, tenant rights, landlord obligations, housing crisis, eviction prevention, multilingual access, SB2272, Act 105, home health licensing, home health agency, home health services, Department of Health, DOH, CMS, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services

Summary: The committee heard several resolutions and one bill focused on energy reliability, utility infrastructure, insurance, tenant rights, and home health licensing. On the energy side, members heard HCR 203/HR 193 on a status update for the Hawaii Electric Reliability Administrator, HCR 204/HR 194 on a comprehensive PUC analysis of cost reduction and risk, and HCR 202/HR 192 creating a legislative task force on future energy pathways. Testimony on the energy measures was generally supportive from the PUC, DCCA’s Division of Consumer Advocacy, the Hawaii State Energy Office, and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, with OHA urging that equity, native Hawaiian impacts, and public trust resources be considered alongside cost savings. The committee also heard HCR 125/HR 117 on coordinating with utilities to address aging utility poles and lines along Farrington Highway and other high-risk corridors; Hawaiian Electric supported the measure, Hawaiian Telcom and Charter Spectrum said much of the work is already underway and questioned whether the resolution was necessary, and committee questioning focused on existing double-pole tracking and the role of DOT and the PUC. The committee then took up HCR 137/HR 129 on timely reimbursement of health care claims under the clean claims statute. The DCCA Insurance Division and the Hawaii Insurers Council opposed the measure as drafted, saying it could be read to require payment beyond policy limits and could raise premiums or reduce market participation. United Policyholders supported the measure, arguing it would simply give policyholders more time to collect benefits they already purchased, and clarified that it was not intended to increase coverage beyond policy limits. The committee later amended the resolution to direct the DCCA Insurance Division to prioritize investigation and enforcement of clean claims complaints. In the decision meeting, the committee recommended and adopted passage of HCR 203/HR 193 as is, HCR 204/HR 194 with an amendment removing the eighth whereas clause, HCR 202/HR 192 with an amendment adding a committee representative to the task force, HCR 125/HR 117 as is, and HCR 137/HR 129 with amendments. The committee also heard SB 2960 SC1 on property insurance, which would extend the time policyholders have after a declared disaster to document replacement-cost claims. The Insurance Division and Hawaii Insurers Council opposed it, warning it could force coverage beyond policy limits and increase premiums, while United Policyholders supported it and said it would help disaster survivors recover benefits they already paid for; members questioned whether similar laws in other states had caused premium spikes and clarified that the bill was not intended to exceed policy limits. The committee also heard SB 2347 SD1 on multilingual tenant-rights notices, with OHA, Hawaii Appleseed, and others supporting the bill but urging restoration of language requiring landlords to directly provide the notice at lease signing. Finally, SB 2272 SD1 HD1 on home health licensing drew support from the Department of Health, SHPDA, and the Health Care Association of Hawaii, with the association requesting an effective date amendment; testimony explained that the bill would allow state licensing compliance to be demonstrated through CMS-approved accreditation or certification surveys, potentially reducing duplication and freeing state resources.

Transcript Highlights:

• AND THEN ONE THING I THINK IS HELPFUL TO EXPRESS ALSO IS WHEN A CONSUMER GETS THE BILL THIS IS A COMMON
• WHEN THE CONSUMER GETS THE BILL WHERE IS ALL THIS GOING? WHY DID MY PREMIUM GO UP?
• I'M RELYING ON THOSE NUMBERS AND WAS TOLD THE SAME THING WHEN ANOTHER BILL CAME OUT.
• A FEW MONTHS LATER AND I GUESS THE QUESTION IS FOR THOSE OF US WHO WERE LEGISLATING AND ACTUALLY DRAFTING
• I WANT TO KNOW ON THE SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES WHICH IS WHAT YOU ARE REPRESENTING IN YOUR DRAFT RIGHT

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Possibly, possibly maybe the answer is not to reauthorize, but to run a new bill, a new bill and...
• See what happens if they, you know, we run a new bill.
• But I also want to give an opportunity for folks that have any draft bills.
• This will be an opportunity to have bills endorsed by the committee.
• So if you are drafting bills and have that, send it to the committee for the November 5th meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• And with that, the first bill in front of us is Senate Bill 435.
• I am here to introduce Senate Bill 435.
• Again, this bill sends a message whether it's in the bill or not.
• Again, this bill sends a message whether it's in the bill or not.
• <01:13:16.000> We neutral on this bill as it sits. We neutral on this bill as it sits.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So we do the analysis based on how the bill is drafted, and in some cases that results in some scary
• ><00:54:23.079> some<00:54:23.359> cases<00:54:23.799> that bill is drafted and
• in some cases that bill is drafted and in some cases that results<00:54:24.440> in<00:54:24.599
• <00:54:55.960> sure<00:54:56.119> it's draft the bill to make sure it's draft the bill
• <01:18:33.239> targeting bill both bills are really targeting bill both bills are really targeting

