Transcript Highlights:

• I probably need to withdraw then because I did not hear you. OK. All right. Stay in this current.
• civics education in Texas high schools by requiring instructional... ...local and state government functions
• education in Texas high schools by requiring instructional content covering local and state government functions

Bills: HB178, HB1551, HB1939, HB2040, HB2354, HB2674, HB3029, HB3460, HB3631, HB3662, HB5201, HB5381, HB178

Keywords: Texas education, public schools, curriculum, social studies, high school graduation requirements, State Board of Education, Education Code, ethnic studies, world history, world geography, U.S. history, government, economics, personal financial literacy, free enterprise, religious literature, Hebrew Scriptures, Old Testament, New Testament, ninth grade

Transcript Highlights:

• This will help strengthen the infrastructure residents need to get around safely and businesses need
• And our trails and our parks and our farms all need consistent support to stay open and be functional
• We need to more rapidly restore them. Number two, the need for speed.
• We need to more rapidly restore them. Number two, the need for speed. Thank you.
• You need to get it checked out.”

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused on the Healey-Driscoll administration’s Mass Ready Act, a $3 billion environmental bond bill. Administration officials said the bill would fund climate resilience, clean water, land conservation, parks, PFAS remediation, food security infrastructure, and coastal and inland flood protection, while also streamlining permitting for housing, restoration, and other resilience projects. They emphasized that the bond authorizes spending but does not itself obligate it, and said the proposal includes deauthorizations as housekeeping. Committee members asked about the new Resilience Revolving Fund, flood and drought management, MVP funding, land acquisition, Chapter 61 right-of-first-refusal changes, salt marsh carbon sequestration, and how the bill would help smaller municipalities and offset expected federal funding losses. Officials said the revolving fund would be managed through EEA and the Clean Water Trust, with criteria aimed at directing aid to communities most in need, and noted that drought issues would continue to be handled through existing DEP and drought commission tools. Several committee members and witnesses discussed specific policy provisions, including flood disclosure requirements for homebuyers and renters, expanded authority for regional planning and small-town access to grants, and permitting reforms that would exempt or expedite certain environmental restoration and priority housing projects from more time-consuming review processes. Administration witnesses defended the reforms as a way to achieve the same environmental outcomes faster and with more certainty, while some advocates argued the bill should go further, especially on Chapter 91 and restoration permitting. The administration also described investments in DCR facilities, water and wastewater systems, open space, agricultural easements, and a new focus on blue carbon and salt marsh restoration. Public testimony largely supported the bill. Mass Audubon, the Trustees of Reservations, the Environmental League of Massachusetts, The Nature Conservancy, MAPC, the Massachusetts Municipal Association, municipal officials, and others praised the bill’s resilience, conservation, and water infrastructure investments. Some witnesses urged additional funding for land protection, coastal resilience, buyouts, and restoration, and several called for stronger or simpler permitting reforms. Municipal witnesses from Boston, Beckett, Beverly, Conway, and regional planning organizations stressed the need for flexible financing, especially for small and rural communities facing costly infrastructure and climate adaptation projects. No votes were taken during the portion of the hearing provided; the committee heard testimony and asked questions before moving on to additional panels.

Transcript Highlights:

