Transcript Highlights:

• So this is about their processes.
• We're going through a process with them now, it has not yet required a subpoena.
• A final note, the substitute to 958 does not in any way alter the current process for survival. drivers
• They will still have to go through the exact same processes as they now do to convince a court that the

Bills: SJR57, SCR8, SB8, SB14, SB24, SB108, SB112, SB125, SB213, SB251, SB315, SB318, SB371, SB378, SB379, SB472, SB487, SB502, SB513, SB565, SB621, SB650, SB689, SB707, SB710, SB761, SB763, SB815, SB854, SB875, SB896, SB916, SB925, SB958, SB961, SB965, SB973, SB987, SB990, SB995, SB1006, SB1018, SB1019, SB1024, SB1026, SB1146, SB1194, SB1198, SB1253, SB1330, SB1343, SB1362, SB1379, SB1497, SB1498, SB1527, SB1532, SB1547, SB1596, SJR36, SJR12, SJR57, SCR22, SCR12, SCR8, SB565, SB765, SB62, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB847, SB1248, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB925, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB815, SB1379, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB241, SB304, SB621, SB1023, SB1024, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB609, SB670, SB502, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB985, SB965, SB1119, SB1505, SB24, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB213, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB378, SB1343, SB608, SB487, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB990, SB1019, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB958, SB761, SB541, SB315, SB379, SB1018, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB1527, SB125, SB599, SB1330, SB53, SB916, SB896, SB1352, SB973, SB785, SB710, SB472, SB1450, SB1502, SB1566, SB414, SB1062, SB1547, SB961, SB1038, SB513, SB578, SB711, SB746, SB942, SB1404, SB1448, SB1738, SB108, SB8, SB318, SB507, SB533, SB689, SB1026, SB1349, SB1355, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596, SB1403, SB1198, SB1146, SB763, SB667, SB1059, SB617, SB1567, SB503, SJR37, SB16, SB310, SB311, SB396, SB505, SB1209, SB1210, SB1470, SB264, SB924, SB1029, SB1185, SB1202, SB1358, SB1364, SB1569, SB1697, SB1376, SB1228, SB519, SB878, SB1350, SB462, SB1535, SB827, SB1585, SB207, SB1207, SB1619, SB1396, SB920, SB1484, SB1273, SB1741

Keywords: central bank digital currency, CBDC, Federal Reserve, digital dollar, digital currency, cashless payments, financial privacy, cybersecurity, government surveillance, financial surveillance, money laundering, terrorism financing, illicit finance, banking policy, monetary policy, payments system, commercial banks, Texas Legislature, concurrent resolution, federal reserve digital currency

