Transcript Highlights:

• minutes of testimony.
• /c><00:46:30.840> testimony.
• minutes of testimony. Thank you. minutes of testimony. Thank you.
• Thank you so much for your testimony.
• Thank you so much for your testimony.

Bills: HF3771, HF3658, HF3453, HF3358, HF1775

Keywords: disaster assistance, contingency account, Minnesota emergency management, public safety, state disaster aid, FEMA, federal cost-share, emergency relief, natural disaster, budget report, appropriations report, management and budget, local governments, utility cooperatives, public works, infrastructure repair, chapter 12B, chapter 12A, emergency management, disaster recovery

Transcript Highlights:

• Seeing none, thank you very much for your testimony.
• Seeing none, thank you very much for your testimony.
• <01:35:21.320> is you Mr clevin um our other testimony is you Mr clevin um our other testimony
• Thank you, gentlemen, for your testimony. Thank you.
• <01:41:12.080> thank gentlemen for your testimony thank gentlemen for your testimony thank

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for your testimony.
• the state um to offer their testimony the state um to offer their testimony and<00:41:22.000>
• We did have this open for people to sign up for testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. Is there anybody else?
• <01:16:38.480> and rates um we had some great testimony and rates um we had some great testimony

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• think you all did get some testimony think you all did get some testimony from<00:07:35.840>
• <00:25:23.600> everybody you very much your testimony everybody you very much your testimony
• Thank you for your testimony.
• committee thank you for your testimony committee thank you for your testimony we'll<01:32:45.159
• Seeing none, thank you for your testimony.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Finance Committee held a hearing on House Bill 619, which would appropriate $1 million to the Solid Waste Management Fund for matching grants to municipalities and businesses for waste diversion projects, with 50% of the money prioritized for food waste diversion. Representative Karen Ebel, the sponsor, said the fund would help New Hampshire meet its solid waste diversion goals, preserve landfill capacity, and support composting, recycling, and related local business activity. She cited New London’s composting program as an example, saying 172 families participated and 32 tons of food waste were diverted in 2024, reducing tipping and trucking costs. Committee members asked about possible alternative funding sources, including a surcharge on landfill tipping fees. Ebel said many other states use such surcharges to fund recycling and solid waste programs, while New Hampshire relies on general funds. She also said the current fund balance was about $900,000 because some money had been used for staffing, and that the grant program was still in rulemaking. Questions also focused on how household composting works and whether municipalities could generate revenue from compost; Ebel said participation is optional, most programs use buckets and transfer stations, and the main benefit is cost savings from reduced disposal rather than compost sales. Testimony in support came from the New Hampshire Municipal Association and the Northeast Resource Recovery Association. Both said municipalities are interested in food waste diversion and composting, that these programs can reduce long-term disposal costs and property tax pressure, and that there is growing demand for technical assistance and grant support. The Northeast Resource Recovery Association said food waste makes up about 24% of municipal and business waste, that fewer than two dozen communities and fewer than two dozen businesses currently offer such services, and that a City of Lebanon pilot program saw about 30% savings by composting on site. The Department of Environmental Services said it was not taking a position but is working on rulemaking for the grant program and expects strong interest from municipalities, private composters, farmers, and anaerobic digester operators. No vote or final action was taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• From the testimony that we received, I don't think this was ever really debated.
• Expert testimony has a much more important role for local government entities.
• The public again can follow through with the expert testimony.
• going to be an expert testimony going to be an expert testimony component<00:25:45.559> of
• So we appreciate your testimony on that. Thank you, Representative Davis. Thank you, Mr.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee heard testimony from Jeff Sigerson, executive director of the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board, who outlined the board’s mission and core programs: campaign finance disclosure, economic interest statements, and lobbying registration/reporting. He described the board as an independent agency with six members, noted current vacancies and confirmation requirements, and said the board’s budget request was essentially flat, with a base budget of about $1.793 million and most costs tied to salaries, office space, and other fixed expenses. He also reviewed the board’s enforcement structure, emphasizing civil-only penalties, a complaint-driven process, and the availability of reports, enforcement actions, and advisory opinions on the board’s website. Sigerson highlighted several recent and upcoming changes. Local ballot question committees for city, school district, levy, and bond issues now must register with the board if they exceed $750 in activity, and the board is preparing outreach and online registration tools to help local committees comply. He also discussed the public subsidy and political contribution refund programs, saying the board paid out about $2.12 million to 230 House candidates in 2024, that 93% of candidates signed the subsidy agreement, and that 2023 PCR refunds totaled about $447,000 for candidates and $1.616 million for party donors. He noted that the PCR maximum refund was recently increased from $50 to $75 per donation, and that payments could drop significantly in 2026 if the one-time supplement is not renewed. A major focus of the presentation was the board’s lobbying report and related legislative recommendations. Sigerson said the board is moving from tracking marginal expenses to tracking the subjects and entities being lobbied, and that lobbying will be expanded from certain metro-area governmental units to all cities, counties, school districts, townships, and other political subdivisions, potentially adding thousands of lobbyists. He said the board held two public hearings and received 23 written comments on proposed changes. The board’s main recommendations were to broaden the expert-testimony exception so that certain paid experts at local hearings would not need to register as lobbyists, while still requiring disclosure of who testified, before whom, and on what subject, and to adjust the current lobbying definition for local government employees and officials who spend more than 50 hours a month on intergovernmental lobbying work.

