Transcript Highlights:

• There are actually three that don't require standardized tests for admissions in the state of Florida
• They have to have a standardized admission test.
• From my understanding, what would be a standardized test for a trade school? Thank you, Mr.
• Favored groups are admitted despite lower scores on the Medical College Aptitude Test or not required
• to take the test at all.

Summary: The committee first confirmed Heather L. Turnbull to the Florida Commission on Community Service without debate. It then took up SPB 7022, which sets Florida Retirement System employer contribution rates beginning July 1, 2025, updates rates to address unfunded liability, and preserves the 3% employee contribution rate. Senator Fine said the bill would increase FRS Trust Fund revenue by about $310 million annually and also gives certain elected officers an option related to DROP accumulations. An amendment was adopted, the bill was submitted as a committee bill, and it was reported favorably. The committee then heard SB 1710, a bill by Senator DeSantis/DeSigley to prohibit state agencies, vendors, and grant recipients from using state funds for DEI-related policies, trainings, and programs, and to impose related restrictions on medical institutions of higher education. Senator Polsky and others questioned the bill’s broad and vague language, its effect on health-related work, public-facing agency positions, private contractors, and medical school admissions. The sponsor said the bill was intended to stop DEI from influencing state agencies and that the medical-school portion would likely be amended out later. Public testimony was overwhelmingly opposed, with speakers arguing the bill would harm health care, education, access, and minority communities; a few supporters said DEI is ideological and should be removed from government and public institutions. After debate, the bill was reported favorably on a party-line style vote, with Senator Errington voting no. The committee then began SB 1678, relating to entities that boycott Israel, with a delete-all amendment. Senator Leak said the bill would expand Florida’s anti-BDS framework to cover nonprofits, foreign educational institutions, foreign government funds, academic boycotts, political subdivisions, and certain grants, while the amendment aligned the bill with existing law and clarified procurement and divestment provisions. Testimony included support from proponents who said Florida should not do business with entities engaged in boycotts of Israel, and opposition from speakers who argued the bill would restrict academic freedom and conscience. Debate continued as the transcript ended, with no final vote shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have high have high compliance costs, the costs associated with compliance testing and licensing,
• Consumer safety and product testing standards require further development to ensure public health industry
• Our labs ran thousands of tests ruling out all the usual diseases.
• Some dairies reported large numbers of dead birds which were tested and found to have highly pathogenic
• TBMDL tested these dead cats, as well as milk from the sick dairy cattle for highly pathogenic avian

Bills: HB294

Keywords: energy efficiency, tax exemption, residential properties, sustainability, real estate

Transcript Highlights:

• Penetration testing as well is another one. Penetration testing as well is another one.
• So most of the entities are responding on their surveys that they don't perform penetration testing and
• they're not bringing in outside firms to do penetration testing today.
• if they reach out to us, we can actually walk them through and scope out and perform a penetration test
• I mentioned the penetration testing that we'll do upon request as well.

Summary: The committee approved the March 26 minutes and then received a quarterly update on major IT projects from NDIT. Staff reported the portfolio included 116 major projects totaling about $546 million, with the overall portfolio under budget but slightly behind schedule. They reviewed projects over the 20% variance threshold, including an Industrial Commission grants management system and DOT’s roadway pre-construction replacement, and then heard startup and closeout reports from HHS, OMB, DPI, and DOT. Several previously troubled projects were closed, including HHS bed management, vital records modernization, and DOT roadway capital planning; some projects finished under budget and ahead of schedule, while others were significantly behind schedule or over budget but were now closed or being remediated. The committee also reviewed NDIT’s annual report, including service-fund financials, peer-state rate comparisons, records management, and customer satisfaction efforts. Members asked about how service-fund revenue and grant administrative charges are accounted for, how chargebacks work, and whether NDIT tracks customer satisfaction scores. NDIT said it does track CSAT-type measures in some service areas and has survey data, but it is not planning another customer survey this summer. Members encouraged more regular reporting of customer satisfaction, service-level metrics, and performance data to help guide future improvements. A major portion of the meeting focused on the state’s mainframe modernization effort. NDIT said the overall effort is still targeting about 2030, with multiple HHS and DOT projects underway and a $15 million tech-debt appropriation already removing some components. Staff described the main obstacles as data cleanup, complex integrations, limited staff capacity, retirements, and vendor constraints, and said they are seeking a vendor with modernization support in the next contract cycle. Members pressed for clearer accountability and faster progress, and NDIT and HHS emphasized that they are working jointly but need continued support and better tools. The committee then heard a cybersecurity update on NDIT’s statewide services and maturity assessments. NDIT explained that it provides vulnerability scanning, endpoint protection, security awareness training, threat briefings, and penetration testing, and that these services are tied to a cybersecurity maturity assessment based on CIS controls. Members questioned the sharp drop in participation since 2020 and whether the self-assessment should be mandatory or tied more strongly to StageNet access or insurance incentives. NDIT said participation is voluntary, but Enderf is now requiring annual assessments to keep a 4% insurance discount, and members discussed whether stronger requirements or audit authority may be needed. The meeting ended as the committee began a follow-up discussion on BEAD broadband connection costs and why some locations are much more expensive to connect than others.

