Transcript Highlights:

• refunds for certain tangible property to finance, Senate Bill 1217. 18 by Hughes relating to the contents

Bills: SJR36, SJR3, SB616, SB565, SB384, SB5, SJR52, SJR53, SJR54, SJR55, SCR18, SCR19, SCR22, SB27, SB29, SB35, SB1151, SB1152, SB1153, SB1154, SB1155, SB1156, SB1157, SB1158, SB1159, SB1160, SB1161, SB1162, SB1163, SB1164, SB1165, SB1166, SB1167, SB1168, SB1169, SB1170, SB1171, SB1172, SB1173, SB1174, SB1175, SB1176, SB1177, SB1178, SB1179, SB1180, SB1181, SB1182, SB1183, SB1184, SB1185, SB1186, SB1187, SB1188, SB1189, SB1190, SB1191, SB1192, SB1193, SB1194, SB1195, SB1196, SB1197, SB1198, SB1199, SB1200, SB1201, SB1202, SB1203, SB1204, SB1205, SB1206, SB1207, SB1208, SB1209, SB1210, SB1211, SB1212, SB1213, SB1214, SB1215, SB1216, SB1217, SB1218, SB1219, SB1220, SB1221, SB1222, SB1223, SB1224, SB1225, SB1226, SB1227, SB1228, SB1229, SB1230, SB1231, SB1232, SB1233, SB1234, SB1235, SB1236, SB1237, SB1238, SB1239, SB1240, SB1241, SB1242, SB1243, SB1244, SB1245, SB1246, SB1247, SB1248, SB1249, SB1250, SB1251, SB1252, SB1253, SB1254, SB1255, SB1256, SB1257, SB1258, SB1259, SB1260, SB1261, SB1262, SB1263, SB1264, SB1265, SB1266, SB1267, SB1268, SB1269, SB1270, SB1271, SB1272, SB1273, SB1274, SB1275, SB1276, SB1277, SB1278, SB1279, SB1280, SB1281, SB1282, SB1283, SB1284, SB1285, SB1286, SB1287, SB1288, SB1289, SB1290, SB1291, SB1292, SB1293, SB1294, SB1295, SB1296, SB1297, SB1298, SB1299, SB1300, SB1301, SB1302, SB1303, SB1304, SB1305, SB1306, SB1307, SB1308, SB1309, SB1310, SB1311, SB1312, SB1313, SB1314, SB1315, SB1316, SB1317, SB1318, SB1319, SB1320, SB1321, SB1322, SB1323, SB1324, SB1325, SB1326, SB1327, SB1328, SB1329, SB1330, SB1331, SB1332, SB1333, SB1334, SB1335, SB1336, SB1337, SB1338, SB1339, SB1340, SB1341, SB1342, SB1343, SB1344, SB1345, SB1621, SJR57

Keywords: dementia, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, research funding, state budget, prevention, healthcare, medical research, Dementia Prevention and Research Institute, aquifer, water management, Edwards Aquifer, sustainability, regulatory framework, SB 565, Texas Water Code, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, compliance agreement, enforcement suspension

Transcript Highlights:

• Never content with the status quo, she actively seeks out opportunities for growth and improvement and

Transcript Highlights:

• And part of that information is grounded in the belief or the contention that there are numerous and
• And part of that information is grounded in the belief or the contention that there are numerous and
• within this bill requires that ammunition used when taking wildlife be limited to no more than 1% lead content
• Well, there's a general contention that our forests are unhealthy and because they all are growing, they

