Transcript Highlights:

• This way, we can try to get through this process efficiently so everyone can have the opportunity to
• And they are working with the family throughout the criminal justice process as well.
• Consolidated and consolidating financial statements and their audited financials to the public.
• They are working with the family throughout the criminal justice process as well.
• Many of us who have seen people processed through jail and talked to parents can relate.

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:

• So, That process can be a little overwhelming at the onset.
• But this is part of the process.
• But this is part of the process.
• Very similar to the prior process.
• In 2019, it was $5,400 to do their audit.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met to continue its tax reform and relief study agenda, approved the December 3, 2025 minutes, and announced a new subcommittee to examine property tax statement issues with counties, auditors, and the tax office. Representative Headland was named chair, Senator Rummel vice chair, and Representatives Dressler and Dr. Dr. and Senator Patton were also assigned. The chair noted the group may need an additional meeting and thanked staff and attendees. A major portion of the meeting focused on economic development incentives. The Department of Commerce presented on the Renaissance Zone program and TIF districts, describing Renaissance Zones as locally tailored tools that combine local property tax relief with state income tax incentives. Commerce said the program has supported thousands of projects since 1999 and cited examples from Beach and Mandan showing increases in property and taxable value, business retention, housing, and downtown revitalization. Committee members raised concerns that smaller rural communities often lack the staff and expertise to apply, and Commerce said it provides outreach through conferences, office hours, and one-on-one assistance. League of Cities and local officials from Bismarck and Ellendale echoed the capacity issue, discussed how the programs have worked in their communities, and suggested possible reforms or more targeted support for small towns. Ellendale’s mayor also described two TIF districts, one for industrial infrastructure in Oaks and one for housing infrastructure tied to a data center project in Ellendale. The committee then turned to stripper oil taxation. The Tax Department gave a comparison of oil and gas tax structures in selected states, noting that most have some form of stripper or marginal well provision, while Alaska does not appear to have a specific stripper-well exemption. Members asked for more detail on definitions and North Dakota’s annual adjusted rate. The Department of Mineral Resources followed with a detailed presentation on North Dakota stripper wells, explaining the statutory thresholds, the 12-consecutive-month production test, and the fact that once a well qualifies it remains on stripper status even if production later rises. DMR said about 11,332 stripper wells are active, representing roughly 54% of wells and about 16% of state production, and emphasized that stripper status can extend well life, preserve tax revenue, and reduce orphaned wells. Committee members and industry witnesses discussed refracs, the economics of keeping marginal wells active, and the competitive disadvantage created by North Dakota’s oil price discount. No votes were taken on these informational items.

Transcript Highlights:

• It will be opt-in, and it will be an easy process for escrow agents.
• The commissioner knows this process. Ms. Scott Leeb knows this process.
• To be clear, House Bill 2793 does not eliminate the existing process.
• And it can be done through the rulemaking process.
• I think if it's something to be due to the rulemaking process, to Mr.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee heard HB 2842, a deed-fraud prevention bill that would create an early alert system for property owners when escrow is opened on their property. The sponsor and several witnesses, including a victim, an Attorney General investigator, and the Department of Real Estate commissioner, described widespread deed fraud and said the bill would provide proactive notice before a fraudulent transfer is completed. The committee adopted the Blackman amendment shifting the reporting entity from DIFI to the State Real Estate Department, then passed the bill with a due pass recommendation by a 7-0 vote. Members then considered HB 2667, which would require recipients of state first-time homebuyer or down payment assistance programs to be Arizona residents for two years and to occupy the home as a primary residence for two years, while barring out-of-state investors from using the homes as rentals. The sponsor said the bill was intended to help younger Arizonans and keep assistance focused on residents invested in the state. Opponents and other members raised concerns that the bill could conflict with existing federal and lender requirements and could reduce participation in local down payment programs; after discussion, the committee passed the bill 4-3. HB 2020 was heard next and would reduce certain school-disruption offenses to a class 1 misdemeanor for minors and narrow the definition of interference with an educational institution. The sponsor and a parent described a case in which a student was charged too harshly after a school altercation, while a public commenter urged case-by-case discretion and warned against saddling children with felonies. The committee passed the bill 4-3. The committee also advanced HB 2793, which streamlines annexation procedures for single-owner annexations and updates notice rules, including electronic newspaper publication. After adopting two amendments, members passed it 4-3. HB 2327, which allows eligible individuals to restrict public access to certain identifying information held by county recorders, assessors, and treasurers, passed unanimously. HB 2858, creating a 1% Arizona-bidder preference in certain state procurement ties, also passed unanimously after amendment. HB 2660, which adds procedural protections and oversight for health profession licensing board actions, passed 4-2 after testimony from the sponsor and a physician who said board actions had chilled speech and due process. Finally, HB 2063, appropriating $1.5 million for the Independent Correctional Oversight Office, passed unanimously after strong support from oversight advocates and former corrections stakeholders, and HB 2681, extending civil-service appeal deadlines from 10 calendar days to 10 business days, also passed unanimously. The committee then discussed HB 2812, which would raise the sick-leave payout cap for retiring state employees from $30,000 to $57,000; witnesses supported the increase and members began discussing a possible amendment to allow retirees to transfer the payout into a health savings arrangement, but the transcript ends before final action on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• The FDA approval process exists for a reason.
• The FDA approval process exists for a reason.
• , and um and not wait for a long process, and um and not wait for a long process, not<01:26:28.960
• And administrative rulemaking process.
• The most staff and the audit staff.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, the next question is on process.
• Members, this is the Senate bill that pertains to the pardon process.
• it's a lengthy process.
• And we'll have time to wait those years to go through the court process or go through the claim process
• When I began my application process to the United States Naval Academy, I started that process when I