Bills: SJR18, SCR9, SCR13, SB10, SB14, SB19, SB263, SB412, SB441, SB523, SB569, SB687, SB688, SB707, SB766, SB914, SB971, SB1006, SB1066, SJR36, SJR18, SCR9, SCR13, SCR25, SB565, SB372, SB495, SB842, SB971, SB1066, SB765, SB523, SB62, SB19, SB18, SB666, SB688, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB706, SB847, SB290, SB766, SB11, SB10, SB13, SB263, SB412, SB441, SB569, SB914, SB1248, SB740, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB917, SB925, SB388, SB1902, SB1121, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB35, SB6, SB815, SB3, SB1281, SB1379, SB1300, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB1451, SB263, SB523, SB569, SB688, SB766, SB914, SB971, SB1066, SR215, SR245, SR247, SR258, SCR9, SJR56, SJR63, SJR64, SJR69, SJR70, SJR71, SCR30, SCR31, SCR32, SCR33, SB1701, SB1702, SB1703, SB1704, SB1705, SB1706, SB1707, SB1708, SB1709, SB1710, SB1711, SB1712, SB1713, SB1714, SB1715, SB1716, SB1717, SB1718, SB1719, SB1720, SB1721, SB1722, SB1723, SB1724, SB1725, SB1726, SB1727, SB1728, SB1729, SB1730, SB1731, SB1732, SB1733, SB1734, SB1735, SB1736, SB1737, SB1738, SB1739, SB1740, SB1741, SB1742, SB1743, SB1744, SB1745, SB1746, SB1747, SB1748, SB1749, SB1750, SB1751, SB1752, SB1753, SB1754, SB1755, SB1756, SB1757, SB1758, SB1759, SB1760, SB1761, SB1762, SB1763, SB1764, SB1765, SB1766, SB1767, SB1768, SB1769, SB1770, SB1771, SB1772, SB1773, SB1774, SB1775, SB1776, SB1777, SB1778, SB1779, SB1781, SB1782, SB1783, SB1784, SB1785, SB1786, SB1787, SB1788, SB1789, SB1790, SB1791, SB1792, SB1793, SB1794, SB1795, SB1796, SB1797, SB1798, SB1799, SB1800, SB1801, SB1802, SB1803, SB1804, SB1805, SB1806, SB1807, SB1808, SB1809, SB1810, SB1811, SB1812, SB1813, SB1814, SB1815, SB1816, SB1817, SB1818, SB1819, SB1820, SB1821, SB1822, SB1823, SB1824, SB1825, SB1826, SB1827, SB1828, SB1829, SB1830, SB1831, SB1832, SB1833, SB1834, SB1835, SB1836, SB1837, SB1838, SB1839, SB1840, SB1841, SB1842, SB1843, SB1844, SB1845, SB1846, SB1847, SB1848, SB1849, SB1850, SB2188, SB2230, SB2312, SB2345, SJR56, SJR63, SJR64, SJR69, SJR70, SJR71, SCR30, SCR31, SCR32, SCR33, SB1701, SB1702, SB1703, SB1704, SB1705, SB1706, SB1707, SB1708, SB1709, SB1710, SB1711, SB1712, SB1713, SB1714, SB1715, SB1716, SB1717, SB1718, SB1719, SB1720, SB1721, SB1722, SB1723, SB1724, SB1725, SB1726, SB1727, SB1728, SB1729, SB1730, SB1731, SB1732, SB1733, SB1734, SB1735, SB1736, SB1737, SB1738, SB1739, SB1740, SB1741, SB1742, SB1743, SB1744, SB1745, SB1746, SB1747, SB1748, SB1749, SB1750, SB1751, SB1752, SB1753, SB1754, SB1755, SB1756, SB1757, SB1758, SB1759, SB1760, SB1761, SB1762, SB1763, SB1764, SB1765, SB1766, SB1767, SB1768, SB1769, SB1770, SB1771, SB1772, SB1773, SB1774, SB1775, SB1776, SB1777, SB1778, SB1779, SB1781, SB1782, SB1783, SB1784, SB1785, SB1786, SB1787, SB1788, SB1789, SB1790, SB1791, SB1792, SB1793, SB1794, SB1795, SB1796, SB1797, SB1798, SB1799, SB1800, SB1801, SB1802, SB1803, SB1804, SB1805, SB1806, SB1807, SB1808, SB1809, SB1810, SB1811, SB1812, SB1813, SB1814, SB1815, SB1816, SB1817, SB1818, SB1819, SB1820, SB1821, SB1822, SB1823, SB1824, SB1825, SB1826, SB1827, SB1828, SB1829, SB1830, SB1831, SB1832, SB1833, SB1834, SB1835, SB1836, SB1837, SB1838, SB1839, SB1840, SB1841, SB1842, SB1843, SB1844, SB1845, SB1846, SB1847, SB1848, SB1849, SB1850, SB2188, SB2230, SB2312, SB2345

Keywords: capital gains, taxation, constitutional amendment, state revenue, individual investment, Supreme Court, judicial independence, Keep Nine, checks and balances, water rights, treaty compliance, Rio Grande, agriculture, drought, international water, Texas water supply, education, Ten Commandments, public schools, religious display

Transcript Highlights:

• So we go into the cyclical process.
• So, first one is: this survey is voluntary, correct? The survey is voluntary, correct?
• It's just a very long and arduous<02:12:36.639> process.
• I know that probably arduous process.
• process and make this a better process process and make this a better process versus<02:13:03.440

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We started this budget process in January.
• This is not a normal budget process.
• That process takes a long time and the only penalties for which we have come to the end of the process
• process, is the same.
• This is a new grievance process on top of existing complaint and due processes that we have.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Did you know that 67% of children's calories today are ultra-processed calories?
• There's a definition of ultra-processed.
• They could not define ultra-processed.
• Let me just go through some of the examples that are ultra-processed.
• Beyond that, there is what would be defined as ultra-processed foods.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Your agency has experienced some in processing the SNAP applications?
• What do you need to actually process these applications timely? Yes sir.
• And so I think that'll be one of the things as we go through the appropriations process. process, that
• To go through that process you have to you have to go through an approval process and it outlines the
• and the grant closeout process that'll take another year or two.

