Transcript Highlights:

• So that's how our violation process would work.
• So those are in the process of being rolled back.
• It's going through a process.
• So that's a whole process that's going on right now.
• So that's kind of an ongoing process.

Summary: The committee met at the Coteau Freedom Mine in Mercer County, approved the June 2 minutes, and heard an overview of the mine from Coteau Properties president Andrew Hawbaker. He described the Freedom Mine as the largest lignite mine in the United States, supplying coal to Dakota Gasification, Antelope Valley Station, and Leland Olds Station. He emphasized the mine’s scale, safety record, reclamation work, workforce needs, community involvement, and economic impact, including payroll, taxes, royalties, scholarships, and local hiring. Members asked about how long land stays in production, how quickly it returns to agriculture after reclamation, labor shortages, and how mining affects groundwater and water wells. Hawbaker said most tracts are mined for about three to five years, reclamation is coordinated with landowners, and the company continues to struggle to find electricians, welders, mechanics, operators, and engineers. The committee then heard from Public Service Commission Chairman Randy Christman on coal mining reclamation and permitting. He reviewed North Dakota’s coal mining history, the state’s reclamation laws, federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act primacy, bonding, permit renewals and revisions, prohibited mining areas, inspection and enforcement, and contemporaneous reclamation requirements. Christman stressed that North Dakota’s program is professional and thorough, with frequent inspections, financial assurance, and a 10-year revegetation monitoring period before bond release. He also discussed federal coal ownership issues that can delay mine plans, the treatment of prime farmland, and how reclamation differs for wind and pipelines. In response to questions, he said one challenge is sometimes releasing land too soon before long-term compaction issues are fully understood, and he noted that data centers do not currently have a comparable reclamation model because they typically own the land. In the afternoon, the committee received an update from Lignite Energy Council president Jonathan Fortner on the lignite industry. He said North Dakota’s lignite sector supports five commercial power plants, four mines, about 12,000 direct and indirect jobs, and more than $5.5 billion in economic activity, while helping keep the state’s electricity rates among the lowest in the nation. Fortner reviewed coal severance and conversion tax revenues, the lignite research fund, federal regulatory rollbacks, carbon capture policy, and the industry’s legal costs fighting federal rules. He also highlighted a study on large-load development, saying new data centers and critical mineral processing facilities could create major local tax revenue and help justify new baseload generation. Members asked whether new gas pipelines would crowd out coal plant development and whether the economic study included jobs and broader local impacts; Fortner said the industry sees room for both and that the study did include construction, operations, jobs, and tax effects.

Transcript Highlights:

• and to make sure we have the process and to make sure we have the process<00:39:00.240> down<
• Nothing that the school own processes.
• So I don't deficiencies in the process.
• <02:01:14.880> Did process, like did they file on time?
• Did process, like did they file on time?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Certificates since July 1, and many are in process in the mail.
• It might be a little later since it’s still in process.
• So we are in the process of trying to educate women.
• Then we go through a process where we do a formal selection.
• this process into corrective measures.

Transcript Highlights:

• , the appeal process is one that has significant implications.
• This process has caused a lot of...
• This bill would not change the board approval process or...
• Do you think this would essentially make your process more efficient?
• We went through this process in 2019; 2018 is when we started.

Bills: HB3557, HB5578, SB973, SB974, SB2068, SB2073

Keywords: ad valorem tax, property tax, incomplete structure, human occupancy, tax exemption, HB 5578, Texas Tax Code, Section 6.062, appraisal district, county appraisal district, chief appraiser, budget hearing, public notice, notice of hearing, newspaper publication, website notice, social media notice, online newspaper, county government, property appraisal

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:10:40.000> applications that we can process applications that we can process applications
• help guide this process in the future. help guide this process in the future.
• everybody a fair shake in the process. everybody a fair shake in the process.
• process with a six member review panel. process with a six member review panel.
• The process that we ran.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• So, I think that there review process.
• to help facilitate the 60 review process to help facilitate the 60 review process for<00:48:52.079
• we're making the process better here. we're making the process better here.
• >> And then what is the current process >> And then what is the current process that
• <01:47:39.040> We different processes in the past. We different processes in the past.

