Transcript Highlights:

• A very detailed process to go through and certify, and it's an ongoing process.
• process works.
• process works.
• process works.
• process works.

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00 Attendance Roll Call: 00:15 HB 195 Discussion: 05:22 HB 195 Roll Call Vote: 16:33 SB 199 Discussion: 18:34 SB 199 Roll Call Vote: 41:25 SB 5 Discussion: 43:50 SB 5 Roll Call Vote: 46:35 HB 687 Discussion: 48:10 HB 687 Roll Call Vote: 50:15, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have to tackle the rate-case process.
• our very in-depth process is different than... ...resources in our planning process and, you know, our
• very in-depth process is different than incentivizing.
• How will that process work exactly?
• I will agree that the rate-setting process is a complicated process, and it's quite involved, and it's

Summary: The committee heard several energy and water affordability bills, with extensive testimony on SB 254 by Senator Becker, SB 541 by Senator Becker, SB 453 by Senator Stern, SB 292 by Senator Caballero, and SB 473 by Senator Padilla. SB 254 was presented as a broad utility affordability package addressing short-term climate credits, a Power Fund, tighter scrutiny of rate increases and utility profits, wildfire spending, securitization of future utility costs, and streamlining. Supporters, including TURN and several environmental and public power groups, said it could lower bills and reduce long-term costs; opponents from investor-owned utilities, labor, business, and local government raised concerns about market impacts, insufficient analysis, and the breadth of the bill. The committee approved SB 254 on a 6-3 vote and placed it on call. SB 541 focused on load flexibility and using existing grid capacity more efficiently. Senator Becker described it as a transparency and planning measure to identify cost-effective load shifting and reduce peak demand, while supporters said it could improve resiliency and save money. Several CCAs and utilities opposed the bill in print or unless amended, arguing that some language implied a mandate and that the concept needed more cost-effectiveness analysis; the author said amendments would remove language dividing the state goal among retail suppliers and clarify that the bill is not a procurement mandate. The committee passed SB 541 as amended to Appropriations on a 9-1 vote and left it on call. SB 453 by Senator Stern would return unspent ratepayer-funded microgrid program dollars and was described as a way to keep the lights on and redirect unused funds. It drew support from local government and environmental groups, with PG&E expressing concern about how the bill would affect its ability to spend awarded funds. The committee passed SB 453 as amended to Appropriations on a 12-0 vote. SB 292 by Senator Caballero would require more granular outage and reliability reporting, including census-tract-level data, to better inform resilience planning after PSPS events; utilities opposed unless amended, citing duplicative reporting and regulatory overlap, but the bill passed 12-0 to Appropriations. SB 473 by Senator Padilla would require or expand water utility decoupling to promote conservation and affordability. Supporters, including water utilities, labor, business, and local government groups, argued decoupling stabilizes revenue, supports conservation, and can keep rates lower for low-use customers. The Public Advocates Office opposed, saying prior pilot data showed no conservation benefit and about $1 billion in added costs, and that the CPUC had already rejected similar requests. Committee members questioned the conservation and capital-investment effects of the different rate structures; the author and supporters argued decoupling helps utilities fund infrastructure while allowing lower fixed charges for low-use customers. The transcript ends during that discussion, before a final vote on SB 473 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• These are processes that we already do, actually.
• The entire process lacks... any due process and it must be changed.
• This is a process that can destroy. careers and reputations and futures without adequate due process.
• And this bill will close that gap and give some due process. need a due process to parents.
• today, raises those serious due process concerns.

