Transcript Highlights:

• And for persons providing in-person<00:10:54.240> testimony, in-person testimony, in-person testimony
• Again, for you for taking my testimony.
• going to respectfully submit testimony going to respectfully submit testimony in<00:38:48.720>
• process, as we've heard testimony process, as we've heard testimony earlier,<02:04:32.159> they
• that we can continue um taking testimony that we can continue um taking testimony on<03:10:20.240

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Berel, thanks for your testimony.
• What I'd like to direct you to, I have some written testimony, but the last page of the testimony is
• <01:23:28.880> short or uh or cut your your testimony short or uh or cut your your testimony
• <01:45:03.679> but everything in our written testimony but everything in our written testimony
• Great, thank you very much. that testimony gets to all of our uh that testimony gets to all of our uh

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• Gentlemen, if you would introduce yourselves for the record and present your testimony. testimony.
• Thank you. testimony for joining us today. We testimony for joining us today.
• . testimony. testimony.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• have written testimony welcome I do have written testimony unless<00:51:54.520> there's<00:51
• Okay, thank you for your testimony.
• Okay, thank you for your testimony.
• Okay, thank you for your testimony. Okay, thank you for your testimony.
• Have a good day. testimony thank you suer seeing no testimony thank you suer seeing no questions<01:17

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Other testimony. Yes, sir. >> Thank you. Other testimony. Yes, sir.
• Appreciate your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. Any other agency testimony? Anyone from the public?
• for your testimony. for your testimony. >> Thank<00:51:23.760> you.
• , >> Testimony.

Bills: HB0130, HB0095, HB0096, HB0097, SF0101, SF0106, SF0067, SF0123

Keywords: Second Amendment, firearms, state rights, federal regulation, law enforcement, civil penalties, government liability, concealed carry, public colleges, university facilities, weapons legislation, self-defense, campus safety, weapons, age requirement, permits, HB0097, Wyoming firearms privacy, merchant category code, MCC

Transcript Highlights:

• We encourage the public to provide written testimony before the hearing by visiting the committee website
• Please note that any written testimony submitted to the committee is considered public comment and may
• Testimony on any such bill will be limited to a statement of name, organization, if any, in position
• The committee will allow no more than 40 minutes of testimony in total.
• today and for which the author waived presentation before the close of the regular order hearing testimony

Summary: The Assembly Appropriations Committee met on July 9, 2025, with a quorum present and opened by taking up its consent and suspense calendars. Several Senate bills were moved on consent, including SB 255, 361, 385, 387, 428, 602, 648, 652, and 693, along with SB 78 on a separate due-pass motion. The suspense calendar was then deemed approved without further discussion. The committee next heard AB 1533, a claims bill authorizing a General Fund appropriation of $672 million to pay state claims, including $600 to the Franchise Tax Board and $72 million to the DMV for stale claims. Assemblymember Wicks presented the bill as one of the annual claims measures, and the Department of Finance and Department of General Services both supported it. Assemblymember Dixon raised concerns about the age of claims, the cost and efficiency of the process, and whether the state could improve how it verifies and pays claims more quickly. After brief public comment was invited, the committee held a roll call vote on AB 1533 and the bill was moved out of committee. The meeting then adjourned after a late-arriving member was added to the roll call for the consent calendar and AB 1533.

Transcript Highlights:

• I prefer that we don't make any amendment or even take verbal testimony.
• I encourage folks to submit their testimony to my office, you know, as a letter or as a package.
• Thank you. testimony. I encourage folks to submit testimony.
• I encourage folks to submit their<00:02:38.519> testimony<00:02:39.519> as<00:02:39.840
• as a uh to my office, their testimony as a uh to my office, you<00:02:42.400> know,<00:02:42.480

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have numerous testimony that has been provided.
• So I'm just going to read out some of the testimony we have: Department of Human Resources providing
• <00:02:52.920> some<00:02:53.000> of<00:02:53.120> the<00:02:53.200> testimony
• <00:02:53.760> we<00:02:54.080> have read out some of the testimony we have read out
• some of the testimony we have Department<00:02:55.000> of<00:02:55.200> Human<00:02:55.959