• So Stony Brook needs to be there. Stony Brook needs to... ...paycheck.
• Stony Brook needs to continue to serve the population that is needed.
• Yeah, your medical needs.
• most addicts need.
• I mean, that's what we need. We need aftercare.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held its fourth public hearing of the 2025-2026 session on bills dealing with involuntary commitment and access to addiction treatment, especially proposals to move Section 35 civil commitments away from jails and prisons and into facilities licensed or approved by DPH or DMH. Chairs Velis and Domb framed the hearing as a discussion of how to support people in crisis with compassion, while also warning against using involuntary commitment as a way to remove unhoused people from public view. The hearing also touched on related concerns about discharge practices, treatment capacity, and the need for a broader continuum of care. Testimony split largely along two themes. Addiction researcher Keith Humphreys argued that many people enter treatment under pressure, that involuntary treatment can be ethically justified in the face of overdose risk, but that it should not be mandated unless high-quality services exist first; he emphasized the need for inpatient care when someone is a grave danger, followed by case management and outpatient support. MAMH’s Kate Alicante supported the bill, saying Massachusetts is the only state that commits people with substance use conditions to jails or prisons and that carceral settings add trauma and stigma; she pointed to prior legislative steps, including the Section 35 commission and the planned closure of DOC’s MESAC facility, as evidence that the Commonwealth is moving toward health-based settings. A major portion of the hearing focused on Stony Brook, a sheriff-run stabilization and treatment center in Hampden County. Boston City Councilor John Fitzgerald, several committee members, and multiple people in recovery described the facility as humane, well-run, and effective, with longer stays, medical monitoring, medication-assisted treatment, counseling, and warm handoffs to aftercare. Several witnesses said Stony Brook saved their lives or helped family members recover, and they argued that the sheriff’s office model should be expanded rather than eliminated. Others, including family members and advocates, countered that even a well-run correctional setting remains stigmatizing and that people should not be treated in facilities run by sheriffs or corrections when they have committed no crime. No vote was taken. The hearing concluded with continued testimony, including Senator Friedman’s support for Section 35 as a civil commitment tool but not in a criminal justice setting, and her separate support for a bill to speed inpatient mental health treatment.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:26:18.159> more were privileged to serve need more were privileged to serve need more
• indeed need to pause them or don't need indeed need to pause them or don't need to<00:31:32.639>
• So I understand being Switzerland in the political sense, but also we need you. We need your fight.
• I understand being Switzerland in the political sense, but also we need you. We need your fight.
• question because I believe there needs question because I believe there needs to<00:53:50.680>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And as I sort of said before, there need to be more black lawyers.
• Would we need them anymore?
• Again, this is, this is not the sunset commission, and it won't have the same functions as the sunset
• And what this is, is not checking to see whether an agency is needed.
• Without built-in checks, the structure lacks the balance needed to ensure meaningful oversight.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Gaetz, I believe that we need to have JAPAC hearings and we need to bring the agencies forward
• And so we need to remind our compatriots that we need to have deadlines within our bills to have rules
• Senator Gates, I believe that we need to have Japsy hearings and we need to bring the agencies forward
• And so we need to remind our compatriots that we need to have deadlines within our bills to have rules
• They have very different functions.

Summary: The Joint Administrative Procedures Committee heard a presentation from Representative Esposito on a proposal to strengthen oversight of agency rulemaking under Chapter 120. The bill would require cost-benefit analysis at the front end and after implementation, create an eight-year sunset and review process for rules, and require express legislative authority for agency rulemaking. Members questioned the lack of concrete examples of burdensome rules, the effect on already slow rulemaking, the choice of an eight-year sunset, and the bill’s origin; Esposito said she was working with stakeholders and cited her chamber-of-commerce background and research with the Cicero Institute. No vote was taken on the bill itself. Staff then reported on legislatively mandated rulemaking from 2023 and 2024, noting that most required rules had been adopted, proposed, noticed, or scheduled, with a few agencies still outstanding. The Department of Financial Services explained a delayed notice of rule development for the MySafe Florida Home condominium pilot program as an oversight that has since been corrected, and the Department of Education said it did not proceed with rulemaking for the Fostering Prosperity grants because the program received no funding in the 2025 budget. The Department of Health described delayed rulemaking for the sickle cell disease and trait registry, saying the registry and opt-out forms were being implemented and that notices of rule development had now been filed. Members pressed the department on why rules took so long and discussed the need for statutory deadlines. The Department of Children and Families reported on two 2023 human-trafficking-related rules: signage requirements for residential treatment facilities and children’s safe homes, and a new certification process for adult safe homes. DCF said the signage rule is now moving forward and the adult safe home certification rule has been submitted for final review after workshops and stakeholder feedback. Senators questioned the lengthy timeline and the lack of oversight during the interim, while the chair emphasized the need for time-certain deadlines in legislation and for JAPAC oversight hearings. The committee also considered staff-proposed amendments to Chapter 120 addressing emergency rules pending legislative ratification and the process for initiating ratification, including a one-year limit and notice to JAPAC. After discussion, the committee voted to forward the proposed amendments to the Senate President and House Speaker. Finally, members discussed a proposed amendment to the administrative law judge appointment and retention process under Section 120.65. DOAH’s interim director opposed the change, saying ALJs and workers’ compensation judges have different functions and warning against shifting appointment power to cabinet officers whose agencies appear before DOAH. Members raised concerns about timeliness, consistency, and accountability in DOAH decisions. The committee voted to forward this proposal as well, with Senator Smith voting no on that motion.

