Transcript Highlights:

• The board, approved by voters, operates as a legally distinct entity from the City of Galveston and is

Bills: SB128, SB203, SB205, SB317, SB393, SB397, SB510, SB582, SB731, SB801, SB867, SB913, SB1071, SB1073, SB1086, SB1087, SB1163, SB1250, SB1285, SB1310, SB1444, SB1483, SB1553, SB1556, SB1723, SB1782, SB1835, SB1861, SB1897, SB1903, SB1950, SB2043, SB2063, SB2082, SB2133, SB2137, SB2260, SB2297, SB2298, SB2334, SB2344, SB2403, SB2446, SB2522, SB2532, SB2549, SB2566, SB2600, SB2619, SB2637, SB2655, SB2688, SB2717, SB2785, SB2790, SB2794, SB2841, SB2847, SB2857, SB2891, SB2919, SB2943, SB2972, SB3047, SB3052, SB3053, SB3057, SB3059, HJR1, HB9, HB26, HB37, HB116, HB334, HB554, HB913, HB1109, HB1151, HB1899, HB2081, HB2809, HB2890, HB2970, HB3012, HB3307, HB3809, HB5092, SB17, SB314, SB455, SB509, SB761, SB963, SB1023, SB1968, SB2122, SB2371, SB2420, SB2544, SB1, SB260, SB1506, SB1637, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SCR12, SCR39, SB2023, SB2943, SB510, SB1835, SB1950, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB1073, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB507, SB1434, SB1772, SB2016, SB1163, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB209, SB2429, SB511, SB2309, SB1085, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB1200, SB1845, SB2458, SB801, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB2797, SB2076, SB2876, SB1640, SB1449, SB1181, SB1359, SB1234, SB2926, SB2972, SB2841, SB1528, SB2891, SB1854, SB317, SB2532, SB1250, SB2082, SB1285, SB1237, SB2819, SB629, SB2608, SB1602, SB2009, SB2460, SB2785, SB867, SB640, SB1698, SB2680, SB2994, SB2747, SB913, SB1071, SB1086, SB1087, SB1483, SB1444, SB1553, SB1556, SB1703, SB2133, SB2297, SB2298, SB2622, SB2955, SB2334, SB1861, SB2043, SB1367, SB2857, SB128, SB3058, SB2044, SB2363, SB2565, SB1888, SB3048, SB3052, SB3053, SB3036, SB3057, SB3056, SB3043, SB3050, SB3063, SB3047, SB3035, SB2446, SB1790, SB1778, SB2847, SB2619, SB203, SB3061, SB2600, SB2799, SB2790, SB2688, SB2515, SB1230, SB2522, SB2639, SB2403, SB2459, SB3051, SB2655, SB2251, SB1884, SB582, SB2617, SB2751, SB2928, SB1310, SB2566, SB2344, SB1897, SB1749, SB1361, SB2549, SB2553, SB2919, SB1782, SB1705, SB2696, SB1944, SB2215, SB644, SB1232, SB2850, HJR1, HB1109, HB1130, HB1689, HB2884, HB1393, HB2559, HB26, HB3012, HB1327, HB109, HB1238, HB2890, HB9, HB2081, HB4215, HB2970, HB37, HB1899, HB3809, HB334, HB554, HB1593, HB2607, HB3526, HB3810, HB5092, HB388, HB2809, HB1151, HB913, HB3307, HB879, HB116, HB12, HB2703, HB1610, HB1615, HB1620, HB30, HB21, HB2712, HB2692, HB1633, HB1318, HB685, HB630, HB4753, HB2742, HB303, HB198, HB1535, HB762, HB148, HB1520, HB5061, HB2286, HB1606, HB1041, HB132, HB11, HCR7, HCR75, HCR86, HCR92, HCR93, HCR126, SB582, SB1163, SB2344, SB2403, SB2446, SB2600, SB2785, SB3047, HB334, HB554, HB1109, HB2081, HB3809, SB510, SB1835, SB1950, SB2943, SB1073, SB1310, SB2532, SB2619, SB2847, SB2972, SR509, SR512, SJR87, SB3072, SB3073, HB49, HB229, HB361, HB700, HB796, HB1128, HB1534, HB1661, HB1803, HB1837, HB1866, HB2149, HB2282, HB2294, HB2434, HB2440, HB2761, HB2785, HB2867, HB3057, HB3062, HB3134, HB3185, HB3225, HB3233, HB3358, HB3388, HB3421, HB3619, HB3658, HB3675, HB3687, HB3697, HB3743, HB3745, HB3787, HB3848, HB3866, HB3940, HB3984, HB4176, HB4205, HB4226, HB4429, HB4437, HB4463, HB4506, HB4730, HB4735, HB4752, HB4813, HB4903, HB4904, HB5033, HB5057, HB5129, HB5137, HB5138, HB5149, HB5153, HB5155, HB5195, HB5196, HB5200, HB5224, HB5294, HB5339, HB5394, HCR108, SJR87, SB3072, SB3073, HB49, HB229, HB361, HB700, HB796, HB1128, HB1534, HB1661, HB1803, HB1837, HB1866, HB2149, HB2282, HB2294, HB2434, HB2440, HB2761, HB2785, HB2867, HB3057, HB3062, HB3134, HB3185, HB3225, HB3233, HB3358, HB3388, HB3421, HB3619, HB3658, HB3675, HB3687, HB3697, HB3743, HB3745, HB3787, HB3848, HB3866, HB3940, HB3984, HB4176, HB4205, HB4226, HB4429, HB4437, HB4463, HB4506, HB4730, HB4735, HB4752, HB4813, HB4903, HB4904, HB5033, HB5057, HB5129, HB5137, HB5138, HB5149, HB5153, HB5155, HB5195, HB5196, HB5200, HB5224, HB5294, HB5339, HB5394, HCR108