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Culture and the Arts met on March 12 at 10:00 a.m. and heard two measures concerning Hawaiian observances. SB 614 SD1 would establish La Kua as Hawaiian Independence Day and SB 1051 SD1 would relate to Hawaiian History Month. No members of the public testified in person or on Zoom for either bill, but the chair read into the record written testimony and comments, including support from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Kingdom of Hawaiian Islands, Kumukahi Health and Wellness, the Hawaiian Civics Club, and several individuals, along with comments from state departments such as Human Resources and Budget and Finance. After recessing for decision-making, the committee voted to advance SB 614 SD1 with amendments and to further adjust the date to July 1st. The vote was unanimous among members present, with Chair and Vice Chair voting aye and Representatives Garrett and Lee also voting aye; Representatives Sayama and Roda were excused. The committee then took up SB 1051 SD1 and similarly recommended it be passed with amendments, also changing the date to July 1st. The vote on SB 1051 SD1 was likewise adopted without opposition, with the same excused members noted. After both measures were approved for advancement, the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• I’m going to keep it to the testimony, all right.
• With that, let's go to Superintendent Paul for your testimony.
• <00:57:16.960> thank and thank you for your testimony thank and thank you for your testimony
• Thank you for your testimony, Ms. Larson.
• Very good, and thank you for your testimony.

Bills: HF846, HF1538, HF1959

Keywords: education, special education, apprenticeship, funding, grants, intermediate school districts, teacher apprenticeship, registered apprenticeship, teacher licensure, teacher shortage, workforce development, education finance, K-12 education, higher education, Professional Educator Licensing and Standards Board, PELSB, Tier 3 license, teacher preparation, mentor teacher, school district

Transcript Highlights:

• We will then continue with our testimony We will then continue with our testimony list<00:00:59.640
• Thank you very much for your testimony.
• Thank you very much for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• You are greatly appreciated, and the testimony you did a great job.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• testimony.
• With me to provide supporting testimony are Dr.
• With me to provide a supporting testimony are Dr.
• And thank you to everyone for your testimony and colleagues for your comments and testimony as well.
• I appreciate the testimony on Sonoma State.

Summary: The committee first adopted its 2025-26 rules on a 7-0 roll call, then approved three consent items—AB 88, AB 240, and AB 313—on a due-pass motion to Appropriations. The hearing then moved to AB 648, which would give community college districts the same zoning authority as the UC and CSU systems to build student and staff housing on property they own or lease. The author and supporters argued the bill would help address severe housing insecurity and homelessness among community college students, while opponents and some members raised concerns about local control, zoning exemptions, and the impact on nearby communities. AB 648 passed the committee on a 5-2 vote and was sent to the Local Government Committee. The committee next heard AB 466, which would require California Community Colleges and CSU campuses to provide organ and tissue donor registry information during student orientation, and request UC campuses to do the same. Supporters shared personal stories about transplants and donation, saying college orientation is a good opportunity to increase registrations. Some members worried about information overload during orientation and suggested campuses have flexibility in how they present the material, but the bill advanced on a unanimous 7-0 vote to Appropriations. AB 326 followed, proposing campus-by-campus external audits of the CSU every three years and public release of the audits. The author, faculty supporters, and a student argued that systemwide audits do not provide enough transparency about how money is spent at individual campuses, citing examples of financial mismanagement and fee increases. CSU opposed the