Transcript Highlights:

• Represent Shamzu. any questions? Represent Shamzu.
• Representative Shimezu and then Representative<01:28:39.280> Garcia. Representative Garcia.
• Representative Hashim excused. Representative Kavaloa. >> I. Representative Syama is excused.
• Representative Takayama. >> Aye. Representative Garcia. >> No. >> No for Representative Garcia.
• Representative<02:42:55.040> Takayyama. Representative Takayyama. Representative Takayyama.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 1790 HD1, which would require law enforcement and oversight agencies to collect and report data on stops, use of force, and complaints to the Hawaii Crime Lab, which would publish incident-level information and annual reports. Supporters, including the Office of the Public Defender, Office of Hawaiian Affairs, the ACLU of Hawaii, Hawaii Justice Rising, and the Policing Project, said the bill would improve transparency, help identify disparities, and support better policy and accountability. OHA requested amendments to ensure Hawaiians are identified as a distinct category in the data, and the University of Hawaii’s Ashley Rubin said the Crime Lab would work with agencies to make implementation as seamless as possible. The Department of Law Enforcement supported the bill’s intent but asked for a longer timeline and culturally appropriate methodology, while HPD opposed the bill as written, saying it would require too many new data points, create a significant administrative burden, and rely on subjective perceptions of race and ethnicity; HPD also noted it is piloting an e-citation system that could help with data collection. Committee members questioned HPD about current manual processes and technology options. The chair reported 18 testimonies total: 15 in support, one in opposition, and two with comments, and no vote was taken in the excerpt. The committee then heard HB 1611 HD1, which would phase down the general excise tax on groceries and nonprescription drugs until a full exemption takes effect in 2034. The Department of Taxation offered technical recommendations, including clearer definitions for groceries and nonprescription drugs and a technical change regarding the county surcharge exemption. Supporters, including the Hawaii Public Health Institute and the Hawaii Food Industry Association, argued the GET on groceries is regressive and worsens food insecurity, especially for low-income households, and said the bill would provide needed relief. The Tax Foundation of Hawaii offered technical concerns, including a possible wholesale-tax enforcement issue once the exemption is fully phased in. The excerpt ends during testimony on HB 1611, with no final committee action shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Representative Joseph and Representative Representative Joseph and Representative
• Representative Brown. outside. Representative Brown.
• Um, Representative Bradley, this doesn't specifically mention children, but anything that would personally
• Representative Clifford continued: Mostly, it is related to your personally identifiable information
• Representative Representative Representative Woodro.

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Your name, who you represent, and you may.
• Your name, who you represent, and you may.
• I've personally lost officers because of that.
• Each of these represents progress, represents safer roads and improved infrastructure, but every one
• of those projects represents a risk as well.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• House of Representatives.
• You told us all of you when you talk, well, there goes another person, and there goes another person,
• and there goes another person.
• So I would just offer that we, we, And there goes another person and there goes another person.
• Thank you very much, Representative Paish. I also want to call out Representative...

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on two proposed ballot initiatives: one to reduce the state personal income tax rate from 5% to 4% over three years, and another to revise the state’s tax collection cap/62F process so it would be based on prior-year collections plus wage growth and include surtax revenue. The committee chair and House co-chair outlined the hearing process, and the first witness was Doug Howgate of the Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation, who testified as the committee’s subject-matter expert on both measures. He said the income tax proposal would lower taxes broadly but would reduce state revenue by about $5.4 billion when fully implemented, with an estimated $800 million hit in FY27, and he discussed possible effects on competitiveness, taxpayer savings, and public finances. On the 62F proposal, he said the revised cap would make refunds more likely, could have produced several large refunds in recent years, and would reduce stabilization fund deposits and constrain recovery after recessions. Committee members questioned Howgate about competitiveness, outmigration, prior tax ballot measures, spending growth, MassHealth, and the interaction between the income tax and surtax. He emphasized that taxes are only one part of the state’s overall competitiveness and that housing, public services, and other factors also matter. He also noted that the surtax is constitutionally restricted but can still support ongoing spending choices. After his testimony, the committee moved to the proponents’ panel. Proponents of both initiatives, including representatives from Taxpayers for an Affordable Massachusetts, the National Federation of Independent Business, Pioneer Institute, and the Mass Opportunity Alliance, argued that the measures would improve affordability, help retain residents and businesses, and support job growth. They cited polling support, outmigration, small-business reinvestment, and comparisons to lower-tax states such as North Carolina. Their economist, Rebecca Paxton, said her model showed smaller revenue losses than critics claim and projected that the revised revenue cap would not create additional annual revenue losses while producing more regular taxpayer refunds. Committee members pressed the panel on competitiveness, prior ballot initiative implementation, and whether the measures would actually address broader affordability pressures; the hearing ended with the committee continuing to take questions from the proponents.

