Transcript Highlights:

• The presentation you'll be able to see what's considered to be the freight analysis framework.
• The presentation you'll be able to see what's considered to be the freight analysis framework.
• That included a trade port market Analysis that was just completed associated with Hatch and another
• And I will just switch over to our legislative priorities.
• But we don't have the authority to legislate like you do or to enforce any legislation.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And then last session, there was legislation, Senate Bill 20, And then last session, there was legislation
• So if no one else is interested, I will go forward and put it legislation, you know, work with legislative
• We also frequently do data analysis.
• And we also frequently do data analysis.
• I know you're not ready to put forth any legislation.

Summary: The task force reviewed survey results from state agencies on potential statutory revisions, with Levi reporting 70 proposals from 20 agencies and noting that about 33 might become agency pre-file bills. Members discussed the need to share the survey more broadly within higher education and to better coordinate issues involving IT and other cross-agency functions. The task force then heard from the Office of Management and Budget on three topics: concessions, architect/engineering pre-qualification, and legal notices. OMB said the concessions law is outdated and inconsistent with current practice, and suggested a collaborative rewrite to allow best-value evaluation, raise the threshold, and standardize solicitation templates. On architect/engineering pre-qualification, OMB proposed expanding authority beyond current state-agency limits and creating uniform templates. On legal notices, OMB proposed modernizing publication requirements, exploring online and abbreviated notices, and working with newspapers and other stakeholders on technology and accessibility improvements. Members asked about where concession revenues go, whether political subdivisions must follow the same rules, and how to move from discussion to action. The task force agreed to have OMB work with Legislative Council and affected stakeholders to develop bill drafts, and the motion passed unanimously. The University of North Dakota then presented a series of proposed revisions focused on public buildings and procurement. UND asked to rework the definition of construction so routine maintenance and one-for-one replacements over $250,000 would not automatically trigger public-improvement requirements, suggested raising the threshold to $500,000, and asked for more flexibility based on project complexity and risk. UND also proposed changes to public bid advertisements to reflect electronic bidding, revisions to construction manager-at-risk selection criteria, changes to architect/engineer procurement rules, an increase in the direct-hire design threshold, and a higher legislative-consent threshold for privately funded projects. The task force supported having UND work with counsel and OMB to develop bill drafts, and that motion also passed. The Department of Public Instruction concluded with proposed cleanup to credentialing and education statutes. DPI recommended reviewing its credential categories for relevance, possibly transferring credentialing authority to the Education Standards and Practices Board, removing outdated school safety patrol language, clarifying waiver provisions, and updating dyslexia screening reporting requirements so the statute reflects current practice. Members focused mainly on whether the dyslexia reporting requirement should remain, and DPI said the screening itself would continue even if reporting language were revised. No votes were taken on DPI’s suggestions, and the task force recessed after the presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Wilmarth, the Senate File 81, was it the intention of the legislation to increase or decrease funding
• Uh, I will from the get-go say that the analysis that's in the slides only look at the general...
• The same analysis is shown on the next slide for middle school per ADM next slide for middle school per
• I'm sort of looking for a sensitivity analysis there. >> Mr.
• Brown and Don Dey, and I was a sidekick at the time attending all those legislative sessions.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I know you received this report back on the first legislative day, February 4th.
• It's broken into parts: there’s a constitutional analysis, an American Law Institute principles analysis

Bills: HB250

Keywords: HB250, Alabama Ethics Commission, statement of economic interests, financial disclosure, candidate ethics, campaign finance, candidate filing deadline, qualifying papers, declaration of candidacy, independent candidate, ballot access, election law, ethics reform, public officials, public employees, asset disclosure, income disclosure, real estate holdings, indebtedness disclosure, late filing penalty

Transcript Highlights:

• general revenues until the street fund is repaid and has not obtained the authorization from the Legislative
• The authorization from the Legislative Joint Auditing Committee for repayment of less than 10% of general
• Under the district court clerk, the following items were noted in the analysis of the district court
• Under the district court clerk, the following items were noted in the analysis of the district court
• bought and fine bank The following items were noted in the analysis of the district court bond and fine

