Transcript Highlights:

• And thanks, because so the incentive for the families to fill out the paperwork was so that their students
• So it's an unintended consequence for a district like mine because before the incentive was fill out
• > the<01:02:24.800> families<01:02:25.320> to<01:02:25.440> fill the incentive
• <01:02:38.440> was<01:02:38.600> fill because before the incentive was fill because
• before the incentive was fill out<01:02:38.840> the<01:02:38.920> paperwork<01:02:39.240

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That created a perverse incentive where we have actually seen some folks in the space backdate contracts
• And that will take care of that perverse incentive that was created.
• :13:55.040> created<00:13:55.480> a<00:13:55.560> perverse<00:13:56.080> incentive
• Um that created a perverse incentive Um that created a perverse incentive where<00:13:57.200>
• take care of that perverse incentive take care of that perverse incentive that<00:14:21.760>

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Call to Order and Roll Call 00:00:02 Discussion HB 144 00:00:58 Vote HB 144 00:02:40 Discussion HB 169 00:03:21 Vote HB 169 00:05:02 Discussion HB 568 00:05:56 Vote HB 568 00:28:27 Discussion HB 627 00:32:26 Vote HB 627 01:00:26, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• . >> So was it like an incentive to have them branch into another region?
• >> Uh, it was an incentive for someone wanting that region of the state, knowing that there was very
• >> Follow up. >> So was it like an incentive to have them branch into another region?
• >> Uh, it was an incentive for someone wanting that region of the state, knowing that there was very
• to have them >> So was it like an incentive to have them branch<00:57:30.720> into<00:57

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The Health and Human Services Oversight Committee met on April 17 and approved the prior meeting minutes, then set its next meeting for May 29 at 9:30 a.m. Members also discussed a New Futures effort to collect questions about Medicaid changes and post answers as an FAQ, with a preference that the FAQ live on New Futures’ website rather than the state website. The commissioner’s office said it would coordinate responses and that the issue is still evolving. The main presentation was an HHS update focused on the state public health laboratory and its work during Public Health Lab Week. Officials reviewed the lab’s history, its biosafety functions, and its role in disease prevention, food safety, preparedness, and response. They highlighted mosquito surveillance for eastern equine encephalitis, West Nile virus, and Jamestown Canyon virus, noting that the lab tested more than a quarter million mosquitoes last year and that mosquito testing helps provide early warning for local public health decisions. They also discussed rabies testing, saying New Hampshire’s lab is the only one in the state that performs it, that rabies is fatal once symptoms begin, and that the work is preventable through early prophylaxis. Members asked about federal funding cuts, water testing, and whether CDC changes to rabies testing would affect New Hampshire. The department said it had been affected by an $80 million federal clawback but was managing through other funds and staff reassignments; for the water lab, temporary staff had been hired to continue swimming-area testing. Officials said the state remains able to handle rabies testing and that federal changes would mainly affect areas without similar services. They also answered questions on Jamestown Canyon virus, saying New Hampshire had one human case in 2025 and three in 2024, compared with zero West Nile cases in 2025 and one in 2024, and that weather and protective measures influence mosquito-borne disease levels. Additional questions covered biosafety levels, cyanobacteria coordination with the Department of Environmental Services, and the Brown Building flood mitigation, which was described as about halfway complete with a hoped-for reopening of the west side by June.

Transcript Highlights:

• Also, the background memo includes state regulations and incentives.
• Also, the backroom memo includes state regulations and incentives.
• In North Dakota, Chapter 38, A macro memo includes state regulations and incentives.
• Texas committed $120,000 per megawatt in incentives. Utah put $1.7 million.
• Of course, financial incentives come into play.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Energy Development and Transmission Committee met in interim session and approved the November 6 minutes. Chair Novak outlined the committee’s study agenda, including large energy users such as data centers, geothermal, landowner relations, wind and solar, and other energy topics across the state. The meeting was framed as informational only, with no bills or formal legislative action taken beyond the minutes approval. Testimony focused first on landowner relations. Oliver County Commissioner Dave Berger described the county’s energy history and local support for coal and related development. North Dakota Farmers Union President Matt Perdue emphasized proactive, face-to-face communication with landowners, respect for property rights, and the need for developers to be transparent about tradeoffs; he also discussed insurance and liability concerns tied to easements. Committee members asked about eminent domain, local versus state authority, and how communities can better understand the revenue and infrastructure implications of energy development. Department of Agriculture Deputy Commissioner Tom Bodine then described the department’s ombudsman programs for pipeline restoration and reclamation, wind restoration, and royalty oversight. He said the programs provide confidential, third-party assistance on reclamation and royalty disputes, but do not provide legal advice. Senators raised concerns about post-production deductions in royalty leases and whether the ombudsman can explain them; Bodine said the program can clarify statements and deductions but cannot resolve legal disputes. He also said the department has not received requests related to fiber lines. Representatives from Grid United and One Oak described their project development and landowner engagement practices. Grid United’s Brent Johnson discussed the North Plains Connector transmission project, its route selection process, voluntary acquisition approach, and efforts to avoid eminent domain by working closely with regulators, counties, townships, and landowners. One Oak’s Danette Welsh and Tom Giltner described the company’s midstream operations, extensive North Dakota footprint, and emphasis on direct landowner communication, consistent local regulation, careful construction practices, and post-construction reclamation. Members asked about setbacks, zoning consistency, invasive species prevention, outside advocacy groups, and eminent domain use; One Oak said it has not used eminent domain on its North Dakota projects, largely because most gathering lines are negotiated easements.

Transcript Highlights:

• One of my questions is about the sort of incentive In a microgrid system versus a virtual system, and
• Updating this Land Conservation Incentives Act, which has not been updated since 2008, is essential to
• Land Conservation Incentives Act also has helped us leverage federal dollars.
• Without enforceable targets, the industry has little incentive to make meaningful methane reductions.
• We need incentives for climate adaptation to be Legally enforced.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:14:38.320> to<00:14:38.480> have don't want a financial incentive to have don't
• want a financial incentive to have people<00:14:38.959> in<00:14:39.199> crisis<00:14:
• It really does set up a financial incentive for people to use police instead of crisis teams.
• It really does set up a financial incentive for people to use police instead of crisis teams.
• <01:08:20.000> then there's really not much incentive then there's really not much incentive

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• However, these companies are also weighing options in other states with competitive incentives.
• He says Minnesota incentives for data centers help attract these investments, but the state needs to
• options in other states with weighing options in other states with competitive<00:22:34.679> incentives
• <00:22:35.679> currently competitive incentives currently competitive incentives currently
• > centers Minnesota incentives for data centers Minnesota incentives for data centers help<00:

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, there is an incentive now to buy housing units typically purchased or rented by growing families
• Um, there is an incentive now to buy housing units typically purchased or rented by growing families
• Um, there is an incentive now to buy housing units typically purchased or rented by growing families
• Um, there is an incentive now to buy housing units typically purchased or rented by growing families
• <04:58:12.160> when what are the economic incentives when what are the economic incentives

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The original promise in 16C was an incentive... ...far beyond walking or biking ability.
• The original promise in 16C was an incentive for cities and towns to regionalize, recognizing the compounding
• But if we reimburse—if the state reimbursed 100 percent—then wouldn't there be no incentive whatsoever
• Like, there's no incentive for them to cut any corners because they know they have control of the market
• Decades ago, as one incentive to regionalize school districts, we were promised full reimbursement for