bill, saying it already conducts annual consolidated external audits and that campus-level audits would add cost without added benefit. After extensive discussion about transparency, audit scope, and implementation, the bill passed 6-1 to Appropriations. The committee then took up AB 335, which would create a California Black-Serving Institution Grant Program to support Black student success and broader underserved student services; supporters emphasized persistent equity gaps and low completion rates, while an opponent argued the bill needed to be carefully amended to comply with Proposition 209 and equal protection requirements. The transcript ends during that item’s discussion, before a final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• >> Thank you for your testimony. >> Thank you for your testimony.
• >> Thank you for your testimony. >> Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your<02:18:05.040> testimony. your testimony. your testimony.
• Thank you for your<03:18:33.920> testimony. your testimony. your testimony.
• >> Thank you for your testimony. >> Thank you for your testimony.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Next we have you for your testimony.
• Thank you very with your testimony.
• testimony.
• <01:09:50.000> Good testimony. Yes. Thank you. Good testimony. Yes. Thank you.
• Thank you for your testimony.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 2312 and first adopted the DE1 amendment, after which the amended bill was discussed. Nonpartisan fiscal staff walked through the spreadsheet and explained the bill’s higher education budget changes, including increases for state grants and tribal college assistance, unchanged funding for several existing programs, and reductions or eliminations for items such as state work study, summer academic enrichment, student loan counseling, concurrent enrollment, and the student parent support initiative. Staff also noted transfers to special revenue funds, the cancellation and reappropriation of ALS research funding, and a new licensing/registration revenue item. The committee was told the bill met the committee’s zero target overall, with a net general fund change of zero relative to the February forecast, while also adding some non-general fund expenditures for program licensing and registration. Members asked several questions about the transfers and specific line items, including whether any new special revenue accounts were being created, the foster care wraparound services line, and the treatment of the University of Minnesota and Centric Care partnership. Staff explained that the transfers generally did not create new accounts, that some items were not in the base, and that the U of M/Centric Care partnership was a one-time appropriation in the prior bill but was now being built into the base at a different amount. The University of Minnesota section also included new or continued funding for medical school development, health training restoration, emergency assistance grants, ALS research, and a weather resiliency program, while the Mayo Foundation section eliminated funding for Mayo Medical School and the Mayo family medicine residency program. The policy portion of the DE1 was then introduced. It included a maximum tuition and fee amount for state grants, direct appropriation of emergency assistance grants to Minnesota State, a juvenile justice appropriation for Metropolitan State University, and the ALS research reappropriation to the University of Minnesota. It also contained repealers for unfunded programs, including a delayed repealer for the student parent support initiative. In the higher education policy article, the bill would allow Minnesota State to offer applied doctoral degrees in cybersecurity, make technical changes to hunger-free campus and sexual misconduct procedures, extend pregnant and parenting student protections to private institutions, allow OHE to retain up to 10% of certain competitive grants for administration, consolidate reports, change the state grant formula so negative FAFSA contributions count as zero, and reduce the state grant lifetime credit cap from 180 to 120 credits. The Northstar Promise provisions would limit tuition and fees to resident rates and require MnState, and request the University of Minnesota, to ensure eligible students receive the benefit.