Summary: The committee first approved a motion by voice vote, then received updates on delinquent private water and sewer reports. For the 2012 reports, staff said five additional 2024 reports had been received since the December meeting, bringing the total to 17 with escrow funds released and 26 still escrowed. For the 2023 delinquent reports, two more had come in, leaving five outstanding; both reports were filed without objection. The committee then focused on Act 709 repayment issues for the town of Daisy. Audit staff said Daisy had made unauthorized payments to a nonprofit and had used restricted street funds for fire-related expenses, and that the town had not yet adopted the required repayment ordinance. Mayor Lisa Cogburn said the council had not approved repayment because members disputed the amount, though she said the town had funds to pay. After discussion about the audit calculations and statutory repayment requirements, the committee adopted a motion requiring 10% repayment of the street fund under the statute and providing that failure to comply would result in withholding turnback funds. The Daisy report was then filed. The committee reviewed numerous additional audit findings from cities, counties, and water departments. Several local officials appeared and described corrective steps, including reconciliation work in Harrison and Carroll County, revenue-code corrections in Izard County, monthly bond-pending reviews in Alexander, fixed-asset documentation and receipt procedures in the town of 56, and bookkeeping/receipt improvements in Ozan and Lee County. Some matters were deferred, including several private water and sewer reports and Green Forest, while others were filed. Reports involving more serious issues were referred to the prosecuting attorney and Attorney General, including Bull Shoals, Lone Oak County, Beaver, Central City, Gravette, Ralston Water Department, Thornton Waterworks, and others. The committee also filed 19 reports with resolved findings and 53 reports with no findings, and adjourned with the next meeting set for February 12, 2026.

Transcript Highlights:

• And to take one step back with this easement process, because of the legislative approval requirement
• We can't move to finalize the easement until we have legislative approval.
• When we get legislative approval, we go through a full appraisal process with a licensed real estate
• That person does a very detailed analysis of determining the cost of a 25-year easement for that area
• Um now to answer the legislative level.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several shoreline easement resolutions and a water-supply study resolution. For the easement measures, the Department of Land and Natural Resources supported each item, and testimony also came from affected landowners and community members. Members asked about why some easements were granted gratis to public agencies, with DLNR explaining that those cases involved public infrastructure such as stormwater management and did not require bonds or rent. For private properties, DLNR described the standard process of monthly rent during the legislative approval gap, followed by a one-time appraised payment for a 25-year easement once the appraisal is completed. A substantial portion of the discussion focused on shoreline erosion and whether hardened shoreline structures or seawalls were contributing to beach loss. On one measure, DLNR explained that a large sandbag shoreline structure was tied to a nearby boat harbor that had altered sand movement over time, causing flanking erosion on adjacent unarmored property. On another, DLNR said a wall built under a valid 1960s permit was originally a boundary or landscaping wall, but now functions as a seawall as the shoreline has migrated landward. Members raised concerns about fairness, public beach access, and whether adjacent owners should share costs, and DLNR responded that shoreline matters are handled parcel by parcel under existing statute. The committee also heard support for a resolution creating a task force or study on desalination. DLNR’s Commission on Water Resource Management supported the intent but asked for more time to complete a comprehensive report, noting the work would require substantial staffing and coordination. The Board of Water Supply and CARES also testified in support, with CARES emphasizing future water-supply needs, cultural and historic preservation concerns, and the importance of coordinating with other agencies. DLNR said it would rely on existing studies and work with county agencies and the Department of Health. No votes or final committee actions were taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The legislation of federal law follows the passage of the Farm Bill.
• So in terms of issues about... legislation for the legislator and the policymaker, when you're thinking
• When you talk to people that know about this legislation, as with the 2019 Texas legislation...
• They provide certificates of analysis, so I'm comfortable with using them for my son.
• It doesn't, but there will be separate legislation. I guarantee it.

Bills: HB28, SB3, SB 3

Keywords: hemp regulation, consumable products, cannabinoids, state health, youth protection, licensing fees, criminal offenses, flash flood, flood warning, outdoor warning siren, emergency alert, disaster preparedness, flood mitigation, Hill Country floods, Texas Water Development Board, municipalities, counties, local government mandate, public safety, grant program

Transcript Highlights:

• I represent CALA, California Action for Legislative Accountability. The stated purpose...
• California Action for Legislative Accountability.
• There have been cases of that happening in the state of California, and we have passed legislation in
• I think it was during the Kirkringle contest, and legislation was passed to prevent uniformed guards
• This bill is not legislating that topic. Okay. Well, but it is talking about Prop 50, right?