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Rowe.
• Thank you, Representative.
• Thank you, Representative.
• Represent the PAC.
• Representative Heffner and Representative Timmons will lead the discussion.

Bills: HJR1101, SB1319, SB1264, HB4237, SB1277, SB2069, HB3066, HB2115, HB2153, HB2268, HB2961, SB1679, SB2018, HB4294, SB2095, HB4113, SB1894, SB1810, HB4268, HB1752, HB3413, SB625, HB3644, HB3940, HJR1096, HJR1100, HJR1099, HB2992, SB1636, HB4302, SB1613, SB1443, HB1409, HB1675, HB1225, HB1381, HB4359, SB1503

Keywords: SB1319, Corporation Commission, Oklahoma, remediation, environmental emergency, brine contamination, oil contamination, oilfield pollution, residential property, home buyout, property acquisition, fair market value, revolving fund, remediation fund, state plugging funds, well plugging, abandoned well, natural breakout, Department of Environmental Quality, DEQ

Transcript Highlights:

• . >> Representative Bratcher. >> Here. >> Representative Bray. >> Present. >> Representative Burke. >
• > Representative Callaway. >> Representative Camuel. >> Here. >> Representative Dotson. >> Representative
• Duvall. >> Here. >> Representative Fleming. >> Representative Gordon. >> Representative Holloway. >>
• Here. >> Representative Marzian. >> Representative Marzian. >> Here. >> Representative Neighbors. >>
• Here. >> Representative Proctor. >> Present. >> Representative Rayburn. >> Here. >> Representative Riemer