Keywords: hospital reporting, child abuse, neglect, administrative penalty, medical ethics, child protection, student privacy, numerical class rank, education policy, academic programs, high school, fetal development, health curriculum, public schools, middle school health education, grade 7, grade 8, State Board of Education, school health advisory council, Texas Education Code

Transcript Highlights:

• being snatched off the streets by masked and unidentified thugs and flown to torture chambers in foreign

Summary: The Assembly met after a quorum call, recess, prayer, and the Pledge of Allegiance, then moved into a highly procedural and contentious floor session centered on redistricting measures. Members debated a point of order raised by Assembly Member DeMaio challenging the constitutionality of SB 280, ACA 8, and AB 604; the Speaker ruled the point not well taken, and the Assembly sustained that ruling on appeal. The body also took up consent-calendar and procedural motions, including suspending rules to adopt late amendments on ACA 8 and to bring the measure up without reference to file. Several motions to re-refer or suspend rules on related measures failed, while the motion to adopt the late amendments on ACA 8 carried. The main substantive item was ACA 8, the Assembly Constitutional Amendment related to redistricting, presented by Assembly Member Berman as a response to mid-decade redistricting efforts in other states, especially Texas. Supporters argued the measure was a temporary, voter-driven response to protect democracy, counter partisan gerrymandering, and address broader threats tied to the Trump administration, including immigration enforcement and health care cuts. Opponents argued ACA 8 would undermine California’s independent citizens redistricting commission, violate the state Constitution, and amount to partisan gerrymandering or a power grab. Members on both sides framed the issue as a defense of democracy, but disagreed sharply over whether the Legislature should act or leave redistricting to voters and the existing commission. No final vote on ACA 8 is shown in the transcript excerpt, but the Assembly did vote on several procedural matters: the appeal of the Speaker’s ruling was sustained 58-18; the motion to adopt late amendments on ACA 8 passed 58-19; a motion to re-refer ACA 8 and SB 280 to Judiciary failed 19-58; and a motion to take up A.J.R. 21 without reference to file failed 19-58. The session remained focused on ACA 8 and related redistricting questions, with extensive floor speeches from both supporters and opponents.