Transcript Highlights:

• that fit their needs.
• that fit their needs.
• So I get the need for immediacy.
• that need.
• care needs, which might explain the need to make sure that they have the funding that they need.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held a May Revision hearing covering several health-related budget proposals and broader concerns about the state’s budget structure. The Chair opened by praising some May Revision changes, such as added health IT funding, county administration support tied to Medi-Cal changes, a delay in Medi-Cal cuts for some lawfully present immigrants, and additional support for Covered California subsidies, while criticizing proposed increases in Medi-Cal premiums, changes to senior eligibility, the lack of a Medi-Cal dental solution, and other reductions affecting counties, mobile crisis units, workforce incentives, and physician shortages. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the state’s budget condition remains weak despite progress on the structural deficit, and the Department of Finance said the May Revision uses a mix of reductions, reforms, revenue proposals, and fund shifts to cut out-year deficits. The committee first heard Department of State Hospitals proposals, including adjustments to county bed billing authority, contract exemption language for online clinical/pharmacy subscriptions, reversion of unspent funds, a revised Metro Central Utility Plant replacement project, electronic health record implementation, and workforce development funded partly through Behavioral Health Services Act resources. DSH also described savings and realignments in incompetent-to-stand-trial and conditional release programs, including extending the independent placement panel program and shifting funds to support additional bed capacity and a mental health rehab center. Members asked about the use of BHSA funds for workforce programs, and the department said the proposal would replace General Fund support with BHSA reimbursements. The Emergency Medical Services Authority proposed funding for statewide behavioral health crisis response guidance and for enterprise system development, and the Department of Managed Health Care proposed modernization of its complaint system and claims-settlement data system to improve oversight and comply with AB 3275. The largest discussion centered on the administration’s BHSA spending plan under Proposition 1, including state-directed prevention, workforce, and other uses, plus General Fund offsets for existing programs. The LAO questioned whether some proposed offsets fit Proposition 1’s non-supplant and eligible-use requirements, while the administration argued the uses were consistent with the measure and that the state-directed share can be adjusted annually. The Commission for Behavioral Health’s proposals drew the most public and member concern. The administration proposed cutting the commission’s Innovation Partnership Fund from $20 million to $10 million and reducing the Community Advocacy Program by $6.7 million, while redirecting BHSA dollars to other state purposes and direct services. Commissioners, advocates, and several members argued the cuts would weaken community voice, reduce support for underserved populations, and disrupt grants already in process; they also objected to using BHSA funds to backfill General Fund commitments. Public commenters, including youth, disability, behavioral health, LGBTQ, tribal, veteran, immigrant, and community-based organization representatives, overwhelmingly opposed the cuts and urged preservation of prevention, advocacy, mobile crisis, and innovation funding. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• The need here.
• need to, etc. need to, etc.
• We need to drive.
• Um, I I do think um that we need need need um<02:14:54.800> as<02:14:55.040> we<02:14:55.199
• need to be committed.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:30:23.039> Um, are still needed. Um, are still needed.
• They need the cash flow, but we need to be real.
• They need the cash flow, but we need to be real.
• We don't need to advance more than what they need.
• they need it. they need it.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Scientific monitoring is needed.
• We need more litter pickup. And that’s why we see this more as a need in that regard.
• So the LAO's evaluation is that these are essential needs that need to be funded.
• we need to re-evaluate that?
• We need to protect those.

Summary: The hearing focused on the governor’s May Revision proposals for transportation, natural resources, climate, and related programs, with the Department of Finance and the LAO presenting competing views on the state’s fiscal condition. Finance said the budget remains balanced over two years, with major climate-bond, water, parks, transportation, DMV, and agriculture proposals, while the LAO argued the state still has a structural deficit and should reject or defer many new discretionary spending items, preserve reserves, and be cautious about ongoing commitments. The LAO specifically questioned the timing and scale of new spending for programs such as Clean California, Healthy Rivers and Landscapes, and the Golden Gate Fields acquisition, and urged more clarity on future obligations and revenue scenarios, including for the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. A major portion of the hearing was devoted to the Healthy Rivers and Landscapes proposal for Bay-Delta water quality implementation. Secretary Wade Crowfoot and Finance described it as an enforceable, science-based alternative to a more traditional regulatory approach, with the state’s $25 million request intended to support early implementation, monitoring, habitat restoration, and environmental flows. The LAO countered that the Water Board has not yet adopted the updated Bay-Delta plan, that the proposal may be premature, and that the Legislature should wait for more information on the state’s total funding commitment and the program’s long-term costs. Several members expressed support for the program as a way to reduce conflict and protect water reliability, while others echoed concerns about timing and fiscal exposure. The committee also examined the proposed $125 million Proposition 4 contribution toward acquiring the Golden Gate Fields property for a shoreline park and habitat project. State officials said the acquisition is a time-sensitive, once-in-a-generation opportunity, with an appraised value of $175 million and additional philanthropic and local funding expected to close the gap. Members questioned whether the project had gone through the usual competitive process, whether the site is the best use of scarce park bond dollars, and how public access, habitat, and disadvantaged-community priorities would be protected. The discussion ended without a vote, and the committee moved on to transportation items including Clean California litter abatement, the Games Route Network, homeless encampment coordinators, and DMV modernization and field office proposals, with LAO recommending rejection or delay on several of those requests as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• were in need of help. were in need of help.
• That's important as needs local needs.
• We need this now. We need it.
• ourselves as as need be. ourselves as as need be.
• We need your help so we can continue to help others and keep HCMC functional.