Bills: HB741, HB 1199, HB2070, HB2402, HB2542, HB2665, HB2789, HB3096, HB3396, HB3595, HB3747, HB4116, HB4127

Keywords: child welfare, relative caregiver, monetary assistance, Department of Family and Protective Services, child custody, family law, emergency power, nursing facilities, assisted living, generator requirements, health and safety, emergency generators, power outage, emergency generator, assisted living facilities, power source, child abuse, neglect registry, court findings, Medicaid

Transcript Highlights:

• part of that normal process.
• Is there a solution or a process?
• We've also uh discovery process.
• <01:20:45.400> So, the discovery process. So, the discovery process.
• discovery process should protect them. discovery process should protect them.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And the process to get all of that...
• new one, there's a process for that.
• It's about due process.
• It's about due process.
• Because we have due process rights in our property, and we have due process rights to our liberty.

Bills: SB1216, SB1391, SB1493, SB1520

Keywords: trauma, public safety, counseling, mental health, employee benefits, law enforcement, stress management, suicide prevention, workforce readiness, disciplinary action, appeals, termination, superior court, investigative process, reinstatement, immigration, data sharing, federal government, undocumented immigrants, visa overstays

Summary: The Committee on Public Safety and Law Enforcement heard several bills related to public safety personnel. SB 1520, which would have required state agencies to share certain immigration-related data with the federal government and sunset in 2029, was set aside after a proposed strike-everything amendment was defeated. The committee then voted 7-5 to give the underlying bill a do pass recommendation. SB 1216, which removes the sunset from traumatic event counseling programs for peace officers, firefighters, and 911 dispatchers and expands eligibility to crime scene and digital forensics technicians, drew support from police and fire representatives and passed 12-1 with a do pass recommendation. SB 1391 would create an AZ POST-administered law enforcement stress management pilot program, funded with a $950,000 general fund appropriation and operated through one Arizona nonprofit. The sponsor described it as a preventive, peer-support-focused program, but several members objected that the bill was overly prescriptive and looked like a vendor-specific measure. The committee voted 5-7 against giving SB 1391 a do pass recommendation. SB 1493, as amended, would require employers to pay taxable costs, attorney fees, and expert fees when a law enforcement officer who was terminated without just cause prevails through the administrative appeal process and then in Superior Court after the employer refuses reinstatement. Supporters argued it was a fairness and due process measure for rare cases where officers must litigate twice to be reinstated. After adopting a chairman’s amendment, the committee approved SB 1493 as amended with a due pass recommendation by an 8-3 vote, with one member changing from yes to no before the final tally.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think it would be a transparent process and it's not an atypical process because it's done on, for
• ,<00:30:17.039> they comfortable with this process, they comfortable with this process, they
• So I think there is no process for removing a moderator short of maybe the constitutional process and
• public RFP process? public RFP process?
• I know in our process on this.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:38:44.319> so make sure I understood the process so make sure I understood the process
• well bursted in in the billing process well bursted in in the billing process so<01:17:41.040>
• Besides the fact that it takes time to process it, at the end of the day, when it's processed, would
• have seen is the credentialing process have seen is the credentialing process be<03:58:48.640>
• And sometimes the credentialing process and the contracting process are simultaneous.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on a non-germane amendment to HB 297 that would create the Granite State Home Mitigation and Resiliency Program. Insurance Commissioner DJ Beton, joined by department staff, explained that the proposal is intended to help homeowners afford insurance by funding proactive home improvements that reduce risk and improve insurability. He said the program would be funded by the first $1 million collected annually from the insurance premium tax, with grants of up to $10,000 available on a first-come, first-served basis. Beton described the problem as rising homeowners insurance premiums, hard-market underwriting, nonrenewals, and the resulting shift to more expensive surplus lines coverage. He said eligible projects could include roof fortification, exterior improvements, flood-related foundation work, and removal of hazardous trees or limbs. He cited similar programs in other states, especially Alabama, Louisiana, and North Carolina, as evidence the model can work and noted that industry representatives were present in support. He also said the program would use means testing aligned with the Department of Energy’s weatherization program to target lower-income applicants. Members asked about the non-germane process, who would administer the program, and how the bill would prevent misuse of grant funds. The commissioner said the department would administer the program using one repurposed existing position, with Treasury handling fund flow through an MOU. Staff explained that applicants would have to show completed work through a signed contract, itemized work, and a sworn contractor affidavit, with some upfront payment allowed for materials and the remainder paid after completion. The chair and members discussed that the amendment is being attached to a different bill only to move the proposal through committee and on to House Finance for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• of pre-processing.
• this starts the process for. this starts the process for.
• We're able to pre-process these.
• expedite voters through the process. expedite voters through the process.
• um increase trust in the voting process. um increase trust in the voting process.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Through the budget process.
• As a new member, I feel included in this process.
• Again, I just want to thank you for this process, Mr. Chair.
• So thank you to everybody who has been part of this process.
• Looking forward to completing this process. We are now adjourned.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And there are permit process.
• everybody else's process?
• everybody else's process?
• and commissions process. Yes. and commissions process. Yes.
• everybody else's process? everybody else's process?