Transcript Highlights:

• But she lost the ability to speak a foreign language. She had impaired hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And entities that have met a financial condition of a financial merchant, entities that have met a financial
• You can search on our website for reports by fiscal year, entity type, entity name, or engagement type
• All of our reports are delivered to management of the entity, those charged with governance of the entity
• All of our reports are delivered to management of the entity, those charged with governance of the entity
• That sole responsibility rests with entity management.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Auditing Committee met to receive annual overviews of its oversight responsibilities and the work of the Auditor General and OPAGA. Committee staff reviewed the committee’s authority over state and local governments, enforcement of audit-report filing requirements, repeated audit findings, Transparency Florida reporting, and lobbying compensation audits. Auditor General Cheryl Norman described her office’s independence, audit standards, quality control, and major audit areas, including the state’s annual financial and single audits, school district and university audits, operational and performance audits, and attestation work. She also noted staffing shortages, recruitment efforts, and a request for carry-forward funds to study salaries. Members asked about whether audits can quantify recoverable dollars, how school district spending comparisons are handled, and how to raise concerns about DCF-related audits or a local city audit that has been pending for years. Norman said her office can quantify findings when possible, sometimes compares costs across districts in operational audits, and that members can bring specific concerns to the appropriate deputy auditor general or the committee. She also explained that citizen or local-government audit requests may require payment of audit costs. OPAGA Coordinator Kara Collins-Gomez outlined OPAGA’s role as a legislative research unit that conducts studies directed by law, the presiding officers, or the committee, and described its policy areas, methodologies, contract monitoring, and recurring statutory reports. Deputy Auditor General Matthew Tracy explained how to read operational audit reports, including findings, criteria, condition, cause, effect, recommendations, and management responses. Deputy Auditor General Greg Senators explained financial audit reports, including audit opinions, required supplementary information, internal control and compliance findings, federal program compliance, and management letters. The meeting concluded with thanks to the presenters and a motion to adjourn, which passed without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• It was allocated in the budget for a coordinating entity.
• The scope of any operational coordinating entity will be able to achieve.
• This entity is being given too broad of a spectrum of duties with too little resources as a new entity
• Should the duplicative duties be removed from either entity?
• that coordinating entity to make those determinations and take those actions.

Summary: The Assembly Higher Education Committee met in a special hearing and took up SB 638 by Senator Padilla, a workforce development bill aimed at creating a coordinating entity called the Middle Class Pipeline Project. The bill would streamline interagency education and workforce programs, improve career technical education and career pathways, and direct resources toward high-unemployment, low-income regions through changes to the CTE incentive grant program. Supporters, including the Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities, the California Edge Coalition, National University, Long Beach City College, and United Ways of California, argued that California needs a statewide coordinating body to reduce silos, improve access to high-quality jobs, and better align education with labor market needs. Committee members focused heavily on whether the proposed entity would duplicate existing bodies such as the California Workforce Development Board and other education/workforce agencies, and whether its broad duties could be carried out with the $1.5 million budget allocation. The author said the bill is intended to move an operational coordinating entity into broader tri-party negotiations with legislative leadership and the Governor, and that the final structure and staffing would depend on those talks. Some members supported the concept but raised concerns about scope, duplication, and whether the bill should be delayed or audited; one member opposed it as too broad and underfunded. The committee ultimately voted to pass SB 638 to the Assembly Appropriations Committee on a courtesy vote. The roll call showed five ayes and three noes, with one member not voting, and the chair later allowed additional members to add on, including an additional aye from Assemblymember Haney. The hearing then adjourned with the chair noting that further conversations would continue on the coordinating entity and its responsibilities.

Transcript Highlights:

• This actually amended the implementation bill for the managing entities section 394.9082.
• feedback from the providers as well, we worked with the managing entities.
• So here's an example of the new managing entity HB 633 Measures Dashboard.
• We also have our weekly, twice-weekly meetings with the managing entities.
• Yes, they're still posted on our managing entity tab.