Transcript Highlights:

• >> Thank you for your testimony. >> Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you very much for your testimony. testimony. testimony. >> Thank<01:43:57.040> you.
• ,<02:12:02.800> the before I start with my testimony, the before I start with my testimony
• Thank you for your testimony. testimony. testimony.
• testimony. Uh, Representative Uler. testimony. Uh, Representative Uler.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• you but he is submitting this testimony you but he is submitting this testimony in<01:31:16.400>
• quite a bit of testimony um my my<02:11:25.840> testimony<02:11:26.360> would<02:11:26.480
• Chairman, 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: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Health, Human Services and Elderly Affairs heard testimony on House Bill 606, as amended, a bill aimed at preventing physicians from denying medically necessary sterilizing or fertility-affecting treatment based on a patient’s age, number of children, marital status, or a doctor’s speculation about future reproductive intentions. Representative Ellen Reed, the sponsor, described the bill as a response to her own long experience with PCOS, heavy bleeding, and repeated refusals by doctors to perform a hysterectomy despite her clear wishes. She said the amendment narrows the bill to medically necessary care, adds definitions for “medical condition” and “appropriate reproductive care,” and removes earlier provisions about voluntary sterilization referrals. She also said the bill does not target religious objections, and that doctors could still refuse for medical, payment, or existing religious reasons not addressed by the bill. Committee members asked about religious freedom, informed consent versus waivers, and the scope of the new definitions. Reed responded that religion was not added to the list of prohibited reasons for denial, and that the amendment is intended to protect doctors when patients sign informed consent or waivers. She explained that “appropriate reproductive care” includes procedures such as hysterectomy, oophorectomy, orchiectomy, salpingectomy, and endometrial ablation, and that the bill now focuses on medically necessary treatment rather than elective sterilization. She said the change was intended to make the proposal narrower and more tailored after earlier concerns. Several witnesses supported the bill with personal accounts of being denied hysterectomies or other procedures despite serious symptoms. Representative Lauren Selig described a decade-long effort to obtain a hysterectomy after years of cycle problems and migraines, saying doctors dismissed her concerns and treated her symptoms as normal. Jade Flad also testified in support, saying she had long been told to simply endure her cycle problems and noted that her husband was offered a vasectomy without similar barriers. The sponsor said online support was strong and that there was little or no written opposition testimony. No vote or final committee action was taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Please remember that your signature is an affirmation that your testimony is true.
• Thank you all for your testimony. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
• You go ahead, sir, you introduce yourself, and looking forward to your testimony.
• Good morning, and thank you to the committee for listening to my testimony.
• Thank you guys for your testimony. Thank you. The board is clear.