Bills: HB1739, HB1741, HB2606, HB2362, HB2608, HB2294, HB2431, HB2375, HB2582, HB2585, HB2231, HB1601, HB2424, HB1956

Keywords: transit-oriented development, zoning, land use, urban planning, density, local governance, housing, inclusionary zoning, inclusionary mandate, affordable housing, below-market-rate housing, inclusionary housing, development exaction, impact fee, housing affordability impact fee, needs assessment study, financial feasibility, rough proportionality, essential nexus, county ordinance

Summary: The committee on Water and Land met on February 19, 2026, and the chair opened by emphasizing strict time limits and that all bills would be deferred if the agenda was not completed before the noon session. The first major measure discussed was HB 1739 HD1, which would preempt county land-use authority in transit-oriented development areas. The Department of Planning supported the bill, saying it could promote state-funded TOD and infrastructure, while the city and county’s position was raised in questioning. Unite Here Local 5 opposed the bill, arguing it would strip counties of self-determination, disrupt state-county policy collaboration, and remove a check on unrestrained development. Committee members pressed the supporters on whether the bill was really about higher density and whether it would override local zoning and sustainability concerns. The committee then heard testimony on HB 1741 HD1, a housing bill described by supporters as reducing inclusionary housing mandates and increasing supply. Grassroots Institute of Hawaii argued affordability mandates reduce overall housing production and raise market-rate prices, while a Zoom testifier said the bill would improve housing stability, health, and community outcomes for working families, kupuna, and young residents. Members asked about the bill’s needs assessment and who would conduct it, with a witness saying the counties would likely contract it out but that the bill did not clearly specify the reviewer. HB 2668 HD1, dealing with water heating systems, drew testimony from the Hawaii State Energy Office and industry representatives. Supporters generally backed adding heat pumps to the law, but one solar-water-heater industry witness asked for amendments to remove or extend the current 15-year statutory life limit for solar water heaters and to update outdated standards and variance rules. A Kauaʻi Climate Action Coalition witness opposed the existing solar-only structure, arguing heat pump water heaters are cheaper, align with climate goals, and should be allowed without a variance. The Energy Office said the current law already allows variances in some cases, suggested adding high-efficiency heat pump water heaters to the exemption, and said the 15-year figure may be too short, with 18 years mentioned as a possible alternative. The committee also briefly moved through several other bills, including HB 2606 HD1 on off-site construction and HB 2362 HD1 on housing, with no notable testimony or action recorded in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• This touches a lot on regulatory and rate-paying processes, rate-making processes, but we're finding
• We have a public notification process.
• Like I said, Century Code lays out, Process.
• One is the first word says it's a process. It is a long process. It's not just a one-stop.
• Processing site of Belfield.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• As part of this established process, ...and ARS 32-14233.
• All this can be prevented if we can expedite the process.
• So actually, what it means is we wait until they go through all these processes, maybe expedited process
• ; everyone else should have to go through that process.
• Out of all states, Arizona ranks 34th in processing.

