Bills: HR310, HR314, HR316, HR317, HR321, HR275, HR276, HR279, HR282, HR286, HR289, HR292, HR295, HR302, HR319, HCR112, HR307, SCR59, SCR61, SCR62, SCR68, SCR69, SCR70, SCR54, SCR55, SCR64, SCR75, HCR79, HCR104, HB75, HB410, HB719, HB750, HB944, HB1098, HB1220, HB1252, HB359, HB210, HB468, HB1117, SB382, HB368, HB552, HB732, HB870, HB1236, SB29, SB42, SB43, SB149, SB208, SB274, SB300, SB312, SB387, SB389, SB401, HR74, HB998, HB901, HR20, HCR65, HCR71, HCR98, HB284, HB306, HB341, HB366, HB393, HB458, HB577, HB603, HB605, HB614, HB625, HB646, HB733, HB752, HB773, HB798, HB911, HB955, HB996, HB1035, HB1069, HB1113, HB1140, HB1180, HB1191, HB1240, HB1255, SB82, SB89, SB97, SB123, SB237, HB36, HB42, HB74, HB119, HB159, HB258, HB259, HB302, HB414, HB459, HB848, HB956, HB1017, HB1028, HB1095, SB217, SB283, SB469

Keywords: oil and gas, orphan wells, inactive wells, shut-in wells, marginal wells, plugging and abandonment, well decommissioning, site remediation, site restoration, Oilfield Site Restoration, OSR program, financial security, bonding, taxpayer liability, public liability, offshore wells, onshore wells, coastal erosion, Department of Conservation and Energy, natural resources

Bills: SCR22, SB53, SB204, SB266, SB268, SB291, SB292, SB296, SB304, SB305, SB413, SB447, SB455, SB462, SB493, SB504, SB519, SB522, SB532, SB541, SB667, SB670, SB673, SB681, SB687, SB711, SB746, SB765, SB783, SB827, SB850, SB860, SB888, SB897, SB901, SB927, SB955, SB963, SB984, SB989, SB993, SB996, SB1023, SB1033, SB1058, SB1062, SB1101, SB1119, SB1172, SB1173, SB1215, SB1220, SB1227, SB1228, SB1229, SB1238, SB1239, SB1245, SB1248, SB1254, SB1259, SB1273, SB1277, SB1302, SB1332, SB1341, SB1346, SB1350, SB1352, SB1353, SB1355, SB1358, SB1370, SB1371, SB1378, SB1403, SB1404, SB1415, SB1437, SB1448, SB1450, SB1464, SB1493, SB1494, SB1537, SB1566, SB1569, SB1589, SB1598, SB1644, SB1709, SB1719, SB1729, SB1733, SB1744, SB1772, SB1810, SB1841, SB1895, SB1930, SB2039, SB2289, SB2312, SCR1, SCR6, SCR27, SCR32, SB2232

Keywords: SCR 22, Senate Concurrent Resolution 22, official state gun, state symbol, cannon, artillery, Texas Revolution, Battle of Gonzales, Come and Take It, Alamo, San Jacinto, Twin Sisters, Sam Houston, Angelina Eberly, Texas history, historic weapon, commemorative resolution, state emblem, Texas heritage, Gonzales Memorial Museum

Bills: SJR 18, SCR 5, SCR 13, SCR 25, SB 3, SB 6, SB 10, SB 11, SB 12, SB 13, SB 15, SB 17, SB 18, SB 35, SB 388, SB 412, SB 441, SB 495, SB 666, SB 687, SB 706, SB 740, SB 815, SB 842, SB 917, SB 925, SB 995, SB 1006, SB 1281, SB 1300, SB 1379, SB 1451, SB 1902, SJR 36, SJR 18, SJR 12, SCR 13, SCR 25, SCR 5, SCR 22, SB 565, SB 372, SB 495, SB 842, SB 765, SB 62, SB 19, SB 18, SB 666, SB 707, SB 888, SB 687, SB 706, SB 847, SB 290, SB 11, SB 10, SB 13, SB 412, SB 441, SB 1248, SB 740, SB 14, SB 1006, SB 504, SB 917, SB 925, SB 388, SB 1902, SB 1121, SB 995, SB 857, SB 305, SB 296, SB 284, SB 35, SB 6, SB 815, SB 3, SB 1281, SB 1379, SB 1300, SB 1497, SB 1499, SB 1498, SB 1451, SB 1061, SB 15, SB 65, SB 241, SB 304, SB 402, SB 499, SB 621, SB 974, SB 1023, SB 1024, SB 1025, SB 1106, SB 686, SB 112, SB 371, SB 204, SB 400, SB 609, SB 1447, SB 670, SB 502, SB 427, SB 850, SB 854, SB 413, SB 1555, SB 1362, SB 1346, SB 1033, SB 1220, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 987, SB 1539, SB 893, SB 447, SB 875, SB 406, SB 509, SB 985, SB 965, SB 17, SB 1119, SB 1505, SB 12, SB 24, SB 57, SB 1194, SB 1253, SB 1215, SB 1532, SB 1268, SCR 12, SCR 24, SB 1302, SB 856, SB 650, SB 583, SB 673, SB 840, SJR 18, SB 11, SB 441, SB 10, SB 18, SB 412, SB 495, SR 238, SR 264, SR 266, SR 267, SR 268, SR 270, SR 271, SR 272, SR 278, SB 1169, SB 1169