Bills: SB1, SB 1

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'd go and see them and process it.
• a lot about Title N in that process. a lot about Title N in that process.
• It violates due process.
• I think, as far as a vetting process, it's an individual process.
• But it is a process.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Judiciary Committee opened a hearing on Senate Bill 141, which would create a narrow exception to New Hampshire’s three-year deadline for motions for a new trial when a petitioner has newly discovered evidence, new forensic testing, or new scientific understanding. The prime sponsor’s representative and advocates from the Innocence Project and New England Innocence Project argued the bill is needed to help wrongfully convicted people access the courts, noting that exonerations often take many years and that outdated forensic science has contributed to wrongful convictions. The chair also said he had drafted a proposed amendment for committee review, but it had not yet been formally submitted. Witnesses supporting the bill emphasized that the measure would not guarantee relief, only allow a petition to be filed and reviewed under existing standards. They discussed examples such as arson science, explaining that some convictions were based on forensic methods later shown to be unreliable. Committee members asked about the scope of habeas corpus, whether the bill would create a new cause of action, and whether additional screening or pleading requirements should be added. The supporters said they would be open to requiring a petitioner to plead innocence, but opposed adding more burdensome preliminary procedures or counsel requirements at the filing stage. Thomas Farardi, from the Attorney General’s Office, testified in opposition or with caution, saying the bill was a “solution looking for a problem” because existing habeas corpus and coram nobis procedures already provide avenues for relief, and prosecutors can act when credible new evidence arises. He argued the current draft could invite additional litigation and create a new cause of action, and said he favored more screening before cases proceed. The discussion also touched on whether the statute applies in criminal cases, the current three-year limitation in RSA 526:4, and questions about posthumous petitions and petitions by deported individuals. No vote or executive action was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Process lives in the individual people.
• You guys have exempted DOCR from that process.
• some sort of administrative process.
• It's an open court process.
• But really what it's about is the process.

Summary: The committee opened with a moment of silence honoring a deceased member, then approved the April minutes. The first major presentation was from Chelsea Florey of Child and Family Services on the Diversion Task Force and related grant programs created with one-time funding from HB 1012. She reported that five of six proposals were funded, with youth diversion services operating in Bismarck, Fargo, Grand Forks, Minot, and a Red River Children’s Advocacy Center program focused on problematic sexualized behavior. Members discussed barriers such as staffing shortages, voluntary family engagement, service fatigue, and the need for better coordination, broader outreach, and possible changes to diversion eligibility rules so low-level cases can remain in diversion longer. Several legislators pressed for more practical system changes and clearer service navigation, while Florey said the task force is trying to build a service array or hub and is leaning on the Children’s Cabinet for broader recommendations. The committee then heard from North Dakota Lottery Director Thomas Lawler, who gave an operational overview and biennium report. He described the lottery’s history, games, retailer commissions, Pick and Click subscriptions, Players Club membership, and revenue distribution. For the 2023-25 biennium, about $67 million in tickets were purchased, with roughly $16.2 million transferred overall, including money for the general fund, drug task force grants, and compulsive gambling prevention and treatment. Members asked about the compulsive gambling allocation and whether the amount is set by statute. A lengthy presentation followed from the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation on criminal justice data connectivity and reentry. Adam Anderson explained that North Dakota’s jail, court, HHS, and correctional systems use multiple separate databases that do not communicate in real time, requiring manual cross-checks and staff communication. He said the department is exploring a centralized hub or other integration approach, but noted challenges with identifiers, vendor contracts, confidentiality, and cost. Robin Schmolenberger then updated the committee on a Medicaid data-sharing project with HHS, saying monthly application assistance is now occurring in correctional facilities and that automated bi-directional data exchange is expected in late 2026 to help suspend and reactivate Medicaid coverage and identify former foster care youth. Members also discussed parole, probation, transitional housing, and the need for better real-time notifications and clearer data definitions. The committee also received an update from county representatives on the 24/7 sobriety program, including a recent attorney general opinion that if a court waives 24/7 fees, sheriffs may use the cheaper twice-daily breath test or urine testing instead of SCRAM bracelets or drug patches. Finally, Bruce Johnson of the Racing Commission presented on an audit report, acknowledging serious findings involving overspending from the promotion fund, grant documentation failures, a breeders fund eligibility reversal, and repeated procurement violations. He said the commission has already changed its procedures by tracking fund limits monthly, requiring grant applications and itemized reports, enforcing breeders fund rules as written, and routing purchases through procurement with written contracts. The committee asked follow-up questions throughout but took no formal votes on these presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Process lives in the individual people.
• some sort of administrative process.
• It's an open court process.
• It's an open court process.
• But really what it's about is the process.