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <01:06:08.960> wishing anyone else online or in person wishing anyone else online or in person
• support anyone else online or in person support anyone else online or in person wishing<01:09:13.679
• <01:38:11.159> wishing thank you anyone else in person wishing thank you anyone else in person
• moved to member questions. anyone online or in person wishing to anyone online or in person wishing to
• Thank you, Representative.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Housing held a public hearing on January 31 and heard testimony on a series of housing and building-code bills. The first major item, HB 1 relating to building codes, drew sharply divided testimony. Supporters, including BIA Hawaii, Grassroot Institute, Dr. Horton, and several builders and trade groups, argued the current code-adoption process is slow, fragmented, and costly, and that reform would help housing production. Opponents, including Sierra Club Hawaii, AIA Hawaii, ICC, and labor representative Kiko Bosi, said the bill would weaken public safety, reduce statewide consistency, and could leave tenants and first responders at greater risk. No vote was taken during the hearing, and members asked questions about the effect of a governor’s emergency proclamation suspending the Building Code Council and about county authority over code amendments. The committee then heard HB 745 and HB 1321, both also relating to building codes. Grassroot Institute supported both measures, saying the system is broken and needs streamlining, while BIA Hawaii and others emphasized the cost burden of repeated code updates. Opponents, especially Bosi and ICC, argued that the bills would undermine the State Building Code Council’s role, create confusion, and prioritize cost over safety; Bosi also said labor should be included in any code discussions. Members questioned whether counties can remove state code provisions and whether the state code already supersedes county codes, and one member noted the need for clarity and consistent enforcement rather than a wholesale overhaul. Later, the committee heard HB 284 on housing, HB 761 on county permitting and inspection, and HB 738 on historic preservation. HB 284 drew support from several housing and real estate groups, while DLNR opposed it. On HB 761, HHFDC supported the bill, DLNR warned that the proposed changes could jeopardize Hawaii’s participation in the National Flood Insurance Program, DAGS said it would likely need to duplicate county permitting staff, and the Department of Planning and Permitting opposed it; Grassroot Institute and NAIOP supported it. For HB 738, HHFDC, DLNR, Grassroot Institute, Hawaii YIMBY, NAIOP, and others supported the measure, with Grassroot and NAIOP suggesting clarifications so expedited review would also cover mixed-use projects and better define the scope of work. The transcript does not show any final votes or committee action on these bills during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• You were representing your constituents.
• There's 12 homes, 12 different states represented.
• Representative Casello: Thank you, Mr.
• Representative Casello: Thank you, Mr.
• Representative Lopez, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met to consider HB 6003, a bill to repeal Florida’s “free kill” law that limits certain survivors’ ability to recover non-economic damages in medical negligence wrongful death cases. The sponsor, Rep. Trabulsy, said the bill would restore access to the courts for a small class of families and noted the measure passed both chambers last year before being vetoed by the governor. She and supporters framed the bill as a fairness and constitutional issue, while opponents argued repeal would increase malpractice exposure, insurance costs, and pressure on physician access, especially in high-risk specialties and rural areas. Public testimony was sharply divided. Supporters included family members who described deaths they said were caused by medical negligence and who argued the current law denies accountability and equal treatment based on marital status or whether a decedent had minor children. Opponents included the Florida Hospital Association, Florida Medical Association, Florida Chamber, U.S. Chamber, Florida Insurance Council, and other health care and business groups, who warned that repeal could worsen already high malpractice premiums, contribute to physician shortages, and destabilize access to care. Several speakers on both sides discussed possible caps on non-economic damages as a compromise, though the bill itself was presented as a clean repealer with no amendments. During debate, several members spoke in support, emphasizing equal access to the courts and rejecting the idea that the law should treat some families differently from others. Opponents of the bill argued that the current system helps preserve market stability and that liability concerns, not the free kill law, are driving provider departures. After closing remarks from the sponsor, the committee voted 15 yeas and 1 nay to report HB 6003 favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Michael, you are recognized for questions.
• Representative Gerwig, you are recognized for questions.
• Representative, follow-up? Just very quickly.
• Representative, follow-up. You're good? Okay. All right, Representative, follow-up. You're good?