Keywords: capital gains, taxation, constitutional amendment, state revenue, individual investment, SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame, football coach, school facility naming

Bills: SJR18, SCR5, SCR13, SCR25, SB3, SB6, SB10, SB11, SB12, SB13, SB15, SB17, SB18, SB35, SB388, SB412, SB441, SB495, SB666, SB687, SB706, SB740, SB815, SB842, SB917, SB925, SB995, SB1006, SB1281, SB1300, SB1379, SB1451, SB1902, SJR36, SJR18, SJR12, SCR13, SCR25, SCR5, SCR22, SB565, SB372, SB495, SB842, SB765, SB62, SB19, SB18, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB706, SB847, SB290, SB11, SB10, SB13, SB412, SB441, SB1248, SB740, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB917, SB925, SB388, SB1902, SB1121, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB35, SB6, SB815, SB3, SB1281, SB1379, SB1300, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB1451, SB1061, SB15, SB65, SB241, SB304, SB402, SB499, SB621, SB974, SB1023, SB1024, SB1025, SB1106, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB400, SB609, SB1447, SB670, SB502, SB427, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1555, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB893, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB509, SB985, SB965, SB17, SB1119, SB1505, SB12, SB24, SB57, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1268, SCR12, SCR24, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB840

Keywords: capital gains, taxation, constitutional amendment, state revenue, individual investment, SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame, football coach, school facility naming

Transcript Highlights:

• It applies to its subdivisions. Policy cannot override statute.
• 01:10:23.040> applies<01:10:23.360> to<01:10:23.440> its<01:10:23.679> subdivisions
• <01:10:24.880> Policy It applies to its subdivisions.
• Policy It applies to its subdivisions.
• >> So, several states have enacted policies that prohibit public universities and political subdivisions

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• controller, the purpose for processing personal data, and a description of the processing pursuant to subdivision
• Subdivision 2 expressly provides that the committing court retains jurisdiction over the person, which

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House first returned to Senate Bill 71, a consumer data privacy and online surveillance bill. Members debated a proposed amendment that would have removed language allowing companies to rely on consumer consent to sell certain sensitive data. Supporters argued consent pop-ups and terms-of-service notices are not meaningful consent and that sensitive data should be categorically protected, citing Maryland and other states. Opponents, including the committee presenter, said the bill was a carefully negotiated compromise needed to establish Vermont’s first data privacy framework and warned that adopting the amendment could jeopardize passage in the Senate or with the governor. The committee reported the amendment unfavorable on a 9-0 straw poll, the House rejected the amendment, and then approved the committee’s recommended proposal of amendment by roll call vote, 129-3. During questioning on S. 71, members discussed the bill’s applicability thresholds, with the presenter explaining that the 35,000-consumer threshold was modeled on Connecticut, while lower 3,000 thresholds for sensitive data and data sales were based on business testimony and intended to capture smaller entities such as accountants, lawyers, nonprofits, and trade associations that share or sell lists. Members also asked about the bill’s many exemptions, which were described as covering entities already regulated by state or federal law, including health care entities under HIPAA and banking and insurance sectors. The presenter and supporters emphasized that the bill still requires clear privacy notices, limits data collection to what is reasonable and disclosed, and gives consumers rights to opt out, correct, and delete data. After the roll call vote, the House ordered third reading, suspended rules to place S. 71 in all remaining stages, passed it in concurrence with proposal of amendment, and suspended rules to message the action to the Senate forthwith. The House then moved to Senate Bill 193, relating to establishing a forensic facility for certain criminal justice-involved persons. The committee presenter from South Burlington previewed that the bill would create a permanent forensic facility, with a separate amendment expected to address interim arrangements while the facility is being developed. The transcript ends as the House begins second reading of S. 193 and the committee reports are introduced, with further debate not shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• What my concern is that subdivision one is emergency removal and placement prevented.
• What my concern is that subdivision one is emergency removal and placement prevented.