Summary: The committee opened with a moment of silence for a deceased member, then approved the April minutes and heard a presentation from HHS on the Diversion Task Force and related youth services grants. Chelsea Florey described the $750,000 one-time appropriation from HB 1012, the five awarded grants, and how programs in Bismarck, Fargo, Grand Forks, and Minot are using the funds for youth diversion, including school-based groups, physical activity, and services for problematic sexual behavior. Members raised concerns about staffing shortages, family engagement, service silos, and whether diversion eligibility rules are too rigid; Florey said the task force is focused on better coordination, broader education about available services, and possible changes to diversion criteria, with the Children’s Cabinet likely to drive broader recommendations. The committee then received a North Dakota Lottery biennium report from Director Thomas Lawler, who reviewed the lottery’s history, games, retailer commissions, player programs, and revenue distribution. He reported about $67 million in ticket sales for the 2023-2025 biennium, about $16.2 million transferred overall, including roughly $13.6 million to the general fund, plus transfers to drug task force and compulsive gambling funds. Members asked about the compulsive gambling allocation and whether it is set by statute. Next, the Department of Corrections presented on criminal justice data sharing and reentry. Adam Anderson explained that jails, courts, DOCR, HHS, and other entities use separate systems with limited interoperability, making real-time communication largely manual. He outlined possible hub or point-to-point IT solutions, but noted cost, vendor, identifier, and data-definition challenges. Robin Schmolenberger followed with an update on a Medicaid data exchange project between DOCR and HHS to suspend and reactivate inmate Medicaid coverage automatically and improve care coordination, with full bi-directional exchange expected in fall 2026. The committee also heard from county representatives on 24-7 sobriety program fees and an AG opinion allowing local sheriffs to use cheaper testing options when courts waive fees. Finally, the North Dakota Racing Commission reviewed a troubling audit. Bruce Johnson acknowledged serious findings involving overspending from the promotion fund, missing grant documentation, a reversed decision on breeders fund eligibility, and repeated procurement violations. He said the commission has begun corrective actions, including monthly tracking of the promotion fund cap, stricter grant documentation, written procurement procedures, and clearer eligibility rules in condition books. Members pressed him on how the overspending occurred, whether the commission board would impose consequences, and whether statutory clarification is needed on the promotion fund limit and related spending rules.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's in the process.
• It's in the process. And accredited yet. It's in the process.
• a bill working through the process, etc. a bill working through the process, etc.
• As far as the process, it is a well-repeated process.
• As far as the process, it is a well<02:42:38.479> repeated<02:42:38.960> process.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This is the end of the process, at least the first round of the process for House of Origin.
• Thank you for caring about our legislative process and making the trek up here.
• Thank you for caring about our legislative process and making the trek up here.
• AB 601 will improve our mandated reporter process. Respectfully ask for an aye vote.
• Listen, we all have a lot of cities that have worked very, very hard in the arena process.