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee hearing covered a wide range of animal, wildlife, hunting, and environmental bills. Early testimony focused on deer management, with Rep. Markey urging creation of a deer commission to address crop damage, vehicle collisions, and Lyme disease, and Sen. Durant supporting bills to allow Sunday bow hunting, expand crossbow use, and reduce the 500-foot dwelling restriction for archery hunting. Supporters framed these measures as practical wildlife-management tools, while questions centered on how they would differ from existing Fish and Wildlife authority and whether they would allow hunting closer to residences. Later, Rep. Sena also spoke in support of a bill to increase protected wildlife management areas and another to require non-lead ammunition, arguing both would benefit biodiversity and reduce environmental harm. A substantial portion of the hearing addressed animal welfare and commerce. Multiple witnesses supported bills to ban or phase out the retail sale of dogs, cats, rabbits, and guinea pigs in pet shops, arguing that pet stores rely on puppy mills and obscure the source of animals, while opponents said the bills would hurt responsible breeders, small businesses, and consumer choice. The committee also heard strong testimony for bills to ban the sale of cats and dogs in pet shops, with supporters citing sick animals, consumer deception, and the need to cut off the puppy mill supply chain. In a separate animal-testing segment, witnesses backed bills requiring non-animal testing methods for cosmetics and household products, saying alternatives are more accurate and humane; biomedical research representatives opposed those bills and a related research-animal measure, warning of unintended restrictions on research institutions and arguing animal models remain necessary for many studies. The committee also heard testimony on horseshoe crab conservation, with supporters of H. 898 urging an end to taking horseshoe crabs for bait because of population declines, shorebird impacts, and the species’ importance to biomedical science. On wildlife trafficking, witnesses backed bills to ban intrastate sales of ivory and rhino horn, saying Massachusetts should close loopholes that aid poaching and align with federal law and other states; one antique dealer testified in support, saying he avoids such items and still sees them in the marketplace. Additional testimony supported bans on fur products from factory farms and on force-feeding birds for foie gras, with advocates emphasizing cruelty, public health, and environmental concerns. The hearing was lengthy and heavily attended, with the chairs repeatedly limiting testimony to three minutes and inviting written submissions; no committee votes or final actions were taken during the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• I would have to understand the content of it more in terms of whether it was it has more to do with management
• I would have to understand the content of it more in terms of whether it was it has more to do with management
• , so we're unable to talk about the details around that procurement. would have to understand the content
• of would have to understand the content of it<00:02:43.840> more<00:02:44.280> in<00:02

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 KCNA Request for Proposal Process 00:00:01 Overview of KWIC Board and Funding of Kentucky Wired Network Refresh 00:18:10 Zayo Network Services 00:34:40 Discussion of Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD) Funding 00:57:32, 958, all

Summary: The committee first focused on a disputed KCNA procurement for a statewide network-related RFP. Members questioned why the RFP had been labeled non-technical, whether COT should have reviewed it, and whether the KCNA board could direct that it be withdrawn. Finance and Administration Cabinet counsel Barbie Dickens said the RFP was authorized by KCNA working with procurement services after termination of the prior contract and breach notices, was issued in November 2025, paused during a protest, later resumed, and remained an open procurement. She said the agency—not the board—directs the procurement process, though she acknowledged an agency and OPS could cancel or reissue an RFP if needed. Legislators pushed back, citing KRS 154 and House Bill 314 as evidence that the KCNA board controls contracts and operations, and one member said the board had requested the RFP be withdrawn. Dickens said she could not predict the outcome and was not KCNA’s counsel. The discussion also touched on whether the current director had asked to stop the RFP and whether that request had been denied, with no final action taken during the exchange. The committee then turned to Kentucky Wired Infrastructure Corporation and the Kentucky Wired refresh project. Jim Barnhart described the structure of the nonprofit corporation, the role of Quick and Quack in the financing and operations arrangement, and the board membership, noting that the refresh funding had been approved in the 2024-26 capital budget. He said the equipment upgrade is necessary because of end-of-life hardware and software support issues, and that the refresh would expand capacity, lower risk, and reduce operating costs. Barnhart said some equipment had already been received, the rest would be purchased later, and the project should begin before September and take about a year to complete. When asked about contract disputes involving Ledcor and whether the vendor had an ongoing contract, Barnhart and the authority representative said they had not been notified of any issues and were not directly involved in that contract dispute. Committee members also raised concerns about a prior market test and whether a lower-cost bidder had been blocked from a previous RFP process. Barnhart said he understood Quack could make that decision and that the Commonwealth did not have input so long as the network was maintained, but he was not involved at the time. A legislator then read from the KCNA statute and argued that the board, not agency staff, is supposed to direct KCNA contracts and operations, saying House Bill 314 did not change those duties. The chair agreed the committee’s intent was for the board to control KCNA and direct contracts, and the discussion ended with a transition away from the KCNA dispute toward future testimony, including a presentation from Zayo Networks on open access networks and broadband infrastructure.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, basically for this, we're going to take the House position and match this to the contents of House
• house position and match this uh<01:33:25.480> to<01:33:25.600> the<01:33:25.720> contents
• of<01:33:26.400> House<01:33:26.680> Bill<01:33:26.880> 1644 uh to the contents
• of House Bill 1644 uh to the contents of House Bill 1644 House<01:33:28.160> Draft<01:33:28.520