Bills: HF4407, HF4382

Keywords: child welfare, African American children, racial disproportionality, family preservation, reunification, foster care, kinship care, relative placement, noncustodial parent, guardian ad litem, ombudsperson, Department of Human Services, county social services, active efforts, reasonable efforts, child protection, placement, out-of-home placement, Northstar kinship assistance, data disaggregation

Summary: The Children and Families Committee adopted the April 8 minutes and then took up House File 4407, as amended by the A1 amendment. The amendment, explained by nonpartisan staff, incorporated much of the Senate version of related legislation and made a series of changes: it revised the definition of “disproportionately represented child,” shifted that determination to the Commissioner of Children, Youth, and Families, made technical cross-reference and terminology updates, adjusted training requirements, set the working group to expire December 31, 2027, and added an appropriation for statewide implementation. The committee adopted the A1 amendment and then referred the bill to Ways and Means. Representative Gilman said the bill is intended to preserve the goals of the Minnesota African American Family Preservation Act while addressing operational, legal, and fiscal problems before statewide implementation. He argued for delaying the effective date by one year, shifting case review responsibilities to the state, and providing funding so counties are not left with an unfunded mandate. He also said the bill adds safety measures related to synthetic opioids and other imminent-harm concerns, and that the delay would allow the working group to finish its recommendations and give counties time to prepare. County officials Steve Schmidt of Meeker County/Minnesota Rural Counties and Jenny Mojo of Clay County testified in support of the bill as amended, emphasizing that counties need clearer responsibilities, staffing, training, technology, and dependable funding to implement the law successfully. Rebecca St. George of DCYF said “active efforts” is not absolutely defined and is determined case by case, often with court involvement. Members raised questions about the meaning of active efforts, the bill’s synthetic opioid language, and whether the proposal should apply more broadly rather than within this specific act. A citizen also cautioned that the opioid language should not unintentionally affect families in treatment programs. Representative Hicks warned that the fentanyl provisions could lead to broad removals and create placement problems for teens with substance use disorder, while Representative Gilman responded that the bill includes a rebuttable presumption and is meant to protect children from imminent harm.

Transcript Highlights:

• In that bill, they had actually a good subdivision of fraud deterrent measures.
• In that bill, they had actually a good subdivision of fraud deterrent measures.

Bills: HF3217, HF2252

Keywords: bioindustrial facilities, economic development, renewable energy, advanced biofuels, state funding, HF2252, Minnesota bonding, volume cap, private activity bonds, tax-exempt bonds, public facility bonds, public facilities pool, unified pool, bond allocation, municipal finance, bond cap, housing bonds, residential rental projects, manufacturing bonds, enterprise zone bonds

Summary: The committee first approved the prior day’s minutes as amended, correcting the meeting number from the 46th to the 45th meeting. It then took up House File 3217, which would restore funding for the Minnesota Bioincentive Program. Representative Kisha argued the state should honor commitments made to companies that met program requirements and had not received full reimbursement. Testifiers from the Great Plains Institute and Minnesota Biofuels Association said the program has supported bioeconomy investment, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, and generated strong economic returns, but has been underfunded, leaving unpaid claims. Members raised questions about whether the bill was retrospective and whether it should be reviewed by another committee; the bill was laid over for further consideration without a vote. The committee then heard House File 2252, a proposal to modernize Minnesota’s private activity bond volume cap by shifting unused allocation from the small issuer/manufacturing bucket to the public facilities bucket while leaving the overall cap unchanged. The bill’s public finance testifier said the current allocation formula is outdated, housing would remain the top priority, and the change would be budget neutral. Testifiers from the Minnesota Milk Producers Association and Minnesota Biofuels Association supported the bill, saying it would better align financing with rural infrastructure, clean water, manure management, renewable natural gas, dairy processing, and low-carbon fuel projects, and could lower borrowing costs for those sectors. Members questioned whether the bill fit the committee’s jurisdiction and noted it might be more appropriate for another committee; the bill was also laid over for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• It just builds better relationship that way. subdivision 3 4.23. subdivision 3 4.23.