Transcript Highlights:

• The May revise proposal included provisions such as the $2,000 asset limit test that were untenable for
• The asset test limit alone would have threatened coverage for seniors and people with disabilities at
• As we heard from our budget chair, those values are tested on a daily basis, sometimes on an hourly basis
• comments with CFT on related to Prop. 98, and we appreciate the rejection of IHSS cuts and asset limit tests
• We deeply appreciate the Assembly rejecting all cuts to IHSS and strengthening the medical asset test

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee met to consider the 2026 Budget Act, which leaders said was the negotiated compromise with the Senate and was expected to move to the floor that evening. Opening remarks emphasized that the plan balances the budget over two years, reduces the structural deficit, and builds reserves, while also protecting core services in the face of federal cuts. Jason Sisney outlined the legislative budget framework and the likely floor bills, including AB 109, SB 110, SB 122, and SB 125. Department of Finance representative Eric Khali said the administration appreciated the two-year balanced approach and supported the modification in SB 122, while noting the package uses additional revenues and new spending to soften or reject some proposed cuts. Most of the discussion focused on major spending areas. Members and subcommittee chairs highlighted protections and additions for health care and human services, including rejecting the proposed Medi-Cal asset limit change, delaying premium increases, restoring clinic and dental funding, supporting distressed hospitals and county indigent care, and expanding county eligibility staffing to handle H.R. 1-related workload. Education members described record or expanded support for TK-12 schools, child care, special education, community colleges, teacher recruitment, and higher education, including a change to extend Cal Grant eligibility to age 30 for some community college students. Housing and homelessness funding was increased for HAP, multifamily housing, and the low-income housing tax credit, while public safety members pointed to investments in victims’ services, restorative justice, and prison closure savings. Several members also raised concerns or priorities tied to the budget deal. Some praised the package as a moral document that protects vulnerable Californians, immigrant communities, LGBTQ residents, seniors, and people with disabilities. Others noted unresolved issues, including the MCO tax’s impact on districts, the need for more support for local journalism, arts, biotech R&D incentives, transit and GGRF-related concerns, and the need for continued work on Prop. 98 and long-term fiscal resilience. The vice chair cautioned that despite the current progress, the state remains vulnerable to revenue volatility and warned that the budget should build more resilience against a possible downturn. No formal vote was taken in the portion provided, but the committee was preparing the budget package for floor action and final negotiations.

Transcript Highlights:

• And the oath that I took was not, 'I, Carlos Guillermo Smith, swear to test illegal theory here in the
• I would venture to say that I would fare okay in a standardized test of the 90 pages released today,
• I would do better on the test than you would. We're not prepared. Senator Polsky?
• And until you tell me different, because no test has been done, that's where I'm going to stand.
• . ...this state, and they are looking at us to ask us the question: Are we going to continue this testing

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D, later substituting identical House Bill 1D, to establish Florida’s congressional districts. The opening prayer and Pledge of Allegiance were followed by procedural remarks, then extensive floor discussion focused almost entirely on the redistricting proposal, its timing, and its legal basis. Senator Gaetz, explaining the bill, said the Governor had transmitted the map two days earlier, argued that mid-decade congressional redistricting is not prohibited by law, and said the Governor’s stated reasons were to address population growth and to draw race-neutral districts. He also said the legislature could accept, reject, or amend the proposal. Much of the debate centered on the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Louisiana decision and whether it affected Florida’s Fair Districts Amendment and the Voting Rights Act. Senators Smith, Rouson, Sharief, Polsky, Arrington, Bracey Davis, Bernard, Nathan, and others questioned the short notice, lack of public hearings, the use of partisan data, the absence of sworn testimony, and whether the map diluted minority voting strength or fragmented communities of interest. Gaetz repeatedly said he was not offering legal opinions, that the Governor’s counsel believed the Fair Districts race-based provisions were inconsistent with federal law, and that any legal challenge would be for the courts. He also said the Governor’s mapmaker reported using census and demographic data, along with political data as one of many inputs, and claimed the map’s compactness was comparable to the current map. A motion by Senator Smith to temporarily postpone consideration of the bill failed on a 12-23 vote. After the Senate returned from a 30-minute break to review the new Supreme Court decision, debate continued. The chamber then substituted HB 1D for SB 8D, read the House bill, and advanced it to third reading. The transcript ends during debate on final passage, with Senators Rouson and Bernard speaking in opposition and arguing the map was procedurally rushed, legally vulnerable, and politically motivated.

Transcript Highlights:

• In the monitoring space, this allows us to expand greatly the amount of waters we're able to test across
• I think we'll be up to about 162 water bodies this year that we will be able to test.
• the monitoring space, this allows us to expand, greatly expand, the amount of waters we're able to test
• I think us to expand, greatly expand, the amount of waters we're able to test now across the state.
• I think we'll be up to about 162 water bodies this year that we will be able to test.

