Transcript Highlights:

• <00:39:17.520> Does thank you for your testimony. Does thank you for your testimony.
• testimony. Thank you for your time. testimony. Thank you for your time.
• testimony that I've emailed to you. testimony that I've emailed to you.
• Yes, you would get the respiratory depression. taking my testimony. taking my testimony.
• Stanch, for your testimony.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <01:23:42.960> Um testimony from Audabon. Um testimony from Audabon.
• >> testimony >> testimony >> testimony<01:30:55.760> of<01:30:57.120> what
• heard this testimony, I'll say it again. heard this testimony, I'll say it again.
• questions, thank you for your testimony questions, thank you for your testimony today. today. today
• testimony today. testimony today.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:19:27.400> thank<00:19:27.559> you testimony thank you testimony thank you anyone<00
• Thank you for your testimony.
• <01:20:20.520> thank 638 thank you for your testimony thank 638 thank you for your testimony
• <01:28:53.440> if thank you so much for your testimony if thank you so much for your testimony
• further thank you for your testimony further thank you for your testimony thank<02:27:36.359>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on House Bill 146, which would require longer retention and quicker disclosure of certain video recordings from traffic stops and similar motor vehicle violations when a citation is disputed. The prime sponsor described the bill as a response to a constituent who challenged a speeding ticket but could not obtain a cruiser video before it was deleted under the current 30-day retention practice. Supporters argued the bill is about fairness and access to potentially exculpatory evidence, and one member suggested a simple 60-day retention period might avoid confusion over different timelines. The sponsor also noted that the bill would not affect criminal cases and that victims and complainants should have access to the same evidence as law enforcement when a recording is relevant to a defense. Major Brendan Davey of the New Hampshire State Police testified in opposition. He said the proposal would create a different discovery standard for one type of evidence, could discourage agencies from adopting body-worn or cruiser cameras, and would add cost and administrative burden. He explained that the State Police already retain routine traffic-stop videos for at least 30 days, but keep videos much longer when complaints or possible litigation are involved, and said the current system balances efficiency with accountability. He also argued the underlying speeding case did not make the trooper video directly material to the citation, though he acknowledged the legislature could choose a longer blanket retention period if it wished. No vote was taken during the hearing. The committee then opened a public hearing on House Bill 638, which would allow people serving life without parole sentences to become eligible for a parole hearing at age 60 after serving at least 18 years, provided they have had no major conduct violations in the prior 10 years. The sponsor said the bill is intended to give a narrow second look to a small number of elderly prisoners, citing the high cost of incarceration and the health challenges of aging in prison. He emphasized that the bill would not automatically release anyone, would not apply to capital murder convictions under RSA 630:1, and would still allow victims to participate in the parole process. Testimony on HB 638 was mixed. Alexander Bailey, a survivor of violent crime and domestic violence advocate, supported the bill, saying many survivors favor rehabilitation, second chances, and restorative justice, and that people in prison often age faster and face serious health and safety problems. Another supporter, Russell Roy, began offering a personal story about crime, addiction, and violence in Concord, but the transcript cuts off before his full remarks. Committee members asked about why age 60 was chosen, how released individuals would support themselves, and whether victims or families would be consulted; the sponsor said 60 was meant to limit eligibility and reflect the health realities of prison, and that parole boards already consider support networks and victim input. No action or vote was taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• situated in after your testimony situated in after your testimony please<00:09:56.000> luckily
• <01:08:39.799> it as you mentioned in your testimony it as you mentioned in your testimony
• funding thank you for your testimony funding thank you for your testimony thank<02:46:21.600>
• One of them is a testimony from Dr.
• talks about in her written testimony talks about in her written testimony this<04:04:34.840>

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And that concludes my testimony.
• <00:56:46.160> uh all and that concludes my testimony uh all and that concludes my testimony
• I I we did sit and listen to testimony I I we did sit and listen to testimony yesterday<01:58:25.440
• <02:08:45.840> we I know I know that through testimony we I know I know that through testimony
• question um you cited some testimony question um you cited some testimony from<04:50:34.600>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first held a work session on HB 505, which would allow the sale of freeze-dried foods produced in homestead food operations. Members raised concerns about the bill’s broad language, especially the provision stating freeze-dried food would not be considered potentially hazardous. Several suggested narrowing the bill to specific products such as processed foods, berries, fruit, dairy products, ice cream, or vegetables, and requiring use of commercial freeze-drying equipment rather than dehydrators. There was also discussion of oxygen absorbers, moisture control, sanitation, and whether the issue should be handled in statute or rules. By the end of the discussion, members generally agreed the topic should be treated in a separate section of law rather than folded into the existing homestead food license, and the chair said the matter would be sent to the food safety subcommittee, with the possibility of a study committee if more time was needed. The committee then moved to HB 277, a technical correction to the animal cruelty statutes. Representative Bixby explained that current law refers to a “colt,” which applies only to male baby horses, leaving fillies unaddressed; the bill would replace “colt” with “foal” and make related wording changes so the restriction applies to any horse under 90 days old not being nursed by its dam. The New Hampshire Farm Bureau testified in support, saying the change was requested to clarify and modernize the statute and that the issue had been identified during work on related animal cruelty legislation. No votes were taken in the portion provided. The chair recessed the work session until 11:00 a.m. and announced that Representative Ktoa would take over the hearing on HB 277.