Bills: HF4561, HF4343

Keywords: homeless prevention aid, homelessness, housing stability, rental assistance, family homelessness, unaccompanied youth, housing navigation, legal representation, family outreach, county aid, Tribal governments, local government aid, general fund appropriation, unspent funds, aid redistribution, sunset repeal, Minnesota property tax aid, services for persons experiencing homelessness, sales tax, use tax

Transcript Highlights:

• And I can tell you, we need to move on it. We need to get our hands around this.
• It needs some detail."
• We need motions on item two. We need a motion on item two, SB 300, Padilla. Ms. Bill.
• We need employer data and we need government-held data to prepare for this moment.
• It would need to be—you need to be... The bill is in print.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:03:45.200> to consistently talk about the need to consistently talk about the need to
• ensure the immediate human rights needs ensure the immediate human rights needs of<00:41:22.319>
• employers need and what job Seekers need employers need and what job Seekers need to<00:56:34.280
• Something that basic is needed.
• Something that basic is needed.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We just need more funding. We need more funding.
• We need to fix it and we need to fund it.
• needs, right?
• Sometimes that's all they need. They just need affordable rent, and they're on their way.
• Sometimes that's all they need. They just need affordable rent, and they're on their way.

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Housing Finance and Affordability held its first hearing of 2025 to examine California’s housing finance system, with opening remarks emphasizing the state’s severe housing shortage, high costs, and the need for practical recommendations to the Legislature and Governor. Co-chairs described the committee as an educational and problem-solving forum focused on financing housing production, first-time homeownership, mixed-income developments, and affordability across the income spectrum. Witnesses from state agencies and the development sector were invited to explain how housing is financed and where the system is breaking down. Panelists from the California Housing Partnership, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, the Tax Credit Allocation Committee/State Treasurer’s Office, CalHFA, and Related outlined the “capital stack” used to finance affordable housing, stressing that projects typically rely on multiple public and private sources, including federal and state low-income housing tax credits, tax-exempt bonds, state subsidies, local funds, and rental income. Speakers noted that affordable housing rents generally cannot support full project costs without public subsidy, and that recent federal changes—especially the expansion of the 4% and 9% tax credit programs and the reduction of the bond financing threshold for 4% credits—should allow California to finance substantially more units. CalHFA also described its homeownership programs, including My Home, Dream For All, and disaster-related mortgage assistance, as well as its multifamily lending and bond issuance programs. Several witnesses and committee members emphasized that the system remains too complex, too slow, and underfunded. They pointed to the need for more state funding, a housing bond, a permanent funding source, and better coordination among agencies, while also citing recent streamlining efforts such as AB 434’s SuperNOFA, AB 519’s one-stop-shop working group, and the planned California Housing and Homeless Agency reorganization. Members raised concerns about equity, access, missing-middle housing, gender and racial disparities, and whether current programs adequately serve extremely low-income households and those at risk of homelessness. No formal votes or actions were taken during the hearing; the discussion ended with committee members and witnesses agreeing that both funding and administrative reform are needed to increase production and improve affordability.