Bills: HB2611, HB2102, HB1710, HB1868, HB1920, HB1812, HB1733, HB1715, HB1723, HB1724, HB1727, HB1711

Keywords: HB2611, Hawaii antitrust, rental housing, rent price-fixing, algorithmic pricing, algorithmic rent-setting, property management software, pricing algorithms, rent coordination, price-fixing, collusion, cartel, multifamily housing, landlord software, occupancy levels, lease terms, Attorney General, public education program, consumer protection, housing affordability

Summary: The committee first took up HB 2611, which would prohibit algorithmic price-setting in Hawaii’s rental market, require public education by the Attorney General, and establish fines and penalties. The Department of the Attorney General opposed the bill, saying its language was too unclear and could expose landlords and agents to criminal and civil liability for ordinary rent-setting practices based on public information or assistance from property professionals. Members asked about antitrust standards, tacit agreement, and whether using county-published affordable-rent schedules would be unlawful; the AG said that would not be unlawful if based on public information and without collusion. Testimony was mixed, with the chair noting support from the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, Hawaii Realtors with comments, 50501 Hawaii and General Strike Hawaii, Haloha Project, 13 individuals, and one opponent. The committee then heard HB 2102, which clarifies that residential projects involving ground disturbance in high-risk areas remain subject to state historic preservation review and removes an exemption for lands presumed nominally sensitive. The Office of Planning and Sustainable Development and the Department of Planning and Permitting supported the measure, saying it would improve clarity and ensure review focuses on projects most likely to affect historic properties or iwi kupuna, while also urging language refinements to better define sensitive sandy-soil areas and balance preservation with housing timelines. NAP Hawaii opposed the bill, arguing it would undo progress made last session and that the current process already includes protections for inadvertent discoveries and efficiency for lower-risk areas. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs strongly supported HB 2102, explaining it was responding to beneficiary complaints about late-added language in last year’s law and saying the nominally sensitive-area language should be removed because it was adopted without sufficient stakeholder input and could be harmful to iwi kupuna protections. Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation and several individuals also supported the bill. Committee discussion focused on how “nominally sensitive” areas are determined, whether project proponents could self-certify areas as exempt, and how high-density residential projects should be treated; SHPD said it uses survey and monitoring data to map sensitivity, that highly sensitive areas like Kīauea are not nominally sensitive, and that some high-density projects should remain exempt if they do not involve new ground disturbance. The hearing included no final vote in the portion provided, but the chair noted 48 individuals in support and continued questioning on the bill’s definitions and implementation.

Transcript Highlights:

• 48,000 vendor payments a week process 48,000 vendor payments a week process 56,000<00:05:23.039>
• <00:24:01.840> some projects are in RFP process some projects are in RFP process some projects
• But rulemaking itself has a process.
• What does not have a process is executive orders from the president. They're process-free.
• what does not have itself has a process what does not have a<01:15:48.960> process<01:15:49.960

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• smart because it creates a small additional window rather than re-imagining the entire method and process
• We've already started this process.
• It's not just like, oh, it's tested, but you can actually validate that the processes used and the test
• licensing process. licensing process.
• Uh, and I think we should keep it that way for the sake of trying to get it through the process this

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Through the rule process, the way the rule process works is that the board would authorize the commencement
• and what would be required or be looked at in the inspection process.
• And I was hoping this process would actually add to that.
• Is there anything like that already in process?
• of processing the kits.

Bills: SB246, SB146, SB300, SB301, SB309, SM17

Keywords: massage therapy, licensure, health and safety standards, continuing education, establishment licensing, civil rights, sovereign immunity, damages, public body, lawsuit limitations, legal notice, child welfare, computing infrastructure, data management, Department of Health, appropriation, foster care, Indian children, cultural competency, training services

Transcript Highlights:

• What is your process there?
• We've got one more coming through the process.
• Do how does what is the process there be?
• It's a computer process program.
• The whole process is incredibly inexpensive.

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Primarily, you know, the enrollment process. It's a one-door enrollment.
• and the process for determining technology improvements. Mr.
• I'm looking at Aaron; I don't think we put this in our C2 process right now.
• Especially from our geo-bonding process that remains unspent.
• That has been a lengthy process, specifically the process That had started before the last session, but

Transcript Highlights:

• There are some that would like us to take that to 90% as it works through the process. We'll see.
• Senate Bill 1461 provides necessary updates to the OIG process.
• a formal appeal process as well.
• I personally see that in process. Again, I think it's worth accountability, right?
• There is due process.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It outlines more clearly so it is meant to put a process in place where we didn't have a clear process
• He said he was worried there did not seem to be much due process in that area.
• Help me understand this a little bit better before due process is provided.
• Help me understand this a little bit better before due process is provided.
• Help me understand this a little bit better before due process is provided.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00 Roll Call 00:52 SB 1 Discussion 01:33 SB 1 Vote 32:39 SB 76 Discussion 34:35 SB 76 Vote 36:20 SB 162 Discussion 37:04 SB 162 Vote 46:35, 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 1, which would create a Kentucky Film Office and a Kentucky Film Leadership Council to promote film production in the state. Sponsors said the bill is intended to expand Kentucky’s use of film tax incentives, improve marketing and infrastructure, and attract productions that could generate jobs, tourism, and broader economic development. They noted a committee substitute made two changes: adding a salary cap for the film office executive director and correcting a date. Members asked about whether the office should instead be housed in the Economic Development Cabinet, how Kentucky’s refundable credit compares with Georgia’s transferable credits, the bill’s obscenity language, the size of the current incentive cap, and whether there should be reporting on the program’s results. Supporters cited a University of Louisville study estimating about $200 million in industry revenue in 2022 and argued the state is not fully using existing credits; an outside witness, Andrew McNeel, opposed the bill, calling the incentives subsidies, warning that Georgia’s uncapped program could lead to pressure to raise Kentucky’s cap, and arguing the bill could subsidize films with little lasting local benefit. After debate, the committee adopted the substitute and passed Senate Bill 1 as amended by House Committee Substitute 1 with an expression of opinion that it should pass. Several members explained their votes, including concerns about transparency, local hiring, and the need for further review. The committee then moved on to Senate Bill 76, which would raise the threshold for a retainage/escrow requirement in certain real estate improvement contracts from $500,000 to $2 million. The sponsor said the change is meant to reflect construction cost inflation since the statute was enacted in 1990. The transcript indicates a motion and second were made, but the discussion was cut off before any final action on the bill is shown. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 162, a simplified bill on unemployment insurance fraud. The sponsor said it would require suspected fraud to be referred to the appropriate state or federal law enforcement authorities, including the Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, county or Commonwealth’s attorneys, and, where applicable, the U.S. Department of Justice, to create a clearer process and accountability. The transcript ends during the presentation, before any vote or committee action on SB 162 is recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• of doing their work, they see something that just doesn't look right, now there is a process that we're
• What's the process? I'm going to take a moment and hand it over to Brian Simy.
• there and and and it's a whole process there and and and it's a whole process so<00:08:17.479>
• And upon the suspicion of fraud, then it is creating a process.
• And that's why I enjoy this process: we kind of just work through to get the best bills.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00 Roll Call 00:29 SB 162 Discussion 01:03 SB 162 Vote 13:48 SB 1 Discussion 14:49 SB 1 Vote 34:43 SB 25 Discussion 38:45 SB 25 Vote 40:31 SB 50 Discussion 41:09 SB 50 Vote 42:55, 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 162, a measure on unemployment insurance fraud. The sponsor said the bill would create a clearer process for state unemployment staff to refer suspected fraud cases, especially smaller-dollar cases that may not draw federal attention, and would help protect employers and the integrity of the unemployment system. Testimony from Brian Sikma supported the bill as a common-sense anti-fraud proposal, but several senators raised concerns that suspending benefits during an investigation could unfairly burden claimants, especially if the claim later proves legitimate. The sponsor and witness said the bill was intended to allow quick adjudication and that benefits could be reinstated after review, and the sponsor noted the referral process would include identifying information and details about the suspected fraud. The committee then voted on the bill; it passed with favorable expression, 8-1, and was sent to the floor. The committee then returned to Senate Bill 1, which would create a Kentucky Film Office and Film Commission and fund the office with a portion of the state transit tax and production-related fees. Senator Wheeler and invited guests described the bill as an economic development and tourism measure