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused primarily on H. 517/S. 314, a bill to provide a sustainable future for rural schools, and H. 697, a bill to require full funding of regional school transportation. Witnesses from rural districts, school committees, superintendents, students, and local officials described chronic underfunding, declining enrollment, high fixed costs, special education and transportation burdens, and the loss of programs, staff, and extracurriculars. Several speakers argued that rural aid should be funded at $60 million annually and made non-discretionary, while others emphasized that transportation reimbursement for regional districts has repeatedly fallen short of the state’s promise and is driving budget crises and overrides. A number of students testified in support of rural aid, describing cuts to classes, counselors, and activities, and the impact on their schools and communities. Committee members also discussed whether transportation policy should be revisited to address underlying cost drivers, including bus bidding practices and whether regional districts should have more flexibility in transportation requirements. The committee also heard H. 515, concerning Hancock Elementary School and a school choice-related exemption from a state requirement that has created a large financial burden for the district. Hancock’s superintendent and Rep. John Barrett explained that a decades-old regulation, recently enforced by DESE, would require Hancock to pay tuition for choice-in students through high school graduation even though the district only serves pre-K through grade 6 and sends its own students elsewhere for middle and high school. They said the rule creates a significant per-student shortfall and has forced Hancock to opt out of school choice. Committee members asked for clarification about how the arrangement works and how the costs fall on Hancock. Additional testimony supported related transportation bills for non-regional districts, especially Plymouth/Carver and North Middlesex, describing high and rising bus costs, special education and McKinney-Vento transportation expenses, and the strain on local budgets. Speakers repeatedly said that state reimbursement has not matched actual costs and that communities are being forced to choose between transportation and classroom services. No votes or final actions were taken in the hearing; the committee simply received testimony and closed the hearing on the bills discussed.

Transcript Highlights:

• certain Both structural and then also geographic in nature as certain jurisdictions continue to throw incentives
• 2319, which is a bill that seeks to create a standalone $100 million credit for a post-production incentive
• We want to leverage all state opportunities as incentives for cultural and creative development.
• so we have a lot of statewide initiatives such as the Strong Workforce Grant Program and other CT incentive
• there's other states and other countries that recognize those clusters, like the post-production tax incentives

Summary: The Joint Committee on the Arts held an informational hearing on California’s first sector-specific creative economy strategic plan, “California’s Future Is Creative,” developed under AB 127 and related legislation. Chair Allen framed the plan as a response to California’s large but vulnerable creative economy, citing workforce losses, federal funding headwinds, and the need to support artists, cultural organizations, public media, museums, cultural districts, and film/TV production. He also highlighted budget asks including support for California Humanities, museums, public media, cultural districts, a post-production incentive proposal (AB 2319), and funding to implement the strategic plan. California Arts Council Director Danielle Brazel, Institute for the Future’s Rachel Hatch, CDE’s Allison Frenzel, and CWDB’s Michael Weoff described the planning process, which included a 30-plus-member work group, interagency coordination, and a phased approach from framework development to implementation and evaluation. They identified major forces shaping the sector over the next decade, including AI, climate disruption, affordability, access to capital, and social cohesion, and outlined six action areas: workforce preparation, business stabilization, cultural identity/tourism, cross-sector incentives, ROI/data tracking, and state capacity/infrastructure. Members and panelists repeatedly emphasized that the plan must be resourced and integrated across agencies rather than left siloed. A second panel of practitioners and advocates focused on workforce pathways and local implementation. Ricarlo Handy described the Handy Foundation’s registered apprenticeship pipeline into film and TV jobs and argued that current data systems undercount gig, 1099, and LLC-based creative work. Joanna Reynolds discussed Arts for LA’s Creative Jobs Collective, which aims to create 10,000 living-wage creative jobs in Los Angeles County by 2030, while Alejandro Gutierrez Chavez urged embedding artists in health, aging, and behavioral health systems as community problem-solvers. Roxanne Messina Kaptur spoke about the need to normalize arts careers and expand residency and school-based models. Senator Rubio, who joined later, shared her own arts and teaching background, supported arts access in schools and small theaters, and raised concerns about AI, asking how schools and educators can adapt. In the final panel, Rebecca Ratzkin reported on 26 statewide town halls with more than 1,100 attendees, which confirmed support for the plan but also highlighted needs for better information access, new financial models, stronger definitions and data, and more partnerships. Julie Baker of California for the Arts and California Arts Advocates urged sustained public funding, saying the plan is actionable only if the Legislature and administration provide resources, including increased California Arts Council funding and support for implementation. No formal votes were taken; the hearing was informational and concluded with calls for continued legislative and cross-agency collaboration.