Transcript Highlights:

• of carriers, then we need a fine, right? of carriers, then we need a fine, right?
• <01:19:29.040> that and a half away if you needed that and a half away if you needed that
• We need seeks to strike a balance.
• So uh than um otherwise needed.
• need to be at at least 12%. need to be at at least 12%.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 47, sponsored by Senator Regina Birdsell at the request of the Insurance Department. The bill would clarify that a birth mother’s health insurance is the primary policy for a newborn’s care unless the mother has no coverage or no employer-sponsored coverage. Birdsell and Insurance Commissioner DJ Benton Court said the measure simply codifies the department’s long-standing interpretation of existing law. Representative Miles asked whether the coverage would extend to a grandchild if a young woman on her parents’ plan had a baby, and Birdsell said it would. The hearing on SB 47 was then closed. The committee next heard Senate Bill 121, introduced by Grant Bosi for Senator Kevin Avard. The bill requires insurers to notify the Insurance Department when they stop writing an entire line of business or, in some cases, when they change Medicare Advantage offerings. Benton Court said the bill was prompted by disruption in the Medicare Advantage market, where consumers and the department were confused by carriers exiting, changing plans, or narrowing offerings. He said the department does not regulate Medicare Advantage itself, but does license the carriers, and the notice requirement would help the department advise consumers; he also said noncompliance could affect a carrier’s license and could lead to fines. Members discussed the notice period, and the department and AHIP indicated support for changing it from 120 days to 90 days to align with federal timing. The hearing was closed with plans to work on an amendment in subcommittee. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 247, introduced by Representative Brian Cole, which would prohibit network exclusion for pharmacies that refuse to dispense prescriptions when PBM reimbursement is below acquisition cost. Cole said the bill is meant to stop pharmacies from being forced to sell at a loss. Members questioned whether pharmacies voluntarily enter PBM contracts, whether the bill would raise consumer prices, and whether it would mainly affect independent pharmacies. Cole and others said the issue has changed over time because PBMs now control a much larger share of the market, and that the bill would let pharmacies refuse loss-making fills and direct patients to mail order instead. The discussion also noted that the bill excludes Medicare and Medicaid and that the current proposal does not create a middle-ground option for patients to pay a premium at the counter.

Transcript Highlights:

• We need to build more housing.
• We need legislative action.
• We need something that is stabilized housing. We need a secure place to live.
• They know what they need.
• We need to act with urgency and we need to move things forward.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Housing held a hybrid hearing on a broad slate of landlord-tenant and home rule bills, with most testimony focused on rent stabilization, tenant opportunity to purchase (TOPA), tenant fees, access to counsel, algorithmic rent fixing, and tenant protections in subsidized housing. Chairs Cyr and Haggerty outlined the hearing procedures and noted that written testimony could also be submitted. Several members and invited speakers emphasized that the committee was hearing from both local officials and residents affected by housing instability, especially in Somerville and other communities facing high rents and displacement. Supporters of rent stabilization and local-option rent control argued that Massachusetts needs tools to prevent displacement while new housing is built. Senator Eldridge, Senator Jalen, Somerville officials, tenant organizers, and residents described steep rent increases, no-fault evictions, and the loss of naturally occurring affordable housing. Somerville’s home rule petition was described as allowing annual increases tied to CPI plus 2%, capped at 5%, with exemptions for owner-occupied two- and three-family homes and a 15-year exemption for new construction. TOPA supporters said it would let tenants or their designees buy buildings before speculative buyers, preserving affordable housing stock; opponents, including small landlords and property managers, argued rent control would reduce supply, discourage investment, and that TOPA could delay sales and harm properties. The committee also heard testimony on bills to curb junk fees and regulate tenant charges, including limits on late fees, lease renewal fees, payment portal fees, attorney’s fees, and other add-on charges. Advocates said these fees can add hundreds of dollars a month and disproportionately harm low-income renters and renters of color. Another major topic was algorithmic rent fixing: Senator Moore and Representative Sabadoza said landlords should not use software such as RealPage to coordinate pricing, citing federal antitrust actions and arguing that competition is essential to lowering rents. Additional testimony supported a statewide right to counsel in eviction cases, with legal services providers saying representation dramatically improves outcomes and can save the state money, and a bill to create an office of tenant protections to better enforce sanitary code violations. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:15:48.000> of to address the mental health needs of to address the mental health needs
• We all want to see children be able to get the help they need when they need it.
• retain staff need needed to meet the retain staff need needed to meet the growing<00:18:00.159><
• > and<00:18:01.520> their growing needs of our patients and their growing needs of our
• the services they needed.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: House File 105 was presented by Representatives Beerman and Baker and then laid over for possible inclusion in a future omnibus bill. The bill would implement the remaining mental health and physician service recommendations from DHS’s rate study, including raising certain Medicaid reimbursement rates to at least 100% of Medicare where a Medicare equivalent exists, increasing community-based children’s and adult mental health rates and behavioral health home rates, and phasing in additional increases over three years. The authors said the proposal also addresses master’s-level clinician reimbursement and fee-for-service hospital inpatient mental health services, and they emphasized that the changes are intended to improve access, transparency, and provider stability. Both authors argued that low MA reimbursement rates are driving access problems across Minnesota, especially for children, families, and rural communities. They said providers are struggling to hire and retain staff, clinics are closing or shrinking, and patients are facing long waits, boarding in hospitals, or delayed care. Representative Baker said the issue is personal and described the bill as a phased, long-term approach because of state budget limits and the size of the cost, which he said is in the hundreds of millions but still awaiting a fiscal note. Public testimony was strongly supportive overall. A family physician said higher rates would improve access, keep clinics open, and help patients avoid emergency care, while a Children’s Minnesota mental health leader described more than 1,200 pediatric boarding episodes in 2024 and said outpatient investment is needed to reduce pressure on emergency and inpatient services. A rural provider said her organization had to close an in-home children’s mental health program because of insufficient reimbursement, harming access in underserved counties. A psychologist testifying for the Minnesota Psychological Association supported the bill’s general direction but objected to repealing the pay differential for doctoral-level psychologists, arguing that doctoral training is more extensive and that eliminating the differential could worsen workforce shortages. After testimony and member questions about the bill’s scope and cost, public testimony was closed and the bill was laid over.