Summary: The Assembly Elections Committee met on May 6, 2026, with a quorum present and heard one bill, SB 73. The author described the measure as a response to perceived threats to California elections, including restrictions on armed or non-uniformed personnel at polling places, protections for ballots and voting equipment, and limits on law enforcement access to election materials without a court order. The chair reviewed a set of agreed amendments, including removing a section conflicting with AB 1664, deleting proposed criminal penalties, clarifying the role of the Attorney General and Secretary of State, and refining language on signature challenges, law enforcement support, and certified voting technology. Supporters, including AAPI Force, CHIRLA, the League of Women Voters of California, and Common Cause, argued the bill would protect voters from intimidation and preserve election integrity. Opponents from CALA argued the bill was unnecessary, would hinder legitimate investigations, and reflected distrust of law enforcement and federal oversight. Committee discussion focused heavily on whether the bill was responding to real-world threats and on the ballot seizure in Riverside County. Members questioned how the measure would affect signature challenges, chain of custody, and investigations into possible fraud. The author and supporters said ballots should remain in election officials’ custody and that federal or local agents should not be able to interfere with election materials or intimidate voters. The chair and other members also discussed the urgency clause and the need to move the bill quickly despite the proximity of the June election. The committee voted to do pass and re-refer SB 73 to the Committee on Public Safety. The roll call initially showed the bill passing 5-1, then after the absent member arrived, the final vote was 6-2, and the bill was reported out of committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• and authority and oversee judicial, and legislative branches uh judicial, and legislative branches uh
• <00:09:37.960> Uh duties such as economic analysis. Uh duties such as economic analysis.
• accordance with the legislative accordance with the legislative appropriations<00:11:04.920>
• Um legislation.
• the legislature did um pass legislation the legislature did um pass legislation this<01:43:58.080

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• legislation legislation are<00:02:49.280> calling<00:02:49.599> on<00:02:50.319> there
• case and guidance from legislative case and guidance from legislative counsel,<00:03:22.080>
• This approach mirrors prior legislative This approach mirrors prior legislative efforts<00:04:10.720
• Um, and when they comment about the legal analysis, constitutional analysis, I have no reason to, um,
• Legislation should be geraness.

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House returned from recess and took up S. 208, a bill on standards for law enforcement identification. The House Judiciary Committee explained that it had rewritten the bill into a model-policy approach focused on Vermont state and local agencies, rather than imposing direct requirements on all law enforcement, because of constitutional and preemption concerns raised by a recent Ninth Circuit decision. The amended bill would direct the Law Enforcement Advisory Board to develop a statewide policy on officer identification and facial coverings by July 2027, require agencies to adopt a consistent policy by October 1, 2027, and deem agencies to have adopted the model policy if they do not act. The committee reported the bill favorably on a 6-5 vote. Members then debated an amendment offered by Representatives Berbeco and McGill to restore federal officers to the bill. Supporters argued that public authority should not be anonymous, that visible identification is necessary for transparency, accountability, and public trust, and that the bill should apply to federal agents as well as state and local officers. They said the amendment included exemptions for undercover work, tactical teams, protective equipment, and safety concerns, and argued Vermont should not wait for courts to resolve every constitutional question before acting. Opponents on the Judiciary Committee said the language remained likely unconstitutional and could jeopardize the bill’s passage; the committee had found the amendment unfavorable on an 8-1 vote. The floor debate continued with several members speaking in favor of the amendment, including arguments that other states have adopted similar requirements and that Vermont should lead on the issue. One member raised a point of order that was not sustained, and the Speaker ruled federal authority relevant to the question. The transcript ends while debate on the amendment was still underway, after a request for a roll-call vote was granted, with no final floor vote on the amendment shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• to focus more on state legislation to focus more on state legislation related<00:07:32.000> to
• legislation in the next session. legislation in the next session.
• waiting into a very live legislative waiting into a very live legislative debate.<00:20:12.960><
• also an executive summary analysis also an executive summary analysis there,<00:54:52.319> and
• The original document is here analysis.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The meeting began with roll call and introductions of commission members and guests, followed by approval of the agenda and a motion to approve the February 10 minutes with a correction clarifying that one quoted statement was misattributed. The commission then moved into presentations. The main presentation came from the Conference of State Bank Supervisors on implementation of the federal GENIUS Act for stablecoins. The speaker reviewed the OCC’s recent 367-page proposed rule, noting it raises many open questions and design choices for states, and discussed expected upcoming rulemaking from the FDIC, Federal Reserve, and Treasury. The presentation focused on six areas: permissible issuer activities, reserve assets and redemption, risk management and supervision, treatment of state-qualified issuers, capital/operational backstops, and foreign issuers. It also flagged unresolved issues around Bank Secrecy Act/AML requirements and the meaning of “digital asset service provider” activities. A substantial portion of the discussion addressed yield restrictions, with the presenter explaining the OCC’s broad definition of yield and its rebuttable presumption against issuer-affiliated or related third-party yield arrangements. The speaker said this likely forecloses many existing white-label structures but leaves some room for third-party payments depending on distance from the issuer, and noted ongoing Senate debate over similar provisions. The presentation also covered reserve valuation, liquidity and diversification requirements, redemption timing, and supervisory expectations such as third-party oversight, IT security, exam cycles, and reporting. No additional votes or formal actions were taken beyond approving the amended minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• We seek to protect the rights of all who participate in the legislative process so that we can have a
• Madam Chair, Assemblymember, the intent of the legislation would be to partner with the health centers
• This is just smart legislation that allows us to fully leverage the resources that we need through a
• And if you look at the analysis on page one, you can see the further definition.
• And if you look at the analysis on page one, you can see the further definition related to emergency