• No questions from Representative Gant, However, I know.

Summary: The Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee met to review how county budgets are developed and how constitutional officers fit into that process. Davin Suggs of the Florida Association of Counties gave an overview of county budgeting, explaining the statutory framework, the role of property taxes and TRIM notices, the fiscal-year timeline, fund balances and reserves, and the Department of Revenue’s oversight. He emphasized that county budgets include the board’s budget plus the budgets of constitutional officers, and that relationships and communication are critical to resolving budget issues. A panel of constitutional officers then described their offices’ budget processes and responsibilities: Escambia County Sheriff Chip Simmons discussed law enforcement budgeting and the importance of negotiated agreements with county commissions; Alachua County Property Appraiser Aisha Solomon explained the June 1 budget deadline, valuation methods, and the appeal process for property assessments; Manatee County Clerk and Comptroller Angelina Coleniso outlined the clerk’s court and finance duties, the county-side budget process, and the clerk’s personal liability under section 129.09 for unlawful expenditures; Leon County Supervisor of Elections Mark Early described the cyclical nature of election costs, staffing, equipment, and the impact of turnout and election law changes; and Columbia County Tax Collector Kyle Keene explained that tax collectors’ budgets are reviewed by the Department of Revenue, with fee offices funding themselves through service charges and budget offices relying on county support. Members asked about personal liability for unlawful spending, conflicts between clerks and county commissions, property valuation and storm damage adjustments, reserve levels, and whether tax collectors can retain excess fees. Responses noted that clerks must refuse illegal expenditures, property appraisers use market-based assessments with VAB and court review available, counties should maintain healthy fund balances for cash flow and emergencies, and tax collectors generally must zero out year-end balances and distribute excess revenues to taxing authorities. The committee took no votes and adjourned after thanking the panelists for their testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:04:04.760> today Hampshire House of Representatives today Hampshire House of Representatives
• : Representatives William Dolan, Dupont, and John McDonald; the day illness in the family: Representatives
• Representatives Osborne and Simpson offer the following resolution: that the House of Representatives
• <00:08:36.080> notify that the House of Representatives notify that the House of Representatives
• [Music] [Music] [Music] Representative McGee. Representatives Paul and Toner.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And we do have a legislator now online who wishes to testify, Representative Soder, Representative Soder
• Representative Paulino.
• Representative Connolly, would you like to testify?
• Representative Paulino? Good morning, sir.
• Thank you, Representative. Mr.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Revenue, chaired by Senator James Eldridge and Representative Adrian Madaro, opened its hearing with a moment of silence for the late Lowell State Senator Ed Kennedy and reviewed hearing procedures and deadlines. The committee then took testimony on several corporate tax bills, including S. 2033/H. 3110 on offshore tax avoidance, H. 3248 on a manufacturing tax exemption, H. 3057 on a tiered corporate minimum tax, and S. 2041 on a corporate tax haven blacklist, along with a separate business interest deduction bill. No votes were taken during the hearing. Supporters of S. 2033/H. 3110, including labor unions, health care workers, educators, public health advocates, seniors, and several legislators, argued that Massachusetts needs new revenue to offset federal cuts to Medicaid, SNAP, health care, education, and other services. They said the bill would raise roughly $400 million annually by increasing the share of offshore profits included in the state tax base from 5% to 50%, and they framed it as a fairness measure that would require large multinational corporations to pay more while leaving most local businesses and workers unaffected. Testimony emphasized risks to MassHealth, PCA services, adult dental care, hospitals, schools, and public health programs if new revenue is not raised. Opponents, including the Mass Taxpayers Foundation and the Council on State Taxation, argued the proposal is poor tax policy and likely unconstitutional because it would tax foreign-source income without allowing foreign tax credits or a comparable apportionment method. They said Massachusetts should take a broader, coordinated approach to federal tax changes rather than a standalone bill, and warned of litigation risk and possible double taxation. Supporters such as MassBudget and former tax counsel Don Griswold countered that the bill is a reasonable rough-justice approach, consistent with federal and neighboring-state treatment, and that it would primarily affect a small number of very large multinationals. On S. 2041, the Global Business Alliance opposed the proposed tax haven blacklist, while supporting a separate bill allowing business interest deductibility.