Summary: The subcommittee heard two Department of Children and Families implementation updates on measures passed in prior sessions. First, DCF reviewed House Bill 633, which increased oversight of behavioral health managing entities through biennial independent audits, standardized claims-based reporting, and new monthly outcome dashboards. The department said it had awarded the inaugural audit to Ernst & Young, found no significant waste, fraud, or abuse, but identified process risks involving financial controls, claims validation, data access, and system access controls. DCF also described its transition to standardized behavioral health coding and said the new public dashboard of 11 measures is posted on its website, though members asked for easier access and for hard copies of the audit report. Members asked about how the department distinguishes Medicaid-covered services from department-funded services, how duplicate payment risks are being addressed, and whether the new reporting and audit requirements would improve oversight without disrupting services. DCF said it is the payer of last resort for uninsured or underinsured individuals, that some overlap with Medicaid is expected because Medicaid does not cover all behavioral health services, and that new claims edits and cross-checks are being built into the system. The department also said it had not found significant negative feedback from providers and that the new requirements are intended to improve transparency and accountability. DCF then updated the committee on Senate Bill 7012, covering human trafficking data collection, domestic violence center certification, limited background-screening exemptions, expanded recruitment for child welfare staff, subcontractor liability protections, a four-year treatment foster care pilot, case management efficiency recommendations, and a statewide study of residential bed capacity for child victims of commercial sexual exploitation. The department said several items are already complete or underway, including limited exemptions in the screening clearinghouse, while others are in procurement or rulemaking. It identified Circuits 4 and 12 as the treatment foster care pilot sites and said the pilot will launch in January 2026. Members questioned recruitment metrics, pilot timing, and report deadlines; the department said final reports are expected by January and that some dates were flexible because of procurement and implementation timelines. The meeting ended after the presentations and questions, and the subcommittee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• or canceled impacted by tariffs or canceled contracts<02:19:44.240> with<02:19:44.559> foreign
• <02:19:44.960> countries<02:19:45.840> because contracts with foreign countries because
• contracts with foreign countries because we<02:19:46.479> don't<02:19:46.719> export.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And on the managing entity side, how has that implementation been going?
• How do you engage with the managing entity sooner?
• Then there are counties who contract with the managing entity.
• I think managing entities could probably do that too. You have one thought?
• I think managing entities could probably do that too. You have one thought?

Summary: The Health Care Budget Subcommittee held a panel discussion on Florida’s mental health and substance abuse system, with representatives from DCF, AHCA, two managing entities, and two providers describing how the state’s behavioral health network is funded and operated. Members focused on the implementation of prior legislative investments, especially the $50 million in recurring funding from Representative Maney’s bill and the earlier $126 million community behavioral health appropriation. Witnesses said the newer funds were used mainly for crisis beds, discharge planning, outpatient services, regional collaboratives, and a USF Marchman Act report, while the larger behavioral health appropriation supported CAT, FACT, FIT, forensic teams, residential and outpatient services, and crisis care, with most dollars going directly to services and only a small share to administration. A major theme was access to crisis care and the role of mobile response teams, 988, and central receiving facilities in diverting people from Baker Act admissions and reducing readmissions. DCF and providers said mobile response teams have expanded, are being used to de-escalate crises and connect people to care, and have shown strong diversion results and reductions in Baker Acts in some regions. Members also asked about waitlists, children in crisis, and how to handle people without housing or support; providers said discharge planning is individualized but often constrained by homelessness, transportation, and a lack of safe placements, and several witnesses identified housing as one of the biggest barriers to recovery and stability. The committee also examined provider sustainability, reimbursement, and funding gaps. Witnesses described delays caused by contract timing, cost allocation rules, and Medicaid reimbursement rates that do not always keep pace with labor and operating costs, especially for smaller providers and rural networks. DCF and AHCA said managing entities can provide advances, retroactive rate adjustments, and technical assistance, and that Medicaid managed care plans have network standards and complaint/dispute processes. Members raised concerns about a reported $7 million loss in federal non-sustainable funds, provider closures, and whether there is a formal ombudsman process for disputes; DCF said the federal reductions were known and tied to one-time funds, and that the department generally handles provider issues informally while working with managing entities to preserve continuity of care.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then in the far right-hand column, the number of entities the number of entities that we counted
• What changes, depending on the size of the entity, is not really the size of the entity but what statute
• And so, that's generating a lot of the issues that we're seeing is entities may have Entities may have
• , entity and classification type.
• It says total number of reporting entities It says total number of reporting entities and then has these

