Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, and before you have Senate Bill 504, and uh this is a comprehensive bill.
• 7 and the revisions to the CPA in sections 6 and 7.
• So basically 504<00:44:22.960> modernizes 504 modernizes 504 modernizes as<00:44:25.040> uh
• I just wanted to take a couple 504.
• So it's in section four, say, um, to Senator Rochefort's example.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Bills: HB287, HB340, HB412, HB440, HB514, HB515, HB521, HB543, HB553, HB570, HB961

Keywords: HB 287, Louisiana Tax Commission, ad valorem, property tax, property assessment, assessment fees, fee extension, sunset extension, public service property, utility property, insurance company property, financial institution property, tax administration, R.S. 47:1838, Act 296, reappraisal, ad valorem tax, valuation, Louisiana tax law, homestead exemption

Bills: HB306, SB149, SB158, HB323, HB362, HB306, SB149, SB158, HB323, HB362

Keywords: education, patriotism, national anthem, Star-Spangled Banner, K-12 schools, constitutional amendment, public works, sealed bids, bidding requirements, procurement, public notice, newspaper advertisement, advertising failure, publisher liability, civil damages, criminal liability, awarding authority, county government, municipal government, construction contracts

Bills: SB 612, SB 1855, SB 2568, SB 3058

Keywords: SB 612, Texas Water Code, Section 49.2127, conservation and reclamation district, water district, reclamation district, developer fees, pipeline construction, water pipeline, sewer pipeline, associated infrastructure, subdivision infrastructure, cost recovery, fee cap, actual reasonable documented costs, engineering fees, legal fees, inspection fees, infrastructure relocation, utility connections

Bills: HB1523, HB2109, HB2694, HB3525, HB3898, HB4646, HB5188, HB5219, HB5320, HB5651, HB5655, HB5659, HB5662, HB5672

Keywords: aquifer conservation, Class V injection well, environmental regulation, groundwater protection, municipal water supply, temporary prohibition, water management, reservoir construction, state water plan, Texas Water Code, environmental impact, Brazoria Drainage District, commissioners, elections, vacancies, resignation, HB 3525, North Texas Groundwater Conservation District, groundwater permit, permit amendment

Summary: The Committee on Natural Resources heard House Bill 2109, which would remove certain long-proposed reservoir projects from the state water plan after 50 years without progress. Chairman Van Deaver and many landowners, local officials, timber interests, and conservation advocates testified in support, arguing that the Marvin Nichols Reservoir has burdened Northeast Texas landowners for decades with the threat of eminent domain, depressed property values, and uncertainty over homes, farms, ranches, schools, churches, and cemeteries. Supporters also said the project would flood tens of thousands of acres, require extensive mitigation, harm timber and agriculture, and that Texas now has better alternatives such as conservation, reuse, aquifer storage and recovery, and desalination. Several members expressed sympathy for the affected families and questioned whether a project could remain in the plan indefinitely without progress. Opposition came from North Texas water interests, including the North Texas Commission, Tarrant Regional Water District, and the Texas Water Association, who argued that the bill would interfere with the state’s long-term water planning process and remove needed future supply options for a fast-growing region. They said Region C faces major projected shortages by 2070, that conservation and reuse have already delayed the need for new supplies, and that reservoirs remain one tool in the state’s water-planning toolbox. TWDB staff explained the existing inter-regional conflict process and noted that the substitute would affect several unique reservoir sites, not just Marvin Nichols. After testimony, Chairman Van Deaver closed by urging passage of the bill, but the committee withdrew the substitute and left HB 2109 pending. The committee then took up House Bill 5188, a brackish groundwater bill. The author said the bill would reduce permitting burdens for wells in designated brackish groundwater production zones, and the committee substitute added requirements on monitoring, groundwater-rights ownership, and allocation of pumpage limits while removing some exclusions and export-fee provisions. Texas Wildlife Association testified against the bill, warning that the exemptions could weaken groundwater conservation districts’ ability to protect freshwater resources and surface-owner rights. San Antonio Water System testified in favor, saying brackish groundwater is a key future supply and that the substitute would help speed development of desalination and brackish projects. The Texas Alliance of Groundwater Districts testified neutrally but raised concerns about reduced district oversight, especially around injection-well exclusions and the loss of export fees, and said discussions on the bill were ongoing.