Summary: The subcommittee began by announcing a change in the agenda order, moving item 6 ahead of item 1 and then item 7, and noting there would be no votes taken on any items that day. Item 6 covered a proposed operational efficiencies control section for the Natural Resources Agency that would let multiple departments jointly fund landscape-scale or multi-jurisdictional projects and allow Finance to transfer climate bond funds to a lead state entity. The LAO said the proposal was reasonable but suggested the Legislature consider requiring summary notification on how it is used; Finance said it would consider that request. Item 7 focused on the 2026-27 biodiversity and nature-based solutions spending plan. Finance and the Wildlife Conservation Board described the climate bond funding for habitat restoration, wildlife crossings, public access, tribal nature-based solutions, and related work, including $111 million proposed for WCB and $30 million for Salton Sea habitat and public access projects. The LAO supported the overall approach but flagged the San Andreas Corridor Program as an area where the Legislature may want to specify geographic priorities. Members discussed the pace of Salton Sea work and whether the proposed projects would count toward disadvantaged community goals. Item 8 addressed Cal Fire’s aviation contract and staffing needs for wildfire response. Cal Fire said year-round fire activity, a larger and more complex aircraft fleet, and labor market pressures justified the proposed contract increase, including more mechanics, pilots, and maintenance support. The LAO recommended approval, saying the proposal addressed health and safety concerns. Members asked about contractor staffing, competition in the bidding process, and future technology for early fire detection and suppression. The committee then took up item 1 on golden mussel containment. Fish and Wildlife described the invasive species’ spread in the Delta, the task force and response framework, and a request for eight new positions funded by Prop. 4 to support control plans, outreach, monitoring, research, and coordination with partners and law enforcement. Members pressed the department on whether the state should fund more direct decontamination infrastructure and grants to local water managers, and on the realistic goal of containing the mussel. The chair and several members emphasized the urgency of the threat and requested an itemized breakdown of the $20 million request. The hearing then moved to a broader LAO overview of wildfire prevention and response funding, where the LAO summarized the state’s funding mix and warned that ongoing wildfire resilience funding will likely decline as one-time bond and GGRF funds are exhausted, prompting discussion of long-term funding options and the balance between prevention, suppression, and community hardening.

Transcript Highlights:

• during<00:00:45.520> your<00:00:45.680> term<00:00:45.840> to<00:00:46.000> test
• /c><00:00:46.160> the<00:00:46.320> term<00:00:46.559> to during your term to test
• I already did my class, so um, I passed my test.
• <00:04:53.759> And<00:04:54.240> yes, class, so um, I passed my test.
• And yes, class, so um, I passed my test.

Bills: SB2060, SB2063, SB2062, SB2069, SB2070

Keywords: rental housing revolving fund, HHFDC, Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation, mixed-income housing, mixed-income rental project, affordable housing, low-income housing, housing finance, housing development, preservation, rehabilitation, pre-development, construction financing, equity investment, credit enhancement, collateral, gap financing, area median income, AMI, perpetual affordability

Summary: The committee heard five housing measures, with the chair announcing that SB 2060, SB 2063, SB 2062, and SB 2069 were works in progress and that decision-making would be deferred to February 3. SB 2060 would allow HHFDC, with Finance approval, to transfer money within the rental housing revolving fund and its subaccounts without further legislative authorization, including a transfer to the mixed-income subaccount for FY 2026-2027. HHFDC and other supporters said the change would give the agency more flexibility to move projects forward, while Catholic Charities Hawaii and a testifier from Roars and Cares supported the bill but warned that shifting money away from lower-income housing could weaken efforts to serve households under 80% of area median income and people at risk of homelessness. HHFDC said the fund’s uncommitted balance was about $100 million and that demand exceeded available resources. SB 2063 would revise the mixed-income subaccount by changing project priorities, adding new criteria, allowing transfers within the subaccount without legislative approval, and directing conveyance tax revenues into the subaccount. HHFDC, OPSD, LURF, Hawaii Appleseed, Housing Hawaii’s Future, Stanford Carr Development, and Roars and Cares supported the measure, while Catholic Charities urged the committee to keep rental and for-sale housing policy separate and to use other mechanisms for homeownership. Catholic Charities said the rental housing revolving fund should remain focused on rentals, and that for-sale initiatives should be addressed separately. The chair indicated an intent to defer the bill for further edits. SB 2062 would make the dwelling unit revolving fund equity pilot a permanent HHFDC program, allowing the agency to buy equity in for-sale developments to lower initial purchase prices and require repayment through shared appreciation. HHFDC said the pilot had been successful, with 83 units committed and $7.6 million of the $10 million program cap already committed, and said permanence would let the agency pair the program with DERF loans earlier in project financing. The chair said SB 2069 would be used as the vehicle for amendments to the DERF equity program and related changes. SB 2069 would authorize HHFDC to use existing dwelling unit revolving fund balances for the equity pilot; it drew support from HHFDC and several housing organizations. SB 2070 would create a permanently affordable for-sale housing program by replacing the current 10-year buyback restriction with a resale price cap tied to an appreciation index, which HHFDC said would preserve affordability while allowing owners to build equity. In questioning, senators pressed HHFDC on whether the bill was necessary, whether it would remove first-time homebuyer and other ownership restrictions, and whether the new program was truly “permanently affordable” if not tied to AMI. HHFDC said the current statutory restrictions limit flexibility, that the proposal would expand access to local residents, and that the price cap would be based on about 4.5% annual appreciation. Supporters said the approach would help buyers move up the housing ladder, while some senators expressed concern that it could open the program to owners of multiple properties and that the committee should see sales-velocity data on existing restricted units before proceeding.

Transcript Highlights:

• They're gonna take it down into Mexico and deploy it and test it out for us, make, make sure that it's
• What we need right now is, are some tests, um.
• Some test opportunities whether it's in Panama or somewhere else in Central America where we could use
• They're used in South America, but a lot of the testing there is, uh, call it coincidental, right?
• We were testing this and we didn't see screw worms.