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , are you talking about the contracting entity or the government entity?
• also add add language that said entity also add add language that said entity would<00:24:31.039
• that are covered under the Tort Claims Act. and for entity any entity that is and for entity any entity
• entity or the government entity? entity or the government entity?
• clearing that up by asking the entity clearing that up by asking the entity itself<00:26:21.200>

Keywords: Judiciary, Division A - Room 216, 29 January, 2026; 3:00 PM, 925, all

Summary: The committee met to discuss several bills, beginning with a block motion on Senate Bills 2138, 2697, 2707, 2717, and 2726. Those measures were described as code-section updates involving redrawn Supreme Court districts, youth court reforms, Administrative Office of Courts matters, replacement of the MyKids youth court computer system, and Mississippi opioid settlement commission procedures. The committee agreed to take them up together, and the motion to report them title sufficient and due pass carried without opposition. The committee then considered Senate Bill 2890, dealing with the judicial operations fund. Members were told the fund no longer has sufficient revenue to cover court operations and requested judicial raises, and the proposed committee substitute would repeal the fund while conforming related code references. The substitute was adopted and the bill was reported title sufficient and due pass. Senate Bill 2730, granting immunity to nonprofits and churches that open during declared emergencies, was amended with a reverse repealer and then passed as amended. Next, Senate Bill 2135 was explained as a change to jury summons procedures so clerks could use the SEMS active/inactive voter designation and summon only active voters, without removing anyone from the voter rolls. The bill drew no opposition and passed, though a reverse repealer was later requested on similar procedural grounds in other bills. Senate Bill 2360 would create a public registry of entities that, though appearing private, are covered by the Mississippi Tort Claims Act; members discussed whether such entities should also be required to identify themselves on websites and written materials, and an amendment to that effect was adopted. A reverse repealer was then added, and the bill passed as amended. Finally, Senate Bill 2362 was presented as a proposal to create a private cause of action under the Unfair Trade Practices Act, allowing claimants to sue directly while still notifying the Attorney General. The sponsor said the bill would not add extra damages and noted similar laws in other states. The committee discussion was cut off in the transcript before a final vote on that bill is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I've had some conversations with our managing entity.
• And I've been a fan of the managing entities for a long time.
• This year, I think it's $180 million with our managing entities.
• This year, I think it's $180 million, with our managing entities.
• Our work at DCF is not about one entity or government alone.