Bills: HB1523, HB2109, HB2694, HB3525, HB3898, HB4646, HB5188, HB5219, HB5320, HB5651, HB5655, HB5659, HB5662, HB5672

Keywords: aquifer conservation, Class V injection well, environmental regulation, groundwater protection, municipal water supply, temporary prohibition, water management, reservoir construction, state water plan, Texas Water Code, environmental impact, Brazoria Drainage District, commissioners, elections, vacancies, resignation, HB 3525, North Texas Groundwater Conservation District, groundwater permit, permit amendment

Bills: HB1523, HB2109, HB2694, HB3525, HB3898, HB4646, HB5188, HB5219, HB5320, HB5651, HB5655, HB5659, HB5662, HB5672

Keywords: aquifer conservation, Class V injection well, environmental regulation, groundwater protection, municipal water supply, temporary prohibition, water management, reservoir construction, state water plan, Texas Water Code, environmental impact, Brazoria Drainage District, commissioners, elections, vacancies, resignation, HB 3525, North Texas Groundwater Conservation District, groundwater permit, permit amendment

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Creighton, could you go back over the bonus section of the bill at the end, please?
• The section for the TEA disapproval of a charter school expansion amendment changes from June 30 to that
• Fourth Monday in August if the district operates a year-round system under Section 25.08.
• The bill amends Section 54.052 of the Education Code to remove prior eligibility for legal immigrants
• This is an attack against a section of Texans that contribute positively to our state economically and

Bills: SB1798, SB1835, SB1319, SB2942, SB2928, SB784, SB1049

Keywords: higher education, tuition rates, financial support, immigration status, Texas law, SB 1835, resident tuition, nonresident students, scholarship students, public higher education, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, Education Code Section 54.213, tuition waiver, in-state tuition, out-of-state students, higher education finance, enrollment cap, capacity limit, workforce development area, nonimmigrant visa

Transcript Highlights:

• Each grant under this section must... must be approved by the commission.
• Members, under Section 21.105 of the Transportation Code, the Texas...
• Economically disadvantaged counties, as defined in Section 222.053 of the Transportation Code, are counties
• agreement with a county to provide funding for maintenance through donations, gifts, or grants to adopt a section
• transportation projects for other entities and mimic TxDOT's State Infrastructure Bank framework in Section

Bills: HB1589, HB2208, HB2297, HB2560, HB2725, HB3080, HB4417, HB4473, HB4520, HB4662, HB4888, HB4905, HB4906

Keywords: HB 1589, toll road, toll project, toll project entity, voter approval, local control, county election, commissioners court, Transportation Code, Chapter 372, road construction, highway funding, infrastructure, public referendum, ballot measure, transportation policy, Texas toll roads, regional mobility, toll collection, vehicle registration

Transcript Highlights:

• any issue in circuit court that wasn't raised before the zoning board, so we agreed to delete that section
• So I just want to speak on that section that the gentlelady just mentioned. ...section that the gentlelady
• note, I do like in the bill where prior to any arrest, and that's on line 67, for violation of the section

Bills: SB270, SB275, HB264, HB281, SB236, SB247, SB249, SB253, SB259

Keywords: county tax, education funding, capital projects, local government, sales tax, food trucks, mobile vendors, business license, health inspection, statewide regulation, zoning ordinances, vessel registration, boating fees, state funds, regulatory changes, water safety, municipal zoning, zoning board, appeals process, circuit court

Transcript Highlights:

• It specifies that an indictment or information in the prosecution of an offense. under Section 31.16
• For those problems if it's okay with you I'd like to kind of walk through SB 13 by section.
• Section 2 lays out the evidence rules. These are the rules of engagement.
• Moving on to section three, it corrects the definition of retail merchandise to include. gift cards.
• And so I highlight that because when you walk. through all six sections of SB 13.

Bills: SB1281, SB1300, SB1379, SB1451, SB1497, SB1498, SB1499

Keywords: mail theft, postal theft, package theft, identity theft, negotiable instrument, check theft, mail receptacle key, mailbox lock, postal key, delivery service, courier, USPS, United States Postal Service, fraud, property crime, elderly victims, disabled victims, identity information, rebuttable presumption, felony enhancement

Transcript Highlights:

• :56:41.720> last similar to the EMS bill I wrote last similar to the EMS bill I wrote last section
• 43.559> vium<00:56:44.480> where<00:56:44.640> we<00:56:44.799> trained section
• last uh vium where we trained section last uh vium where we trained the<00:56:45.400> EMS<00:

Bills: HF110, HF111, HF263, HF105

Keywords: HF110, Adrian Independent School District, Independent School District No. 511, school construction, sales tax exemption, use tax refund, refundable exemption, construction materials, capital improvements, school roofing, playground remodel, retaining walls, plumbing, bathroom remodel, locker room remodel, window replacements, local tax relief, general fund appropriation, Minnesota chapter 297A, retroactive tax refund

Transcript Highlights:

• For almost 20 years, the Alliance, a 504 network, has focused on identifying and contracting with the
• The network report card is for certified networks as well as 504 networks, including the Alliance.
• This bill in Section 2 resurrects that.
• This bill in Section 2 resurrects that.
• As a practical matter in this case, if this bill passes with Section 2...