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• order that this bill will work.
• <01:46:59.520> to<01:46:59.760> replace drafted Senate Bill 36 seeks to replace drafted
• to continue to work on this bill.
• to continue to work on this bill.
• to continue to work on this bill.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're just requesting your approval of this request to be included in the budget bill drafts.
• We're just requesting your approval of this request to be included in the budget bill drafts.
• We are just requesting this to be included in their bill. All right. Thank you.
• Chairman, motion to adopt the letter and update North Arkansas College's name in the bill drafting.
• We're taking this action so their appropriation bills can be updated accordingly.

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:

• That they cannot bill for separate services.
• Good morning, I'm Bill Halsey. Sorry, I was off camera.
• Bill, um... ...tee up the next three months of meetings.
• Thank you, Bill.
• Bill, I think that's a great place to start.

Keywords: 962, all

Summary: The Care Management Meeting opened with a DSS update on the PCMH program. Staff reported the program remained steady at 124 practices, 553 sites, and 2,548 providers, with some month-to-month fluctuation driven by practice consolidation, retirements, and a few practices leaving the program because NCQA requirements were burdensome. Members asked about declining provider and site counts, member attribution trends, and whether PCMH practices overlap with behavioral health homes; DSS said attribution changes are largely due to members becoming ineligible, moving, or getting other insurance, and that PCMH and behavioral health homes are separate programs that coordinate informally. The committee also discussed why some smaller practices leave the program and whether the requirements could be made easier to support retention. The committee then resumed a detailed presentation on the Husky Dental program. The presenter described the dental benefit’s history, the importance of preventive oral health, workforce and consolidation pressures in dentistry, and the lack of interoperability between dental and medical records. Network data showed year-over-year declines in enrolled dental practitioners and service locations, with access gaps concentrated in rural and eastern parts of the state. Appointment availability surveys showed average waits of 38 days for adults and 23 days for children, but much longer waits at FQHCs than private fee-for-service practices. The presenter said Connecticut remains above the national median on CMS pediatric dental quality measures, though sealant rates remain a concern, and noted that preventive care is associated with lower per-member costs. Members raised concerns about provider participation, large practices dropping Medicaid, mobile dental care, and whether the public directory accurately reflects which dentists are actually accepting new patients. The presenter said the plan uses secret-shopper calls, tracks appointment availability, and has begun using place-of-service coding to better identify school-based dental care. She also noted a new MOU with 20 Head Start programs to share data and provide oral health literacy and navigation support. The final major topic was implementation planning for HR1. DSS said CMS guidance was expected in early June and proposed using upcoming meetings to cover medical frailty, communication strategy, and data integration/ex parte verification. Committee members urged the department to create a dashboard to track disenrollments and other impacts of HR1, to build a process for complaints and problem resolution, and to think through cost-sharing, caregiver verification, exemptions, and notices. Members also asked about using existing eligibility structures such as the working-disabled program as a model. The committee agreed to move the next meeting to June 10 by Zoom, with the agenda to be circulated in advance and any PCMH Plus quality data shared if available.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're just requesting your approval of this request to be included in the budget bill drafts.
• We're just requesting your approval of this request to be included in the budget bill drafts.
• We are just requesting that this be included in their bill. All right. Thank you.
• Chairman, motion to adopt the letter and update North Arkansas College's name in the bill drafting.
• We're taking this action so their appropriation bills can be updated accordingly.

