Transcript Highlights:

• So that is the background of my bill, Mr.
• /c><00:05:00.520> uh Minnesota uh so that is is the uh Minnesota uh so that is is the uh background
• of my bill Mr chair and I'd background of my bill Mr chair and I'd be<00:05:03.639> happy<00:
• She's still getting milk checks that are right at her cost of production, so she can afford her labor
• have a checking have a checking account<01:33:01.560> and<01:33:01.679> that's<01:

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Will we be checking genitals?
• Will we be checking genitals?
• Will we be checking genitals?
• Do we have to check each one, or are you suggesting a different way of checking?
• We have to check each one, or are you suggesting a different way of checking?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Judiciary Committee opened a hearing on House Bill 148, which Rep. Jim Kofalt said is the same language as last year’s HB 396, vetoed by the governor. He described the bill as allowing, but not requiring, separation by biological sex in three areas: bathrooms and locker rooms, houses of correction, and certain athletic competitions. Kofalt argued the bill would give local school boards and other policymakers discretion to set practical rules, citing concerns about safety, privacy, and a Milford incident involving a biological male in girls’ locker rooms. Committee members pressed him on the lack of a definition of “biological sex,” and he said he did not think one was necessary because males and females are commonly understood. He also said the bill was meant to address situations where outside groups threaten lawsuits and leave local boards with no latitude. Testimony then split sharply. Supporters, including Executive Counselor Karen Hill and several others, said HB 148 would roll back anti-discrimination protections, contradict New Hampshire’s “Live Free or Die” values, and harm transgender and non-binary people. Opponents described the bill as discriminatory and unnecessary, arguing that existing bathroom and sports policies already work and that the bill would invite harassment, invasive enforcement, and legal conflict. Several speakers, including trans residents and parents of trans children, said they had used public restrooms without incident and warned that enforcement would be impractical or abusive. One supporter argued the bill was needed to protect girls’ privacy and safety and cited school sports disputes and a concern about a sex offender at a game as examples of why sex-segregated rules should be restored. Committee members asked questions about how biological sex would be defined, whether the bill was responding to real incidents in New Hampshire, and how any restrictions would be enforced. Kofalt said he was aware of issues in several school districts and at the State House, but did not have detailed documentation for every case. No vote or final action was taken in the portion of the hearing provided; the chair instead moved through public testimony under a strict two-minute limit and noted that follow-up questions would be limited so the committee could hear multiple bills that day.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:17:44.720> appears you know if another cross check appears you know if another cross check
• uh opportunity to you know check uh opportunity to you know check constantly<00:32:06.639> check
• Um, I favored the cross-check program because of what it did, uh, the years that we used the cross-check
• Um, I favored the cross-check program because of what it did, uh, the years that we used the cross-check
• Um, I favored the cross-check program because of what it did, uh, the years that we used the cross-check

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• it was short and brash, but I don't want to waste your time and just want to give you a little background
• Short and brash, but I don't want to waste your time and just want to give you a little background of
• given that this I just wanted to check given that this type<00:23:54.559> of<00:23:54.640>
• We all have very differing backgrounds.
• We all have very differing backgrounds.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Education Funding Committee met in executive session on a bill concerning school meal access and reimbursement. The bill would address local school districts’ responsibility to provide meals during school hours, reimburse schools for meals served at no cost, and make an appropriation. The committee first moved to retain the bill, with supporters saying it was complex, had uncertain fiscal impacts, and should be considered alongside other related meals bills. Opponents argued the committee already had enough information, that the bill served a small number of students at relatively low cost, and that delaying action would harm children who need food to learn. The committee also heard from Tim Roar, a Keene school business administrator and co-designer of the bill, who explained that the proposal was intended to be an opt-in program for districts, with rulemaking to set participation requirements. He said the bill was meant to target aid to students between 175% and 200% of poverty, reduce bad meal debt, and avoid spending taxpayer money on families who could afford to pay. He estimated the state cost at about $250,000 in year one, with local taxpayer costs around $8,500 for Keene, and said some districts already have systems for online applications while others do not. Committee members questioned him about meal debt, online application software costs, and how districts handle students who reach debt limits. Roar said districts still feed students who are hungry, but use other resources and family outreach when meal debt is capped, and he argued that parents should be responsible for providing lunch when they can afford it. Other members pushed back, saying they had seen students go hungry and that teachers sometimes pay for lunches themselves. One member noted the bill would increase eligibility, make it easier to apply, strengthen personal responsibility, and was not a mandate. The discussion ended without a recorded final vote in the excerpt, though the retain motion remained the central action under debate.