Bills: HB2176, HB2333, HB2435, HB2447, HB2617, HB2683, HB2686, HB2725, HB2726, HB2906, HB2953, HB2958

Keywords: health care, licensure, complaints, investigation, safety, patient care, regulatory compliance, prosthetics, orthotics, health insurance, Medicare, medical necessity, disability rights, coverage, reimbursement, internationally trained physicians, medical board, clinical training, provisional license, healthcare workforce

Summary: The committee heard and acted on several health care bills. HB 2726 would require Access contractors to cover diagnosis and treatment of mild obstructive sleep apnea, including a new prescription tongue-stimulation device; supporters said it offers an effective, less burdensome alternative to CPAP and could improve adherence and outcomes, while Access was neutral and raised concerns about cost and bypassing its normal clinical review. The committee adopted the Bliss amendment and then approved HB 2726 as amended on an 8-4 due-pass vote. HB 2435 would create a pathway for internationally trained physicians to receive a provisional Arizona medical license, with a later amendment adding a four-year supervised rural practice requirement and automatic conversion to a full license if criteria are met. Supporters argued it would help address severe physician shortages in rural and underserved areas, especially for cardiology and other specialties, and several doctors testified about their experience and the need for more access. Opponents, including the Arizona Medical Board, said the state already has a case-by-case licensure process for foreign-trained physicians and warned the bill could weaken safeguards and allow insufficiently vetted applicants. After adopting the amendment, the committee approved HB 2435 as amended on a due-pass recommendation. HB 2958 would require Access to cover comprehensive dental care for pregnant women age 21 and older, with a $500,000 pilot program and reporting requirements. The sponsor and public health advocates said preventive dental care during pregnancy can reduce infections and improve maternal and infant outcomes, and the bill drew broad support from health and advocacy groups. The committee passed HB 2958 on an 11-1 due-pass vote. The committee also approved HB 2176, which changes criteria and timelines for health care institution licensing complaints and informal dispute resolution, with supporters saying it would improve transparency and predictability for hospitals while preserving enforcement authority. Finally, the committee heard HB 2447, which would bar insurers from paying certified registered nurse anesthetists less than physicians for the same anesthesia service; opponents argued it would interfere with contract negotiations and raise costs, while supporters said insurer reimbursement cuts are harming rural access and shifting costs to hospitals. The transcript ends during testimony on HB 2447, before any committee vote on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• What's the process right now?
• But what is the process? I mean, is it.
• We call it a due process. Yes, sir.
• Yeah, it all starts with the RSO. process, right?
• . process, the judge knows when he gives a ruling, huh, there's an appeals process. well, I am not God

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• do that now during rule making process do that now during rule making process long<00:22:02.799>
• > groups<00:23:20.640> together process involved getting groups together process involved
• four weeks and we're actually processing four weeks and we're actually processing at<00:40:54.160
• <00:53:47.760> right with that, we are in the process right with that, we are in the process
• :54:52.319> in<00:54:52.559> the startup process is probably in the startup process is

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• any observing the legislative process any observing the legislative process any objections hear none
• of of betting and and as you the process of of betting and and as you the process of of betting and
• but I enjoy the process in the process but I enjoy the process in the process but I enjoy the process
• and is done in the committee process and is done in the committee process and before he even arrives
• process of simplified and uh both the process of simplified and uh both the process of Distributing

Keywords: sessions, 2025-R, 1, 219

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:54:03.319> has<00:54:03.559> the the process has the the process has the necessary
• I think it's a corruption of our process.
• The speaker thinks it's a corruption of our process.
• think it's a Corruption of our process think it's a Corruption of our process so<01:30:07.840>
• substantially more access to the process substantially more access to the process that's<01:31:09.440