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 408 by Senator Myers, a major workers’ compensation overhaul centered on creating an all-claims medical database, requiring electronic reporting and billing, and modernizing fee schedule and claims data collection. Myers said the bill was designed to improve transparency, reduce disputes, address outliers and abuse, and help injured workers return to work faster. The committee adopted technical amendments, then considered a large amendment set combining portions of House bills 780 and 1101, which added preliminary determination procedures, fraud language, temporary total disability and supplemental earnings benefit changes, and a fallback deadline for the department to establish a fee schedule if no agreement is reached by 2029. Several members and witnesses objected that the amendments were dropped late and would turn SB 408 into an omnibus bill; supporters argued the package was the best chance for comprehensive reform. After debate, the committee adopted the amendments and reported SB 408 favorably as amended. Testimony on SB 408 was sharply divided. Supporters, including some providers and injured-worker advocates, said the bill’s core value was transparency through the database and that the system needed modernization and a better fee schedule. Opponents argued the added amendments would burden pro se claimants, expand litigation, and weaken injured workers’ rights, especially through fraud and preliminary hearing provisions. Committee members also questioned whether the combined package was germane and whether it should be allowed to move as a single reform measure. Louisiana Workforce Commission staff explained the timeline for data collection, electronic billing, dispute rules, and eventual fee schedule rulemaking, and said the department could execute the law as amended. The committee then turned to House Bill 585 by Representative Chasson, concerning workplace violence and safety plans for small-box discount retailers. The bill was revised through a substitute that required covered retailers to develop and submit a written workforce safety plan, or submit an existing plan if one already existed. Representative Glorioso raised concerns that requiring a written safety plan could create new civil liability under Louisiana’s assumption-of-duty doctrine and increase litigation and insurance costs. Chasson responded that the intent was simply to encourage safety planning and that businesses already had such plans. The committee discussed possible narrowing language, but the transcript ends before a final disposition on HB 585 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• All right, Rep Geren is present and just a reminder our testimony will be at 2 minutes length per testimony
• There's also a visual aid in my written testimony if you don't mind distributing it, Andrew.
• I've included in my testimony a photograph of an artwork.
• Appreciate your testimony. Yes, sir.
• Then we'll start with you, ma'am, on your testimony. Laura Martinez: Hi, everyone.

Bills: SB 37

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

Transcript Highlights:

• If you testimony.
• If you have any my full testimony.
• other about their testimony. other about their testimony.
• I I did Jeff the prior testimony.
• Um thank you for uh taking my testimony.<02:27:15.600> Um testimony. Um testimony.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, thank you, Madam your testimony.
• . testimony. testimony.
• Thank you so much for your testimony.
• Thank you so much for your testimony.
• continue with your testimony. continue with your testimony.

Bills: HF3951, HF4005, HF962, HF4585, HF3870, HF4542, HF3893, HF4293, HF4075, HF4057, HF3809

Keywords: submetered utility service, tenant rights, digital payment, eviction protection, housing policy, biometric data, consent, data protection, civil penalties, privacy laws, HF4585, Minnesota, harassment restraining order, HRO, restraining order, temporary restraining order, petitioner notice, service of process, law enforcement notification, sheriff

Transcript Highlights:

• . testimony. testimony.
• <01:03:52.960> Lean with your testimony. And if Mr. Lean with your testimony. And if Mr.
• Thank you for your testimony. Mr.
• and proceed with your testimony. and proceed with your testimony.
• That >> Thank you for your testimony.