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee met on March 25, 2025, with Chair Mia Bonta presiding and initially operating as a subcommittee until quorum was established. The committee heard several health-related bills, including AB 73 on creating a Black Mental Health Navigator certification, AB 499 on lowering the state reimbursement trigger for the Robert F. Kennedy Farm Workers Medical Plan, AB 843 on aligning California health insurance language-access rules with federal standards, AB 257 on a specialty care network using telehealth and virtual services for Medi-Cal and underserved communities, AB 64 on allowing diacritical marks on vital records, AB 315 on the Home and Community-Based Alternatives waiver, and AB 40 on clarifying that emergency services include reproductive health services such as abortion. Testimony generally emphasized disparities in access, culturally competent care, language access, rural provider shortages, and the importance of preserving or expanding programs that help vulnerable populations. Supporters included authors, state and local health organizations, advocacy groups, and affected individuals. AB 73 was backed as a way to address stigma, mistrust, and culturally competent mental health access for Black Californians. AB 499 was described as helping keep a self-insured farmworker health plan operational while maintaining a low-cost, labor-management model. AB 843 was supported as a way to prevent children and families from having to translate sensitive medical and insurance information and to protect limited-English-proficient Californians. AB 257 drew support as a demonstration project to improve specialty care access through California-based clinicians and virtual care, with examples of reduced wait times and costs. AB 64 received emotional testimony from the author, a child and his family, and others about the importance of accurately recording names with accents and other marks. AB 315 was presented as a cost-neutral or cost-saving way to expand home- and community-based care for medically fragile people, with strong support from disability, health, and provider groups. AB 40 drew support from reproductive health and medical organizations, while one opposition witness argued it could conflict with emergency care standards and overburden emergency departments. The committee took roll-call votes and advanced AB 499, AB 73, AB 843, AB 257, AB 64, AB 315, and AB 40 to Appropriations, with AB 40 receiving some no votes. The committee also adopted its 2025-26 rules and approved a consent calendar that included AB 225, AB 304, AB 403, AB 688, and AB 951. Several measures were initially placed on call and later lifted and recorded as passing out of committee before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• McClure, to discuss the judicial branch legislative agenda, you are recognized, sir.
• They can emanate from budget issues that are part of our legislative budget request.
• And legislative issues will percolate up from those committees.
• So, in the And legislative issues will percolate up from those committees.
• There are some positions legislatively that are also prescribed in statute.