Summary: The committee first considered revisions to the JBC rules, which staff said were all prompted by acts passed in the 2025 legislative session. The rules were adopted without objection. Members then received a balanced budget presentation from DFA Secretary Jim Hudson on the governor’s FY27 proposal, which he said was built around three priorities: limiting state government growth, continuing investments in education, and advancing income tax cuts. He highlighted major additions for education funding, EFA growth, pay plan costs, higher education productivity funding, drug task forces, corrections medical costs, the governor’s 1033 initiative, SNAP error-rate reduction, and Medicaid sustainability, while also explaining a new A/B funding category structure intended to prioritize recurring costs and preserve room for tax cuts. Members questioned Hudson about the cost of income tax reductions, the constitutional balanced-budget requirement, education funding, the Educational Adequacy Fund, Medicaid trust fund balances, and the impact of federal changes on Medicaid and SNAP. Hudson said each tenth of a percent income tax cut would cost about $58 million, the budget remained balanced, public education would still receive historic increases, and the Medicaid trust fund would be monitored closely with additional set-asides proposed. He also said the FY27 SNAP administrative cost increase would be about $18 million. The committee then heard from the Division of Higher Education, which reported institutions were 2.61% more productive overall and that the budget recommendation followed the statutory productivity formula. Questions focused on why some institutions were receiving decreases or large increases, how the formula works, and how the new return-on-investment metric and committee composition would affect future funding. The committee approved several higher education-related actions, including personnel changes for nine institutions and special language for North Arkansas College’s move into the University of Arkansas system. Staff then walked members through the higher education appropriation summary, explaining large percentage increases at several institutions were tied to federal funds or corrected carry-forward issues, including the U of A School of Mathematical, Sciences and the Arts, South Arkansas College, SAU Tech, ASU Mountain Home, and ASU Newport. Members also discussed UAPB’s 1890 extension program and the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture’s land-grant matching funds; officials said UAPB’s recommendation was being aligned with actual spending and that the Division of Agriculture’s Smith-Lever and Hatch matches were included within its overall appropriation. The committee ultimately adopted the Higher Education Coordinating Board’s recommendations for all institutions and then moved on to the Department of Corrections section, with the chair outlining how the committee would proceed through those appropriations by section.

Transcript Highlights:

• So here you can see again a summary of what kind of went on in the Rioth bill this year.
• I mean, Two days before we needed the bill drafted, they were still messing around with Rios and everything
• drafted, if I, is that right?
• You know, one of the problems with um bill drafting that leads to that stuff getting done late is just
• Chairman and Charles, if, if you could start working on the draft outline so we could begin to maybe

Transcript Highlights:

• So, with that, I request this bill be read at length. >> The bill, there is a request for the bill to
• be read at length. >> A bill for an SCT bill summary.
• I have drafted bills with the support of community with the same funding mechanism and have passed them
• This led to, you know, drafting many bills that did not originate from a lobbyist.
• So, the bill that we passed in here remains the bill that will be sent Here remains the bill that will

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman, Member, Senate Bill 1798, To explain the bill, Mr.
• Chair, I was, this bill, your amendment, I was this bill your your amendment helps because this bill
• Chapter 3 is on bill drafting, and we can get that. ...free copy of my book, State Legislature's Owner's
• Chapter 3 is on bill drafting, and we can get that language down.
• This is not a prescriptive bill. This is not a vendor bill. I would never support a vendor bill.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee began with brief announcements and thanks to staff and members as this was described as the last regular House Education Committee meeting of the 57th Legislature. Chad Heinrich of the University of Phoenix invited members to an upcoming lunch-and-learn on artificial intelligence and education. The chair and ranking member both offered closing remarks recognizing staff, pages, and public testimony over the session. The committee then heard SB 1497, which requires school districts with at least 300 employees and a self-insurance program to seek quotes for health coverage and related services at least every four years, with some exceptions for certain self-insurance arrangements. The sponsor and supporters said the bill is intended to increase competition, transparency, and better benefits for school employees. There was no opposition testimony, and the bill passed 10-0 with a due pass recommendation. Members next considered SB 1711, which directs the State Board of Education to compile age-appropriate resources on preventing and recognizing inappropriate contact, including sexual conduct, and requires schools to make those resources available to students and parents. Supporters said it would provide vetted, voluntary resources without mandating curriculum; opponents argued it was too limited and should include more robust, trauma-informed, age-appropriate sex education and accessibility requirements. The bill passed 7-3. SB 1798, creating a FAFSA awareness program and school designation for schools that promote FAFSA completion, also passed after testimony from a college student and the Arizona Board of Regents in support; the vote was 8-2. The committee also heard SB 1143, which requires schools to submit federal civil rights data collection information to ADE and directs ADE to publish an annual school safety report. Supporters framed it as a transparency measure for parents and policymakers, while opponents said it was duplicative, could be misused, and should apply to private schools as well. It passed 7-3. Finally, SB 1684, as amended, creates a private right of action against public schools for serious physical injury caused by bullying after a prior report and a negligent failure to respond; an amendment narrowed the bill to on-campus or school-sponsored events and removed verbal reports from the definition of prior report. Trial lawyers and the ACLU opposed it, warning about litigation and zero-tolerance discipline, while supporters said it would hold schools accountable for serious bullying. The amended bill passed 6-3.