meant to expand Kentucky’s film industry, attract productions statewide, and build on existing tax credits. Witnesses, including Mary K. Po... and Misty Wrigley Miller, said a state film office would help market locations, provide a searchable database for producers, and make it easier for rural communities to compete for productions. They cited an economic impact study showing about $200 million in film-related economic activity in 2022, with additional ripple effects and tax revenue, and argued the office would help create jobs and workforce opportunities for Kentuckians. Members generally praised the concept of Senate Bill 1 and compared Kentucky’s potential to Georgia’s film industry growth. Witnesses said Kentucky already has strong incentives but needs a dedicated office and commission to better promote the state and coordinate production activity. The discussion emphasized that the commission would help ensure a return on investment and that local crews and businesses would benefit from more productions. The transcript ends during continued discussion of the bill and questions from senators, with no final vote on Senate Bill 1 shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• There is really no precious metals that are left in that process at all.
• There is really no precious metals that are left in that process at all.
• There is really no precious metals that are left in that process at all.
• There is really no precious metals that are left in that process at all.
• There is really no precious metals that are left in that process at all.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee held its first hearing of the 2025 session and reviewed several measures. SB 102 would restrict third-party restaurant reservation services from listing or selling reservations without a written agreement from the restaurant; the Attorney General recommended amendments to strengthen the bill against First Amendment and Contracts Clause challenges, and the Hawaii Restaurant Association strongly supported it, saying restaurants should control who represents them. The committee also heard SB 137 on electric utility mergers and acquisitions, with support from Ulupono Initiative and IBW Local 1260. Supporters said the bill would preserve state policy protections, including renewable energy and rate-making goals, and protect workers; IBW also suggested amendments, including a severability clause. The committee discussed a possible alternative approach from the PUC involving solicitation of bids from non-investor-owned utilities, and Ulupono said it would consider that idea but was concerned about preserving time for co-op formation. Members then heard SB 142, which would require insurers paying claims by check to send them by certified mail with restricted delivery and return receipt. The Insurance Division stood on its written testimony, while the Hawaiian Insurers Council, State Farm, NAMIC, and the American Property Casualty Insurance Association opposed the bill. A senator questioned whether the measure was too prescriptive and could create problems for claimants displaced by disasters; the response was that insurers and claimants usually remain in contact and that other payment methods may already be available depending on the carrier. SB 157 would ban algorithmic price setting in Hawaii’s rental market and require a public education program; the committee noted written testimony in support and comment, but no oral testimony was taken before moving on. SB 158 would create a state-owned bank implementation board within DCCA; DCCA’s financial institutions division, the Budget and Finance Department, and the Legislative Reference Bureau submitted comments, while the Hawaii Bankers Association opposed and the Hawaii Credit Union League commented. The committee also heard SB 318, which would require DCCA to adopt privacy rules for direct-to-consumer genetic testing and specify whether genetic information may be used for investigative genetic genealogy. The Office of Consumer Protection and Andrew Crossland opposed the bill, saying federal law and existing state protections already cover much of the area and that rulemaking would be a better way to address it; members raised concerns about federal changes and the need for state protections, but OCP said the bill was not the best approach. SB 332 would prohibit bundling foreclosed homes at public sale and delay finality of sales; L. Strong and written testimony supported it, citing Lahaina’s post-fire foreclosure risks and warning of investors profiting from the disaster. The final measure, SB 525, would require written notice and consent before mortuaries, cemeteries, or pre-need funeral authorities sell or recycle precious metals recovered after cremation. DCCA’s consumer protection and licensing divisions offered comments, while the Hawaii Funeral and Cemetery Association opposed the bill, saying it was surprised by the measure and was unaware of current consumer problems in the industry.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm going to speak just to the process. This biannual process is sound.
• So I urge that you guys fund this fund so that we can continue to work in that process. Thank you.
• Madam Chair, Representative, there is an application process. They do turn in an application.
• It's a rigorous selection process based upon readiness.
• Madam Chair and Representative, I've watched this process enough to understand that once something is