Bills: HF2400, HF1724, HF3437, HF4333, HF2874, HF4052

Keywords: real estate, appraisers, disciplinary actions, sanction matrix, Minnesota Statutes, direct primary care, healthcare agreements, medical services, patient care, health insurance, mortgage fees, residential loans, commercial loans, finance regulations, investment properties, insurance, supplemental health insurance, short-term care, home health care, nursing care

Transcript Highlights:

• discussion of the bill and testimony. discussion of the bill and testimony.
• Please introduce yourself and begin your testimony.
• Please introduce yourself and begin your testimony.
• . testimony. testimony.
• I'm here today to offer testimony I'm here today to offer testimony opposition<01:01:55.520> to

Bills: HF3405, HF3413, HF3769, HF3768, HF3771, HF3465

Keywords: Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, BCA, Use of Force Investigations Unit, federal agents, Department of Homeland Security, DHS, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, ICE, Customs and Border Protection, CBP, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, USCIS, officer-involved death, use of force, law enforcement accountability, police oversight, independent investigation, criminal sexual conduct, sexual assault, peace officers

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from February 25, 2026, and then took up several Department of Corrections-related bills. House File 3768, as amended by the A1 amendment, would extend the DOC’s graduated licensing and enforcement tools to juvenile detention facilities and state-licensed halfway houses, allowing corrective action plans and conditional licenses instead of only revocation. Commissioner Paul Schnell and Dakota County Juvenile Services Center Deputy Director Matt Bower testified in support, saying the bill would improve consistency, stability, and accountability without changing jail licensing. Members asked about costs and sheriff input; the commissioner said the bill is cost-neutral and that sheriffs were informed but did not provide input. The committee adopted the amendment and recommended the bill to the general register. The committee then heard House File 3769, another DOC technical update bill, which would clarify tuberculosis screening procedures when incarcerated people refuse testing, allow mental health units at more than one facility and short-term stabilization at Oak Park Heights when clinically appropriate, and clarify the department’s substance use disorder treatment programs. Schnell said the changes were technical but important for effective operations. Members again asked about county costs and sheriff support, and the commissioner said the bill affects only DOC facilities and is cost-neutral. The committee approved the motion to re-refer the bill to the Health Finance and Policy Committee. The final major item was House File 3405, the chair’s bill, as amended by the A3 amendment. The amendment broadened the definition of federal agents, made the effective date retroactive, and removed a sexual assault investigation section to eliminate the fiscal note. The bill would require the BCA’s use-of-force unit to investigate deaths caused by federal agents in Minnesota, not just Minnesota peace officers. Chair Mohler argued the bill closes a loophole and ensures state-level, independent investigations; Dr. B.B. Newman testified in support, saying it preserves Minnesota’s investigative authority and public confidence. Deputy Superintendent Scott Mueller said the BCA already investigates deadly-force cases and has handled some federal-related cases, but he did not think the bill was necessary and recommended a no vote. Members debated whether the bill was needed given existing practice, with supporters saying the statute should clearly require state investigation and opponents questioning whether it would change anything. The committee adopted the amendment and continued discussion of the bill as amended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you so much for the testimony.
• Thank you so much for the testimony.
• Thank you so much for the testimony.
• Bro, thank you so much for your testimony. Thank you so much for your testimony.
• so much for for your testimony um we'll so much for for your testimony um we'll turn<00:34:26.280>

Bills: HF2582, HF2266, HF2518, HF2039, HF1941

Keywords: child care, grants, appropriation, workforce development, families, YWCA Minneapolis, job training, child development, economic assistance, WomenVenture, economic development, entrepreneurship, women entrepreneurs, business training, financial support, youth programs, funding, employment, Minnesota, American Indian