Summary: The Committee on Children, Families, and Elder Affairs met to consider several bills and the confirmation of Taylor Hatch as Secretary of the Department of Children and Families. SB 1310, relating to reporting of student mental health outcomes, was temporarily postponed. The committee then took up SB 1354 on behavioral health managing entities, adopted a delete-all amendment, and heard support for the bill’s focus on transparency, accountability, audits, referral patterns, and a DCF report due by December 1. Members discussed the capacity of the current reporting system and the need for coordination with school districts. The committee voted the bill favorably. The committee next considered SB 1620 on mental health and substance abuse disorders, which implements selected recommendations from the 2025 Commission on Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders. The bill, as amended, includes reforms on dignity and patient-centered care, crisis response, individualized treatment plans, use of the DLA-20 assessment tool, data analysis by the Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, and creation of a research center. Amendments removed a direct medication-provision requirement in favor of a review and report on discharge procedures, medication adherence, and long-acting injectables, and clarified licensure priorities for short-term residential treatment programs. Testimony and debate emphasized the need for action, better data, and efficient use of public funds. The committee reported the bill favorably. Finally, the committee heard from Taylor Hatch, the Governor’s appointee to lead DCF. Hatch described her background in state government and her priorities for DCF, including coordination, transparency, prevention, permanency, and responsiveness to vulnerable Floridians. Several members spoke in support, citing her experience at APD and familiarity with the agency’s work. The committee voted unanimously to recommend her confirmation, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• regulate them and those are entities regulate them and those are entities that<00:15:12.399>
• entities it's kind of a tricky thing. entities it's kind of a tricky thing. they<00:25:31.919>
• There are various entities<00:32:48.159> that entities that entities that um um um are<00:32:52.240
• government entity. government entity.
• Your entity may be solvent criterion. Your entity may be solvent and<01:31:18.760> well-run.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee took up the pooled risk management program bill and reviewed a new amendment drafted with input from the Insurance Department and Legislative Services. Department witnesses explained that the proposal would move oversight of pooled risk management programs from the Secretary of State’s office to the Insurance Department, add a licensure requirement, preserve the programs’ non-insurer status, and exempt them from third-party administrator licensure. They also described a series of solvency tools in the draft, including financial reporting, risk-based capital standards, minimum capitalization, investment limits, commissioner examination and enforcement authority, rulemaking authority, merger and affiliate-transaction review, confidentiality protections, and a separability clause. A major theme of the discussion was that pooled risk management programs differ from commercial insurers because the risk remains with the member local governments rather than being backed by a state guarantee fund. Witnesses said the bill is designed to emphasize solvency over return of premium and to give the Insurance Department a regulatory “toolbox” to prevent insolvency, including a proposed $5 million excess or stop-loss coverage benchmark, optional accessible policies, and a requirement that boards vote on dividends or premium returns when capital exceeds 600% of risk-based capital. Members questioned how this approach differed from the original Secretary of State bill and whether assessments on towns would still be possible; the department responded that the new framework would allow more flexible oversight and alternatives to immediate court action. The committee also discussed why the statute should continue to say the programs are not insurers, with the department explaining that this preserves their autonomy and avoids applying unrelated insurance laws and premium taxes. Members asked about the department’s workload and were told the department believed it could absorb the new duties without additional funding. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• had a fire this last week in your area, but the egg production that we have is kind of large-scale entities
• Incidentally, this originally was designated a foreign animal disease, which is why our agent was involved

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• and state law to include pharmacies contracted with a 340B covered entity.
• Prescription drugs to pharmacies contracted with a 340B covered entity.
• understand that the 340b covered entity understand that the 340b covered entity definition<00:37
• <00:37:38.880> as prescription drugs to these entities as prescription drugs to these entities
• <00:37:44.440> under considered a 340b covered entity under considered a 340b covered entity

Keywords: 00:00 Introductions 02:46 Roll Call 03:35 Discussion on SB 14 46:13 Vote on SB 14 48:07 Discussion on SB 17 50:38 Vote on SB 17, 958, all

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Health Services opened with the chair welcoming several new members and outlining session rules: hearings would start and end on time, the committee would limit the number of bills heard each meeting, prioritize bills heard during the interim, and generally avoid using the consent calendar except in extreme circumstances. The committee then briefly considered administrative regulations, which were treated as approved if members had no questions. The main item was Senate Bill 14, a measure addressing the 340B drug discount program. The chair said the bill had already passed the Senate in a prior session and had been heard in interim, so he did not present it again. He described the bill as prohibiting drug manufacturers from discriminating against 340B covered entities by refusing 340B pricing when the same drug is offered at that price in the state. He also said the committee would not debate the federal 340B program itself, but would hear testimony on the bill. Hospital leaders and Kentucky Hospital Association representatives testified in support, arguing that 340B savings are essential to rural hospitals, oncology services, transportation support, chronic care, addiction recovery, and new service lines such as chemotherapy and hepatitis treatment. They said the program helps keep care close to home and that manufacturer restrictions on contract pharmacies have reduced access and cost hospitals millions. Opponents from BIO Kentucky and the National Alliance of Healthcare Purchaser Coalitions argued the bill would expand federal law beyond Congress’s intent, create administrative burdens, and not lower patient out-of-pocket costs. The chair repeatedly pressed opponents to address why Kentucky should be denied the same 340B pricing available in other states. No vote on the bill was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• other than the public entity who holds that Article 97 interest. ...by an entity other than the public
• other than the public entity who holds that Article 97 interest. by an entity other than the public
• entity who holds that Article 97 interest.
• consult with the public entity.
• I guess what you’re understanding, whether or not the new entity or the entity that now has an easement