Summary: The subcommittee heard testimony on a broad agenda of workforce, labor, and workers’ compensation bills. HB 4676 would require political subdivision workers’ compensation networks to follow the same notice, access, and complaint rules as certified TDI networks; supporters said public employees and first responders deserve equal access to care, while municipal risk pool representatives opposed added regulation and said existing 504 networks already perform well. HB 4479 would create a rural workforce development grant program at TWC to support college-and-career readiness and local workforce alignment, and HB 3844 would define “opportunity youth” in state law to improve data, coordination, and access to services for disconnected young Texans; both drew strong support from rural, education, and chamber witnesses. HB 5545 would clarify federal tax treatment for wage-replacement benefits in non-subscriber injury benefit plans, with proponents calling it a win for employers and injured workers. HB 5118 would direct TWC and DIR to study AI and automated employment decision tools in hiring, including bias and oversight concerns. HB 1667 would move existing PTSD workers’ compensation language into a broader Labor Code chapter so more first responders, including state and campus officers, could qualify for benefits; supporters called it a technical fix to extend coverage more evenly across agencies. The committee also heard several first-responder and workers’ compensation bills. HB 2369 would speed up claims handling for injured first responders by allowing a single medical evaluation, giving carriers 60 days to accept or deny a claim, and letting workers seek treatment while disputes proceed; law enforcement supporters said it would help injured officers return to work faster, while opponents warned it would revive extent-of-injury waiver problems and increase litigation. HB 4483 would reclassify certain workers’ compensation maintenance taxes as surcharges to reduce retaliatory taxes imposed by other states on Texas-domiciled carriers, and HB 875, as revised by committee substitute, would create a small-project exception to municipal workers’ compensation and bonding requirements for certain low-value construction contracts in small cities; both were presented as cost-saving measures for Texas employers and local governments. HB 4415 would extend anti-retaliation protections for workers’ compensation claimants from first responders to all public employees and expressly waive sovereign immunity for those claims, with supporters describing it as closing a loophole that leaves public workers without the same remedy available in the private sector. The committee also took testimony on HB 5400, which would expand remedies for sexual harassment victims by removing the requirement to first file an administrative charge, extending the filing deadline from 300 days to two years, clarifying retaliation, and eliminating current damages caps. Supporters, including employment lawyers and a parent of a victim, said the current deadlines and caps prevent many survivors from obtaining counsel or full relief, especially younger workers and those in small workplaces or franchises. Across the agenda, witnesses repeatedly emphasized access to care, fair treatment for injured workers, rural workforce development, and stronger protections for vulnerable employees. After each bill was laid out and testimony heard, the chair generally closed the public hearing and left the bill pending; no final votes were taken, and the subcommittee adjourned after completing the agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• And one other thing to think about, too, in all of this is we will have the 504 payout.
• that I mentioned it's the same list in those sections about noise, odor, aesthetics, and so on.
• noise<00:41:36.840> odor list in those sections about noise odor list in those sections about
• It leaves sections two and three as originally introduced and removes section four, the edits made to
• And while you're there, we'll go back to page six, section one, page six, line five.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But when you get all the way down to section EEE in 453.04, subsection 2, Triple E, and I wrote it down
• students' individual education plans, also known as an IEP, their education plan, known as an EEP, 504
• Parents may not even realize that they have an IEP or 504. Many of them are outdated.
• And so I've been through plenty of the 504 meetings, the IEP meetings, that parents sit and have those
• And so I've been through plenty of the 504 meetings, the IEP meetings, that parents sit and have those