Transcript Highlights:

• We don't coordinate studies like this in the background. I work for the company directly.
• I work for like this in the background.
• They shouldn't be worried that if they check out a more expensive product, it'll impact the price of
• :44.280> they They shouldn't be worried that if they They shouldn't be worried that if they check
• out a more expensive product, check out a more expensive product, it'll<01:22:46.160> impact<

Bills: HF3794, HF3408

Keywords: surveillance, price discrimination, wage discrimination, automated decision systems, consumer protections, data privacy, biometrics, consumer protection, price setting, biometric data, retail, privacy, 1183, house

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from March 3, 2026, and then received a presentation from the Minnesota Office of the Attorney General on the Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act. Assistant Attorney General Caitlin Miko and Deputy Attorney General Jessica Whitney reviewed the law’s scope, consumer rights, business obligations, and enforcement history. They said the law took effect July 31, 2025, gives Minnesotans rights to access, delete, and opt out of sale, profiling, and targeted advertising, and is enforced by the Attorney General with penalties up to $7,500 per violation. They reported more than 200 complaints in the first six months, many warning letters, and a shift from education to active enforcement now that the initial warning-letter period has expired. Committee members asked about how the universal opt-out works, what happens when companies deny deletion or editing requests, how the office determines willful noncompliance, and whether the law could burden small businesses. The AG’s office said the opt-out can be set through privacy-protective browsers or extensions, companies must respond to consumer requests within 45 days, small businesses are exempt as defined by the SBA, and investigations look for patterns and evidence of willful conduct rather than minor technical violations. The office also said it needs additional funding to fully staff enforcement efforts and noted that it has already issued subpoenas and civil investigative demands. The committee then took up House File 3408, the Stop Grocery Surveillance Price Gouging Act. The author explained that the bill would prohibit retail grocers, physical and online, from setting individualized prices based on consumer information, would limit certain uses of facial recognition and electronic shelf labels, and would preserve narrow exceptions for discounts and loyalty programs. Public testimony followed from the Minnesota Farmers Union in support, arguing that grocery consolidation and surveillance pricing could worsen already high food costs and harm fair competition. The Minnesota Grocers Association opposed the premise that grocery stores use surveillance pricing, said shelf prices are generally uniform and set from a single storewide database, and argued electronic shelf labels are efficient and not nefarious. A technology company representative similarly said ESLs do not use personal data or facial recognition, prices are uniform, and a 2025 study found no meaningful price increases after ESL adoption. The bill was laid over for possible further discussion after the testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• check companies, tenant screeners, and companies who are engaged in identity verification, fraud detection
• <00:10:41.400> check<00:10:41.600> companies, bureaus, background check companies,
• bureaus, background check companies, tenant<00:10:42.360> screeners, tenant screeners, tenant
• out that book, that is not a check out that book, that is not a perfect<01:08:30.000> copy.
• The point isn't to check a box, missed.

Bills: HF4456, HF4544, HF3698

Keywords: data broker, data brokerage, consumer privacy, personal data, data privacy, Minnesota attorney general, registration, public registry, civil penalties, enforcement, special revenue fund, privacy rights, data sales, data collection, consumer protection, chapter 325M, controller, processor, data broker registry, transparency

Transcript Highlights:

• He carries the Ten Essentials, purchases his Hike Safe card, and checks and double-checks and triple-checks
• I have a science background, and so I add that into the mix.
• I have a science background, and so I add that into the mix.
• I thought this is worth sharing: power must never be trusted without a check.
• I thought this is worth sharing: power must never be trusted without a check.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Check. Check. Maybe later.
• And our advice to them, since we can't provide them direct legal advice by code, again, is always to check
• He's unable to join us today, so I will do my best to share the background on this bill.