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:06:02.039> for repeat of any public testimony for repeat of any public testimony for specific
• That was one question I had because during the testimony I think it got raised.
• <00:54:12.119> during remind everyone the testimony during remind everyone the testimony during
• Seeing no further questions, I want to thank you again for providing that testimony.
• Richard in the Election Law Committee testimonies a couple of sessions ago.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We appreciate your testimony.
• We appreciate your testimony.
• So thank you all for the testimony. Thank you. Thank you.
• Thank you very much for your testimony.
• I'll be submitting some additional written testimony.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee hearing focused on a broad set of energy efficiency, building decarbonization, school modernization, and lighting bills. Testimony generally came from municipal leaders, labor unions, environmental groups, and advocates who supported measures such as H. 3529/S. 2294 on building energy and decarbonization, H. 3577/S. 2286 on a zero-carbon renovation fund, H. 3476/S. 2275 on healthy and sustainable schools, H. 3565 on Mass Save zero-carbon assessments, H. 3477 on clean lighting and appliance efficiency standards, and the Dark Sky bills on outdoor lighting. Supporters argued these bills would cut emissions, lower utility bills, improve indoor air quality and school conditions, and direct resources to environmental justice, gateway, and low-income communities. Witnesses emphasized that Massachusetts’ older building stock and school facilities need major upgrades, and that state funding and financing tools are needed to close gaps left by declining federal support. Mayors, labor leaders, and environmental advocates said the proposals would create local jobs, expand apprenticeships, and help municipalities and schools undertake retrofits, ventilation improvements, heat pump installations, and other decarbonization work. Several speakers also defended Mass Save as highly cost-effective while urging new funding sources beyond ratepayer bills for larger-scale building upgrades. One representative asked about the difference between current Mass Save audits and proposed zero-carbon assessments, and the sponsor explained the new assessments would include heat pumps, solar, storage, wiring upgrades, and rate-structure guidance. There was also testimony on the Dark Sky bill, with astronomers and museum representatives arguing that better-shielded, downward-facing lighting would reduce energy waste, protect wildlife and human health, and preserve night skies without compromising safety. Committee members raised concerns about pedestrian safety and whether education might be enough instead of legislation; supporters responded that the bill follows established lighting standards and targets only unnecessary glare and skyward light. On the school bill, an open-shop contractor group opposed the measure, arguing its PLA and apprenticeship requirements would restrict bidding and reduce competition, while labor organizations strongly supported the workforce standards and prevailing wage provisions. No votes were taken during the hearing. The committee heard extensive testimony and several members asked clarifying questions, but the transcript does not show any final action or disposition on the bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• While that's loading, is someone ready to cover some testimony?
• Please state your name for the record and present your testimony.
• your testimony. your testimony.
• complete our testimony. complete our testimony.
• Is there Thank you for your testimony.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• comments before we move to testimony? comments before we move to testimony?
• Thank you for your testimony. Next you. Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. All right, that concludes our testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. your time. Thank you for your testimony.
• All right, that concludes our testimony. All right, that concludes our testimony.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for your testimony and for the remote testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you so much for your testimony.
• Would that conclude your testimony?
• Would that conclude your testimony?