Bills: SB3326

Keywords: renewable energy, energy storage, cost reduction, public utilities commission, Hawaii energy policies, 910, house, all

Summary: The joint committees on Energy and Environmental Protection and Labor heard SB 3326, a bill concerning a study of separating transmission from generation in Hawaii’s electric system. Testimony was largely opposed. Life of the Land argued that true separation on an isolated island grid has not been shown to work anywhere and said the bill would waste taxpayer money. Hawaiian Electric and the Public Utilities Commission also opposed the measure, saying Hawaii already uses competitive bidding for new generation, that the bill would add cost, complexity, and reliability risks, and that a new study would duplicate prior work. In response to questions, the PUC explained its existing competitive bidding framework and said it had not seen an island system fully restructure in this way. The chair then amended the bill’s intent to require the PUC to open a proceeding for an independent, comprehensive analysis of the state’s energy pathways, including cost reduction, financial risk, state energy goals, and reliability, rather than narrowly focusing on separation. Both committees voted to pass SB 3326 SD2 with amendments, with the Energy committee adopting the recommendation unanimously and the Labor committee adopting it with one reservation and two no votes. The Energy and Environmental Protection Committee then took up SB 2497 SD2, which would require electric utilities other than cooperatives to provide transparent, publicly accessible customer bill impact analyses and annual reports to the PUC. The Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs and the PUC offered comments, with the PUC supporting the intent. Life of the Land said the proposed disclosure requirements would be too complex for most ratepayers to use meaningfully, while Hawaiian Electric said the bill could raise costs and slow projects, though it acknowledged some of the language changes and said much of the information is already available through existing planning and regulatory processes. Hawaii Clean Power Alliance and one individual testified in support. No vote was taken on SB 2497 SD2 during the excerpt. The committee also heard SB 3183 SD2, which would bar higher-income taxpayers from claiming the renewable energy technologies income tax credit for certain residential solar systems and would change refundability rules. The Department of Taxation, the Hawaii State Energy Office, and the Tax Foundation offered comments, while the Hawaii Solar Energy Association and numerous companies and individuals opposed the bill. Opponents raised concerns about impacts on financing models and the solar market. Members asked the Department of Taxation for data on how credits are claimed by homeowners versus third-party owners and on the refundability of the credit; the department said it did not have the information immediately available but would follow up. The chair indicated decision-making would likely be deferred to allow further review, and no vote was taken in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• There was a technical error in the table of contents, so the numbers did not match.
• was a technical error in the table There was a technical error in the table of<00:13:30.720> contents
• 31.279> the<00:13:31.519> numbers<00:13:31.839> did<00:13:32.079> not of contents
• So, the numbers did not of contents.