Summary: The committee first heard the proposed Pre-K-12 education budget for fiscal year 2025-26, totaling $34.7 billion. The chair highlighted major increases for the FEFP, including $29.6 billion for public schools and K-12 scholarships, a $984 million year-over-year increase, along with higher per-FTE funding, $4 billion for the Family Empowerment Scholarship, $431.4 million for VPK, funding for school safety, the Florida School for the Deaf and Blind, school hardening, Jewish day school security, and an education enrollment stabilization fund. With no public comment, the committee adopted a motion for staff technical corrections and then approved the budget proposal as a recommendation to the full Senate Appropriations Committee. The committee then considered SB 1402 on dropout retrieval programs. The bill expands eligibility so any individual who has withdrawn from high school may enroll in dropout retrieval services and clarifies how school grades are calculated for virtual instruction providers that offer those services. An amendment clarifying the grading calculation was adopted, and the committee reported the bill favorably. Next, the committee took up SPB 7030 on educational scholarship programs, a broad measure addressing school choice funding and administration. The bill would fund the Family Empowerment Scholarship as a separate categorical, expand the education stabilization fund, create fall and spring application windows, require a single scholarship application and more documentation, assign student IDs, standardize payment timing to monthly installments, require continued eligibility verification, and add Level 2 background checks for providers receiving state funds. Members raised questions about background-check enforcement, payment timing, data sharing, and the impact on homeschool and private-school families. Public testimony included support from school-choice advocates and concerns from private-school representatives about added regulatory burdens and deadlines. The committee adopted the bill as a committee bill and reported it favorably, with Senator Osgood voting no. Finally, the committee considered SB 508 on the Family Empowerment Scholarship Program, which requires private schools to disclose in writing what accommodations, modifications, and services they will provide to students with existing plans such as IEPs, EEPs, 504 plans, or ELL plans before enrollment. An amendment was adopted to require public schools to consult with private schools about equitable services. Testimony was mixed: supporters said the bill would give parents needed information for informed choice, while private-school representatives said the language could be burdensome and vague. The committee reported the bill favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• 504 education programs and and Section 504 plans<00:14:45.160> of<00:14:45.440> eligible
• six, states that every individualized education program or Section 504 plan for an eligible blind student
• So we recommend that that section be removed: section 302A-AC, subsection B, on page five, lines one
• <00:25:10.039> be that section be that section be removed<00:25:12.159> which<00:25
• which section 302 a AC removed which section 302 a AC subsection<00:25:16.320> B<00:25:16.760

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, then moving to section that lawsuit.
• You know, we've been section two.
• <01:00:28.880> 3A subject matter of paragraph section 3A subject matter of paragraph section
• We're not adding the section.
• 504 504 there<02:17:09.439> was<02:17:09.599> one<02:17:09.840> paragraph<02:17

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The continued conference on House Bill 609 focused on reconciling House and Senate drafts dealing with firearms and other personal defense tools, local government preemption, and agency rulemaking. Representative Leyon walked through amendment 21107H, explaining that it narrows undefined terms, clarifies that the General Court has supremacy over local regulation, allows damages actions for violations of preemption law, and adds language limiting agency rules unless specifically authorized by statute. She also described a three-year sunset and a delayed effective date for new rules so existing rules could continue temporarily while the legislature considers any needed statutory carveouts. Members then debated the practical effect of the language, especially whether it would bar agencies from adopting internal employment rules or instead require those rules to come through JCAR and be tied to express statutory authority. Several examples were discussed, including state plow drivers, corrections employees, and other workers who may need to carry personal defense tools in the field. The committee also discussed a provision making a plaintiff a prevailing party if a municipality changes a challenged policy after suit is filed, and a clause stating that good faith or advice of counsel is not a defense, though it may be considered in mitigation. The discussion narrowed to the difference between the House approach, which some members read as an absolute prohibition on agency rules in these areas, and the Senate approach, which some members said would allow rules only when an agency can point to express enabling authority and JCAR can review them. Members agreed that the goal was to prevent agencies from adopting rules that conflict with the statute while still allowing legitimate safety-related regulations where the legislature has authorized them. The conference took a recess and later resumed with the chair stating the parties had reached an agreement in principle based on the latest Senate language, and Representative Leyon was asked to continue reviewing the draft line by line for remaining concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• can uh look into this specific section can uh look into this specific section to<00:06:05.520>
• <00:36:09.839> three RSA 195 section 29 specifies three RSA 195 section 29 specifies three
• the children with IEPs and the 504 the children with IEPs and the 504 classifications<03:43:25.520
• I'm reading the wrong section. I apologize. I'm reading the wrong section. I apologize.
• review their IEP or 504 and make review their IEP or 504 and make adjustments adjustments adjustments

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That is bottom of page one, section two, starting on line 27.
• And in section three is the study commission.
• is<00:07:40.319> the<00:07:40.960> study And in section three is the study And in section
• There's there's some next section.
• So that is what the bill does or the amendment. sections on the commission and the sections on the commission

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• five you'll see riddling and in section five you'll see the<00:05:25.280> warnings<00:05:25.800
• Yeah, it would just be the last section. Okay, thank you.
• This is just a, perhaps exposing my ignorance, but section two repeals RSA such and such, but section
• > one<03:39:36.000> uh such and such uh but section one uh such and such uh but section
• Representative Weber: It doesn't say that section one replaces it.

Keywords: 1189, house, all