Transcript Highlights:

• But we don't just need more credentials, we need to make sure students are earning credentials of value
• that the state needs.
• So, we need that money to provide the clinic center that we need to educate and. provide patient care
• We need them in South Texas.
• We need to look at that.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We don't want you finding out that you need to be admitted or need surgery in the lobby.
• We don't want you finding out that you need to be admitted or need surgery in the lobby.
• Uh, buying up of a need that we all have, right? Everybody needs housing.
• Uh, buying up of a need that we all have, right? Everybody needs housing.
• Uh, buying up of a need that we all have, right? Everybody needs housing.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• What do I need to understand so we can better serve those needs?
• I'm thinking, you know, we know where I'm going is that we need to, well, we need to educate, first of
• Why do you need to partner?
• We need $20 million or $15 million.
• They need to be paired up to the producer problem in real need.

Summary: The committee met in Fargo and approved the minutes from the March 31 meeting before hearing a series of informational presentations focused on North Dakota agriculture, water, and research. NDSU President David Cook opened with remarks about NDSU’s land-grant mission, emphasizing statewide service through research, teaching, and extension, and highlighting examples such as the Lilac Agriculture startup and the university’s role in applying research to real-world problems. He said he intends to spend time listening across the state to better understand local needs. The committee then received a detailed presentation on a state irrigation and drainage study from Tom Bodine on behalf of Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring. The study projected significant potential for expanded irrigation acreage, especially in counties such as McLean, Williams, Sargent, Burleigh, Mountrail, McKenzie, McIntosh, Dunn, and Bottineau, and estimated major economic gains from irrigation, including higher farm returns and support for value-added agriculture. Members discussed water permits, surface water versus aquifers, infrastructure, drought resilience, and the role of legal drains in improving productivity and generating economic activity. The presenters also noted that the full report is available online. Dr. Greg Lardy followed with NDSU’s required interim report, outlining the university’s agricultural research and extension system, including the State Board of Agricultural Research and Education, seven research-extension centers, and the economic importance of agriculture to the state. He highlighted recent research impacts such as new crop varieties, potato breeding successes, virtual fencing, AI-assisted weed control, weather-network tools, and 4-H programming. He also described NDSU’s budget priorities: restoring the governor’s proposed 10% cuts, additional operating support, and deferred maintenance funding. Committee members asked about the new agricultural field lab, storage sheds, and NDSU’s partnership with Grand Farm. The committee also heard from the North Dakota Water Resources Research Institute and a professor presenting water-related research, including data center cooling, water reuse, smart irrigation, and a feasibility study on co-locating data centers with greenhouse and aquaculture production. Members asked about water use, ownership, and whether the concepts were operational or still speculative. Finally, North Dakota AgTech presented its NSF-funded innovation engine work, describing startup commercialization, on-farm trials, workforce development, and partnerships with NDSU, UND, tribal colleges, and other land-grant institutions. No formal votes were taken beyond approval of the prior meeting minutes.