Transcript Highlights:

• HGA offering comments comments comments in<00:19:18.880> person. in person. in person.
• Um, representative. representative. representative.
• Representative Amato? >> I. >> Representative Garrett is excused. Representative Kapela? >> Aye.
• Representative Kila? >> Aye. Representative Olds? >> Aye. Representative Morikawa? >> Aye.
• I >> representative<01:41:53.199> Hi >> representative Hi >> representative

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 1783, which would expand public-private partnership options for charter school facilities. The Department of Education offered comments, the Charter School Commission and SFA supported the bill, and Hawaii Technology Academy, Hawaii Kids, Hawaii Children’s Action Network, HGA, Aloha Project, and several individuals testified in support, while UPW opposed it. Supporters said charter schools need faster and more flexible ways to address severe facility shortages and high costs, and SFA described the bill as a pilot model that could leverage developer partnerships and state contributions, citing Maryland as an example. Members asked whether the bill was limited to charter schools; DOE said the language could be read to include other public school facilities, but if focused only on charter schools, DOE was less concerned. The Charter School Commission also described an existing public-private preschool model through Parkway Village Preschool and PACTED. The committee then took up HB 1778, which would establish a CIP database for school facilities. SFA supported the bill, saying it would create a more disciplined, transparent basis for funding decisions by documenting facility condition, needed repairs, classification, and timing. DOE initially said it rested on its comments, then responded to questions by saying it already maintains deferred maintenance lists, uses systems such as Maximo, CPT, GIS, and finance software, and sends legislators project-status letters twice a year. DOE said it is working on improving its outward-facing dashboard and integrating its systems, but questioned whether the bill would add value beyond existing tools. Members emphasized the need for a publicly accessible, real-time transparency tool, while DOE said it was still evaluating its current systems and was not yet seeking funding for a new IT program. For HB 2344, creating an Independent Public School Realignment and Closure Commission, DOE said it wants to remain part of any consolidation process to keep students and education central, while SFA said the bill is timely and framed it as a restructuring response to changing conditions and possible federal funding cuts. SFA compared the proposal to the federal BRAC process for military base closures and said Hawaii has the same enrollment as in 1961 but many more schools, arguing that the state needs a more deliberate approach to school closures and land reuse. The Attorney General’s office raised technical concerns about several sections, including unclear references to administrative support, a governor-approval sequence, a possible conflict with existing statutes governing closed-school disposition, and a missing section number. Testimony on HB 2345, which would establish a geographic CIP district, began with DOE in opposition; DOE said the bill would duplicate existing work, add confusion by creating two agencies doing the same thing, and spend money inefficiently because district project coordinators and project lists already exist.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:29:06.240> Pazovv committee of which representative Pazovv committee of which representative
• were<00:29:13.120> the with representative Belker were the with representative Belker were
• Uh, Representative should know about.
• But was the person vaccinated?
• But was the person vaccinated?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The Special Committee on COVID Response Efficacy met briefly without a quorum because many members were tied up in legislative committee of conference work. The chair said the committee would resume in June and, in the meantime, directed members to the committee webpage and the 2024 committee’s report and COVID-19 after-action report, which he said could be reviewed for possible updates and legislative recommendations on how New Hampshire should respond to future pandemics. The chair then introduced two recent articles as framing material: one about the U.S. Supreme Court declining to hear a challenge to the Los Angeles Unified School District’s COVID vaccine mandate, and another about CDC internal emails and alleged failure to publicly acknowledge vaccine safety signals. He argued these examples raised concerns about mandates, transparency, and the balance between individual rights and public health, and said the committee would revisit the issue in future meetings. Representative Pollazok thanked the chair for presenting both legal and medical perspectives and suggested the committee focus on reviewing scientific methodology and the quality of evidence behind competing claims. A member asked whether vaccine pamphlets now include risks and benefits, and the chair responded that FDA-approved products should have patient inserts available on the FDA website, including sections listing adverse events from clinical studies and commercial use. He said he would research and email the committee copies or excerpts. Members also discussed how to evaluate studies over different time periods, dosing levels, and the timing of side effects, as well as the difficulty of comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated outcomes when definitions change over time. Before adjourning, the chair said the committee would ask the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services how it would monitor and assess vaccine or pandemic-related issues in real time and whether additional structures would be needed in a future emergency. He said the committee would likely take July and August off, resume in September, and aim to have a draft report by mid-October and a final report by late October ahead of the November elections.

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Bell? Representative Lujan? Here. Representative Bhojani? Here. A quorum is present.
• Thank you to Representative Hefner for his comments on the bill.
• And I can speak from personal experience.
• I represented Ms. Blair and her daughter in their case.
• Thank you, Representative. Any questions for Representative Hood?

Bills: HB875, HB1667, HB2369, HB3844, HB4415, HB4479, HB4483, HB4676, HB5118, HB5400, HB5545

Keywords: workers' compensation, municipal construction, bidding requirements, small municipalities, contracting policies, first responders, PTSD, mental health, emergency services, medical expenses, injury claims, insurance carriers, opportunity youth, workforce development, employment, education, federal funds, employment discrimination, immunity waiver, public employees

Transcript Highlights:

• Represent Kegel. Any further discussion? Represent Kegel.
• >> I'm getting 10 or 11 over here. represent. represent. represent.
• Representative Green. Representative Green.
• Uh further discussion represent. represent. represent.
• Uh, Representative Representative Green. Uh, Representative Kegel. Kegel. Kegel.

Bills: HF3418, HF3739, HF3791, HF3356, HF3695, HF3430

Keywords: pedestrian safety, traffic safety, roadway improvements, nonmotorized transportation, crosswalks, sidewalks, bike lanes, complete streets, Vision Zero, Toward Zero Deaths, MnDOT, Department of Transportation, Department of Public Safety, local road authority, county roads, city streets, tribal transportation, capital improvements, safety design solutions, grant program