Keywords: 1064, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Just for a little background, this was designed from the task force to help primary farmers provide another
• And by creating a voluntary check-off on personal state income tax returns, Massachusetts residents would
• So I literally cannot write that check to the least developed countries fund without this bill.
• So I literally cannot write that check to the least developed countries fund without this bill.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on H. 3256, a bill stemming from the Massachusetts Cranberry Revitalization Task Force that would remove Chapter 61A barriers for certain renewable energy projects on non-producing agricultural land. Supporters said the bill would let farmers separate adjacent land from Chapter 61A without a municipal right of first refusal, avoid rollback and advance tax penalties, and use small solar or other renewable projects to generate supplemental income while keeping the farm in operation. Testimony emphasized that the proposal is intended to be “farm-first,” limited to marginal or accessory land, and could also produce local tax revenue for municipalities. Some members raised concerns about whether the bill should be limited to solar, the appropriate project size, impacts on other agricultural sectors, and whether future sales or conversion back to other uses should trigger local rights of first refusal. Witnesses said the bill had been reported favorably in a prior session and noted that similar projects typically involve 20-year leases with extensions. The committee also took testimony on S. 2009, which would authorize regional transportation ballot initiatives. MAPC and Transportation for Mass argued that the bill would give municipalities and groups of municipalities a flexible tool to raise local revenue for transportation projects such as transit, roads, bridges, bikeways, and pedestrian infrastructure, with sunset provisions so the revenue ends when the project ends. They said the measure would not raise taxes on its own, but would allow local voters to decide whether to adopt a revenue source, and pointed to examples from other states where similar initiatives funded major transit and infrastructure projects. No votes were taken during the hearing. Testimony was also heard on S. 1922, which would create a Massachusetts fund allowing voluntary taxpayer donations to the UN Least Developed Countries Fund or related 501(c)(3) nonprofits supporting climate-vulnerable communities. Climate Reality Project representatives said the bill would let Massachusetts residents support climate resilience projects in the world’s poorest countries at no cost to the Commonwealth, and could serve as a model for other states. Senators questioned how recipient countries and nonprofits would be selected, what safeguards would exist regarding countries such as Yemen, and how taxpayers would know where donations would go; witnesses said the fund would be administered through the UN system and that they would provide more clarification. Rep. Michelle Ciccolo also testified on H. 3051, seeking a one-year deferral of the higher interest rate that applies when deferred property taxes become due after the death of a senior or veteran, saying the current jump to 16% can burden heirs and discourage use of the deferral program. The hearing concluded without any votes or committee actions.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I'll send you, it's more of an Excel spreadsheet that gives you the ability to check off the boxes
• deliver credible, community-rooted recommendations, it is important that the folks that we recommend do check
• the bottom of the document, which we'll get there in a bit, but that just goes into professional background
• So that way, anybody that might check off a box, we did put there, as well as gender, since we said that

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The commission met to advance planning for a proposed Cape Verdean Cultural Center in Massachusetts, with members emphasizing the historical significance of Cape Verdeans in the Commonwealth and the need to complete a feasibility study over the next year. After roll call and introductions of new participants, the commission unanimously approved the prior meeting minutes. Members also reviewed and approved a draft nomination criteria document, with a small edit to explicitly include Cape Cod in the geographic representation language. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on expanding commission membership. Rochelle Barbosa presented criteria aimed at ensuring regional, gender, generational, and sector diversity, along with needed expertise in areas such as history, museums, architecture, fundraising, nonprofit governance, language preservation, legal issues, and community organizing. The commission discussed several organizations and institutions that should have designees, including Bridgewater State’s Cape Verdean studies program, Mili Mila, the Schooner Ernestina Morrissey Advisory Board, and the New Bedford Whaling Museum. Members also reviewed a long list of suggested nominees and identified possible gaps, including legal expertise and representation from Taunton and Cape Cod-area communities. Because the commission had 16 additional nominees for 12 remaining seats, members agreed that more vetting was needed before final appointments. Representative Vieira proposed, and the commission approved, forming a three-member nominating committee consisting of Senator Miranda, Commissioner Monica Vega, and Commissioner Manny Lopes. The committee was tasked with narrowing the list and bringing back recommendations for a vote at a later meeting. Members also discussed scheduling another meeting before the end of the month so appointments could be finalized and the commission could begin its work plan, including monthly meetings, listening sessions, and visits to cultural institutions. The meeting adjourned after those next steps were outlined.