Transcript Highlights:

• good morning I have a written testimony good morning I have a written testimony may<01:28:28.080
• position thank you for your testimony position thank you for your testimony are<01:40:48.239>
• The committee has his testimony.
• testimony testimony okay<02:02:08.040> is<02:02:08.159> there<02:02:08.360> anyone<
• I'm not reading the whole testimony.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The hearing focused on House Bill 610, which would fold the Office of the Consumer Advocate into the Department of Energy rather than fully eliminate consumer advocacy functions. The prime sponsor argued the current office is small, funded by a special assessment on ratepayers, and duplicative of DOE work. He said moving the function to DOE would streamline energy policy review, reduce bureaucracy, and better focus the larger agency on lowering residential energy costs. He also disputed claims that the Consumer Advocate is independent, saying the office is appointed through a political process similar to DOE leadership. Committee members and the sponsor discussed whether the bill would actually relocate existing positions or replace them, and whether the Department of Energy would absorb the cost of the transferred staff. The sponsor said the fiscal note shows roughly a million-dollar reduction in both revenue assessment and spending, and that the bill would effectively reduce the office from five positions to three. He also defended his cost estimates for energy-code-related housing impacts and said the Consumer Advocate has sometimes supported policies he считает increase costs, such as energy-efficiency measures and building code changes. He argued the office should focus more on energy supply and generation, including natural gas and nuclear, rather than efficiency alone. Representative Wendy Thomas testified in opposition, saying the Consumer Advocate is an important, fair, and impartial voice for ratepayers and warning that the bill was fiscally irresponsible because the incumbent could still be owed salary and benefits if the office were repealed. She also said the bill’s drafting was confusing and that the Consumer Advocate’s role is to push back on utilities on behalf of consumers. Other members raised questions about whether the DOE would simply inherit the same political appointment structure and whether the bill would meaningfully lower bills. No vote was taken in the excerpt; the chair indicated additional testimony would follow, and the Department of Energy was present to answer questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:12:42.360> this for listening to my testimony this for listening to my testimony this
• Chairman, for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• Your testimony. Any questions?