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, there are four real tests for whether or not surveillance pricing is met.
• There are four real tests for whether or not surveillance pricing is met, and whether it applies under
• When those four tests are met, then, as we are defining it now, this is the definition of surveillance
• Here to test... and provide a temperate common area within the park when feasible during extreme heat
• Here to test. ...park. That was an amendment we took in the prior committee.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills. AB 416 would allow emergency room physicians to initiate 5150 mental health holds, with supporters saying it would reduce emergency room bottlenecks and speed care for patients in crisis. County and behavioral health representatives opposed the bill, and some members raised broader concerns about the 5150 system and juvenile placements. The bill was ultimately approved on a do-pass as amended vote. AB 446, the Surveillance Pricing Act, drew extensive testimony. The author and supporters argued it would prohibit businesses from using personal data to charge different prices for the same product or service, describing the practice as discriminatory and exploitative. Business and industry groups opposed the bill, warning that its language was too broad, could affect discounts and loyalty programs, and would create litigation risk through a private right of action. After discussion about enforcement and possible amendments, the bill passed on a do-pass motion. AB 632 would give local governments a faster way to collect penalties for serious code violations, including unsafe housing, fire hazards, and illegal cannabis activity, by allowing certain fines to become money judgments and clarifying lien authority. It had support from county and city groups and no opposition was voiced in the hearing; the bill passed as amended. ACA 7, a constitutional amendment intended to clarify and limit misuse of Section 31A, also moved forward after brief support testimony. The committee then took up AB 649, which would extend protections for businesses that proactively obtain certified access specialist inspections and fix accessibility violations; the author, a small business owner, and others testified in support, while disability rights groups moved to neutral after amendments. Members discussed the balance between access enforcement and reducing predatory litigation, and the bill was still under consideration as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• potent anti-aging products are safe for kids to use because these products have never been clinically tested
• potent anti-aging products are safe for kids to use because these products have never been clinically tested
• And whether or not the FDA industry has tested this clinically in a lab setting, they have done that
• They have been measured in the brain, testes, breast milk, and placenta, among other places where we
• Is there any kind of scientific testing around the 2% limit that you're aware of?

Summary: The committee heard a series of environmental safety and toxic materials measures, with several bills moving forward on unanimous or near-unanimous votes to Appropriations. Early in the meeting, the consent calendar was approved, including AB 372, AB 455, AB 1096, AB 1102, and AB 754. AB 362 by Assembly Member Ramos, which would recognize tribal beneficial uses of water and strengthen consultation and protection for tribal water uses, drew strong support from tribes and environmental groups. Water agencies and local government representatives opposed unless amended, raising concerns about CEQA requirements, co-management language, and conflicts with existing water law. The bill advanced to Appropriations, with some members voting aye and others not voting or absent. AB 728 by Assembly Member Lee would require age verification for the sale of certain anti-aging skin care products to minors. The author and a youth witness described social media-driven use of adult skin products by children and alleged skin damage, while supporters argued age checks are a reasonable consumer protection. Dermatologists and retailers opposed the bill, saying it could restrict legitimate acne and other medical uses of over-the-counter products, create compliance problems, and lacked a clear scientific basis. The committee discussed possible ambiguity in the bill’s definition of anti-aging products, but the measure still passed to Appropriations. AB 532 on low-income water rate assistance, AB 773 on copper-based anti-fouling paint, AB 998 on household hazardous waste disposal of vape pens, AB 1031 on geothermal hazardous waste fees, and AB 864 on solar panel hazardous waste and recycling all received strong support and advanced to Appropriations. Supporters for AB 532 emphasized water affordability and local program authority; AB 773 supporters said conflicting state water and pesticide rules are creating confusion for harbors and cities; AB 998 was presented as a practical way to let schools and local facilities dispose of confiscated vape devices safely; AB 1031 was framed as reducing DTSC fee burdens on geothermal development in Imperial County; and AB 864 would ease recycling and reuse of end-of-life solar panels. The committee also began hearing AB 1264 on ultra-processed foods in school meals, with the author and supporters arguing it would phase out the most harmful ultra-processed foods from school meals by 2032, but the transcript cuts off before the full discussion and any action on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• Substitute for Senate Bill 1072, a bill to be... ...entitled an act relating to the expedited DNA testing
• Many law enforcement agencies do not have dedicated DNA testing funding in their budget; this program
• Committee Substitute for House Bill 874, a bill to be entitled an act relating to the expedited DNA testing
• Expedited DNA testing grant program. Is there debate on the bill?
• That is the original Lemon Test, later amended in 1997, I believe. It's a three-part test.