Summary: The committee heard extensive testimony on Proposition 36 and its implementation, with judicial and budget officials describing it as a major shift from misdemeanor to felony processing for repeat drug possession and certain theft offenses. Witnesses explained that the law creates a treatment-mandated felony process that can lead to dismissal if a defendant completes treatment, but also requires evaluations, court monitoring, and potentially long, open-ended supervision. Judicial representatives said the new law is already generating large numbers of filings, creating workload, staffing, courtroom, and facility pressures, and that access to treatment beds, housing, and evaluation capacity is limiting participation. Several speakers emphasized that collaborative courts are effective but are not a perfect fit for Prop. 36 because those programs are typically probation-based and serve different risk/need populations. Court officials from San Bernardino and Orange counties said the impacts vary by county but are severe, with some counties seeing hundreds or more filings in a short period and others moving more slowly to build treatment infrastructure first. They argued that Prop. 36 is effectively an unfunded mandate unless the state provides more resources for judges, staff, facilities, treatment, housing, and supervision. The Legislative Analyst’s Office noted that Prop. 36 will reduce the Proposition 47 savings that fund mental health and substance use treatment grants, but said the near-term reduction is relatively modest and that the full effect will take time to appear because of the way those savings are calculated. Members of the committee repeatedly raised concerns that the state is underfunding the courts and counties needed to carry out the new law. The committee also reviewed the Governor’s proposed trial court operations budget, including a partial restoration of a prior $97 million cut and additional ongoing funding. Judicial branch officials said the restoration helped avoid furloughs, hiring freezes, and service reductions, and supported cybersecurity, technology, staffing, and records management. The LAO recommended that the Legislature seek more detail on how midyear restorations are handled and consider clarifying language for transferring unspent trial court trust fund monies to the General Fund. Finance said the flexibility in the ongoing funding was intentional and would be taken back for consideration. In a separate item, the committee heard testimony on a $6.3 million increase for Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal appointed counsel programs. Judicial officials and appellate project representatives said the system is facing a crisis because indigent appeals have risen sharply while the number of panel attorneys has fallen, leaving many cases waiting months for counsel. They argued the proposed increase would help but is still below what is needed to recruit and retain attorneys and prevent delays that affect criminal, juvenile, and child welfare cases. The committee also discussed the Tracy courthouse project in San Joaquin County, where local officials said reopening a courthouse closed since 2011 is necessary to serve a growing population and relieve overcrowding elsewhere. The LAO and Finance both noted the project is next in line under the facilities plan, though LAO suggested the Legislature could consider whether other facility priorities should come first.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:02:34.320> how written testimony that detailed how written testimony that detailed how
• I I stand on my testimony. I I stand on my testimony.
• my testimony in strong support. Thanks. my testimony in strong support. Thanks.
• I'll stand on my testimony. Thank you. I'll stand on my testimony. Thank<01:37:00.240> you.
• something else raised in the testimony. something else raised in the testimony.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee took up several gubernatorial nominations, beginning with GM 640 for Juanita Rio Colón to the Commission on Water Resource Management. Public testimony and the nominee’s remarks strongly emphasized her water-system management background, Native Hawaiian stewardship values, and representation for Molokai. Committee members praised her qualifications and neighbor-island perspective, and also discussed broader concerns about reforming the Water Commission, including a separate bill to create a more independent authority and reduce politics in water decisions. Colón said she supported the restructuring effort and would serve with integrity and attention to constitutional water rights and climate resilience. The committee then heard GM 639 for Moses Haia III to the same commission. DLNR and OHA testified, and Haia described his long legal career, prior work on the Waihole contested case, and experience with Native Hawaiian rights and water law. Members asked about his ability to serve impartially given his advocacy background; Haia acknowledged that some may perceive a conflict from his prior work but said he did not believe it was a reasonable conflict and would follow the law and balance competing interests. The discussion again returned to the proposed Water Commission restructuring, which Haia said he supported as a way to provide independence and balance. Next, the committee considered GM 649 for Gilbert Coloma to the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission. DLNR and other testifiers explained that this was a new interstate commission created under the 2024 act, with Hawaii joining six U.S. states to address fisheries issues across state boundaries. Coloma, a commercial fisher from Hilo, said he brought more than 40 years of industry, cultural, and traditional experience and would represent Hawaii’s fishing communities. Members asked about the commission’s structure, meeting rotation, and funding, and were told the state covers dues through special funds. The committee also briefly took up GM 692 for Riley Smith’s reappointment to the Board of Land and Natural Resources. The Hawaii Cattlemen’s Council supported him, while Sierra Club Hui raised concerns about prior decisions affecting Native Hawaiian rights and public trust resources. Smith said he supported more residential uses in East Kapolei if the necessary planning and environmental review changes were made, and he began responding to questions about prior BLNR litigation before the transcript cut off.