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from February 25, 2026, and the chair noted the absence of Representative Katie Jones due to the birth of her baby. The chair also acknowledged that the committee would be discussing difficult topics related to the June 14 killing of Mark and Melissa Hortman and Gilbert. The main business began with House File 3418, which Chair Tabke moved for possible inclusion in a future omnibus bill, and the committee adopted the A1 author’s amendment. The bill was described as a pedestrian safety measure prompted by a fatal Moorhead crash involving a young boy; it would create an opt-in program for communities to use pre-made traffic safety templates, with the state covering 80% of project costs to speed implementation of measures like lane narrowing, rumble strips, and bollards. A Moorhead testifier said the city could have acted faster with such funding, and members generally supported the goal while raising concerns about overlap with existing Safe Routes to School and active transportation programs, the bill’s fiscal note, and how communities would be selected. MDOT testified that it already supports similar community demonstration projects and has funded about 30 such projects since 2019. HF 3418 was laid over. The committee then took up House File 3739, a memorial highway bill for Mark and Melissa Hortman. An A1 amendment to shift funding away from trunk highway funds and toward legislative budgets was moved but not adopted after members argued memorial signage should continue to be paid for with private funds, as in prior memorial highway designations. The bill author explained the memorial was intended to honor Melissa Hortman’s service and connection to Highway 610, and members discussed the length of the proposed memorial stretch and whether it should be narrowed to the area she represented. Several members supported the tribute but expressed concern about using public funds and about setting a precedent for future memorial highways. The committee indicated the bill would move on to Ways and Means with other issues still to be worked out.

Transcript Highlights:

• right absolutely correct so if a person right absolutely correct so if a person is<00:18:09.720>
• questions representative Chun question questions representative Chun question for DHS<00:45:48.839>
• I'm in person. Oh, you're in person. Okay. Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, and members.
• Representative Amato votes aye. Representative Amato, aye. Representative Martin, aye.
• Representative SS, aye. Representative Takoi, aye. Representative Alos, aye.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Health Committee held its first hearing of 2025, with Chair Greg Takayama and Vice Chair Representative Leoy opening the meeting and outlining housekeeping rules, including a two-minute limit for testifiers and Zoom etiquette. The committee first heard HB 303 on health care preceptors. The Department of Health, Department of Taxation, University of Hawaiʻi, Hawaii State Center for Nursing, and several health care organizations supported the bill, saying the existing preceptor tax credit program has been successful and that expanding eligibility to additional professions and students would help address workforce shortages. In response to questions, the Department of Health said the annual tax credit cap is $1.5 million, about 650 to 670 credits are currently used each year, and the bill applies only to unpaid preceptors. The committee then moved on to HB 441, which would raise cigarette taxes. The Attorney General, Department of Health, University of Hawaiʻi Cancer Center, Hawaii Public Health Institute, American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, and others supported the measure as a way to reduce smoking, especially among youth, and to support tobacco control and cancer-related programs. Opponents, including the Taxpayers Protection Alliance and the Cigar Association of Hawaii, argued the tax is regressive and unreliable as a revenue source. The Department of Health noted the last cigarette tax increase was in 2011, and one witness urged a larger increase than proposed. No vote was taken on either bill in the portion of the hearing provided. The committee also heard HB 557 on telehealth. The Department of Health supported the bill so long as it did not displace executive budget priorities, and the Hawaii State Health Planning and Development Agency and Hawaii Primary Care Association supported it. HPCA said the bill would conform state insurance law to recent Medicare changes expanding audio-only telehealth coverage beyond mental health services, and it emphasized access for rural residents, kupuna, and people with disabilities. HMSA opposed the bill as written, saying it strayed from the intent of Act 107 and that audio-only telehealth should remain limited because of quality-of-care concerns, though it supported continued access and asked for a different amendment approach. A telehealth provider also testified that payment disparities limit provider expansion and that audio-only access remains important for patients with serious illness. The hearing ended in the excerpt before any committee action or vote on HB 557.

Transcript Highlights:

• What the difference between a personal representative is Na legal representative and kind of differentiate
• The powers of each and the bill seems to make the take the place of patient personal representative and
• We also this definition of a person represented a legal representative, Mr. Press.
• personal representative is there's a clear distinction under HIPPA between the 2 and a personal representative
• I have not just the difference between personal representative in legal representative but also in the