Transcript Highlights:

• look to see if there was other funding we could make available, and we did identify a consolidation incentive
• We did say that the Consolidation Incentive Fund, with change of the rules, the $5.9 million that's sitting
• Any amount above that is where we could look at our consolidation incentive funding.
• Any amount above that is where we could look at our consolidation incentive funding and see if we can
• Well, that's where we're saying we could use the consolidation incentive funding.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the incremental cost for us to create that function, but it also includes, you know, benefits and incentive
• Representative Kempenich: Yeah, and you probably, on the incentive, is this part of where the bonus or
• So to clarify, Scott, this is base salary, incentive comp, the loaded burden rate for software and tech
• Client fund impact, incentive fees, savings, and excess...
• Client fund impact, incentive fees, savings, and excess return.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• extended, local officials or local entities that are providing funding or matching funds or tax incentives
• yet know what's being contemplated, either local officials or local funders who are providing tax incentives
• Or local funders who are providing tax incentives or public sector dollars to incent the data center,
• that period of time, is there the opportunity for local officials or those who are providing tax incentives

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and several guest and staff introductions. The chamber then took up returning messages from the House and acted on multiple bills, with votes recorded on each. Senate Bill 628 on transportation facility designations was concurred in as amended and passed 31-4 after discussion about naming roads for deceased individuals and an exception for President Trump. The House amendment to the Live Local affordable housing package, CS/CS/HB 1389, was also concurred in and passed 35-0; Senator Claudio explained it as the fourth iteration of the Live Local Act, including new provisions allowing certain affordable housing on qualifying religious property, extending some timelines, and removing accessory dwelling unit language. CS/CS/HB 1451 on utility services was concurred in and passed 30-6 after questions about phasing out surcharges and reporting requirements. The chamber also substituted CS/CS/HB 1279 for SB 7038 and adopted an education amendment package before passing the bill 36-1, while several other measures were temporarily postponed. The Senate then considered CS/CS/SB 484 on data centers and concurred in the House amendment 383-957, passing the bill 31-6. Senator Avila said the amendment strengthened ratepayer protections, required a PSC tariff filing, and directed an OPAGA study on large-scale data centers. Several senators pressed concerns about the removal of the Senate’s nondisclosure agreement prohibition, the possibility of delayed public awareness of data center projects, and whether costs could be shifted to other ratepayers; Avila responded that the amendment preserved local land-use authority and that ratepayer costs could not be borne by the general body of ratepayers. Debate reflected a split between senators who supported the bill as a needed regulatory framework and those who objected to the transparency changes and the loss of the Senate’s original NDA language. Later, the Senate took up land use and development regulations, substituting CS/CS/CS/HB 399 for SB 208. An amendment by Senator Jones to remove language affecting a Fontainebleau Hotel water park project in Miami Beach failed 17-20 after debate over local control and preemption. Senator McLean’s amendments then added a sunset date and other changes, and Senator Claudio’s amendment preserved Miami-Dade’s urban development boundary supermajority protections and related planning provisions. The chamber then began extended debate on Senator Martin’s amendment creating a process for property owners to challenge rural boundary designations and seek compensation or removal from the designation without going to court; supporters framed it as a property-rights and due-process measure, while opponents argued it would undermine local planning, impose costs on taxpayers, and weaken voter-approved rural boundaries in Orange and Seminole counties. The transcript ends amid that debate, with no final vote shown on the rural boundary amendment in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• know, may like to use their sick days a little more than others, uh, I think this is an awesome incentive
• know, may like to use their sick days a little more than others, uh, I think this is an awesome incentive
• know, may like to use their sick days a little more than others, uh, I think this is an awesome incentive
• know, may like to use their sick days a little more than others, uh, I think this is an awesome incentive
• know, may like to use their sick days a little more than others, uh, I think this is an awesome incentive