Summary: The Assembly met on May 23, 2025, established a quorum after a roll call, and proceeded through a long House of Origin floor session with prayers, the Pledge of Allegiance, and routine parliamentary actions. Early in the day, a motion by Assembly Member Gallagher to suspend the rules and take up AB 12 immediately failed on a 18-39 vote. The chamber then moved through the daily file, with many measures passing by wide margins, often with bipartisan support and little or no opposition. Among the notable bills discussed were measures on law enforcement oversight and records access (AB 847), CalFresh data-sharing exemptions (AB 593), campus-area housing for students and staff (AB 893), insurance and wildfire hardening updates (AB 1), missing middle housing code changes (AB 6), tribal peace officer status in a pilot program (AB 31), utility bill analysis before new mandates (AB 61), fairgrounds funding (AB 258), Diwali as a state holiday (AB 268), labor and worker organizing rights (AB 288), algorithmic price-fixing and antitrust enforcement (AB 325), elections and jail voter information (AB 331), protections for judges and court personnel (AB 343 and AB 352), school construction procurement (AB 361), school-zone speed limits (AB 382), transit worker protections (AB 394), blue carbon coastal mitigation (AB 399), K-9 standards for law enforcement (AB 400), livestock carcass composting (AB 411), translation of housing materials (AB 413), immigrant educational rights notices (AB 419), gun violence restraining order implementation (AB 451), special education and child care measures (AB 560 and AB 563), cannabis tax relief (AB 564), and disability access protections for businesses (AB 649). Several bills addressed housing, energy, public health, and public safety, and many authors emphasized affordability, transparency, and administrative efficiency. The session also included several ceremonial or recognition items, including ACR 73 declaring Italian American Heritage Month, which was adopted by voice vote after 65 coauthors were added. Most measures were approved overwhelmingly, though a few drew some dissent, including AB 421? no—AB 399 passed 42-30, AB 450 passed 49-6, AB 461 passed 49-8, and AB 621 passed 58-0. The transcript ends partway through AB 772, which was introduced as an educational equity bill addressing cyberbullying after school hours, but the remainder of that item is not included in the provided text.

Transcript Highlights:

• Through a purchasing process inside our district, we're big enough.
• Companies, a fund that then processes the claims.
• Each time, they deferred me to the PIR process.
• This process has been long and difficult for my family.
• My memory of the process, and I could be mistaken...

Bills: SB 13, SB 27, SB 57, HB1325, HB1655, HB3312, HB5526, SB13, SB57, SB207, HB441, HB591, HB5019, SB27, SB843

Keywords: lobbying, public funds, political subdivision, local government, county association, municipal lobbying, registered lobbyist, Texas Legislature, taxpayer lawsuit, injunctive relief, attorney's fees, government finance, county dues, state association of counties, sheriffs association, law enforcement officers, legislative advocacy, bill tracking, legislative alerts, Government Code Chapter 556

Transcript Highlights:

• , or uh sending people through processes, or uh sending people through processes, we<00:49:15.080
• this long process. this long process.
• <04:02:06.240> of actually then engage the process of actually then engage the process of
• And so, I believe that this process.
• . process. process.

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So I think that will help everyone through this process.
• And while we were in that budget process, I watched a lot of goals.
• I'm very proud of the way in which we were able to help guide the process.
• It’s more of a voluntary thing. Right, right.
• You've come to the budget process more recently, and it's remarkable to me.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, approval of the previous day’s journal, and a series of special guest introductions recognizing family members, interns, students, public servants, and community advocates. Committee reports and Senate messages followed, including Senate refusals to concur on a large number of amendments to Senate Bill 1421 and the appointment of a conference committee on House Bill 2818. The main floor action centered on the state budget, especially House Bill 2 (public education). The budget chair explained the conference report’s funding mix for K-12 schools, including $8.4 billion for public education, changes to the foundation formula, use of blind pension funds, and possible ARPA dollars later in the process. Members debated whether the report underfunded schools by $45 million or more, with opponents arguing the state was not fully funding the formula and supporters saying total school funding remained at record levels and that the issue was the source of funds rather than the total amount. A substitute motion to send HB 2 back to conference failed 62-89, and the conference report was then adopted 83-68; the bill was third read and passed 83-68. The House then took up House Bill 2003 on higher education, where the conference report largely restored the governor’s recommendation and directed the department to develop a new funding formula by the end of the year. Members discussed performance-based funding, scholarships, apprenticeships, and the need for a slower transition to any new model. The conference report passed 119-28, and the bill was third read and passed 109-32. House Bill 2004, covering Revenue and Transportation, included about $20 million for rural roads and other transportation funding; members discussed constitutional concerns, MoDOT projects, and a small local safety fix. The conference report passed 128-21, and the bill was third read and passed 127-27.

