Video & Transcript Research : 'testimony'
Page 136 of 500
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
Senate Energy and Natural Resources (03/18/2025)
Energy and Natural Resources
Transcript Highlights:
- Thank you for your testimony.
- Thank you for your testimony.
- Thank you for your testimony. Thank you for your testimony. Senator R., thank you, Mr. Chairman.
- Thank you for your testimony.
- and copy of the um I have some testimony and on<01:49:14.840>
the <01:49:15.000>testimony<
MN
MN
Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session
House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee 2/27/25
Judiciary Finance and Civil Law
Transcript Highlights:
- Thank you for your testimony.
- Thank you for your testimony.
- Please support HF 2, and thank you for your testimony. Of course. Thank you for your testimony.
- thank you thank you for your testimony thank you thank you for your testimony and<01:00:12.039><
- <01:03:44.319>
the you thank you for your testimony the you thank you for your testimony the
Keywords:
pregnancy support, women's health, maternity homes, nonprofit organizations, grant funding, abortion, family services, Office of Inspector General, inspector general, legislative audit, fraud prevention, waste and abuse, public funds, grant oversight, state grants, grant management, whistleblower protection, retaliation, subpoena power, data practices
MN
Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session
House Transportation Finance and Policy Committee 2/24/25
Transportation Finance and Policy
Transcript Highlights:
- you thank you so much for your testimony you thank you so much for your testimony um<00:53:03.359
- I will elaborate on my testimony against HF 749.
- I will elaborate on my testimony against HF 749.
- <00:59:47.079>
uh time thank you for your testimony uh time thank you for your testimony uh - deserves uh thank you for the testimony deserves uh thank you for the testimony uh<01:04:38.760>
NH
New Hampshire 2026 Regular Session
House Resources, Recreation and Development (02/04/2026)
Resources, Recreation and Development
Transcript Highlights:
- Thank you for your testimony.
- for your testimony. for your testimony.
- Seeing none of blue sheets. testimony. testimony.
- . testimony. testimony.
- . testimony. testimony.
Summary:
The committee first took up HB 163FN, dealing with requiring current, verifiable evidence of a species’ presence before land-use restrictions are imposed for habitat protection. Members discussed an amendment that had been worked on with agencies and stakeholder groups. Fish and Game testified that, while the amendment improved the bill, the agency still opposed it because of concerns about citizen science, how the proposal would apply to public versus private property, and how the transition to DES would work. Representative Darby argued the amendment was ambiguous, lacked a full hearing, and did not clearly address record verification or private-property access issues. The amendment passed 8-7, and the committee then voted OTPA 8-7, with a minority report noted.
The committee then moved to HB 1752FN, which would create a chain of custody for timber and carbon credits. Representative Davis presented an amendment saying it would help law enforcement investigate timber theft and add transparency to New Hampshire’s carbon registry by identifying buyers of carbon credits. Supporters said the change would impose little burden and align with practices in other states. Opponents, including Representative Darby, Representative Vale, and the state forester from DNCR, said the carbon market is complex, the amendment was not fully vetted, and a hearing with all stakeholders was needed; they also raised fiscal-note concerns. The amendment passed 8-7, and the committee then voted OTPA 8-7, again with a minority report.
Finally, the committee opened a hearing on HB 1019, which would add an active water treatment professional to the state water well board. Representative Peter Petrino and Representative Wendy Thomas said the board should include expertise on contamination risks and treatment technologies, citing concerns about arsenic, radon, and PFAS in private wells. The chairman of the Water Well Board testified in opposition to the bill as drafted, saying the board supports the general idea of licensing water filtration work but does not currently have authority or rules to oversee that field and believes the proposal would put “the cart before the horse.” Members questioned whether the board’s current mandate even covers filtration systems, and the discussion ended with those concerns unresolved.
MA
Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Committee on Juvenile and Emerging Adult Justice Jun 21st, 2026 at 01:00 pm
Senate Committee on Juvenile and Emerging Adult Justice
Transcript Highlights:
- The testimony for this hearing is received by invitation only, and I think most folks here know we don't
- I really appreciate your testimony.
- Thank you to the panel for your testimony.
- Really appreciate the testimony from the panel. Thank you.
- I really appreciate the testimony from the panel.
Summary:
The Senate Committee on Juvenile and Emerging Adult Justice held an informational hearing focused on diversion programs and services for high-risk youth, with no bills before the committee and no votes taken. The chair and members emphasized that the session was intended to hear from invited testimony and discuss how to strengthen diversion, reduce court involvement, and improve outcomes for youth. The committee heard first from the Office of the Child Advocate and diversion providers, who described the Massachusetts Youth Diversion Program, its statewide expansion to 10 of 11 court counties, and its reported success rate of about 80% completion without reoffending. Testimony highlighted that diversion keeps youth out of court, connects them more quickly to community-based services, and can address needs such as mental health, education, and substance use. Witnesses also pointed to racial and ethnic disparities in arrests versus summonses, regional variation in diversion access, and the need for clearer statutory authority, more funding, and broader use of pre-arrest diversion.
Committee members asked about the difference between arrest and summons, who can initiate diversion, why arrest rates have increased relative to summonses, and how diversion might prevent harmful downstream consequences such as detention or immigration enforcement involvement. Witnesses said police, clerk magistrates, district attorneys, and judges can refer youth to diversion, and argued that local policy, training, and legislative changes could expand use. They also discussed the impact of detention on youth, including stigma, lost school time, and the lack of credit for time served in the juvenile system. Testimony from Citizens for Juvenile Justice focused on prevention, school discipline, and the school-to-prison pipeline, arguing for more restorative practices, better data, and legislation to limit suspensions and expulsions, especially for younger students and nonviolent conduct. They also raised concerns about DCF-involved and foster youth, who are disproportionately represented in the juvenile system.