Bills: HF3898, HF3957, HF4372, HF4350, HF3692, HF4085

Keywords: pesticides, wild rice, environmental protection, agriculture, water quality, pollinators, training, management plan, fertilizer research, education grants, Minnesota Agricultural Council, technology transfer, agricultural productivity, HF4372, Minnesota agriculture, meat processing, meat processing training, retention incentive grants, grant extension, project deadline extension

Transcript Highlights:

• different pieces on this, specifically to the bill, though, I want to, you know, call attention to subdivision
• Then<00:27:17.120> next<00:27:17.520> year, Then next year, then section 2 of subdivision

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And then ideally the, uh, local municipality or political subdivision will have secured additional funding
• And then ideally the, uh, local municipality or political subdivision will have secured additional funding

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:03 Roll Call 00:00:08 Discussion of Indiana Residential Infrastructure Fund 00:01:27 Discussion of Affordable Housing Trust Fund 00:33:30 Discussion of Urban Infill 01:12:37 Approval of Minutes from July Meeting 01:39:00 Adjournment 01:39:42, 958, all

Summary: The Housing Task Force heard a presentation from Anita Sanford of the Homebuilders Association of Kentucky and Sheri Cybert of Indiana’s Residential Infrastructure Fund about Indiana’s low-interest loan program for local housing infrastructure. They described the program as a voluntary, locally driven model that helps communities finance roads, sewers, sidewalks, traffic lights, turning lanes, and other infrastructure needed for new housing development. Sanford emphasized that infrastructure and regulation are major drivers of housing costs, citing estimates that infrastructure can account for up to 30% of a home’s cost and regulations another 25%, and said the association is studying Kentucky-specific regulatory costs. She also noted that every $1,000 added to new home construction can price out about 2,000 Kentucky households. Cybert explained that Indiana’s program, administered through the Indiana Finance Authority, began in 2023 with $75 million appropriated over two years and has since closed 17 loans totaling $60.7 million, with more than 2,700 projected housing units. The program reserves 70% of funds for rural communities and 30% for urban communities, requires applications from local governments rather than developers, and asks communities to show need through a market study, describe the infrastructure and housing to be built, and provide preliminary engineering plans and a repayment source. She said the loans currently carry an interest rate around 3.5%, reset quarterly, and that the program has generated about $25 million in savings to communities compared with private borrowing. She also described recent Indiana legislative changes that encourage higher density and other zoning reforms, and said a majority of those local ordinance changes must be adopted for an application to be fundable. Members asked about the ordinance requirements, the funding split between rural and urban areas, repayment mechanisms, and whether there were caps on project size. Cybert said repayment is worked out case by case, often through existing or project-specific TIFs, temporary tax agreements, or letters of credit, and that the program has no cap on request size or income/affordability restrictions. She said the largest request funded was $19 million for a 700-unit project. Co-chair Mills and others discussed whether Kentucky could adopt a similar model and what it would cost, while Sanford and Cybert said they were still refining budget estimates. Later, Scott Welch, president of the Homebuilders Association of Kentucky, testified that upfront infrastructure costs are a major barrier in his projects, citing a $1 million pump station and road-widening and utility relocation costs as examples, and said an infrastructure fund would help get projects off the ground.

Transcript Highlights:

• is able to extend the appropriation with one line of text, whereas we had to copy in the entire subdivision
• is able to extend the appropriation with one line of text, whereas we had to copy in the entire subdivision

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And upon reading uh subdivision 4, it And upon reading uh subdivision 4, it looks<01:35:59.520> like

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• responsibility for compliance: any official responsible for hiring employees by the state or its political subdivision
• responsibility for compliance: any official responsible for hiring employees by the state or its political subdivision

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• > Representative Smith, your concern is that this bill is asking for an exception to section 1, subdivision
• Representative Gomez, the bill is asking for an exception to section 1, subdivision 2, which is titled

Bills: HF1698, HF632, HF1352, HF2197, HF618, HF1248, HF1697

Keywords: property tax, exemption, leased land, public use, commercial property, HF632, Minnesota property tax, conservation easement, conservation restriction, assessed value, property valuation, tax assessment, real property, land conservation, farmland preservation, natural areas, riparian buffer, water quality, water quantity, county assessor

Transcript Highlights:

• The MSFA is a political subdivision of the state of Minnesota, serving as the organization responsible
• state of Minnesota, the city of Minneapolis, and the Minnesota Vikings, the MSFA, as a political subdivision

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• staff does a great job, but I think on lines 4.1 through 4.2 it refers to the rates required under subdivision
• six, and I just wonder if that should have been subdivision five.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Minnesota Statutes 216C.05, subdivision 4, sets a goal to have retail electricity rates for each customer
• Minnesota Statutes 216C.05, subdivision 4, sets a goal to have retail electricity rates for each customer