Transcript Highlights:

• bill.
• The bill. The bill is left pending. Thank you.
• Some of these things, and we started drafting a bill to that effect.
• her bill.
• Cole Sunset Bill, committees were formed to contemplate and draft model policies which all law enforcement

Bills: HB1583, HB1775, HB1832, HB1836, HB1837, HB1866, HB1983, HB2029, HB2217, HB2318, HB2363, HB2486

Keywords: mental health, emergency detention, peace officer, mental illness, prevention of harm, border security, private landowners, study and report, General Land Office, participation, controlled substances, opioid antagonists, law enforcement training, substance abuse prevention, Texas-Mexico border, criminal justice, public safety, law enforcement, National Park Service, arrest powers

Transcript Highlights:

• Parsley said, House Bill 4806 is a conglomeration of bills about what this bill attempts to do in redefining
• The bill... The bill for the MRI in Houston is $18,000.
• In the bill draft, the Senate changed to substantial disruption in your life because they viewed that
• You've thought of a way to draft in the past a bill, but I've never seen you propose one.
• When was the first bill paid? When was the second bill paid? When was the third bill paid?

Bills: HB4806

Keywords: civil action, damages, health care services, noneconomic damages, negligence, legal standards, 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• bill? bill?
• He said the bill that they have drafted in front of them has a blank in terms of the dollar amount, and
• He said the bill that they have drafted in front of them has a blank in terms of the dollar amount, and
• the bill over. the bill over.
• This is actually her bill, and I'm not sure exactly the amendment drafted, but I do know that it was

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I wrote the bill with him. You can sit. I wrote the bill with him.
• Attorney Crozier, who helped draft this bill, sends her apologies that she has a conflict out of state
• Attorney Crozier, who helped draft this bill, sends her apologies that she has a conflict out of state
• I support this bill because it is a bill whose time has come.
• And I urge you to support Senate Bill 1167 and House Bill 1948.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on the Judiciary held a lengthy public hearing on a wide range of civil actions, labor, consumer protection, and animal welfare bills. Chair Lydia Edwards and Representative Michael Day opened with strict testimony rules and time limits, then heard from legislators and advocates on measures including animal-abuser pet ownership bans (S. 1207/H. 1914), a name-change privacy bill (S. 1045/H. 1973), tort claims reform (H. 1724), law enforcement council coverage under the Tort Claims Act (S. 1199), civil rights and qualified immunity-related proposals (H. 1641), employee free speech/captive audience restrictions (S. 1078/H. 1653), consumer protection and civil rights jurisdiction expansion (S. 1041), private right of action for wage theft (H. 1916), gun-owner liability insurance (H. 1836), pseudoephedrine sales tracking (S. 1243/H. 1581), prepaid legal services plans (H. 1612), structured settlement protections (H. 1863), third-party litigation financing disclosure (H. 1861), antitrust reform for small businesses and workers (S. 1038/H. 1982), legal notices in online-only newspapers (S. 1279/H. 1632), and several animal cruelty and protection bills including H. 1938, H. 1949, S. 1277/H. 1934, and H. 1764. Testimony was largely supportive from bill sponsors and advocacy groups, with repeated themes of protecting vulnerable people and animals, improving access to justice, and updating outdated laws. Supporters of the animal bills argued for stronger possession bans, broader cruelty citations, and civil removal tools to prevent repeat abuse; opponents or conditional supporters raised due process and enforcement concerns, especially around warrantless seizures and requiring retail or shelter staff to check registries. On the labor and consumer side, supporters said the antitrust bill would curb monopoly power and help small businesses and workers, while opponents warned it could destabilize competition and burden successful firms. The employee free speech bill was backed as a response to captive audience meetings, and the wage-theft bill was presented as a way to let workers or organizations pursue claims when individual employees are afraid to come forward. Several public officials and association representatives testified on the law enforcement and civil rights bills. Chiefs of police supported adding law enforcement councils to the Tort Claims Act, saying it would close a liability gap for regional mutual-aid collaborations. But police representatives opposed changes to the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act and qualified immunity-related provisions, arguing the federal system already provides a workable forum and that expanding liability could increase costs, reduce morale, and worsen recruitment and retention. On the consumer/civil rights bill, Senator Collins and a veteran described an out-of-state assault case that they said showed the need for Massachusetts to let residents seek redress at home when rights are violated elsewhere. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the hearing itself; the committee mainly received testimony and questions. Several witnesses indicated they had submitted written testimony or proposed amendments, and some bills drew requests for favorable reports while others were explicitly opposed unless amended.