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Your work is deeply personal.
• Your work is deeply personal.
• How one person violates the constitutional right of another person, all you need to do is read the jury
• But again, I just think you folks bringing people together in person, not on a screen, in person, I think
• It is personal.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The meeting was a special commission hearing on antisemitism held off-site at Kerem Shalom Synagogue in Concord, with commissioners approving prior minutes and noting a quorum, a rescheduled October 27 meeting, and the addition of a new commissioner. The co-chairs and host speakers emphasized the personal and communal significance of holding the hearing in a synagogue and the importance of confronting antisemitism while protecting free speech, academic freedom, and civil discourse. The commission heard from former SJC Justice and current UMass General Counsel David Lowy, who discussed the IHRA definition of antisemitism, said its use as nonbinding guidance does not raise First Amendment concerns, and described UMass’s response to a discriminatory academic conference policy. Commissioners also asked about campus speaker vetting, protest rights, and university practices for addressing antisemitism and protecting students’ access to education. District Attorney Marian Ryan testified about restorative justice as a tool for addressing hate incidents, saying it can help victims be heard, reduce reoffending, and be used in criminal, school, and community settings. She described local programs, online reporting forms, and the need for better statutory tools, including changes to restitution and education requirements in hate-crime cases. Commissioners asked whether restorative justice affects charging decisions, and Ryan said it should not alter whether a hate crime is investigated or charged. She also identified model programs and said the commission’s work aligns with the national strategy it is charged with implementing. Three rabbis then described the rise in antisemitic incidents in schools and communities, the emotional toll on Jewish families, and the need for stronger school responses, clearer language in incident communications, and better training for educators. Rabbi Brad David recounted repeated incidents in Acton-Boxborough and praised the district’s improved partnership and response, while Rabbi Tom Shah described parental anxiety, concerns about classroom materials lacking context, and the need for balanced instruction. The rabbis also discussed synagogue security costs and measures, including volunteer security teams, police support, grants, and physical protections. Commissioners said the testimony would inform forthcoming recommendations, and DESE staff noted they are developing instructional-materials guidance and a rubric for educators. The final witness, Professor Christina Miller, outlined hate-crime prosecution issues in Massachusetts, including mixed-motive cases, the need for clearer statutes and jury instructions, better training for police and clerk magistrates, guidance on sentencing and diversity-awareness programs, and the use of community impact statements.

Transcript Highlights:

• Persons asking court administration staff for personal information about a judge is a common occurrence
• a staff for personal information about a staff for personal information about a judge<00:15:22.560
• Uh, Representative Bliss.
• >> Thank you, Representative Steer. Mr. >> Thank you, Representative Steer. Mr.
• Uh Representative Feist. >> Thank you. Uh Representative Feist.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee took up House File 3874 and laid it over for possible inclusion in a finance bill. The Minnesota Judicial Branch, represented by State Court Administrator Jeff Shorba and Chief Judge Michael Fritz, presented a supplemental funding request focused on two main areas: judicial safety and security, and the employer share of Minnesota Paid Leave costs. Shorba said the branch was grateful for prior budget support but noted it did not receive salary increases for staff or judges and did not get funding for juror per diem. He explained that the branch is seeking funding for personal data protection, home security, two additional judicial security positions, security for the chief justice at public events, and a revived courthouse security grant program. Much of the testimony centered on rising threats against judges and court staff. Shorba and Fritz described increases in incidents, threats, and disturbances, and Fritz gave several examples of threatening behavior involving judges’ homes, personal information, and online doxxing. They argued that the branch needs better threat assessment, coordination with local law enforcement, and security measures at homes, courthouses, and online. Members expressed support for the concerns and asked questions about how threats are currently handled and whether state patrol officers assigned to security duties would need additional training. The second major topic was the judicial branch’s request for funding to cover its employer contribution to Minnesota Paid Leave, which took effect in January 2026. Shorba said the branch followed MMB’s calculations and expected the cost to be addressed through broader state government funding, but the branch did not receive an operational adjustment. He said the branch is now having to hold positions open to absorb the cost. Members questioned why the request was not included in the earlier budget process, and Shorba responded that the branch believed the issue would be handled centrally and later learned it had not been funded for the judiciary. No vote on the funding requests was taken in the discussion shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Nato. Representative Nato.
• Um, so no, no one has to go through me personally or the organizations that I represent.
• Um, so no, no one has to go through me personally or the organizations that I represent.
• Um, am I correct, Representative? Representative? Representative?
• >> Well, uh, quickly, Representative, I note that the first line of Roman numeral 7 says or any person

Keywords: 1189, house, all