Keywords: House streaming session for Thursday, March 5, 2026, 957, house, all

Summary: The House convened with 127 members present, heard a prayer, and then recognized 2025 Maryland Blue Ribbon Schools and the Maryland Municipal League on its 90th anniversary. The Blue Ribbon resolution named Baltimore Polytechnic Institute, Diamond Elementary School, Little Flower School, Meyersville Elementary School, St. Louis School, Stoneleigh Elementary School, and Wilson Whims Elementary School, with principals introduced from the gallery. The MML resolution honored the league’s service to Maryland’s cities and towns and invited members to meet municipal officials after the floor session. The clerk also noted a second printing of the 2026 rule book due to a table-of-contents error. The chamber then took up House Bill 80, the Residential Leases Fee Disclosures bill. Floor debate focused on what fees must be disclosed, what counts as a utility versus a fee, whether the bill applies to oral leases, and how the measure applies to landlords with four or more units. Supporters said the bill is intended to ensure tenants know all upfront fees before signing and to create a clear enforcement pathway; opponents raised concerns about penalties, affordability, and the burden on landlords. The bill passed on third reading by a vote of 95-34. The House next considered House Bill 153, which requires air conditioning in newly constructed residential rental units and units undergoing specified substantial renovations, with the standard that habitable spaces be kept at 80 degrees or lower. Members asked whether window units would satisfy the requirement, how the bill interacts with older buildings and ongoing renovations, whether it applies retroactively, how enforcement would work, and whether it references federal refrigerant rules; the sponsor said it does not require central air and is prospective only. Supporters argued it reflects existing practice in Montgomery and Prince George’s counties and clarifies habitability standards, while opponents cited costs and concerns about older homes. The transcript ends during debate on this bill, before a final vote is recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• the records for the purposes of either putting these people on, deposing them, or addressing this contention
• deposing them or addressing addressing addressing um<01:02:37.839> this<01:02:38.640> contention
• um this contention by respondent. um this contention by respondent.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Kentucky Legislative Ethics Commission met on November 18, 2025, approved the October 14 minutes, and then took up five motions in ethics matters 24LEC3 and 24LEC6. Those motions included a renewed motion to dismiss and motion to quash by Representative Daniel Gberg, a renewed motion to compel/sanctions and continuance request by Mr. Jenkins, and competing motions in limine concerning evidence and redaction of deposition transcripts. Vice Chair Mike Schaw was appointed hearing officer for the motion practice, and the commission agreed to hear the motions one at a time in open session. Representative Chris Lily joined later by Zoom. Counsel for Representative Gberg argued the remaining allegations were minor, that the commission lacked key exculpatory materials such as an alleged LRC report, policies, procedures, and training materials, and that the record did not support the ethics charges. She also argued the case had been broadened by extraneous allegations and that the respondent had been unfairly prejudiced. Enforcement counsel responded that he had produced all materials in his possession, that any LRC materials were not in the commission’s custody, and that the commission’s probable-cause findings were based on sworn testimony and affidavits already in the record. He argued the motions to dismiss and for summary judgment should be denied because genuine issues of material fact remained and the commission had already found probable cause on three ethics violations. Commission members questioned both sides about the alleged LRC report and whether it was part of the commission’s record. The chair stated the commission had not relied on any LRC report and had not withheld anything, while another member emphasized that the proceeding concerned alleged violations of the ethics code, not LRC sexual-harassment policy. A commissioner also noted the unusual structure of the proceeding and questioned whether the complaints, taken as true, stated a basis for dismissal. The transcript ends during continued discussion of the standard for dismissal and summary judgment, with no final ruling on the motions captured in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we made a very strong point of contention that that's not appropriate.
• 36:29.000> of And uh we made a very strong point of And uh we made a very strong point of contention
• contention that that's not appropriate. contention that that's not appropriate.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first approved the August 12 minutes and then handled a large agenda of 355 contracts totaling about $278.7 million. It agreed to defer three Office of Energy Policy items to the October 2025 meeting and reviewed a deferred Kentucky Educational Television contract without objection. The main substantive discussion centered on two University of Louisville legal services PSC amendments and a Seven Counties Services MOA item. For the University of Louisville items, members questioned a large increase in hourly rates and the scope of the legal services, especially complex litigation work and a Colorado estate matter. University officials said the contracts followed an RFP, involved specialized litigation, included local counsel where required, and were expected to be offset by savings in other PSCs and by a potential financial recovery in the Colorado matter. The committee also discussed whether the $125 hourly rate was a statutory requirement or committee policy; the chair later said staff would verify whether it was an executive-branch regulation or statutory rate. Both University of Louisville items were ultimately approved, though Senator Meredith voted no on one and Senator Douglas explained his support while urging future adjustments and more information sharing. The Seven Counties Services contract drew questions about how the $18.7 million would be used and whether federal changes could affect future funding. Cabinet officials described 988 crisis response, outpatient mental health and substance use treatment, prevention, recovery, and harm-reduction services, and said they were monitoring federal developments daily. Representative Petrie and Senator Thomas pressed the cabinet on the long-running Seven Counties bankruptcy and the need to push for resolution; officials said the matter was pending on a motion for reconsideration and that they would try to help move it along. The contract was approved. At the end of the meeting, the committee approved the remaining agenda items as reviewed without objection, but Senator Meredith voted no on the blanket approval motion because of numerous retroactive contract requests and what she said were insufficient explanations such as administrative error or staff being on conference. She said retroactive approvals should be rare and supported stronger internal controls.