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you give us a little bit more background, like how many years, and is this live?
• I'm sending emails on Office 2016 without spell check, and thinking, okay, it's just the House, and then
• you start checking every state agency, and there's only one that really met the standard, and that was
• Not in my last check. And I've engaged with, I think, everybody that will answer the phone.

Bills: HB2809

Keywords: cybersecurity, post-quantum encryption, CMMC 2.0, state agencies, data protection, US-based vendors, 1182, all

Summary: The Committee on Science and Technology heard two informational presentations before taking up its only bill, HB 2809. The first presentation, from the University of Arizona, focused on fusion energy research and commercialization. The presenter described fusion as a clean, safe, long-term energy source with major potential for Arizona, emphasized growing U.S. and Chinese investment in the field, and argued that Arizona could become a hub for fusion supply chains, talent, and deployment. Members asked about timelines, regulation, and how fusion might compare with small modular reactors and other energy sources; the presenter said fusion could be commercially deployable in roughly 12 to 15 years if public-private investment continues. The second presentation, from XRDNA, described a spatial-temporal addressing system for physical objects and events, aimed at improving coordination across space, infrastructure, logistics, and defense. The company said it is testing with Space Force and launch providers, uses AI provenance tools, and sees its main near-term use case in logistics and space operations. HB 2809 would require state agencies handling sensitive data, including elections, public safety, benefits, finance, and infrastructure information, to implement post-quantum encryption meeting or exceeding CMMC 2.0 validation, using a U.S.-based vendor and U.S.-developed, manufactured, or maintained components. An amendment clarified that agencies would not be required to connect offline systems to the internet to install encryption, and that agencies could use offline methods such as removable media. The sponsor argued the bill is needed because Arizona’s legacy systems are vulnerable, cited prior cyber incidents and audit findings, and said the bill would secure data even on older systems while keeping the encryption key with the Auditor General. Members generally supported the concept but raised questions about implementation, costs, the Auditor General’s role, and the need for more stakeholder input. No one signed in opposition; the Secretary of State’s office was noted as neutral. The committee adopted the Pingarelli amendment and then passed HB 2809 as amended on a 9-0 vote, giving it a due pass recommendation. Several members explained their yes votes as support for the bill’s goal while emphasizing the need for careful implementation and broader discussion. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So just a little background on the commission.
• I can check on that and make sure that that’s covered. Okay. Thank you for that.
• I can check on that and make sure that that's covered. Okay.
• Claire Ramsey, for the Department of Social Services, speaking to the Guardian background check system
• Our Guardian background check system has been our ongoing system, and we're looking to continue funding