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met with a quorum present and heard several Office of the State Courts Administrator presentations. Judge Mark Mahan discussed the impact of 2023’s HB 837 litigation reforms on court operations, explaining that the law’s changes to comparative negligence, filing deadlines, collateral source evidence, premises liability, bad faith claims, attorney’s fees, and offer-of-judgment rules triggered a major March 2023 civil filing surge. He described how filings tripled statewide, with especially large increases in auto negligence and premises liability cases, and outlined how circuits responded through active case management, added resources, and workflow changes. Members asked whether the bill’s immediate effective date contributed to the surge and whether clearance rates would normalize over time; Judge Mahan said the court system viewed its response as a success and expected rates to settle as the backlog is worked through. The committee then received a presentation on problem-solving courts from Jennifer Grandal and Judge Nina Richardson. Grandal reviewed Florida’s drug courts, mental health courts, veterans courts, dependency and early childhood courts, noting statewide best-practice standards, annual reporting requirements, funding sources, and data collection systems. Judge Richardson gave a local perspective on treatment courts, emphasizing that they address underlying mental health and substance use issues, rely on judicial supervision and sanctions as well as incentives, and help participants achieve recovery and avoid reoffending. She said the programs are accountable, transparent, and effective, and thanked the Legislature for continued support. Finally, Judge Rachel Nordby and Eric McClure outlined the judicial branch’s legislative agenda. Nordby summarized the Supreme Court workgroup’s recommendations to expand Florida’s vexatious litigant law, including broader coverage, fewer qualifying adverse cases, a longer lookback period, and a public records exemption for stricken defamatory or sham material. McClure then highlighted additional agenda items: modernizing the duty-judge statute, expanding senior management retirement eligibility, authorizing additional judgeships based on workload studies, removing the statutory cap on court-ordered nonbinding arbitration compensation, protecting appellate clerks’ personal information, allowing alternative authentication for certain judicial notarizations, and creating a hearsay exception for guardian ad litem reports and testimony. No votes were taken, and the committee adjourned after member introductions and staff introductions.

Transcript Highlights:

• And my second question was relating to the age specified in the legislation. So it's 14 and under.
• Specifically addressed with this legislation no longer apply.
• under years ago and is no longer a city under the<00:23:54.559> court's<00:23:54.960> analysis
• <00:23:55.440> is<00:23:55.600> now<00:23:55.760> metro the court's analysis
• is now metro the court's analysis is now metro government.<00:23:56.720> The<00:23:56.960>

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The House Judiciary Committee met with a quorum and considered four bills. House Bill 4, relating to grooming a minor, was presented as a response to child sexual abuse concerns and would create criminal penalties for adults who groom or solicit minors for sexual conduct. Members raised questions about possible impacts on teachers, youth ministers, nonprofits, and other good-faith communications, as well as concerns about vagueness and age thresholds. The sponsor and supporters said the bill was intended to target predatory conduct while exempting job-related, age-appropriate, and other non-predatory discussions. The committee approved HB 4 favorably by a vote of 14 yes, 0 no, and 5 pass. House Bill 84, dealing with local government liability for riot-related property damage, was described as a clarification of longstanding Kentucky law so it would apply to consolidated and unified local governments such as Louisville. The sponsor said the bill preserves accountability when governments have notice of a riot and fail to act, while opponents questioned whether language about citizens’ aid could encourage vigilante behavior. The sponsor and another member said the bill was not about vigilanteism but about preserving existing rights and ensuring equal protection for property owners across the state. HB 84 passed favorably by a vote of 15 yes, 1 no, and 1 pass. House Bill 188, relating to public safety in jails, would extend peer-support confidentiality protections from police officers to jail employees and add jail and medical staff to third-degree assault protections. The sponsor said the measure was prompted by concerns from Warren County jail leadership and was intended to improve mental and physical safety at no cost to taxpayers. Members voiced support for extending protections to jail and penitentiary staff, and the committee passed HB 188 favorably with 18 yes votes and no opposition. House Bill 143, relating to fiduciary bonds, would allow fiduciary bonds to be notarized instead of attested by the circuit court clerk, a change described as a practical request from clerks and attorneys. It passed unanimously, 18 yes, 0 no, 0 pass, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• As a member of the Nuclear Legislative Working Group, I've seen presentations on SMRs as you're doing
• There are 23 questions they can answer, including the big one about legislation, and questions about
• I hope that some of these states that come forward, they get legislation, they get funding, they get
• And I think because you as legislators, and you have the advantage of being in a state that, you know
• Like, how many sessions do you think we will have before the legislative session in January?