The final panel, the Children's League of Massachusetts and transition-age youth providers, shifted to child welfare and young adult supports. They supported reducing court involvement in child requiring assistance cases, expanding family resource centers, and strengthening services for transition-age youth leaving DCF or DYS custody. Providers described housing instability, homelessness, and the need for education, employment, behavioral health, and supportive housing services for young adults ages 18 to 23. Across the hearing, witnesses consistently argued that early intervention, community-based supports, and diversion are more effective than court processing or detention for most youth, and that the legislature can help through funding, statutory clarity, expanded eligibility, and stronger data collection.
NH
Transcript Highlights:
- Thank you for your testimony. >> Um, you can keep going.
- both for your testimony. both for your testimony. >> Thank<00:22:21.240>
you. - Uh, thank you for taking my testimony.
- both for your testimony. both for your testimony. >> Thank<00:38:10.200>
you. - Merrill's testimony, I think we would want to offer that as a committee. Sounds good.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Committee on State and Local Government - 02/20/25
State and Local Government
Transcript Highlights:
- Please state your name for the record and you may proceed with your testimony. Thank you, Mr.
- Thank you, Miss Mittendorf, for your testimony. Next, we'll go to Mr. Lightfoot.
- Please state your name and you may proceed with your testimony. Good afternoon.
- I think, based on your testimony, this is meant indeed for cities without dedicated staff.
- Thank you for your testimony.
US
US Federal 2025-2026 Regular Session
Organizational business meeting to consider an original resolution authorizing expenditures by the committee during the 119th Congress; to be immediately followed by hearings to examine the real impacts of debanking in America. Feb 5th, 2025 at 09:00 am
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee
Transcript Highlights:
- Chairman, and thank you all, gentlemen, for your testimony.
- Klein, whose testimony I enjoyed. I understand his position.
- Is that your testimony? Yes, sir.
- Thank all of you for your testimony. Mr.
- Thank you so very much for your testimony.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- Members will pick up right where we had to go into recess, and that is with taking public testimony on
- The floor is now open for public testimony.
- Thank you for your testimony.
- The floor is now open for public testimony. The chair calls Carmen Tilton.
- If you could get your written testimony to us, uh, we'd appreciate that.
Bills:
SB 227, SB 269, SB 407, SB 463, SB 527, SB 547, SB 1283, SB 1380, SB 1383, SB 1511, SB 1640, SB 1784, SB 2069
Keywords:
school funding, education reform, state budget, property taxes, equity in education, healthcare policy, vaccines, exemptions, religious beliefs, public health, workplace violence, healthcare facilities, definition expansion, safety regulations, health and safety code, health insurance, anesthesia, pediatric dental services, coverage, medical necessity
FL
Florida 2025 Regular Session
April 1, 2025 - 04:00 PM
Transcript Highlights:
- Is there any public testimony on the amendment? Seeing none, is there any debate on the amendment?
- Is there any public testimony on the bill? We do have some public testimony?
- Public testimony, and we do have some public testimony.
- Any public testimony? We do have public testimony.
- Is there any further public testimony? All right, members, we're in debate. Go ahead.
Summary:
The committee heard three member bills. CS/HB 1095 would create a criminal offender substance abuse pilot program in Hillsborough County for probationers ordered to abstain from drugs and alcohol, with frequent testing, immediate arrest for violations, and a cap of 150 participants. An amendment removed the fiscal impact by eliminating an appropriation and directing any appropriated funds to the administering entity; the amendment and bill both passed, and the bill was reported favorably as a committee substitute.
CS/HB 1455 would establish mandatory minimum sentences for repeat sexual offenders or predators who commit specified sexual offenses, including 10-year and 20-year minimums depending on the offense, with no gain time or discretionary early release. The only public testimony was in support from the Smart Justice Alliance. The committee approved the bill 11-1 and reported it favorably.
CS/HB 1283 would make the sex trafficking of a child under 12 or a mentally incapacitated person a capital felony punishable by death or life imprisonment. Members questioned the fiscal impact, housing on death row, and how the death penalty process would work; the sponsor said the bill was aimed at the worst offenders and that current law already provides mandatory life for trafficking a child under 12. Public testimony included opposition from the Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, and support from the Smart Justice Alliance. After debate focused on constitutionality and the death penalty, the committee passed the bill 10-3 and reported it favorably.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- the bill, sent up the committee substitute, explained the differences, and we'll now take public testimony
- The floor is now open for public testimony. Chair calls Mark Friesenhahn.
- The floor is now open for public testimony. Chair calls Mark Friesenhahn.
- That is pretty much my testimony. We need your help to fix it. Thank you. Thank you very much. Mr.
- Public testimony is closed, and the bill and its committee substitute will be left pending.
Keywords:
rock crushing, permits, air quality, environmental monitoring, aggregate production, seismicity, public meeting, land use, SB 1758, cement kiln, portland cement, aggregate production operation, aggregate quarry, semiconductor wafer manufacturing, chip fabrication, semiconductor plant, vibration, seismic disturbance, liability limitation, TCEQ
MN
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
House Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee 3/17/26
Public Safety Finance and Policy
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.
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
MN
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
MN
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
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Finance (02/11/2025)
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.
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.
MN
Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session
House Elections Finance and Government Operations Committee 1/22/25
Elections Finance and Government Operations
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.
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.
NH
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.
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Health, Human Services and Elderly Affairs (03/12/2025)
Health, Human Services & Elderly Affairs
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.
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.