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The hearing opened with Department of Finance and Legislative Analyst’s Office remarks on the May Revision, which both described efforts to reduce large out-year operating deficits through a mix of revenue increases, spending reductions, and reserve use. Finance said the May Revision more than halves projected deficits in later years, while LAO stressed that revenues are at unprecedented levels yet the state still faces a significant structural deficit and is drawing down reserves; LAO urged maintaining at least the administration’s level of budget solutions and adding to reserves rather than new ongoing commitments. The chair echoed concern about cuts to vulnerable populations and noted the tension between service reductions and requests for additional administrative positions. The committee then heard a series of California Health and Human Services and HCAI proposals, including additional legal support for CalHHS to respond to federal HR1 changes; a net-zero transfer of positions for a centralized eligibility/data-sharing platform; 988 crisis line implementation funding and continued work with the Trevor Project to train crisis centers to better serve LGBTQ youth; EMS data system maintenance funding; HCAI implementation of AB 1312 hospital charity care screening; SB 660 data exchange framework funding; CalRx biosimilar insulin reappropriation; and a diaper access initiative that would provide free diapers to newborns in participating hospitals and support a future direct-to-consumer purchasing option. Members questioned the diaper program’s universal design, the use of a Public Contract Code exemption, and the selection of Baby2Baby, with the chair expressing concern about optics and the lack of an income threshold. The committee also discussed distressed hospital funding, with HCAI requesting up to $50 million for another round of grants to hospitals in immediate financial distress. HCAI said it receives annual and quarterly financial reports but the data lag limits real-time monitoring, and the LAO recommended stronger program parameters and turnaround plans. Members argued the repeated need for distressed hospital aid reflects a structural problem, not a short-term gap, and raised broader concerns about hospital reimbursement and patient flow. Other items included reverting $19.6 million in unused opioid settlement funds from HCAI to DHCS for General Fund offset, and a Rural Health Transformation Program request to increase HCAI spending authority to cover the full federal award. Later, DMHC presented funding requests to implement PBM licensing and financial review requirements under AB 116, modernize the managed care complaint system, and build an electronic claims settlement data system under AB 3275. The final major discussion focused on the Behavioral Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission, which opposed the May Revision’s proposed reduction of its Innovation Partnership Fund from $20 million to $10 million and a $6.7 million cut to community advocacy grants. The Commission argued these programs are core to Proposition 1’s goals of statewide innovation and community accountability, while Finance said the proposal is consistent with Proposition 1’s maximum funding levels and reflects a broader effort to prioritize direct services and use unspent prior-year funds; members pressed for more information and questioned whether the cuts would undermine the new behavioral health framework.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, Mark Manganello has helped give us some background questions, some flavor for what quadrupling the
• So, Mark Manganello has helped give us some background questions, some flavor for what quadrupling the
• So, Mark Manganello has helped give us some background questions, some flavor for what quadrupling the
• So I really appreciate that, and I appreciate also the discussion on the checks and balances because
• on the checks and balances because<01:03:26.799> at<01:03:26.960> the<01:03:27.119>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Education Funding Committee Subcommittee on Adequacy and Funding Sources opened its second meeting by reviewing four retained bills assigned to it: HB 651, HB 772, HB 491, and HB 734. The chair said the goal was to compare the bills across the board, consider whether any one of them should be the committee’s recommended vehicle, and then vote on a recommendation to the full committee. He noted the bills would move out before November 21 and be taken up on the House floor in January, while related LSRs were also being developed for the coming session. Representative Ames argued that HB 651 should be the main vehicle because it would substantially raise the adequacy base and adjust differential aid categories to better reflect real school costs, including poverty, special education, and English learner needs. He described the bill as building on court guidance and said the current funding formula is far below actual district needs. He also supported HB 491 as a study vehicle to examine revenue options, saying