Bills: SCR4, SCR18, SCR43, SB227, SB269, SB330, SB434, SB437, SB438, SB463, SB528, SB584, SB604, SB663, SB668, SB682, SB747, SB841, SB912, SB968, SB1013, SB1020, SB1044, SB1137, SB1138, SB1143, SB1164, SB1169, SB1200, SB1236, SB1244, SB1299, SB1325, SB1335, SB1369, SB1410, SB1418, SB1422, SB1455, SB1468, SB1495, SB1534, SB1579, SB1580, SB1612, SB1624, SB1667, SB1734, SB1745, SB1746, SB1760, SB1784, SB1860, SB1862, SB1864, SB1896, SB1898, SB1920, SB1940, SB1952, SB1998, SB1999, SB2004, SB2032, SB2052, SB2068, SB2073, SB2121, SB2127, SB2141, SB2145, SB2161, SB2167, SB2196, SB2207, SB2216, SB2246, SB2323, SB2332, SB2395, SB2429, SB2431, SB2439, SB2443, SB2581, SB2601, SB2629, SB2702, SB2705, SB2717, SB2798, SB2873, SB2881, SB2964, SB3034, SCR4, SCR38, SB39, SB227, SB240, SB330, SB401, SB407, SB467, SB506, SB512, SB527, SB584, SB618, SB619, SB636, SB648, SB663, SB715, SB732, SB758, SB801, SB843, SB847, SB870, SB957, SB1013, SB1020, SB1065, SB1152, SB1164, SB1181, SB1183, SB1257, SB1283, SB1299, SB1325, SB1349, SB1395, SB1433, SB1455, SB1490, SB1558, SB1574, SB1624, SB1626, SB1640, SB1717, SB1718, SB1727, SB1734, SB1756, SB1757, SB1789, SB1832, SB1845, SB1868, SB1920, SB1924, SB1964, SB2004, SB2018, SB2031, SB2037, SB2052, SB2073, SB2075, SB2080, SB2111, SB2117, SB2154, SB2161, SB2196, SB2206, SB2253, SB2268, SB2322, SB2323, SB2349, SB2533, SB2540, SB2570, SB2623, SB2626, SB2658, SB2660, SB2692, SB2705, SB2717, SB2722, SB2742, SB2743, SB2753, SB2788, SB2877, SB2900, SB2920, SB3031, SB5, SB260, SB1786, SB1, HJR4, HB135, HB 1109, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SJR84, SJR59, SCR12, SCR39, SCR38, SCR4, SCR18, SCR43, SCR46, SCR48, SCR19, SB2023, SB1257, SB240, SB1727, SB870, SB618, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB1073, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB1502, SB507, SB1026, SB1349, SB1433, SB1434, SB1376, SB1585, SB1772, SB2016, SB1163, SB619, SB1122, SB732, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB261, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB529, SB209, SB2429, SB1999, SB511, SB2309, SB510, SB1860, SB2037, SB1924, SB2253, SB2018, SB2206, SB1299, SB841, SB668, SB584, SB1085, SB2431, SB1490, SB1868, SB2314, SB434, SB2046, SB1667, SB2127, SB1975, SB1760, SB1734, SB1335, SB2246, SB2439, SB1624, SB1244, SB1468, SB2717, SB1612, SB1262, SB604, SB2395, SB1832, SB1745, SB1746, SB2207, SB1784, SB1524, SB528, SB437, SB269, SB1137, SB968, SB636, SB747, SB1325, SB1455, SB2056, SB1940, SB2052, SB1579, SB2068, SB3034, SB1920, SB1558, SB1236, SB1044, SB884, SB463, SB227, SB517, SB1200, SB1410, SB1626, SB1845, SB1863, SB2216, SB2681, SB1717, SB2141, SB2323, SB2200, SB2332, SB2199, SB1757, SB2050, SB1138, SB2458, SB1864, SB2201, SB1862, SB1055, SB2660, SB1898, SB2662, SB2161, SB2964, SB2881, SB1065, SB801, SB2743, SB2533, SB2073, SB3014, SB3013, SB2702, SB2629, SB2443, SB2349, SB2167, SB2145, SB2121, SB758, SB648, SB647, SB512, SB438, SB1721, SB2268, SB1495, SB2705, SB2366, SB1422, SB1369, SB1013, SB682, SB2692, SB2570, SB2797, SB2111, SB1896, SB1164, SB1020, SB663, SB2371, SB1152, SB2196, SB2383, SB2581, SB2798, SB330, SB646, SB843, SB1998, SB1418, SB2788, SB1169, SB2873, SB1754, SB1534, SB1718, SB2779, SB2004, SB1143, SB1756, SB912, SB2119, SB2032, SB527, SB1580, SB1952, SB2601, SB2322, SB2448, SB1777, SB1283, SB407, SB2392, SB2076, SB2786, SB3031, SB2877, SB2876, SB2284, SB2225, SB1540, SB2920, SB2929, SB1395, SB1972, SB2540, SB1183, SB2742, SB2595, SB2217, SB2117, SB715, SB2330, SB1964, SB1383, SB500, SB1640, SB39, SB2001, SB2080, SB2722, SB506, SB2514, SB2623, SB2658, SB1574, SB2900, SB2753, SB2398, SB401, SB1241, SB2927, SB2173, SB2538, SB898, SB467, SB1449, SB2529, SB1531, SB2846, SB2476, SB2031, SB986, SB1181, SB2075, SB2154, SB2864, SB31, SB2880, SB1359, SB2386, SB771, SB2844, SB2550, SB1351, SB1423, SB1931, SB2245, SB2589, SB2707, SB2807, SB2351, SB410, SB659, SB816, SB2776, SB2693, SB2580, SB1980, SB1886, SB1234, SB739, SB482, SB456, SB127, SB1666, SB2843, SB2801, SB800, SB2055, SB784, SB2986, SB735, SB1012, SB324, SB2926, SB2938, SB2007, SB2138, SB1242, SB843, SB1152, SB1164, SB1299, SB1349, SB1868, SB2037, SB2349, SB2788, SB39, SB1183, SB1717, SB1832, SB2743, SR429, SR432, SCR38, SB39, SB240, SB618, SB870, SB1183, SB1257, SB1717, SB1727, SB1832, SB2743, SB2, SB3058, SB3059, HB6, HB14, HB43, HB 100, HB136, HB149, HB204, HB206, HB307, HB467, HB685, HB 1130, HB1393, HB1644, HB2027, HB2118, HB2176, HB2468, HB2488, HB2525, HB2596, HB2890, HB2894, HB3077, HB3114, HB3204, SCR4, SCR18, SCR43, SB269, SB330, SB434, SB437, SB438, SB463, SB528, SB604, SB663, SB668, SB682, SB747, SB841, SB912, SB968, SB1020, SB1044, SB1138, SB1143, SB1236, SB1244, SB1325, SB1335, SB1369, SB1418, SB1422, SB1455, SB1468, SB1495, SB1534, SB1579, SB1580, SB1612, SB1624, SB1667, SB1734, SB1745, SB1746, SB1760, SB1784, SB1860, SB1862, SB1864, SB1896, SB1898, SB1920, SB1940, SB1952, SB1998, SB2032, SB2052, SB2068, SB2073, SB2121, SB2127, SB2141, SB2145, SB2161, SB2167, SB2196, SB2207, SB2216, SB2246, SB2323, SB2332, SB2395, SB2431, SB2439, SB2443, SB2581, SB2601, SB2629, SB2702, SB2705, SB2798, SB2873, SB2881, SB2964, SB3034, SB227, SB584, SB1013, SB1137, SB1169, SB1200, SB1299, SB1410, SB1999, SB2004, SB2429, SB2717, SB3058, SB3059, HB6, HB14, HB43, HB 100, HB136, HB149, HB204, HB206, HB307, HB467, HB685, HB 1130, HB1393, HB1644, HB2027, HB2118, HB2176, HB2468, HB2488, HB2525, HB2596, HB2890, HB2894, HB3077, HB3114, HB3204