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We appreciate your understanding and remind you that the committee has your written testimony.
• We appreciate your understanding and remind you that the committee has your written testimony.
• We stand on our written testimony. I'm just here to answer any questions if there are any. Mahalo.
• We stand our written<00:04:36.320> written<00:04:36.720> testimony.
• I'm just here written written testimony.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on three resolutions: HCR 61, HCR 182, and HCR 183. Testimony on all three was generally supportive, with support noted from the Hawaii Children’s Action Network, Grassroot Institute of Hawaii, ACLU, Chamber of Commerce, Hawaii Food Industry Association, Hawaii Renewables Fuels Coalition, the University of Hawaii, and CARES. Angela Melody Young testified in strong support on behalf of CARES on multiple items, urging consideration of county processes, financing structures, and the need for procedures free from partisan influence. For HCR 183, the University of Hawaii said it stood on its written testimony and was available for questions. The discussion focused less on opposition and more on suggested policy considerations. Testimony on HCR 61 raised questions about how physical notes or related procedures should be administered and whether the process should be housed in a nonpartisan office. On HCR 182 and HCR 183, testimony emphasized coordinating state and county financing and planning, including references to property tax classifications, general obligation bonds, and long-term statewide projects such as Aloha Stadium. At the close of the hearing, the chair recommended taking all three resolutions together. The committee voted to pass HCR 61, HCR 182, and HCR 183 unamended, with all voting members present voting aye and two senators excused. The resolutions were adopted.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'd be happy to answer any questions, but we just stand on our written testimony.
• You have my written testimony and support of this bill, and I'm present for any questions you may have
• We submitted written testimony in support of HB 1440 this morning.
• written testimony in support of<00:13:09.279> hb1<00:13:10.279> 1440<00:13:11.279>
• That was what the auditor referred to in his testimony.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:49:19.760> but I'll I'll kind of close my testimony but I'll I'll kind of close my testimony
• If you have written testimony, we certainly want to receive it.
• Thank you for taking my testimony.
• I covered that, I thought, pretty well in my testimony.
• I don't want you to just read your testimony.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee opened its hearing with a procedural discussion about a forthcoming Monday hearing, and the chair confirmed that any amendment deemed non-germane would be made public in advance and included in the calendar. The committee then took up House Bill 6, which would replace the word “citizen” in the Right-to-Know law with “any person,” allow requesters to specify the format of records, and expressly reference preliminary drafts circulated to a quorum or majority of a public body as disclosable material. The sponsor said the bill was intended to clarify existing law, remove uncertainty after a Rochester-related dispute over requester eligibility, and make records easier to obtain electronically unless doing so would be impossible, unusual, unduly burdensome, or harmful to recordkeeping integrity. Testimony was mixed. Cordell Johnston, speaking for himself as a municipal attorney, opposed most of the bill, especially the requirement that records be delivered electronically or by mail, arguing that out-of-state or out-of-country requests can be fishing expeditions that impose significant burdens on towns and clerks. He said local residents already can obtain records at town hall and that many municipalities voluntarily email records as a courtesy, but should not be required to mail large volumes of material. He also said the preliminary-draft language was unnecessary because such drafts are already covered when circulated to a quorum or majority. Representative Alexander raised concerns about the breadth of “any person,” potential abuse by bad actors, and the cost to municipalities, while Representative Peternell asked about whether the bill should account for nonresident property owners and business owners. The sponsor responded that limiting requesters by residency would not meaningfully stop abuse and said he did not know the bill’s fiscal impact, though he suggested it might improve efficiency. Yil Biset of the ACLU of New Hampshire testified in support of HB 6, calling it a modest and reasonable transparency measure. He said the preliminary-draft language was acceptable and consistent with existing exemption language in the public-meeting and documents statutes, and he said he was not aware of foreign-bot document requests occurring in New Hampshire. He also noted that current law already requires electronic disclosure when records exist electronically and can reasonably be provided that way. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• testimony this morning. testimony this morning.
• and thank you for, uh, your testimony. and thank you for, uh, your testimony.
• >> Thank you for your testimony. >> Thank you for your testimony.
• >> Thank you for your testimony. >> Thank you for your testimony.
• That's my testimony.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• >> Thank you for your testimony. So, just >> Thank you for your testimony.
• If it's a long testimony, my testimony would reflect what some of the other people in support have said
• . testimony. testimony.
• So, thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you very much for your testimony. testimony. testimony. >> Thank<02:38:39.840> you.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We will now move to testimony for the DE1.
• First on move to testimony for the DE1.
• record and proceed with your testimony. record and proceed with your testimony.
• I need to find my testimony again. Okay. I need to find my testimony again. Okay.
• Um, proceed with your testimony.

Bills: HF2438

Keywords: transportation finance, transportation policy, MnDOT, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Department of Public Safety, Metropolitan Council, highway funding, trunk highway fund, county state-aid highway fund, municipal state-aid street fund, state aid roads, local roads, bridge funding, road construction, transit funding, passenger rail, freight rail, aviation, airport development, safe routes to school

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you, members of the committee, for taking my testimony.
• >> thank you for your testimony. >> thank you for your testimony.
• , >> Thank you for your testimony, >> Thank you for your testimony, Representative. >
• adverse effects of um in my testimony. adverse effects of um in my testimony.
• <01:52:16.159> is Senator Roford, uh, my testimony is Senator Roford, uh, my testimony is

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Please introduce yourself for the record and continue with your testimony.
• Please introduce yourself for the record and continue with your testimony."
• record and continue with your testimony record and continue with your testimony thank<01:09:32.080
• My testimony applies to both bills. I'll save you some time. Thank you, Mr. Mcus.
• I'm really struck by the testimony today by Ms. Bennett, Mr. Hail, and Ms.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• your testimony. your testimony. Thank<00:35:30.520> you.
• Are there any for your testimony.
• proceed with your testimony. proceed with your testimony.
• Owens for your testimony, not just your testimony, but your conservative think tank because at a time
• Owens for your testimony, not just your testimony, but your conservative think tank because at a time

Bills: SF856, HF4482, HF3672, HF1234, HF4591, HF3554, HF936

Keywords: Inspector General, fraud prevention, state audit, public funds, misuse, transparency, government accountability, HF4482, Minnesota Historical Society, state historic sites, historic site management, historic preservation, county historical society, local historical society, municipality, county government, admission fees, grants-in-aid, site operations, site maintenance

Transcript Highlights:

• I I will admit that my my testimony.
• Uh thank you for your testimony. right. Uh thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• some written testimony. That's okay. some written testimony. That's okay.
• I think the to keep my testimony brief.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• give your name and be on your testimony. give your name and be on your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. very much. Thank you for your testimony.
• for the record and begin your testimony. for the record and begin your testimony.
• provide testimony to Senate File 1806. provide testimony to Senate File 1806.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We stand on our written testimony.
• written testimony.
• you chair we'll stand on our testimony you chair we'll stand on our testimony and<00:26:05.919><
• I'll largely stand on my written testimony.
• I'll largely stand on my written testimony.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard several bills, beginning with HB 934 on broadband and digital equity. Testifiers from the Lieutenant Governor’s office, the Office of Enterprise and Technology Services, DCCA, the University system, the Hawaii State Council on Developmental Disabilities, and others generally supported the measure and emphasized the need to coordinate broadband efforts, fund operations, and expand access to high-speed internet, devices, and digital navigation services. The Chamber of Commerce and West Coast Comprehensive Health Center supported the bill but objected to HD1 language excluding broadband infrastructure for retail service, warning it could create unintended consequences and limit community-led or rural projects. The Lieutenant Governor explained the state expects roughly $400 million to $500 million in federal broadband funding, described the bill as consolidating efforts under a broadband office attached to the CIO, and said the office would focus on infrastructure, devices, and training. No vote was taken on HB 934 in the portion provided. The committee then took up HB 97 on travel insurance. The Insurance Division said it had no major problem with the product but requested technical changes to align with licensing requirements and noted the bill largely codifies practices already used in the industry. Industry witnesses from Allianz and the U.S. Travel Insurance Association said the measure would create a consistent framework, add consumer protections, and align Hawaii with the NAIC model adopted in many other states. Members questioned whether there was a specific problem the bill was solving, and the division responded that it was mainly a framework and form-review measure rather than a response to a known enforcement issue. The bill was discussed but no final action was reported in the excerpt. HB 448 on technology enablement drew broad support from the Hawaii Technology Development Corporation, the Chamber of Commerce, the Food Industry Association, and other business representatives. Supporters said the measure would help businesses use technology such as digital platforms, e-commerce, robotics, and AR/VR to improve competitiveness, especially in tourism and other sectors. Committee members pressed for clearer scope, cost estimates, and assurances that local companies would be used; the agency said it would prioritize local-first contracting, use federal NIST-related support where possible, and estimated an initial request of about $200,000, though it could not give a firm total. Members expressed concern that the plan was still too undefined. The committee then began HB 455 on small business loans, where the Attorney General suggested explaining why a special fund is needed, and a witness from H Collaborative said the bill would help startup businesses that struggle most to access capital.

Transcript Highlights:

• Communication consistently in testimony.
• > of<01:45:27.080> many According to the testimony of many According to the testimony of
• Vermonters that we heard clear testimony Vermonters that we heard clear testimony about.<01:47:40.480
• Singh's testimony on January 30th, Dr.
• that stands out in this testimony that stands out in this testimony that that that according<01:

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House began with routine business, including referral of Senate Bill 211 on motor vehicle inspections to the Transportation Committee and Senate Bill 298 creating the Vermont Voting Rights Act to the Committee on Government Operations and Military Affairs. The chamber also referred House bills reported by Ways and Means to Appropriations, including H. 211 on data brokers and personal information and H. 931 on miscellaneous education law changes. JRH9, a joint resolution urging the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association to reconsider its opposition to rapid prompting method communication instruction for students with apraxia of speech or autism, was read and referred to Human Services. Several announcements followed, including a welcome to members of the Vermont chapter of the American Physical Therapy Association, a reminder about an education reform meeting, and a correction regarding a prior reference to S. 138 of 2023 and the working group on student protections from harassment and discrimination in schools. The House also recognized guests in the gallery, including Donnie Kanovsky, who was described as a proponent of JRH9. The Speaker announced that H. 606 on firearms procedures, H. 642 on youthful offender proceedings, and later H. 585 would be bumped to later in the calendar. The House then took up H. 537, the right to grow vegetable gardens. The committee explained the bill would protect vegetable gardening in common interest communities and rental housing, while allowing reasonable restrictions and landlord or association oversight; witnesses included a South Burlington resident, HOA and landlord representatives, and legislative counsel. The committee reported an 8-0-0 vote, the House adopted the committee amendment, and ordered third reading. The chamber then passed H. 171 on Attorney General investigations into a law enforcement officer’s use of a firearm and H. 519 allowing Randolph police officers to enroll in Group C of the state retirement system. The House also passed H. 536 on toxic heavy metals in baby food products after extended debate over whether infant formula should be included. Supporters said the bill would help parents make informed choices and noted the amendment was intended to align with federal action; opponents argued formula-specific federal work was still underway and urged waiting. The chamber then passed H. 550 on gender equity in correctional facilities, H. 733 on franchise agreements, H. 775 on housing production tools, H. 887 on crime victim status under the Fair Employment Practices Act, H. 917 on military affairs, and H. 921 on alcoholic beverages. Action on H. 930 addressing chronic absenteeism was postponed one legislative day, and H. 942 on miscellaneous agricultural subjects began second reading with the committee outlining sections on water quality training, non-sewage waste management, and unit pricing.