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight held an oversight hearing on draft regulations implementing Article 97 of the Massachusetts Constitution under Chapter 274 of the Acts of 2022, the Open Space Act. Chairs Cabral and Collins framed the hearing as a review of how the new process for dispositions or changes in use of Article 97 land would work, including public notice, environmental justice protections, replacement land, appraisals, and the role of the legislature. Under Secretary Stephanie Cooper and Commissioner Adam Bakke testified for EEA/DCAM, followed later by Deputy Inspector General O’Neill and Deputy Inspector General Giles on appraisal review. Much of the discussion focused on how the draft regulations would operate in practice. EEA said the regulations would require advance public notice, define “comparable location” for replacement land, and allow the Secretary to make findings on whether an action would adversely affect environmental justice communities. Members pressed for longer public comment periods, clearer notice to local officials, more frequent updates to the site evaluation tool, and a clearer definition of terms such as “limited duration” for permits and licenses. EEA said the regulations are intended to standardize a process that has been handled through policy and case-by-case review, and that the legislature still retains the final authority to approve any Article 97 disposition. Committee members also questioned whether the draft rules shift too much discretion to the Secretary and whether the proposed “proponent” process could allow private entities to drive Article 97 actions. EEA responded that non-public proponents would still need municipal support and legislative sponsorship, and that the regulations do not create a new avenue to bypass the existing home rule and legislative process. Members raised concerns about the current policy’s unanimous-vote requirements for municipal commissions, the proposed waiver provisions, whether MEPA applies, and the lack of explicit enforcement or penalty language in the act or regulations. EEA and DCAM said the act does not provide an enforcement mechanism and that disputes would generally be handled through the courts or the Attorney General. The Inspector General’s office explained its role in reviewing appraisals for special legislation, including Article 97 matters, to ensure compliance with USPAP standards and to forward its review to DCAM. The hearing did not include any votes or formal committee action; members indicated that the committee may later issue recommendations to the executive agencies based on the testimony and questions raised.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there a reason those wouldn't count towards educational service entities.
• They are currently used for private entities at risk Farmer ranch, private entities, alternative agriculture
• , private entities establishing a veterinarian practice, private entities healthy corner store, private
• entities affordable housing developments.
• The only difference here is that the entity we're talking about is a private education entity.

Bills: HB1590, HB1242, HB3818, HB4305

Keywords: education funding, linked deposits, education infrastructure, charter schools, nonprofit organizations, Oklahoma Education Infrastructure Program, HB1242, cervidae, deer, elk, sales tax exemption, agricultural exemption, livestock, ranching, farm tax, agricultural sales tax, Oklahoma Tax Commission, agriculture, producer sales, private treaty

Transcript Highlights:

• direct appropriation to a private entity direct appropriation to a private entity from<00:21:31.360
• There is no such transparency for any private entity.
• about which we going to a private entity about which we know<00:25:37.760> nothing.
• Chair Gomez, your point about this one entity is well taken.
• Um it looks like maybe Chair entities.

Bills: HF2446, HF2563, HF2444

Keywords: agriculture finance, broadband development, Department of Agriculture, Board of Animal Health, Agricultural Utilization Research Institute, Office of Broadband Development, food safety, food handler license, cottage food, home processed food, livestock dealer, meat packing company, milk marketer, milk marketing license, grain buyer, grain storage, beginning farmer, emerging farmer, farm down payment assistance, livestock investment grant

Transcript Highlights:

• It's the underlying credit of the participating entities.
• But do the other local entities that already created the PUA?
• I'll have to agree to let the new entity join?
• I don't think that there's any prohibition on other entities joining as well.
• Absolutely not just the entities within the within the PUA.