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• on local legislation. from the committee on local legislation.
• You may remember we passed legislation legislation legislation um two years ago uh to basically take
• front of us, the same legislation that we're of us, the same legislation that we're of us, the same legislation
• the hemp legislation restricts, what the hemp legislation restricts, what the hemp legislation restricts
• , what the hemp legislation mandates, what the hemp hemp legislation mandates, what the hemp hemp legislation

Bills: SB 66, SB 317, SB 393, SB 397, SB 456, SB 614, SB 628, SB 629, SB 636, SB 715, SB 731, SB 801, SB 872, SB 905, SB 986, SB 1012, SB 1013, SB 1015, SB 1032, SB 1113, SB 1181, SB 1212, SB 1241, SB 1250, SB 1278, SB 1285, SB 1376, SB 1444, SB 1449, SB 1524, SB 1525, SB 1528, SB 1556, SB 1588, SB 1660, SB 1704, SB 1708, SB 1802, SB 1833, SB 1844, SB 1854, SB 1863, SB 1957, SB 1959, SB 1965, SB 1999, SB 2035, SB 2056, SB 2082, SB 2119, SB 2138, SB 2165, SB 2199, SB 2201, SB 2203, SB 2245, SB 2284, SB 2419, SB 2422, SB 2452, SB 2487, SB 2523, SB 2529, SB 2533, SB 2541, SB 2586, SB 2595, SB 2605, SB 2615, SB 2675, SB 2690, SB 2717, SB 2753, SB 2778, SB 2835, SB 2841, SB 2891, SB 2929, SB 2933, SB 3016, SB 3039, SB 3044, HB 912, HB 2525, SJR 3, SB 5, SB 29, SB 326, SB 494, SB 530, SB 769, SB 783, SB 963, SB 1238, SB 1271, SB 1786, SB 1967, SB 2312, SB 72, SB 616, SB 1143, SB 1172, SB 1267, SB 1273, SB 1506, SB 1759, SB 2361, SB 1, SB 260, SB 1637, SJR 36, SJR 50, SJR 63, SJR 59, SCR 12, SCR 39, SCR 48, SCR 19, SB 2023, SB 1524, SB 2422, SB 2119, SB 2753, SB 1863, SB 62, SB 666, SB 847, SB 284, SB 854, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 1505, SB 583, SB 507, SB 1434, SB 1376, SB 1772, SB 2016, SB 1163, SB 1122, SB 731, SB 397, SB 508, SB 1436, SB 287, SB 261, SB 1882, SB 393, SB 1791, SB 209, SB 2429, SB 1999, SB 511, SB 2309, SB 510, SB 1085, SB 1975, SB 2717, SB 1262, SB 636, SB 2056, SB 884, SB 517, SB 1200, SB 1845, SB 2681, SB 2199, SB 2458, SB 801, SB 2533, SB 3014, SB 3013, SB 758, SB 1013, SB 2797, SB 2076, SB 2876, SB 2284, SB 2929, SB 2595, SB 715, SB 1640, SB 