Transcript Highlights:

• we've had several communities that have not applied for a KPDI and they've indicated they're quite content
• KPDI and they've indicated<00:21:04.320> they're<00:21:04.640> quite<00:21:04.960> content
• <00:21:05.679> to<00:21:05.919> allow indicated they're quite content to allow indicated
• they're quite content to allow the<00:21:06.480> adjacent<00:21:07.039> community<00:21

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee received an update from Secretary Jeff Noel of the Kentucky Cabinet for Economic Development, joined by Matt Wingate and Terry Bradshaw of the Kentucky Association of Economic Developers, on the Kentucky Product Development Initiative (KPDI) and the closing fund. The presentation focused on how KPDI helps communities develop shovel-ready industrial sites by funding infrastructure, engineering, geotechnical work, and other site-preparation costs. Noel emphasized that the program is designed to reduce uncertainty for companies, improve speed to market, and support statewide job creation and investment, especially in rural and eastern Kentucky where development costs are often higher. Testimony highlighted the complexity and expense of preparing sites, with examples of road, water, power, and rock-removal costs, and the importance of third-party evaluation in scoring applications. Noel said the program has 116 total projects statewide, with 20 active projects stemming from pilot efforts and 35 projects already resulting in about 6,381 jobs and $4.4 billion in investment. He cited examples including Crown Holdings, Flash Metals, Phoenix Paper, Pratt Paper, AESC, Sound Elements, Kitchen Foods, Latte, Krueger, Biomass, and Anna Munsman. Bradshaw added that even communities that have not yet landed a project have benefited by building spec buildings or improving access to industrial property. The speakers said the last KPDI round drew $81 million in requests but only $35 million in available funding, and they urged lawmakers to consider whether additional funding or program adjustments are needed. Suggested changes included modestly increasing eligibility or funding flexibility for rural and eastern Kentucky, while maintaining third-party performance metrics, and continuing to prioritize finishing existing parks and creating strong regional sites. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, new paragraph heading, no new content. 104.5, limits placed on the municipality.
• <01:16:26.480> new Uh, new paragraph heading, no new Uh, new paragraph heading, no new content
• . content. content. 104.5,<01:16:29.120> limits<01:16:29.520> placed<01:16:29.760> on

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We feel this is the best fit for the program content that we deliver with legacy dollars.
• <00:24:09.360> work<00:24:09.600> that We feel this is the best fit for the program content
• We feel this is the best fit for the program content that we deliver with legacy dollars.
• We feel this is the best fit for the program content that we deliver with legacy dollars.

Bills: HF2563

Keywords: HF2563, legacy finance bill, Legacy Amendment, outdoor heritage fund, clean water fund, parks and trails fund, arts and cultural heritage fund, Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council, Clean Water Council, Minnesota legacy funds, habitat conservation, prairie restoration, wetland restoration, forest conservation, riparian buffers, water quality, groundwater protection, drinking water, septic systems, watershed planning

Transcript Highlights:

• Paragraph B repeals a reporting requirement related to the biodiesel content mandate that has been implemented
• requirement related to<00:39:40.880> the<00:39:41.119> biodeiesel<00:39:42.000> content
• <00:39:42.480> mandate<00:39:42.880> that to the biodeiesel content mandate that to
• the biodeiesel content mandate that has<00:39:43.359> been<00:39:43.560> implemented.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The reason I'm laying it over today is because there is still discussion about what the actual contents
• 07.799> actual still discussion about what the actual still discussion about what the actual contents
• 59:09.359> should<00:59:09.559> be<00:59:10.240> so<00:59:10.400> I'm contents
• of this bill should be so I'm contents of this bill should be so I'm going<00:59:10.720> to<00

Bills: HF627, HF474, HF361, HF1837

Keywords: HF627, fiscal note, fiscal notes, Minnesota Legislature, state government, committee procedure, ranking minority member, minority party, standing committee, Ways and Means, Finance Committee, legislative process, budget analysis, fiscal impact, Minnesota Statutes 3.98, committee chair, legislative transparency, HF474, Hubert H. Humphrey, Henry Mower Rice

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, not commenting directly on the content of the ruling, but to your larger question of, um, improving
• Eevee. um not commenting directly<00:38:11.119> on<00:38:11.359> the<00:38:12.079> content
• /c><00:38:12.480> of<00:38:12.640> the<00:38:12.800> ruling, directly on the content
• of the ruling, directly on the content of the ruling, but<00:38:13.359> to<00:38:13.599> your