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• when you have insurance companies making these health care types of decisions, you end up with incentives
• And so there is still a necessary pathway to professional licensure and an incentive for individuals
• and<00:24:18.400> an professional lensure and and an professional lensure and and an incentive
• <00:24:20.799> Um incentive for individuals to do that.
• Um incentive for individuals to do that.

Keywords: 00:00 Call to Order 0:22 Roll Call 1:05 SB 65 Discussion 9:30 SB 65 Vote 11:55 SB 177 Discussion 26:34 SB 177 Vote 30:05 SB 245 Discussion 33:07 SB 245 Vote 33:48 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Licensing and Occupations met on March 3, 2026, with a quorum present and first took up Senate Bill 65, sponsored by Senator Steve West. The bill would nullify administrative regulations found deficient by the Administrative Regulations Review Subcommittee. West said the committee had found three deficient regulations this year, including one related to vaping rollout problems and one involving GLP-1 coverage expansion for Medicaid. Senator Berg raised concerns that striking the GLP-1 regulation could limit Kentucky’s ability to use these drugs for weight loss and other health benefits, but the sponsor and others said the action would only block the specific regulation and that doctors could still prescribe GLP-1s under existing Medicaid authority. The committee passed SB 65 with favorable expression, 8-2. The committee then considered Senate Bill 177, sponsored by Senator Rick Girdler, and first adopted a substitute. The bill concerns speech-language pathologist licensure. Testimony from Kate Wood Hall and Ann Blandford of the Kentucky Speech-Language-Hearing Association explained that the substitute would remove the mandatory post-professional graduate experience as a requirement for full licensure, while keeping an interim pathway and preserving an optional compact-related pathway. They said the change responds to updated graduate training standards and federal billing issues, including CMS guidance that had temporarily disrupted reimbursement and access, especially in rural areas. Members asked whether the change would weaken standards or affect compact participation; witnesses said it would not, and that the compact option remained available. The committee also noted that pages two and three of the substitute were missing and staff would restore them. Several senators spoke in favor while explaining reservations. Senator Berg supported the bill and shared a personal story about speech therapy in her family. Senator Douglas also voted aye but expressed concern about reducing requirements for trained professionals and about incentives in professional education. Senator Chambers Armstrong asked whether the opt-in structure would create barriers or affect compact participation, and witnesses said it would not increase costs and that other states, including Virginia and Oregon, were pursuing similar approaches. SB 177, as amended by the substitute, passed with favorable expression.

Transcript Highlights:

• There needs to be incentives and things that help to prevent these scenarios, so that no one is unfairly
• Housing Finance Corporation to establish and oversee the Homes for Veterans Property Management Incentive
• Housing Finance Corporation to establish and oversee the Homes for Veterans Property Management Incentive
• may appropriate funds for the purpose of implementing the Homes for Veterans Property Management Incentive
• For the purpose of implementing the Homes for Veterans Property Management Incentive Pilot Program.