Transcript Highlights:

• That may be part of this process, right?
• You worked with them for this process? No.
• And that you're there to help manage that process and engage with that process, and keeping the goals
• Have you been involved in this process? Yeah.
• This is what regulations are, and this is the process.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Human Services Committee met in interim session and first approved the previous meeting minutes before receiving a series of presentations on homelessness and housing stability. Jennifer Henderson of the North Dakota Housing Finance Agency updated members on the new Interagency Council on Homelessness, describing its executive-order mandate to review resources, gather input from stakeholders, identify gaps, and develop recommendations. She said the council’s first work is building a statewide program matrix of existing homeless services and funding sources, with attention to youth, tribal communities, and other vulnerable populations. Members raised concerns about youth homelessness, homeless veterans, and how the council will stay focused on a practical framework rather than getting lost in details. The committee also discussed possible connections to the rural health transformation grant and agreed to continue the topic later in the spring. Beth Olson of Presentation Partners in Housing described the organization’s housing-first model in Cass County and Clay County, including homeless prevention/diversion, housing navigation, and Cooper House, a 42-unit permanent supportive housing building in Fargo. She said the organization focuses on people with long-term and chronic homelessness, many with mental health, addiction, health, domestic violence, and Indigenous identity-related barriers, and reported strong outcomes: 85 of 86 people housed in 2025, 91% still housed after one year, and major reductions in emergency room use, ambulance rides, jail stays, detox days, and shelter use. She also explained that state funding has grown from a small share of the budget to about $1.1 million in state-connected funding for fiscal 2026, largely through contracts tied to supportive services. Members asked about vouchers, rent contributions at Cooper House, length of stay, and whether similar projects could be expanded elsewhere. Andrea Olson of the Community Action Partnership of North Dakota outlined statewide homeless and housing-related services delivered through six community action agencies in all 53 counties. She explained the Community Services Block Grant structure, said housing was identified as the top need in the most recent statewide needs assessment, and described programs including Supportive Services for Veteran Families, North Dakota Homeless Grant services, and Home ARP supportive services. She emphasized that the end of North Dakota Rent Help has increased pressure on the system, that the current $2 million annual homeless grant is far smaller than prior rent-help assistance, and that community action is using case management and financial assistance to move households toward self-sufficiency. Members asked about funding formulas, rural service delivery, and coordination with Presentation Partners to avoid duplication. YouthWorks then began a presentation on youth homelessness, describing services for ages 12 to 24, the special needs of youth and former foster youth, and the organization’s use of federal and state funds to support transitional housing, emergency shelter, maternity housing, and diversion services.

Transcript Highlights:

• to be debated and it's had a process to be debated and discussed<00:26:19.600> so<00:26:19.840
• department to make sure that the process department to make sure that the process that<00:40:25.359
• You know, if in the process of that we really do come around to saying, you know, this as a result of
• We have a consumer complaint process, which I probably should have described.
• We have a consumer complaint process, so we have a volunteer hotline that is five days a week.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting began with introductory remarks for new and returning members of the House Commerce Committee, led by Chairman John Hunt. Members briefly introduced themselves and their backgrounds, and several noted the committee’s bipartisan, collegial tone. Hunt explained the committee’s structure and traditions, including the division into three subcommittees: banking and business, consumer protection, and liquor commission matters, with insurance now handled as a single area. He also reviewed basic hearing procedures, including decorum, questions for information only, and the committee’s practice of moving bills through subcommittees before full committee executive sessions. The committee then heard an overview from the New Hampshire Insurance Department, led by Commissioner DJ Bettencourt and staff. The department described its mission as promoting a safe and competitive insurance marketplace and emphasized consumer protection, market competition, and affordability. Officials outlined the department’s responsibilities, including licensing insurers, producers, adjusters, and TPAs; reviewing insurance forms; regulating companies and market conduct; overseeing financial solvency; and investigating insurance fraud. They also noted that the department is self-funded through assessments on insurers, collects premium taxes and fees for the state, and returned more than $2.7 million to companies in fiscal year 2024 due to underspending. The presentation also covered the broader regulatory framework for insurance, including the role of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners in promoting uniform standards across states and territories. Officials said New Hampshire licenses about 1,200 insurance companies and roughly 245,000 producers and adjusters, and that the department’s financial examinations are part of an accreditation system used nationwide. No votes or formal committee actions were taken in the portion provided; the session was primarily organizational and informational, with the insurance department presentation beginning the committee’s substantive work for the term.