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Water and Land met on March 25, 2025, and first announced it had deleted HCR 3 and HCR 4567 from the agenda pending similar Senate measures. It then heard HR 35/HCR 40, which urges DLNR and other state agencies to work with community groups to co-steward community forests on public lands. DLNR’s urban and community forester testified in strong support, and several organizations and individuals submitted support; there were no questions or opposition noted. The committee next heard HCR 64, asking OPSD to convene a working group on establishing and placing an Office of Resilience and Recovery. OPSD and the Governor’s Office of Recovery and Resilience supported the resolution and suggested friendly amendments, including replacing county civil defense representatives with mayors or their designees and allowing subject-matter experts to serve. Members questioned the office’s role, funding, and relationship to other resilience and emergency management offices, and the witness explained it was created after the Maui wildfires to coordinate long-term recovery, with special-project funding and a focus distinct from response and mental health functions. The committee also heard HR 59/HCR 65 on coordinating concurrent reviews of general plan, district boundary, and zoning amendments during land reclassification. OPSD testified with comments and warned that the proposal could facilitate spot zoning if individual landowners could use the concurrent process, recommending it be limited to county-initiated actions. A related discussion followed on HR 118/HCR 122, which would create a collaborative working group on surveying and protecting iwi kūpuna and related coastal erosion issues; DNR, OHA, and others supported it with suggested additions, and testimony emphasized cultural sensitivity and community-specific decision-making. Members asked about burial practices and a recent court ruling, and witnesses said the working group could help guide broader policy and communication. Finally, the committee heard HR 145/HCR 151, requesting DLNR to report on its lease enforcement process and procedures. DLNR said it was recruiting staff to conduct lease inspections but had difficulty filling positions due to compensation, and explained that new or extended leases can include inspection requirements, while retroactive cost-shifting would raise contractual issues. Members asked for information on lease renewal timelines and whether inspection provisions were being added to renewals; DLNR said those decisions are made in public sunshine meetings and agreed to provide additional information. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The paid media, we work with a media buyer, and they also do a lot of our content creation.
• also do a<00:20:21.039> lot<00:20:21.159> of<00:20:21.280> our<00:20:21.520> content
• <00:20:22.120> creation<00:20:23.120> and<00:20:23.440> we a lot of our content
• creation and we a lot of our content creation and we have<00:20:23.880> a<00:20:24.120> variety

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• such as smoke, hail, wind, collapse, vandalism, and mischief, and it was to cover dwellings and contents
• dwellings mischief and it was to cover dwellings mischief and it was to cover dwellings and and and content
• c> Congress<00:04:33.759> responded<00:04:34.199> to<00:04:34.400> these content
• Congress responded to these content Congress responded to these findings<00:04:35.840> and<00

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have launched a significant project to review and ensure that all of our online resources and content
• our online Ensure sure that all of our online resources<00:15:31.360> and<00:15:31.600> content
• <00:15:32.440> are<00:15:32.800> digitally resources and content are digitally resources
• and content are digitally accessible<00:15:34.079> and<00:15:34.240> meet<00:15:34.880

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee met to approve the January 16 minutes and then heard a budget presentation from State Court Administrator Jeff Shorba on behalf of the Minnesota judicial branch. Shorba described the courts’ structure, mission, and workload, noting 322 judges, about 2,800 staff, roughly 1 million district court filings annually, and a current budget of about $479 million. He emphasized the branch’s constitutional obligation to provide fair and timely access to justice and said the courts are funded almost entirely through legislative appropriations. He also highlighted recent accomplishments made possible by prior legislative funding, including eliminating the pandemic felony and gross misdemeanor backlog, expanding remote and hybrid hearings, improving courtroom technology, sustaining treatment courts, and increasing pay for interpreters and psychological examiners. Shorba outlined the judicial branch’s 2026–27 budget request, which he said totals a 12% increase over the starting biennial base. Major requests included $77.3 million in 2026–27 and $104 million in 2028–29 for a 6% judicial salary increase and related compensation costs; $5.1 million in 2026–27 and $1.76 million in 2028–29 for digital accessibility compliance with new federal ADA rules; $4 million in 2026–27 and $800,000 in 2028–29 to modernize justice partner access to court records; $7.2 million in 2026–27 to raise pay for contract psychological examiners; and $18 million in 2026–27 to increase juror pay from $20 to $100 per day and align mileage rates with federal rates. He also discussed ongoing funding needs for interpreter services, jury costs, cybersecurity, and other statutorily required court services, saying temporary funding provided in the prior session will expire and that permanent support is needed. Members asked questions about treatment courts, employee bargaining, and mental health competency issues. Representative Eric requested more detail on funding for newly launched and existing treatment courts, and Shorba said many treatment courts begin with federal grants before transitioning to state support after about three years. He confirmed the judicial branch negotiates its own employee contracts rather than the executive branch doing so, and said the branch has three unions plus many unrepresented employees. On mental health and competency, Shorba said the branch is focused on obtaining timely psychological evaluations and is not responsible for treatment services themselves, but acknowledged a shortage of examiners and treatment beds and said a related competency board would be testifying the following week. No votes or formal actions were taken beyond adoption of the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• What I want to highlight for you is that table of contents for the start of the chapter, so it starts
• a little bit on page 351, but if you look at 352, that table of contents can be very helpful to you
• that table of content that table of content for<01:22:55.719> the<01:22:55.880> start<
• can be very 352 that table of contents can be very helpful<01:23:05.920> to<01:23:06.159>
• of that report would be what the content of that report would be would<06:19:50.360> be<06:19