Summary: The committee first took up CS for SB 1342, a transit-oriented development bill intended to expand housing near fixed transit corridors. The sponsor said the measure builds on the Live Local Act by reducing regulatory barriers and encouraging private investment around transit investments. An amendment was adopted that narrowed definitions, limited the bill to land use and development regulations, removed a private cause of action, and exempted certain sensitive areas including military installations and environmentally sensitive lands. Supporters argued the bill would increase housing supply and maximize the return on state transit spending, while local government groups and other opponents warned it would preempt local zoning, impose uniform density rules, and create infrastructure, evacuation, and public input concerns. The bill was then reported favorably. The committee then considered CS for SB 1334, an elections bill that would require documentary proof of citizenship in certain voter registration and verification processes, update candidate qualification rules, require U.S. citizen markers on driver licenses and ID cards, and clarify that paper ballots are the primary voting method. Two technical amendments were adopted. The sponsor said the bill would streamline verification by allowing agencies to rely on Real ID and DHSMV records, reduce duplicate documentation, and improve communication between state systems. Senators questioned the fiscal impact, data-sharing procedures, storage of sensitive documents, effects on students, disabled voters, and people without driver licenses or Real IDs. A large number of public speakers opposed the bill, arguing it would burden eligible voters, especially students, seniors, disabled people, low-income residents, naturalized citizens, and people with name changes, while a smaller number supported it as an election integrity measure. The bill was ultimately not finished in the portion of the transcript provided, but the committee continued taking testimony and questions. Later, the committee took up CS for SB 1362 on advanced air mobility. A strike-all amendment was adopted to align the bill with the House version and authorize FDOT to fund vertiports and charging systems as part of public-private partnerships, including up to 80% of the non-federal share when federal funds are available and up to 100% if FDOT elects to do so. The sponsor framed the bill as helping Florida lead in advanced air mobility, and the measure was reported favorably with support from industry and local government representatives. Finally, the committee heard SB 174, which would designate a portion of State Road 985 in Miami-Dade County as Charlie Kirk Memorial Avenue and direct FDOT to install markers at an estimated cost of $2,400. The sponsor said the designation was tied to Turning Point USA activity at FIU and civic engagement. Several senators objected in debate, arguing Kirk was divisive and that the state should reserve road memorials for figures more broadly deserving of honor; others defended the designation as symbolic and non-regulatory. The transcript ends during the sponsor’s closing remarks, before a final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• As a separate incentive, we are also asking, and it's not reflected in the budget for.
• I think voice writing is the incentive to young people to come into the profession.
• So we targeted in the past retention incentives to Those targeted places to try to keep people to stay
• decreased from 37% to 16.6%, and we believe those are really tied to being able to provide monetary incentives
• I'm here to talk specifically about our locality incentive program request, and what I think I'm uniquely

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We tend to start with this one because it's our longest incentive on the books in New Mexico, established
• And it's now the Job Training Incentive Program.
• The Job Training Incentive Program is simply a reimbursement to the employer of wages paid to an employee
• This $25 August enrollment incentive is for anyone who opens an account; they will match the $25.
• I like the idea of the incentive for individuals.

Transcript Highlights:

• my understanding, the motivation behind including the MOU language in the bill was to provide an incentive
• It's also to provide incentives for industries, and you're right. We've had vision.
• It puts the committee in charge of developing a strategy and deciding how to provide the best incentives
• It also provides incentives for behavioral changes to improve health or reduce the risk of death or disability
• It just allows them to offer the incentives, and then it's really up to the individuals to determine

Bills: HB106, HB144, HB145, HB252, HB1732, HB2221, HB2467, HB2468, HB2517, HB2518, HB2963, HB3016, HB3689, HB3960, HB4386, HB4490, HB4751, HB5247, HJR175, HB2213, HB106, HB144, HB145, HB252

Keywords: HB 106, oil and gas, Railroad Commission of Texas, overhead electrical lines, electrical distribution system, power line maintenance, administrative penalty, Natural Resources Code, oil and gas lease, well operator, energy safety, utility infrastructure, regulatory compliance, cleanup fund, oil and gas regulation and cleanup fund, production safety, leasehold operations, electric utility, distribution poles, inspection

Transcript Highlights:

• And so where would they get some level of incentives that would come from the county or from the city
• of Coleman or... ...county or from the city of Coleman or there's no mention of incentives coming from
• Like what would it give some type of tax incentives?
• ...expert on this statute that we are now adding this extra one to, but it seems to me that the incentive
• I would think that we would have something in place as an incentive, like a TIF district or something