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Elections Committee met on February 6, 2025, and first considered the reappointment of Steven Swanson to the Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board. Swanson described his background in legal aid, lobbying, judging, and international rule-of-law work, and said he wanted to continue serving the public. Committee members praised his experience and discussed the importance of campaign finance oversight, including preventing corporate participation in Minnesota elections. Senator Wosinski moved to recommend Swanson’s confirmation, and the motion was adopted. The committee then heard Senate File 529, a proposed constitutional amendment to state that elections shall be free, fair, and equal, and that no civil or military power may interfere with the free exercise of the right to vote. Senator Dibble presented the bill as a way to strengthen voting rights and provide a constitutional basis to challenge voter suppression, gerrymandering, and unfair campaign practices. Testimony in support came from David Fischer of Clean Elections Minnesota and Jean Massie of Fair Vote Minnesota, both of whom argued the amendment would protect access to voting, increase confidence in elections, and align Minnesota with other states that have similar language. Members discussed whether the amendment’s broad language could invite judicial interpretation or affect future election laws. Senator Koran questioned how the proposal would improve Minnesota’s already high turnout, while Senator Grant raised concerns that the terms “free, fair, and equal” were undefined and could shift power to the courts. Senator Lucero proposed an oral amendment to add “ensuring one eligible citizen, one vote” after the word “equal,” saying it would address concerns about future voter ID laws. The amendment was restated by counsel and discussed, with Senator Dibble saying it did not significantly harm the bill but suggesting it might imply a requirement he did not intend. The transcript ends during discussion of that oral amendment, and no final vote on the bill itself is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:09:06.320> think<00:09:06.720> members our process and I think members our process
• And<00:32:33.440> in<00:32:33.679> that<00:32:33.919> process, And in that process
• an burdensome process. an burdensome process.
• needs to go along with this process needs to go along with this process because<01:25:33.440>
• sure that this process is secure. sure that this process is secure.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: House File 4240, an elections administration bill, was introduced as a package of updates to absentee voting, statewide voter registration system use, early voting procedures, recordkeeping, removal of outdated statutory language, and reimbursement for municipalities and counties that administer certain special elections. The author, Rep. Freiberg, described the bill as a modernization and efficiency measure that would clarify procedures while maintaining election security. Several amendments were adopted. The A4 amendment, offered by Rep. Freiberg, was described as aligning language with the Senate and passed without objection. The A6 amendment, offered by Rep. Cosnik, would give school districts more direction on polling locations for special elections in multi-county districts; Rep. Lee raised concerns that it could affect many districts statewide and questioned whether it applied to early voting, while Rep. Cosnik said it was narrowly tailored and intended to prevent disenfranchisement. Rep. Freiberg and Rep. Lee both said they would support it as a voter-access measure despite possible costs, and it was adopted. The A5 amendment, offered by Rep. Schultz, would require the Secretary of State to provide voter information to the U.S. Department of Justice upon request for civil-rights and federal voting-law enforcement; it was debated at length, with supporters framing it as election integrity and opponents arguing it would jeopardize voter privacy and could be used by the Trump administration to pressure Minnesota. The amendment was adopted after a roll call request. The debate on A5 was especially contentious, with Republicans arguing the state should cooperate with federal efforts to clean voter rolls and Democrats arguing the DOJ had overreached, mishandled civil-rights investigations, and sought voter data without a lawful need. Members on both sides cited voter fraud, privacy, and federal-state election authority, and several speakers referenced recent DOJ actions and court disputes. The transcript ends during further discussion of the federal role in elections, with no final disposition on the underlying bill shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• So they are really the engines behind this evaluation process.
• Part of our funding process.
• So that process in there.
• And then after that, we start the closing process.
• If we want to get more money through the water transport process...