Keywords: Pflugerville, Trail Capital, health and wellness, outdoor recreation, community connectivity, patriotism, town designation, community engagement, Trophy Club, Texas Town of Patriotism, Port Aransas, Mustang Island, Fishing Capital of Texas, Texas fishing, coastal tourism, charter fishing, deep-sea fishing, bay fishing, pier fishing, angling

Transcript Highlights:

• You guys been in a tough test, but thanks for you both of you coming together and working together to
• You guys been in a tough test, but thanks for you both of you coming together and working together to
• You guys been in a tough test, but thanks for you both of you coming together and working together to
• You guys been in a tough test, but thanks for you both of you coming together and working together to
• You guys been in a tough test, but thanks for you both of you coming together and working together to

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• There are affordable, tested solutions to protect it.
• We know and tested solutions.
• What you see in red is where the Soviets achieved in the 1960s with high-altitude nuclear EMP tests:
• What you see in red is where the Soviets achieved in the 1960s with high-altitude nuclear EMP tests:
• So the neutral ground blocking device has been developed and has been tested.

Bills: SB75, SB715, SB776, SB1299, SB1405, SB1968, SB2021, SB2077, SB2148, SB2321, SB2330, SB2411

Keywords: electric generation, reliability, ERCOT, Public Utility Commission, penalties, performance requirements, energy policy, construction contracts, compensatory damages, government delays, contractor, legislation, nonprofit donor privacy, membership lists, supporter confidentiality, volunteer privacy, association rights, public records exemption, Texas Public Information Act, government transparency

Summary: The committee first took up pending business and favorably reported several bills without objection or by recorded vote, including SB 783, SB 1238, SB 1706, SB 1791, SB 458, SB 1644, and SB 1810, with some of them also sent to the local and uncontested calendar. The committee then moved into hearings on additional bills. SB 1968, by Senator Schwertner, would update the Real Estate License Act by repealing subagency, requiring written buyer-agent agreements before showings, and clarifying when a formal buyer representation agreement must be signed. Texas Realtors testified in support, saying the bill modernizes agency rules and increases transparency, while a committee substitute corrected drafting issues. SB 2411, the annual update to the Texas Business Organizations Code, was also laid out and left pending after supportive testimony from the Texas Business Law Foundation and drafting committee representatives. The committee also heard SB 2321, which would codify ERCOT’s current practice of notifying TCEQ when backup generation needs enforcement discretion for grid reliability; Sierra Club and a chamber of commerce witness supported it with suggestions for clearer emissions reporting, and the bill was left pending. SB 2077 would broaden eligibility for the Texas Mutual Insurance Company board by narrowing conflict restrictions tied to insurance-related interests; Texas Mutual supported the change and the bill was left pending. SB 1405, a broadband bill, would align state law with FCC standards and streamline Broadband Development Office processes; it was left pending after supportive testimony. SB 1299, protecting nonprofit donor privacy, drew support from privacy advocates and concerns from one witness about transparency for publicly funded nonprofit operations; it was left pending. The committee then heard SB 776, which would bar government construction contracts from shifting delay damages to contractors when delays are caused solely by the public owner. Contractors, surety representatives, and water infrastructure advocates supported the bill, arguing it would improve fairness and reduce inflated bids, while water utilities and critical infrastructure entities opposed it, warning of more litigation and higher costs; the bill was left pending. Finally, SB 715, which would apply reliability requirements retroactively to all generation resources in ERCOT, drew opposition from renewable and storage groups and support from some critics of renewable subsidies, with witnesses split over whether it would improve reliability or raise costs; testimony was underway when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Hawaii and in Hawaii in in in Hilo<00:33:38.000> has Hilo has Hilo has um<00:33:41.919> testing
• <00:33:42.760> supplies<00:33:43.760> to<00:33:44.080> test<00:33:45.039>
• water um testing supplies to test water um testing supplies to test water catchment.<00:33:46.640
• So why do you need $100,000 when it's been studied for a long time and, in fact, there is a testing ability