Bills: SB193

Keywords: SB193, acequia, community ditch, irrigation works construction fund, water infrastructure, ditch infrastructure, irrigation, New Mexico water law, agricultural water, farmers, Rio Grande, acequia association, forest land protection revolving fund, state fund transfer, irrigation projects, 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It does not alter the current process for survivors to seal their records; they still will have to go
• through the exact same process as before.
• This not only delays the process but also places directors in difficult positions with both the courts
• We have an in-depth fiscal process.
• Again, this bill simply removes the approval process of the budget.

Bills: SB663, SB958

Keywords: community supervision, budget approval, corrections department, strategic plan, judicial oversight, SB 958, Texas Government Code, nondisclosure, order of nondisclosure, criminal history record information, trafficking of persons, human trafficking, compelling prostitution, survivor rights, record sealing, expunction, deferred adjudication, prostitution, controlled substances, theft

Transcript Highlights:

• Would I understand that the process, or you can tell me whether or not the process would be the same,
• Would I understand that the process, or you can tell me whether or not the process would be the same,
• "Would I understand that the process, or you can tell me whether or not the process would be the same
• :14.479> on approval processes to do construction on approval processes to do construction on
• <04:01:33.040> goes variability into how that process goes variability into how that process

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, and we're excluding passenger terminal facilities, which would still go through the normal process
• Passenger terminal facilities, which would still go through the normal process. Okay. Okay.
• Was there any benefit to utilizing this method to assist with getting projects through the process in
• So with this process, if you notice less people bid, I know you said one company may throw out four bids
• So with this process, if you notice less people bid, I know anyway.

Bills: HR275, HR282, HCR112, SCR62, SCR64, SB513

Keywords: highway maintenance, signage, transportation safety, DOTD, infrastructure, public safety, federal grants, job creation, Utility Terrain Vehicles, UTVs, safety regulations, transportation, Louisiana, task force, vehicle operation, legislation, accidents, HCR112, House Concurrent Resolution 112, Louisiana Highway 1

Summary: The House Transportation Committee met on May 26 with a quorum present and took up several resolutions and one Senate bill. SCR 64 created a task force to study construction management at risk (CMAR) in Louisiana public works; an amendment added representatives from the Louisiana Associated General Contractors and Associated Builders and Contractors, and the resolution was reported with amendments. HR 282 created a task force to study utility terrain vehicles with state agencies; an amendment added the State Fire Marshal, and it was also reported with amendments. The committee then considered SB 513 on public works project delivery methods. The bill originally included an average-bid award method for certain pilot projects, along with airport design-build provisions. Testimony from a Reason Foundation analyst and from the Louisiana Associated General Contractors raised concerns that average-bid contracting could encourage collusion, raise costs, and lacked supporting data or use by U.S. transportation departments, while airport design-build was supported. The committee adopted an amendment in concept to strike the average-bid provisions, leaving the airport-related design-build language in place, and SB 513 was reported with amendments by a vote of 11 yeas and 4 nays. The committee also reported SCR 62 favorably, which urges DOTD to evaluate school zones on state highways in response to safety concerns and near misses, including a fatal incident referenced by the author. HCR 112 was reported favorably to study flooding on Louisiana Highway 1 in Shreveport, and HR 275 was reported favorably to study an interstate highway signage maintenance and reporting program. The meeting concluded after all items were disposed of and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Fundamentally, AB 2215 seeks to undermine existing processes for extending water rights.
• AB 2215 seeks to undermine existing processes for extending water rights permits.
• That is what the regulatory process is for. That's why it takes time.
• This is taking something out of a regulatory process and handing it over to the Legislature.
• This is taking something out of a regulatory process and handing it over to the Legislature.

Summary: The Assembly Appropriations Committee heard a regular order agenda with 101 bills and first took up AB 2215, which would extend the time for the Department of Water Resources to fully develop its State Water Project water rights. The author and supporters argued it would improve water reliability and affordability for millions of Californians and could save ratepayers money, while opponents said it would bypass the Water Board’s administrative process, set a precedent for other water rights holders, and potentially facilitate costly projects like the Delta Conveyance Project. The bill was moved on a do pass vote, with Mr. Hoover voting no and Ms. Krell not voting. The committee then approved two consent calendars and heard several bills with little or no opposition. These included AB 2038 on extending insurance nonrenewal/cancellation protections for wildfire victims; AB 2322 on clarifying which commercial, industrial, or institutional sites are subject to municipal stormwater permits; AB 1794 on direct home shipment of enteral nutrition; AB 1696 on clarifying that nurse midwives do not need physician supervision within their scope of practice; AB 1860 on allowing county offices of education to use design-build methods; AB 1876 on codifying nondiscrimination protections in health care; AB 2281 on election cybersecurity resources; AB 2448 on protecting sensitive medical records and reproductive health data; AB 1994 on providing victims with information about federal immigration relief options; and AB 1829 on expanding how CalWORKs community college funds may be used to support student parents. Most were supported by sponsoring organizations and related stakeholders, with limited opposition noted on AB 1696 and AB 2281. The committee also placed a large suspense calendar on approval, listing dozens of additional bills, and then opened public comment on bills not heard that day. No members of the public came forward, and the hearing was adjourned. Several bills were reported out on roll call votes, with some members not voting or voting no on particular measures, but the transcript does not provide full vote tallies for each bill.