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Education Committee held its organizational meeting for the new term, with members introducing themselves and describing their backgrounds in teaching, school boards, special education, administration, law, and related fields. Chair Glenn Cordelli outlined the committee’s goals and procedures, emphasizing civility, professionalism, and respectful treatment of witnesses and members. He also noted that the committee has been split into two this year because of the large volume of bills, and said the committee had already sent three bills to the other education committee, with 36 bills currently assigned and more expected. The chair reviewed committee rules and logistics: hearings should start on time, members should minimize cell phone use and avoid searching during testimony, and questioning of witnesses is limited to one question at a time unless the chair allows a follow-up. Members were told to use the title “Representative,” to sign up on pink cards to testify, and to submit written testimony to the clerk. He also explained that hearings are for listening rather than debating, while executive sessions are where debate and motions occur. Possible motions include ought to pass, inexpedient to legislate, and retain in committee for further work, including subcommittees. Additional procedures covered scheduling, with the committee expected to meet Wednesday and Thursday the following week because of a holiday, and regular meetings generally planned for Monday and Wednesday. The chair also discussed the consent calendar, reports from majority and minority positions, and the expectation that members who testify on a bill should not then question other witnesses on that same bill. No legislation was voted on at this meeting; it was a procedural and orientation session for the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• [No audible transcript content.] [No audible transcript content.] [No audible transcript content.]
• [No audible transcript content.] [No audible transcript content.] [No audible transcript content.]
• [No audible transcript content.] [No audible transcript content.] [No audible transcript content.]
• [No substantive transcript content captured in this section.] e e e e<00:07:59.479> e good<00:

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• No additional content beyond the transition to the next witness.
• They have web-based services where they share video content on how you can deny rides to people who have

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing opened with the co-chairs introducing House and Senate members and explaining the hybrid format, three-minute testimony guidance, and the deadline for written testimony. The committee then heard extensive testimony on S. 2665, which would require employers to post notice to employees when an I-9 audit or similar federal immigration inspection is underway. Supporters, including immigration attorneys, a pediatrician, a labor leader, and an affected family member, argued the bill would protect privacy, give workers time to gather documents and consult counsel, and reduce fear and wrongful arrests. One witness from Illinois described a similar law there and said it had not caused the problems employers feared, while others said recent ICE enforcement has made notice especially important. The committee also heard testimony on S. 1360, a bill affecting collective bargaining rights for State Police, with the State Police Association arguing that a statutory gap lets departmental rules override their contract and that the bill would restore intended bargaining protections. A separate labor bill, S. 1305, was also briefly supported by the AFL-CIO as part of broader worker-classification protections for app-based delivery drivers. A large portion of the hearing focused on H. 2066, which would impose fines on transportation network drivers who refuse rides to people with disabilities using service animals. Testimony from blind and disabled riders, service dog users, advocates, and the Disability Law Center described repeated ride cancellations, drivers pulling away after seeing a service animal, and the difficulty of enforcing existing anti-discrimination laws through MCAD or other agencies. Witnesses said the current system leaves riders without practical recourse because drivers are hard to identify and complaints can take years, and they argued that fines on individual drivers would create a real deterrent. Several witnesses also described the impact on employment, medical appointments, and daily independence. Committee members asked about service-animal verification, whether refusals are ever appropriate, and whether penalties should target drivers or companies; witnesses said legitimate refusals are limited to misbehaving or unsafe animals and that companies already have policies and some training, but enforcement remains weak. The committee also heard from a witness supporting a related bill on rideshare accessibility and from advocates describing broader transportation discrimination issues. One witness discussed a separate proposal to study service-animal denial, and others noted that Uber’s self-identification feature and company policies have not solved the problem. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the meeting ended after the final witnesses on the service-animal bill and a brief organizational discussion about related legislation and committee business.