1241, SB 2538, SB 1449, SB 2529, SB 986, SB 1181, SB 1359, SB 2245, SB 410, SB 1234, SB 456, SB 1012, SB 2926, SB 2138, SB 2615, SB 2972, SB 2841, SB 3016, SB 1856, SB 2035, SB 1528, SB 1373, SB 672, SB 2891, SB 1854, SB 317, SB 2539, SB 2532, SB 1250, SB 2082, SB 2203, SB 1285, SB 1959, SB 1454, SB 2520, SB 2541, SB 1708, SB 1237, SB 1844, SB 1586, SB 3039, SB 2819, SB 66, SB 629, SB 1015, SB 2342, SB 2903, SB 2933, SB 1965, SB 2477, SB 3029, SB 2605, SB 2419, SB 1957, SB 375, SB 250, SB 777, SB 628, SB 2523, SB 2367, SB 2703, SB 2608, SB 2778, SB 3044, SB 2965, SB 2521, SB 865, SB 1032, SB 2165, SB 2501, SB 2675, SB 2452, SB 2835, SB 872, SB 1212, SB 1278, SB 1588, SB 1602, SB 1704, SB 1723, SB 1833, SB 1858, SB 1946, SB 2009, SB 2177, SB 2460, SB 2785, SB 2373, SB 1660, SB 614, SB 867, SB 1608, SB 1525, SB 905, SB 640, SB 2487, SB 1698, SB 383, SB 705, SB 748, SB 1113, SB 1117, SB 1802, SB 2340, SB 2586, SB 2680, SB 2690, SB 2994, SB 2747, SB 1950, SB 913, SB 1071, SB 1086, SB 1087, SB 1483, SB 1444, SB 1553, SB 1556, SB 1703, SB 2133, SB 2297, SB 2298, SB 2622, SB 2955, SB 3059, SB 2782, SB 2781, SB 2637, SB 2633, SB 2337, SB 2334, SB 1861, SB 2043, SB 1367, SB 946, SB 945, SB 2857, SB 128, SB 571, SB 1263, SB 3058, SB 612, SB 2221, SB 2587, SB 2044, SB 2363, SB 2713, HB 1109, HB 1392, HB 22, HB 2525, HB 3093, HB 517, HB 912, HB 1130, HB 142, HB 1689, HB 2018, SB 2311, SB 1986, SB 2565, SB 2943, SB 1888, SB 2417, SB 3048, SB 3052, SB 3053, SB 3036, SB 3057, SB 3056, SB 3043, SB 3037, SB 3050, SB 3063, SB 3047, SB 3035, HJR 98, HJR 99, HB 136, HB 2884, HB 1393, HB 2730, HB 1399, HB 1244, HB 467, HB 331, HB 2559, SB 66, SB 456, SB 628, SB 1012, SB 1015, SB 1032, SB 1241, SB 1376, SB 1708, SB 1959, SB 1965, SB 2035, SB 2199, SB 2245, SB 2284, SB 2419, SB 2523, SB 2529, SB 2541, SB 2595, SB 2605, SB 2778, SB 2933, SB 3039, SB 3044, SB 1524, SB 1863, SB 2119, SB 2422, SB 2753, SB 1844, SB 2533, SR 417, SR 500, SR 501, SR 502, HCR 128, HB 23, HB 45, HB 104, HB 519, HB 748, HB 791, HB 1056, HB 1481, HB 3181, HB 3211, HB 4044, HB 4290, HB 23, HB 45, HB 104, HB 519, HB 748, HB 791, HB 1056, HB 1481, HB 3181, HB 3211, HB 4044, HB 4290