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Bills: HJR1088, HJR1090, HJR1091, HB1370, SB2154, HJR1092, HJR1093, HJR1095, HJR1099, HJR1100, HB3021, SB893, SB206, SB248, SB259, SB423, SB563, SB604, SB633, HJR1077, SB667, SB1224, SB1257, SB1264, SB1319, SB1360, SB1437, SB1531, SB1543, SB1806, HB3004, SB1572, HB4342, SB1618, SB2, SB237, SB1632, SB1687, SB1726, SB1859, SB1894, SB1461, HB4432, SB1948, SB1589, SJR52, SR46, HCR1030, SB2071, SB2182, SB1451, HJR1088, HJR1090, HJR1091, HJR1092, HJR1093, HJR1095, HJR1096, HJR1099, HJR1100, SB2185, SB893, HB3021, SR46, SB206, SB237, SB248, SB259, SB423, SB563, SB604, SB625, SB633, SB667, SB1224, SB1257, SB1264, SB1319, SB1360, SB1378, SB1437, SB1531, SB1543, SB1572, SB1618, SB1632, SB1687, SB1726, SB1806, SB1859, SB1894, SB1948, SB2071, SJR52, HB1370, HJR1077, SB2, SB1451, SB2182, HCR1030

Keywords: education rules, administrative rules, joint resolution, Oklahoma State Department of Education, higher education, State Regents for Higher Education, Teachers' Retirement System, charter schools, Statewide Charter School Board, career and technology education, CTE, OEQA, rule approval, legislative oversight, permanent rules, school governance, teacher retirement, education agencies, Oklahoma Register, Department of Agriculture, Food, and Forestry

Bills: HJR1088, HJR1090, HJR1091, HB1370, SB2154, HJR1092, HJR1093, HJR1095, HJR1099, HJR1100, HB3021, SB893, SB206, SB248, SB259, SB423, SB563, SB604, SB633, HJR1077, SB667, SB1224, SB1257, SB1264, SB1319, SB1360, SB1437, SB1531, SB1543, SB1806, HB3004, SB1572, HB4342, SB1618, SB2, SB237, SB1632, SB1687, SB1726, SB1859, SB1894, SB1461, HB4432, SB1948, SB1589, SJR52, SR46, HCR1030, SB2071, SB2182, SB1451

Keywords: education rules, administrative rules, joint resolution, Oklahoma State Department of Education, higher education, State Regents for Higher Education, Teachers' Retirement System, charter schools, Statewide Charter School Board, career and technology education, CTE, OEQA, rule approval, legislative oversight, permanent rules, school governance, teacher retirement, education agencies, Oklahoma Register, Department of Agriculture, Food, and Forestry

Summary: The Senate met with a quorum, prayer, pledges, and recognition of two student pages before taking up a long agenda of House joint resolutions and bills, mostly related to administrative rules and agency approvals. The chamber advanced and passed H.J.R. 1088, 1090, 1091, 1092, 1093, 1095, 1099, and 1100, which approved permanent rules for education, energy and agriculture, business and commerce, building code, health-related agencies, general government agencies, the Oklahoma Health Care Authority, and OMES. Several senators criticized the process for moving rule resolutions quickly and without committee vetting, while supporters said the calendar delays required direct consideration. The Senate also adopted conference committee reports and passed SB 206, SB 248, and HB 3021, with HB 3021 making small changes to graduation requirements, including science/math course language, Oklahoma history flexibility for some military families, and personal financial literacy counting toward math in some cases. A major portion of the meeting focused on House Bill 1370, which was described by its author as repealing an automatic state trigger that would replace any federal gasoline tax if the federal government suspended it. Supporters argued the bill would prevent Oklahoma drivers from paying more if the federal gas tax were repealed and framed it as tax relief; opponents argued it could reduce highway and bridge funding and create a budget hole. The Senate suspended several rules to bring the bill up, but rejected a motion to suspend the fiscal-impact rule for a proposed amendment. After debate, the chamber passed the measure 41-7 and then approved it as an emergency measure. The Senate also took up Senate Bill 893, a conference report dealing with foreign ownership near critical infrastructure and agricultural land. The bill would restrict certain foreign adversary ownership or leasing within 10 miles of critical infrastructure, add training zones and other protected areas, delay implementation until July 1, 2027, and create an enforcement process involving Attorney General review and whistleblower-style reporting. Senators raised concerns about enforcement, possible misuse, and profiling, while the author said the bill was aimed at national security and infrastructure protection. The conference report was adopted and the bill passed. Later, the Senate received notice that the House was ready to convene in joint session, and the chamber briefly stood at ease before returning to continue its work.