Transcript Highlights:

• We occurred. the the process changed.
• And making process and addressed there.
• would be, um and and what that process would be, um and and what that process would<02:02:14.400
• weren't paying them to do this process. weren't paying them to do this process.
• Game for for that process to be working. Game for for that process to be working.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's like, hey, go, they have, we, through our processes and just the nature of the finance markets,
• We will continue working with them as the bill moves through the process.
• And just as the bill works through the process, we'd love to be part of the conversation.
• We have been having productive conversations with the author's office early on in the process.
• So to that extent, absolutely, the court enforcement process still works.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• However, the lengthy delays caused by the Coastal Commission review process do have a real impact on
• This is not the fault of the City of Santa Monica; it is part of a very long process where there are
• But I wanted to provide a clarification on the housing element process.
• We have been having productive conversations with the author's office early on in the process.
• So to that extent, absolutely, the court enforcement process still works.

Summary: The committee heard a long housing agenda with several bills presented before quorum was established. AB 1725, as amended, would require disclosure of nearby oil wells and methane monitoring issues in a specific district; the author and community witnesses described serious health and safety risks in Vista Hermosa Heights, while the California Apartment Association, California Building Industry Association, and California Chamber of Commerce opposed, arguing the bill targeted the wrong industry and that the state should instead fix abandoned wells directly. AB 2110, a local finance tool to create tax increment districts for workforce housing for education, health care, manufacturing, and public safety workers, drew no witnesses in support or opposition and was presented as a way to help workers live closer to jobs. AB 1732 would expand CEQA streamlining for public university and college housing projects; UC and several housing and labor groups supported it, while housing advocates raised concerns about amendments affecting existing 100% affordable housing exemptions. AB 1771, amended into a study bill, would direct HCD to report on the long-standing resident manager requirement for apartment buildings with 16 or more units; the rental housing industry supported studying the issue, while the chair emphasized the need to consider tenant protections and the impact on current resident managers before changing the law. The committee also heard AB 2185, which would direct state affordable housing programs to update guidelines to better support factory-built housing; it drew broad support from housing, labor, technology, and local government groups, with no opposition. AB 2748 would delay new EV-readiness requirements for 100% affordable housing developments, keeping the prior 40% standard through 2035; supporters said the higher standard would add significant costs and threaten project feasibility, while clean air and transportation advocates argued the code changes are modest, important for equity, and should not be rolled back. Members split along those lines, with some emphasizing housing production and others urging more public subsidy for EV infrastructure rather than delaying the code. SB 417, a proposed $10 billion affordable housing bond for the November ballot, received extensive support from housing organizations, local governments, labor, and business groups, but Habitat for Humanity and the Los Angeles mayor’s office asked for specific allocations for CalHome and interim housing; the bill was ultimately moved to Appropriations on an 8-0 vote, with members noting ongoing negotiations over funding priorities. Finally, AB 1740 would create an urban multimodal community designation for Santa Monica, allowing local approval of certain low-impact coastal-zone activities—such as some housing, bike and bus lanes, outdoor dining, and building changes—without Coastal Commission review. The author and Santa Monica officials said the bill would reduce delays and uncertainty for infill housing and local economic recovery while preserving protections for sensitive coastal resources; supporters included housing, business, and city groups. The Coastal Commission and environmental organizations opposed, saying the bill would carve out broad exemptions, weaken public access and appeal rights, and bypass the local coastal program process that Santa Monica has not completed. Committee members debated the Commission’s role, with some criticizing it for opposing legislation and others arguing the bill was a common-sense way to modernize coastal permitting. A motion and second were made on AB 1740, and the bill was left pending with the committee’s action to be taken when appropriate.

Transcript Highlights:

• You're in the process of writing another book? I'm not sure.
• The stakeholder process for this bill was not a good job.
• Thank you. ...a reinstatement process.
• This bill will undermine due process and actually will slow the court-ordered treatment process and system
• This is where the due process infringement comes.

Keywords: 1182, all