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee first considered a series of Governor’s Message nominations, largely to the State Council on Developmental Disabilities and one to the Hawaii Advisory Commission on Drug Abuse and Controlled Substances. Testifiers and agencies spoke in strong support of the nominees, emphasizing their advocacy, community involvement, and lived experience. The committee heard from nominees and supporters for John Paul Moses III, Cynthia Fowler, Joshua Eay, Alicia Kim, Raymond Mamea, Maria Christina Valenzuela, Eden Watabayashi, Sierra Whiteside, and Brandy Lynn Macallani Hayen. After hearing testimony, the committee voted to advise and consent on each nomination, with the votes adopted by the members present. The committee then took up SR 53 / SCR 69, which asks the Department of Health to convene a pharmacy benefit manager working group to improve transparency, fairness, and drug affordability. Supporters included the Hawaii Pharmacist Association, the University of Hawaii system, and several individuals, while the Department of Health said the issue is complex and may require additional support or a different structure. Members discussed whether the Department of Health should lead the effort or whether another entity, such as SHIPA with an appropriation, might be more workable; the Department of Health suggested a $100,000 appropriation could be sufficient. Next, SR 56 / SCR 73 proposed a report on the developmental needs of children born during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Office of Wellness and Resilience supported the measure and asked for an extended deadline to the end of 2026, and several youth, mental health, and community organizations testified in support. The committee also heard SR 69 / STR 86 on creating an aeromedical services working group, with support from Air Methods, the Department of Health, and the Hawaii Medical Association, and SR 99 / STR 118 on studying the use of filtered catchment water for business activity, which drew support from the Plumbing and Mechanical Contractors Association and comments from the Department of Health that the issue is complicated and should include the Department of Agriculture. No final votes on the resolutions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Members of the public wish to test file a legislative business may register at the kiosk outside.
• If that goes through, if everything's approved, how many total testing areas with the proper testing
• Yes, that will be the case. case. additional testing and monetary equipment?
• I need to make sure that you're they're testing against House Bill 1335.
• I'm testing on behalf of CenterPoint Energy in support of HB 1335.

Bills: HB206, HB 1285, HB1335, HJR107, HB206

Keywords: pipeline, construction, cash bond, county authority, local government, HB 1285, Railroad Commission of Texas, RRC, drones, unmanned aircraft, UAS, drone inspections, oil and gas, pipeline inspection, surface mining, well sites, tank batteries, disposal wells, injection sites, natural resources

Transcript Highlights:

• are part of the committee that sets rates for the general outpatient codes, now for psychological testing
• are part of the committee that sets rates for the general outpatient codes, now for psychological testing
• includes therapy for individual and family group, psychiatry, psychological and neuropsychological testing
• includes therapy for individual and family group, psychiatry, psychological and neuropsychological testing
• includes therapy for individual and family group, psychiatry, psychological and neuropsychological testing

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: House File 105 was presented by Representatives Beerman and Baker and then laid over for possible inclusion in a future omnibus bill. The bill would implement the remaining mental health and physician service recommendations from DHS’s rate study, including raising certain Medicaid reimbursement rates to at least 100% of Medicare where a Medicare equivalent exists, increasing community-based children’s and adult mental health rates and behavioral health home rates, and phasing in additional increases over three years. The authors said the proposal also addresses master’s-level clinician reimbursement and fee-for-service hospital inpatient mental health services, and they emphasized that the changes are intended to improve access, transparency, and provider stability. Both authors argued that low MA reimbursement rates are driving access problems across Minnesota, especially for children, families, and rural communities. They said providers are struggling to hire and retain staff, clinics are closing or shrinking, and patients are facing long waits, boarding in hospitals, or delayed care. Representative Baker said the issue is personal and described the bill as a phased, long-term approach because of state budget limits and the size of the cost, which he said is in the hundreds of millions but still awaiting a fiscal note. Public testimony was strongly supportive overall. A family physician said higher rates would improve access, keep clinics open, and help patients avoid emergency care, while a Children’s Minnesota mental health leader described more than 1,200 pediatric boarding episodes in 2024 and said outpatient investment is needed to reduce pressure on emergency and inpatient services. A rural provider said her organization had to close an in-home children’s mental health program because of insufficient reimbursement, harming access in underserved counties. A psychologist testifying for the Minnesota Psychological Association supported the bill’s general direction but objected to repealing the pay differential for doctoral-level psychologists, arguing that doctoral training is more extensive and that eliminating the differential could worsen workforce shortages. After testimony and member questions about the bill’s scope and cost, public testimony was closed and the bill was laid over.