Keywords: disability, supported decision-making, legal assistance, confidentiality, access to justice, autonomy, civil rights, advocacy, monuments, memorials, public property, historical significance, civil penalties, local governance, SB 393, Sparks, Middleton, local government, political subdivision, public securities

Transcript Highlights:

• No, if you want to legislate support, support's easy.
• I'm like, no, if you want to legislate support, support's easy.
• When it comes down to the challenges related to interventions, that needs to be in legislation.
• Nevada System of Higher Education, we stand in support of this legislation.
• You're seeking a legislative solution to what I see is mostly a policy problem.

Keywords: 909, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This legislation is one thing to hopefully streamline some of that.
• It requires architecture engineer analysis when MDH permit conditions.
• This legislation is one thing to hopefully streamline some of that.
• It requires architecture engineer analysis when MDH permit conditions.
• requires architecture engineer analysis requires architecture engineer analysis when<00:13:36.000

Keywords: Public Property - Room 409, 29 January, 2026; 2:30 P.M., 925, all

Summary: The Public Property Committee held its organizational meeting and elected Senator Ladner as secretary. It then took up Senate Bill 2203, which would centralize leasing authority for state agencies in privately owned space under DFA and, when cheaper, move certain agencies into the capital complex area to encourage consolidation and cost savings. Senator Seymour questioned specific references in the bill, including a corporation mentioned in current law and whether the measure could affect ports, the Gulf Coast Coliseum, universities, community colleges, or local offices outside Metro Jackson. Blunt said the bill was intended only for state agencies in the Metro Jackson area and not for local county offices or other institutions, and he later identified the corporation reference as the Mississippi Home Corporation. The committee adopted a title-sufficient do-pass motion and reported the bill out. The committee next considered a bill by Senator Hobson authorizing the Soil and Water Conservation Commission to construct a levee project in Yazoo County using federal funds, at an estimated cost of more than $100 million. Hobson said the project would address significant flooding and complete a portion of levee work near Carter and Satartia. With no questions, the committee again adopted a title-sufficient do-pass motion and reported the bill out. Senator Williams then presented Senate Bill 2594, the Mississippi Antiquities Law bill, which would streamline demolition of abandoned, vacant, or blighted buildings on public university and community college campuses while preserving historic properties. He said the measure would require coordination with the Mississippi Department of Archives and History, define blight, require engineering analysis in some cases, and give MDH 90 days to respond before demolition or further inspection proceeds. Several senators raised concerns that the bill’s language was too broad, especially the definitions of blight and other causes, and that it might let institutions tear down too much without sufficient oversight. Williams said the bill was meant to balance preservation with practical needs and agreed to work on a floor amendment to tighten the language. The committee then voted to report the bill out. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 2340, authorizing DFA to sell, lease, or convey the former DPS property at 1900 East Woodrow Wilson Avenue in Jackson. The committee substitute would direct proceeds to the general fund rather than DPS, while preserving mineral rights, allowing repurchase under certain conditions, and requiring DFA review of proposals. Senators discussed possible redevelopment uses, including University Medical Center, and the bill’s restrictions on uses such as heavy industrial, adult entertainment, casinos, liquor stores, and solid waste facilities. No final vote on this bill was reflected in the portion of the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:34:21.599> in been a kind of a costbenefit analysis in been a kind of a costbenefit analysis
• inexpedia to legislate. inexpedia to legislate.
• <04:39:19.279> budget the purview of the legislative budget the purview of the legislative
• clarify that um the uh legislative clarify that um the uh legislative oversight<04:40:09.680>
• opinion that this is a legislative opinion that this is a legislative prerogative<05:31:04.240><

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a hearing on House Bill 1571, which would direct the Department of Education to review and revise statewide academic standards and curriculum and make an appropriation. Representative Kristen Noble, the sponsor, said the bill is intended to update outdated standards, especially in math, and to have the department create a list of high-quality curriculum and materials aligned to the revised standards. She noted she would likely amend the bill to change a requirement that districts “shall” select from the list to “may,” and said a misplaced crossed-out section would need to be restored and moved by amendment. She also said assessments would need to be updated to match any new standards. Testimony from Marie Banfield strongly supported the bill and the move away from a mandate, arguing that current standards are outdated and that Common Core and related standards have not improved student outcomes. She criticized the math standards for emphasizing multiple strategies and written explanations over computation, and said stronger standards would better support students, including those with learning or communication challenges. She also argued that New Hampshire should follow examples such as Massachusetts, which she said used rigorous standards successfully. Nate Green of the Department of Education did not take a position on the bill but explained that the bill would affect statewide academic standards, state assessments, and potentially federal compliance. He distinguished academic standards from minimum standards in statute, said any standards revision would require work with content experts, State Board approval, and then a corresponding assessment update that could take about two years. He estimated assessment development costs could range from about $200,000 to $500,000 for minor revisions and $1 million to $2 million for a wholesale new set of standards. He also said the bill would apply to public and charter public schools, not private or homeschool students, and that the department does not currently provide a statewide list of curriculum materials because curriculum decisions have historically been local.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so these ideas have come not merely from legislators, but from the public.
• ,<00:04:28.760> but<00:04:28.960> from<00:04:29.240> the merely from legislators
• , but from the merely from legislators, but from the public.<00:04:30.120> And<00:04:30.280>
• Uh, we have the language of the legislative charge.
• Again, this is data and a way of analysis that the PUC could be using to say, are we doing, you know,

Bills: HF4470, HF2418, HF3417, HF3365, HF3463

Keywords: HF4470, Melissa Hortman, memorial, statue, memorial garden, State Office Building, Capitol Mall Design Framework, capital investment, appropriation, Capitol Area Architectural and Planning Board, Department of Administration, public art, commemorative monument, landscaping, artist selection, family consultation, Minnesota legislature, state building site, capital appropriation, political subdivisions