Bills: HB 1520, HB 1545, HJR 110, HJR 203, HB 245, HB 1465, HB 1482, HB 294, HB 793, HB 809, HB 3928, HB 334, HB 2037, HB 1973, HB 285, HB 4341, HB 4264, HB 1043, HB 837, HB 1234, HB 1193, HB 1194, HB 1646, HB 1729, HB 2498, HB 1314, HB 2295, HB 1353, HB 1531, HB 1988, HB 5398, HB 3960, HB 3923, HB 1407, HB 1764, HB 2221, HB 2214, HB 2517, HB 2518, HB 2213, HB 5008, HB 5092, HB 3421, HB 3663, HB 3748, HB 3800, HB 3756, HB 2613, HB 3782, HB 5246, HB 4344, HB 4044, HB 4066, HB 2702, HB 2807, HB 2869, HB 2898, HB 3181, HB 3250, HB 4153, HB 2091, HB 2115, HB 2542, HB 2768, HB 3349, HB 3352, HB 4406, HB 1593, HB 1899, HB 3133, HB 4432, HB 4960, HB 3214, HB 3915, HB 3508, HB 2145, SB 304, SB 608, SB 2312, SB 494, SB 530, HB 45, HB 2520, HB 35, HB 47, HB 318, HB 349, HB 554, HB 1359, HB 1373, HB 2254, HB 2259, HB 2853, HB 3073, HB 3088, HB 353, HB 355, HB 786, HB 762, HB 705, HB 932, HB 849, HB 1119, HB 3041, HB 713, HB 3104, HB 3970, HB 4042, HB 4490, HB 1731, HB 2607, HB 3689, HB 1788, HB 1612, HB 138, HB 15, HB 1971, HB 1338, HB 2989, HB 267, HB 1201, HB 2954, HB 5265, HB 1804, HB 5061, HB 1520, HB 1545, HJR 110, HJR 203, HB 1887, HB 1914, HB 2402, HB 2306, HB 1809, HB 2350, HB 3000, HB 3237, HB 3326, HB 3211, HB 1056, HB 2081, HB 2187, HB 3092, HB 3308, HB 3526, HB 3750, HB 3527, HB 4219, HB 4230, HB 4290, HB 5238, HB 4804, HB 4749, HB 245, HB 1465, HB 1482, HB 294, HB 793, HB 809, HB 3928, HB 334, HB 2037, HB 1973, HB 285, HB 4341, HB 4264, HB 1043, HB 837, HB 1234, HB 1193, HB 1194, HB 1646, HB 1729, HB 2498, HB 1314, HB 2295, HB 1353, HB 1531, HB 1988, HB 5398, HB 3960, HB 3923, HB 1407, HB 1764, HB 2221, HB 2214, HB 2517, HB 2518, HB 2213, HB 5008, HB 5092, HB 3421, HB 3663, HB 3748, HB 3800, HB 3756, HB 2613, HB 3782, HB 5246, HB 4344, HB 4044, HB 4066, HB 2702, HB 2807, HB 2869, HB 2898, HB 3181, HB 3250, HB 4153, HB 2091, HB 2115, HB 2542, HB 2768, HB 3349, HB 3352, HB 4406, HB 1593, HB 1899, HB 3133, HB 4432, HB 4960, HB 3214, HB 3915, HB 3508, HB 2145, HCR 6, HCR 12, HCR 34, HCR 50, HCR 55, HCR 58, HCR 70, HCR 71, HCR 72, HCR 74, HCR 75, HCR 78, HCR 80, HCR 93, HCR 100, HCR 107, HCR 116, HCR 117, HCR 90

Keywords: Angelina and Neches River Authority, river authority, Sunset Advisory Commission, Texas Sunset Act, Special District Local Laws Code, local government, natural resources, board of directors, director training, board governance, public testimony, open meetings, public information, conflict of interest, ethics, complaint system, general manager, board president, staggered terms, removal of director