the legislature needs informed choices about how to pay for the changes. Representative Damon strongly backed HB 651 and HB 491, citing constitutional obligations, the Conval and Rand rulings, and large projected funding increases for districts such as Claremont, Windham, and communities in the chair’s district if HB 651 had passed earlier. Representative Fellows said he has an LSR similar to HB 491 that would study existing and new revenue options using criteria such as revenue potential, administrative cost, affected groups, implementation timeline, and implementation cost, with input from revenue administration and outside agencies. Representative Papich Muller emphasized constitutional separation-of-powers concerns, reading Article 83 and saying he was not comfortable with the broad claim that “cherish” clearly mandates a specific spending level, though he said he intends to follow Supreme Court guidance. Representative Ricky read testimony from a local school board member arguing that the state already imposes many mandates on schools while providing the least funding in the country, and that HB 651 would help restore meaningful local control. No final vote or action was taken in the portion provided, though the chair had indicated the subcommittee would vote before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• If I was a 65-year-old veteran and I apply and I don't check the block that says I'm a veteran, you're
• I do not have a military background, but I do know that there doesn't appear to be as much engagement
• , but I do not have a military background, but I do know<01:06:06.960> that<01:06:07.599> there
• I've come from that background and to make it myself, it helps me when I talk.
• I've come from that background and to make it myself, it helps me when I talk.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I'd like to give you a little bit of a background.
• um give you a little bit of a background um give you a little bit of a background um<00:06:29.360
• But somebody has to write the check for that. Who's going to pay the officer to go and assist?
• But somebody has to write the check for that. Who's going to pay the officer to go and assist?
• But somebody has to write the check for that. Who's going to pay the officer to go and assist?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee work session focused on HB 153, a bill intended to improve law enforcement response to animal cruelty cases. The bill’s sponsor explained that the proposal would require one sheriff or deputy and one state trooper in each county to receive specific training in animal cruelty laws so they could serve as knowledgeable resources. The sponsor described real-world examples where agencies were unclear about jurisdiction, veterinary involvement, and response protocols, arguing that better training was needed because animal cruelty cases can require quick action and many towns do not have animal control officers. Jerry Sorenson, a retired UNH professor and longtime animal cruelty instructor, described the existing training structure at Police Standards and Training. He said recruits receive a required two-hour introductory block at the academy, while additional animal cruelty materials and a more comprehensive online resource library are available through the Benchmark system for certified officers. He noted that the older two-day in-service course he taught was more detailed and guided, but the current online materials are more of a self-study resource and are not mandated for in-service officers. He also said the committee could track usage through Benchmark analytics. Kurt Arenberg of the Humane Society of the United States and Rob Johnson of the Farm Bureau both supported the goal of ensuring a trained law enforcement contact is available statewide, but they questioned whether assigning one trained officer per county would be the best way to achieve it. They emphasized the need for a real-time response and for officers to know where to find help and guidance, rather than expecting one person per county to handle all cases. Vincent Greco of State Police said the agency is willing to help and has handled animal cruelty matters, but he said one trooper per county would not realistically meet the goal given coverage demands and vacancy rates; he suggested broader access to resources and training may be more effective. Representative Freeman asked how cases are handled now and was told State Police responses generally follow standard criminal investigation steps, with assistance from animal control, veterinarians, and other resources when available. No vote or final action was taken during the work session.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:44:32.400> on<00:44:32.560> how background on how background on how House<00:44:33.920
• That I'll have to check and I'm more than happy to provide it back to you.
• And I think it's helpful background for you folks as you look at this bill."
• And I think it's helpful background for you folks as you look at this bill."
• I think it's helpful background for you folks as you look at this bill."