Transcript Highlights:

• And what they do, it's basically a giant testing lab where they test roofs, they test buildings, you
• A testing lab where they test roofs, they test buildings, you know, for safety in various conditions.
• You have you passed the test,<01:59:05.600> okay. test, okay. test, okay.
• I'm glad I passed the test. >> Thank you. I'm glad I passed the test.
• >> Are you talking about muscle testing? >> Are you talking about muscle testing?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on Senate Bill 562, which would create a home damage mitigation and resilience grant program aimed at helping homeowners make property improvements that could reduce insurance costs and non-renewals. Commissioner DJ Bettencourt of the New Hampshire Insurance Department explained that the program is modeled in part on Alabama’s safer homes program, but tailored for New Hampshire hazards such as floods, microbursts, heavy snow, ice, and falling trees. He said the grants would be limited to primary residences, subject to a means test, capped at $10,000, and intended to help homeowners make targeted improvements such as roof fortification or tree removal that could improve underwriting outcomes and lead to premium discounts. Bettencourt said the program would not use state taxpayer funds and would instead rely on philanthropic donations, possible federal or regional housing-bank funding, and other outside sources. He said the department would not need new staff, and that a current position could be reconfigured to help administer the program part-time. Committee members asked about the funding language, the meaning of “loans” in the bill, whether there were any other states using a similar no-state-funds model, and how many homeowners could be helped. Bettencourt said Rhode Island and Connecticut were moving forward in a similar way, and that the number of beneficiaries would depend on how much money is raised. Members also questioned how the grant program would actually lower premiums, whether savings would apply only to participants or more broadly, and how the IBHS evaluation process would work. Bettencourt and department staff said the direct benefit would be to the homeowner whose property is improved, though neighbors could also benefit in some cases. They explained that IBHS is a building-safety organization that certifies contractors and inspectors and that its standards can qualify homes for insurer discounts. Questions were also raised about confidentiality provisions, first-come-first-served grant awards, rollover of unused applications, and possible tax treatment of donations. The sponsor said those details would be addressed through rulemaking or existing tax rules, and no vote was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's tested every year.
• On top of that, we also do, with both Rio and PERS, employer testing, so part of our testing of the census
• data... ...both Rio and PERS employer testing.
• They go through and do penetration testing for NDIT and the university system right now.
• They go through and do penetration testing for NDIT and the university system right now.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, so I was just wondering if you could kind of give me what the cost breakdown is of genetic testing
• , preventative care after a positive test, versus treating stage four cancer, and especially if there's
• ,<00:10:29.519> um, breakdown is of of genetic testing, um, breakdown is of of genetic testing
• ><00:10:31.200> after<00:10:31.600> a<00:10:31.920> positive<00:10:32.399> test
• preventative care after a positive test preventative care after a positive test versus<00:10:33.839

Bills: HF3388, HF400

Keywords: HF3388, Minnesota premium security plan, reinsurance, health insurance, group health carriers, MCHA, MNsure, individual market, premium stabilization, carrier assessment, health insurance assessment, premium security plan account, state innovation waiver, high-risk pool, reinsurance payments, healthcare premiums, insurance carriers, deferral of assessment, financially impaired condition, HF400

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from the prior day and then heard House File 400, a bill described as a defrayal measure for health insurance mandates. Representative Perryman said the bill would not block future mandates, but would require the state to pay the added costs of any new mandated benefits so those costs would not be shifted to premium payers. She and supporters framed the bill as a way to protect affordability for Minnesota employers, workers, and families, especially in the fully insured market. Testimony in support came from the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce and the Minnesota Council of Health Plans. They argued that Minnesota has a high number of mandated benefits, that each new mandate adds cost to premiums, and that businesses—especially small and midsize employers—are already struggling with rising health insurance costs. The health plans representative said the bill would use the existing Commerce defrayal process to reimburse plans for eligible mandate-related claims, allowing those costs to be removed from premium rates. Several members echoed support, saying the bill would improve transparency by showing the fiscal impact of proposed mandates and help prevent people from being priced out of coverage. Members also explored how mandates apply in the market and how premiums are set. Deputy Commissioner Julia Dryer explained that, unless otherwise specified, mandates generally apply to the individual, small group, and fully insured large group markets, while self-insured ERISA plans and other markets are generally outside that scope. Representative Elkins noted that the affected market is relatively small and said small businesses are increasingly moving to self-insured plans because of cost. He and others raised concerns about affordability, while Representative Smith argued that mandates often ensure needed care and that the bill shifts costs to taxpayers rather than insurers. Representative Bacham added a personal example from tribal self-insurance, saying preventive physicals had saved lives and asking whether other factors besides mandates are driving insurer costs. No amendments were offered, and the bill was laid over for possible future consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• 29:56.799> lead fund for lead fund for lead lead<00:29:59.279> um,<00:29:59.679> testing
• lead um, testing lead um, testing for<00:30:01.440> the<00:30:01.520> lead<00:30:01.840
• > testing<00:30:02.320> and<00:30:02.559> water.
• for the lead testing and water. for the lead testing and water.
• <01:19:12.719> assessments a section for certain test assessments a section for certain test

Keywords: 1191, senate, all