Transcript Highlights:

• we have an external review process for medical necessity, and we administer that process that review
• regarding the external review process regarding the external review process for<00:22:46.559>
• we administer that process that review we administer that process that review goes<00:23:09.840>
• <01:12:35.120> In the review and approval process. In the review and approval process.
• the neighbors earlier on in the process. the neighbors earlier on in the process.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The joint hearing opened with House Bill 1969, which would provide state funding for colorectal cancer screenings for uninsured and underinsured residents. The Department of Human Services said it supports the goal of early screening but would need new administrative capacity, including a program manager and claim pre-screening, to run the program. The Department of Health supported the measure and cited low screening rates in Hawaii, noting an educational campaign to encourage screening. The Insurance Division raised concerns about reliance on federal FAQs, warning that guidance can change and may create state cost exposure. Supporters including the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network and the Hawaii Medical Association argued the bill would close a preventive-care gap, reduce late-stage diagnoses, and save long-term costs; the committee also discussed implementation costs, estimated by DHS at roughly $1.4 million to $2 million annually plus administrative expenses, and a 6-month to 1-year timeline to establish the program. The committee then took up House Bill 1965, which would require health carriers to spend at least 6% of total medical expenditures on primary care providers. The Insurance Division said several provisions raise technical and legal concerns, including the premium freeze, the medical loss ratio language, the lack of an existing external review process for downcoding claims, and a new mandate for medically necessary inter-island transportation that could trigger an ACA defrayal. The Department of Human Services supported the intent but suggested broader language to include primary care supports and services, and noted that QUEST integration plans already invested at least 9% of total medical expenditures in primary care in 2024, with additional spending on supports and low-value care reductions. State health planning officials strongly supported the bill as an investment in primary care, saying it could improve outcomes and lower long-term costs, though they acknowledged a possible temporary premium increase during the transition. Testimony in support emphasized Hawaii’s physician shortage, especially on Maui, the Big Island, and other neighbor islands, and warned that clinics are under financial strain and may close without higher primary care reimbursement. The Hawaii Healthcare Task Force, AARP Hawaii, and other supporters said the bill would help retain providers, improve access for Medicare and Medicaid patients, and prevent downstream costs from emergency room use and avoidable hospitalizations. No votes or final committee action were taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• , legislative control in the process, legislative control in the process, including<00:02:28.400>
• wondering a little bit of the process. wondering a little bit of the process.
• I thought this would be a let's process.
• ,<01:04:17.359> however, of the day, this process, however, of the day, this process, however
• <01:52:42.960> um I would question what is the process um I would question what is the process

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The joint hearing opened with chairs explaining that the program integrity omnibus bill is a combined draft assembled from individual member bills and governor proposals, many of which had already been heard in committee. Members emphasized the compressed end-of-session timeline, said the language was not yet ready for enactment, and invited continued revisions as the bill moves next to judiciary and finance. Several speakers stressed the need for bipartisan collaboration, while also warning that the Legislature must act this session on program integrity rather than defer reforms. The fiscal staff then walked through a spreadsheet showing the bill’s overall budget effects and major provisions. The package includes DHS proposals on transforming human services, market- and receipt-based rate reform, enhanced program and payment integrity, uniform service standards, nursing facility rate changes, ICS reforms, and a repeal/redesign of housing stabilization, along with child care assistance integrity and human services redesign items in DCYF. Staff highlighted that the bill combines multiple sources, including governor proposals and member bills, and noted several items that are also in the supplemental human services budget. Committee discussion focused heavily on prepayment review, remote supports, ICS, and provider accountability. Chairs said the bill would codify prepayment review with a 60-day notice requirement after providers were caught off guard by prior rollout, and that remote supports and ICS language were placeholders or under active debate. One member argued the system needs stronger standards but cautioned against harming compliant providers, while another urged the committee to learn from good providers and warned against repeating failed implementations. Staff also reviewed thematic indexes covering billing and service delivery oversight, EVV, administrative reform, licensing and background studies, provider enrollment, sanctions, and child care provider compliance training. No formal votes were taken in the portion provided. The hearing ended with staff beginning the index walkthrough and members indicating that posted amendments would be considered as the bill advances through the remaining committees.