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The only reason we set the operation is because Sherry will give you her background at NMSU; she has
• One thing that I do want to mention is to what Senator Muñoz said: as far as my background, I did help
• main difference between your committee substitute and the original bill, let me go back and double-check
• do realize how expensive higher education is, especially for those coming from a working-class background
• It might be women, individuals from rural communities, and people from different backgrounds that are

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't know how much of my background you want to hear, but I'm a licensed certified social worker with
• They're doing extensive checking to make sure that the training sticks.
• the central office, whose sole responsibility was to oversee these facilities and go out there and check
• Where's the background test? Where's the training?

Summary: The Joint State Agencies committee met to approve prior minutes and then focused on the death of Zachary Moore at the Southeast Arkansas Human Development Center, later clarified in discussion as the Warren facility. DHS officials described Moore’s background, said he died after a prolonged prone restraint followed by a delayed chemical restraint, and reported that 13 staff were terminated, the superintendent was replaced, a consultant was brought in, and the agency entered a settlement with the family for $725,000. Members pressed DHS on the cause of death, restraint policies, staff training, supervision, family notification, and why the family had not been kept informed; DHS said a family-notification procedure exists but that communications during litigation had been handled through counsel. The committee also heard that six staff had been criminally charged with manslaughter and neglect of a vulnerable person, and that the death certificate listed the manner of death as homicide with cause of death tied to physiologic stress associated with struggle and prone restraint. DHS officials gave broader context on the five human development centers, their licensing and accreditation, resident population, mortality review process, and training programs. They said the centers serve highly medically and behaviorally complex residents, that annual restraint training and CPI-based instruction are required, and that the mortality review committee and Office of Long-Term Care review deaths and make recommendations. Members repeatedly criticized the agency for not having complete information at the meeting and for what they saw as gaps in oversight, staffing, and chain-of-command clarity during emergencies. DHS responded that the Warren facility had not been meeting the same standards as the others, that the consultant’s root-cause analysis identified multiple failures, and that new crisis-team and chain-of-command procedures were being drafted. A second major topic was staffing and recruitment. Members discussed low pay, turnover, use of float and on-call staff, rural staffing shortages, and a waiting list of about 2,000 people for home- and community-based services. DHS said CNAs at the centers start at about $39,000 a year, that a broader retention and recruitment plan is being drafted for all five centers, and that a separate rate study for PASS services will be implemented in January 2027 but does not cover CNA pay. The meeting ended with testimony from Moore’s mother, Angela Stevens, who said money could not replace her son and urged stronger training, background checks, and supervision so other residents would be protected. The committee asked DHS to keep members and Stevens updated on consultant reports, recruitment efforts, and follow-up on the family communication issue, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• One thing I did check on: AWS is evaporative cooling.
• Our engineering reviews are double-checked and reviewed by MISO, which is the regional grid, before that
• You know, my background in economic development. And, you know, in the old days, I don't know.
• You know, my background in economic development.

Summary: The Committee on Utilities held an informational hearing on data centers in Missouri, with the chair explaining that the goal was to hear from three speakers with different perspectives and allow committee questions, but no public testimony. The first witness, Matt Edelow of the International Union of Operating Engineers and Columbia-Jefferson City Area Building Trades Council, spoke in support of data center development for its construction jobs, long-term employment, tax revenue, and local economic benefits. He said the Montgomery County projects had already put about 200 Missourians to work, described the facilities as using closed-loop water systems and generator noise levels that he said would be limited by setbacks and acoustics, and urged local hire and apprenticeship requirements. Committee members asked about water use, noise, cybersecurity, labor, and tax revenue, and he said one project could generate about $13.1 million annually at full buildout. The second witness, Rob Dixon of Ameren Missouri, testified that Senate Bill 4 and the Public Service Commission’s large-load tariff provide strong protections for existing customers. He said large data center customers must sign long-term contracts, pay 100% of interconnection costs, post collateral, pay at least 80% of contracted demand, and face exit and reduction fees, with load-shedding rules applying to them like other customers. Dixon said Ameren’s planning process includes engineering reviews and MISO review before projects proceed, and that the utility’s integrated resource plan calls for 5.3 gigawatts of new generation by 2030, with 2.2 gigawatts of signed large-load agreements already in place. He also said large customers can help spread fixed grid costs and put downward pressure on rates, and noted that the protections apply to investor-owned utilities, not co-ops or municipal utilities. The final witness, John Kaufman of the Consumers Council of Missouri, argued that the current protections are not strong enough and that data centers could raise rates through construction work in progress, stranded generation costs, and other risks if projects change or technology shifts. He urged greater consumer protections, including more upfront financial security from data centers, reconsideration of construction work in progress policies, and possibly requiring data centers to bring their own power in some cases. Committee members debated his claims about SB 4, QIP, and rate impacts, with some members saying the law already contains clawbacks and consumer-benefit requirements, while others echoed concerns about transparency and public understanding. The hearing ended without any votes or formal action, and the chair said the committee would continue the discussion in future meetings.

Transcript Highlights:

• The red flag law and background checks, and it was not easy.
• Every year that I have been in this place, I voted in favor of background checks and red flag laws until

Keywords: 1183, house