Bills: HB 1089, HB 1163, HB 1177, HB 1238, HB1318, HB1400, HB1407, HB1532, HJR7, HJR7

Keywords: coastal protection, environmental management, Gulf Coast, storm risk management, funding, Texas General Land Office, healthcare, insurance reform, patient access, insurance regulation, affordable care, health insurance, consumer rights, coverage transparency, claims process, insurance regulations, aggregate production, environmental impact, financial responsibility, reclamation

Transcript Highlights:

• ." entity." entity."
• Subsection five A reads an entity. An entity. Let's stop there. What is the definition of entity?
• Subsection five A reads an entity. An entity. Let's stop there. What is the definition of entity?
• Subsection five A reads an entity. An entity. Let's stop there. What is the definition of entity?
• entity entails. entity entails.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The House convened, established a quorum, and approved the journal from April 20, 2026. Members then made announcements about committee schedules, open enrollment, and the Bolder Boulder event, and welcomed guests from the Leadership Program of the Rockies. The House also adopted Senate Joint Resolution 20, recognizing April 9, 2026 as Home Education Day in Colorado, on a 60-2 vote with three excused. Supporters described home education as a longstanding family choice and emphasized parental rights and educational flexibility. The chamber then received committee reports, including an Appropriations Committee report advancing House Bills 1052, 1132, 1143, 1226, 1343, and 1344 to the Committee of the Whole. The Majority Leader moved several bills to special orders for April 21, 2026 at 9:20 a.m., and the motion was adopted without objection. The Committee of the Whole took up House Bill 1028, concerning second language diploma endorsements for graduating high school students. After adopting the appropriations report, the House passed the bill. Supporters said it would recognize bilingualism and Colorado’s diversity. The committee then considered House Bill 1143, concerning background checks for non-employment-based educational opportunities. The bill sponsor said it would allow qualified people without Social Security numbers to participate in internships, clinical placements, and volunteer opportunities by using alternative identification. Several members opposed the bill and supported amendments, arguing for employer or institutional choice, narrower definitions, and concerns about constitutional rights, tax compliance, and the breadth of the bill. Amendment L6 failed, and the transcript ends amid extended discussion of Amendment L7 regarding enforcement against public entities, with no final action on the bill shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Some of their managing entities received $5.2 million.
• We also have the managing entities' annual needs assessments.
• We also have the managing entities' annual needs assessments.
• Definitely, I hear from the managing entities.
• Are the managing entities providing data back to DCF?

Summary: The Human Services Subcommittee met to review implementation of House Bill 7021, the recent overhaul of Florida’s Baker Act and Marchman Act, and to hear from DCF Assistant Secretary Erica Floyd Thomas about how the department is using the $50 million appropriation tied to the bill. Representative Maney, the bill sponsor, gave a lengthy background on why he pursued the reforms and emphasized that the goal was to improve access, reduce unnecessary crisis interventions, and give agencies the resources needed to carry out their responsibilities. He and the chair both noted that the bill was the product of many years of work and broad bipartisan support. DCF reported several early outcomes and implementation steps, including a statewide reduction in Baker Act initiations over the past five years, strong diversion rates from crisis through 988, mobile response teams, care coordination, and forensic multidisciplinary teams, and the creation of new tools such as a Baker Act dashboard and the first annual Marchman Act report. The department described key statutory changes: law enforcement discretion in initiating Baker Acts, a single-petition process, remote appearances, stronger discharge planning, interim services, updated parent notification and hold-period rules, an ombudsman office for children’s behavioral health, and regional collaboratives to identify local service gaps. DCF said it has updated manuals, FAQs, trainings, and rules, and that the managing entities have begun contracting for services. Members asked about how the $50 million was allocated, why much of it went to crisis capacity rather than outpatient care, how much has been spent so far, whether administrative costs are capped, and how the department will measure success. DCF said most of the money was used to preserve and expand crisis beds, detox beds, CSU beds, short-term residential treatment, discharge planning, and outpatient supports, with $1.3 million for the ombudsman and regional collaboratives and $48.3 million to managing entities. The assistant secretary said the department tracks readmissions, utilization, provider capacity, and monthly and quarterly reports from managing entities, but it is still early to see full effects because contracts were only recently executed. Members also raised concerns about children, families, veterans, workforce shortages, transparency, and gaps for hard-to-place individuals, including those with developmental disabilities or dementia. The meeting ended with no formal action beyond adjournment after questions were completed.