Transcript Highlights:

• and go ahead with your testimony. Okay. and go ahead with your testimony. Okay.
• Thank you for your testimony, Miss Dand.
• Um, is Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you so much for your testimony. Thank you so much for your testimony.
• Um, next next testifier at testimony.

Bills: HF1027, HF2226, HF1916, HF1915, HF1567, HF1986

Keywords: mortgage foreclosure, redemption, foreclosure surplus, sheriff's sale, junior lienholder, mortgagor, homeowner protections, loss mitigation, dual tracking, foreclosure redemption period, certificate of redemption, certificate of sale, sheriff, county recorder, registrar of titles, homeownership center, lien priority, real property, foreclosure by advertisement, surplus funds

Transcript Highlights:

• We will not be taking additional testimony on the bill today.
• your full name begin your testimony your full name begin your testimony please<00:15:44.399>
• <00:45:24.720> Mr full name and begin your testimony Mr full name and begin your testimony
• State your full name and begin your testimony.
• Uh, Chair Nney, please begin your testimony.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for that testimony.
• Thank you for that testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• I caught the last end of your testimony. Thank you, sir.
• testimony.

Summary: The committee met on May 26, 2026, and first approved the minutes from the May 22, 2025 meeting. The main topic was the Northwest Louisiana earthquake cluster, with testimony from Louisiana Department of Conservation and Energy staff, LSU and Tulane geoscientists, and later LSU law professor Keith Hall. Witnesses said the cause of the swarm has not been definitively identified, but induced seismicity from wastewater injection or hydraulic fracturing remains a concern. They described 50 earthquakes reported by the USGS in Red River, Bienville, DeSoto, and Natchitoches Parishes, including a magnitude 4.9 event on March 5, 2026, and explained that Louisiana’s sparse seismic network limits detection and depth/location estimates. C&E said it inspected Class II injection wells within 12 miles of the events, found no violations, now requires more frequent injection reporting, and is working with researchers and LSU on a possible state monitoring network and future policy changes. Committee members asked about injection depths, fault locations, whether the activity could be natural, and whether Louisiana should adopt stronger monitoring or a traffic-light regulatory system like other states. The witnesses said more data is needed before firm conclusions can be drawn, but that denser monitoring can detect smaller quakes and help identify patterns. Professor Hall summarized responses in other states, including more frequent reporting, increased monitoring, injection reductions, moratoria, and traffic-light systems in Oklahoma, Kansas, Texas, Ohio, and Illinois. Members also discussed whether operators should share more seismic and geologic data, and several said the state should avoid jumping to conclusions while still improving oversight. The committee then heard from William Berger, a Texas geoscientist, who described using AI and operator data to model wastewater injection and seismic risk, and said broader data sharing would improve forecasting and siting decisions. He and another witness emphasized that many earthquakes arise from clusters of wells rather than a single well, and that proprietary concerns limit voluntary disclosure. The committee also received a brief update from GOSEP and the Louisiana National Guard on the Barksdale Air Force Base drone incursions. GOSEP said it logged the incident in WebEOC and shared releasable information, while State Police and the FBI said they were limited in what they could disclose. Officers said a task force has been formed, some personnel have received federal drone-mitigation training, and House Bill 940 is intended to mirror the task force MOU. Finally, Major General Thomas Friloux and Brigadier General Jason Maffus updated the committee on the merger of GOSEP into the Louisiana Military Department. They said the merger has reduced GOSEP from seven divisions to three, brought back employees to in-person work, modernized the state’s common operating picture, and produced about $10.5 million in first-year cost avoidance through staffing and contract changes. They also noted the planned transfer of the Louisiana Center for Safe Schools to the Louisiana Commission on Law Enforcement, ongoing hurricane preparedness, and continued coordination with parish emergency managers. No votes were taken on the substantive topics, and the meeting ended with the committee moving through its agenda items and receiving informational testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for your testimony. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• Thank you for your testimony. for now. Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• Are there any other members testimony.
• Fergus's testimony for Northstar Promise Plus award.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Minnesota has always been a testimony.
• proceed with your testimony. proceed with your testimony. Good<00:18:02.799> morning.
• Chair and proceed with your testimony.
• brought wrap up your testimony, please. brought wrap up your testimony, please.
• , whomever, as it was stated in testimony, whomever, as it was stated in testimony, millions<00:26

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 3117, which would impose an excise tax on social media companies based on Minnesota monthly users and data-mining activity, and adopted an A1 amendment that added clarifying language identifying social media platforms. Chair Gomez described the bill as a way to tax companies profiting from data mining and social media use, citing concerns about child bullying, misinformation, and wealth concentration. The bill was laid over for possible inclusion in the 2025 taxes bill. Supporters testified that the measure would help raise revenue from a highly profitable industry and better align the tax code with the social costs of data collection and social media use. Pastor Julie Thompson, MAPE representative Tanner Fritzinger, Council Member Sue Bud, and Eric Bernstein of We Make Minnesota all backed the bill, arguing that social media companies extract value from users’ data, contribute to mental health and social harms, and should pay more toward public needs. Bernstein also framed the tax as a way to broaden the tax base and fund schools and other services. Opponents warned that the bill could sweep in local broadcasters, newspapers, and other businesses that use digital platforms and collect some user data, and that costs would likely be passed on to consumers. Wendy Pollson of the Minnesota Broadcasters Association said the definitions were too broad and could unintentionally include local media. Deb Peters, speaking for Americans for Digital Opportunity, argued the tax would raise costs for small businesses and consumers, create legal risks, and amount to double taxation. Several members echoed concerns about regressivity, administration, and whether the bill actually addresses online bullying or data privacy, while supporters said it is a first step toward taxing a new, lightly taxed industry.

Transcript Highlights:

• Your bill is as you would like it, Representative Schultz, so go ahead with your testimony.
• I'll let you introduce yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony. Thank you, Mr.
• Please introduce yourself for the record and go ahead with your testimony. Thank you, Mr.
• And based on the testimony in support of this bill, it is the thing that people are waiting for.
• things that were heard in the testimony things that were heard in the testimony in<00:45:41.280>

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:09:03.839> uh chair please begin your testimony uh chair please begin your testimony uh
• pronunciation and begin your testimony pronunciation and begin your testimony thank<00:33:03.000
• <00:41:38.000> of fairly clear through the testimony of fairly clear through the testimony
• Uh, thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. I appreciate it.

Keywords: 1183, house