Bills: HJR1088, HJR1090, HJR1091, HB1370, SB2154, HJR1092, HJR1093, HJR1095, HJR1099, HJR1100, HB3021, SB893, SB206, SB248, SB259, SB423, SB563, SB604, SB633, HJR1077, SB667, SB1224, SB1257, SB1264, SB1319, SB1360, SB1437, SB1531, SB1543, SB1806, HB3004, SB1572, HB4342, SB1618, SB2, SB237, SB1632, SB1687, SB1726, SB1859, SB1894, SB1461, HB4432, SB1948, SB1589, SJR52, SR46, HCR1030, SB2071, SB2182, SB1451, HJR1088, HJR1090, HJR1091, HJR1092, HJR1093, HJR1095, HJR1096, HJR1099, HJR1100, SB2185, SB893, HB3021, SR46, SB206, SB237, SB248, SB259, SB423, SB563, SB604, SB625, SB633, SB667, SB1224, SB1257, SB1264, SB1319, SB1360, SB1378, SB1437, SB1531, SB1543, SB1572, SB1618, SB1632, SB1687, SB1726, SB1806, SB1859, SB1894, SB1948, SB2071, SJR52, HB1370, HJR1077, SB2, SB1451, SB2182, HCR1030

Keywords: education rules, administrative rules, joint resolution, Oklahoma State Department of Education, higher education, State Regents for Higher Education, Teachers' Retirement System, charter schools, Statewide Charter School Board, career and technology education, CTE, OEQA, rule approval, legislative oversight, permanent rules, school governance, teacher retirement, education agencies, Oklahoma Register, Department of Agriculture, Food, and Forestry

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill reforms the prior authorization process in health insurance.
• audit results sent to the state superintendent.
• I believe DPI will—the application process will be the guardrails necessary.
• until the health process.
• until the health process.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a quorum present. The chamber received notice that the governor had signed several bills, and the Speaker appointed conference committees after the Senate failed to concur with House amendments on Senate Bills 2180 and 2330. The House also approved several sixth-order amendments without objection before moving into reconsideration and final action on House Bill 1300, which concerns legislative term limits. After procedural motions to reconsider and undo concurrence, the House voted to do not concur on HB 1300, sending it back to the chair’s lap for further negotiation. A major portion of the meeting focused on Senate Bill 2232, which changes mandatory reporting rules for prenatal exposure to controlled substances and alcohol. Supporters said the bill is intended to keep pregnant women in prenatal care by removing an automatic CPS report if a woman tests positive but enters and stays on a treatment plan; opponents argued it weakens protections for unborn children and creates vague standards for mandated reporters. The House passed the bill 57-36. The chamber also passed Senate Bill 2280 unanimously, establishing timelines and standards for prior authorization in health insurance, and passed Senate Bill 2186, which creates a civil remedy for interference with court-ordered parenting time, a child custody review task force, and related reporting requirements. The House then took up Senate Bill 2239, an apprenticeship grant program with a $1.1 million appropriation, but rejected it 14-79 after the committee said the program lacked a clear administrative home. Senate Bill 2241, creating a framework for public charter schools, generated extensive debate over school choice, local control, funding, staffing, and rural impacts; supporters emphasized flexibility and community-driven options, while opponents warned about diversion of funds and weak guardrails. The bill passed 64-29. The House also passed Senate Bill 2024, the Department of Environmental Quality budget, after discussion about federal funding uncertainty; Senate Bill 2374, updating property insurance laws and market rules; Senate Bill 2216, creating a waterfowl habitat restoration stamp; Senate Bill 2245, allowing certain duck and goose hunting from anchored floating craft; and Senate Bill 233, establishing a distressed ambulance services process, which drew questions about how affected districts and neighboring services would be involved.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:36:48.240> by we've got a a good integrated process by we've got a a good integrated process
• And, and we were looking at our quality control process, our case review process even before HR1, and
• And, and we were looking at our quality control process, our case review process even before HR1, and
• And, and we were looking at our quality control process, our case review process even before HR1, and
• Does that through the EBT process.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 FY 2025 Budget Close Out 00:02:55 Impressions of H.R. – 119th Congress 00:28:15 SNAP Payment Error Rates 00:37:05, 958, all

Summary: The committee first established a quorum, approved the July minutes, and recognized Jennifer Hayes of the Department of State Budget Director for her retirement and long service. Secretary Hicks then presented a review of fiscal year 2025 closeout for the general fund and road fund, explaining that the general fund ended with a $313 million surplus and the road fund with a $61 million surplus. He attributed the general fund result to strong corporate income and LLC tax receipts, investment income, and lower-than-budgeted spending, while noting that individual income tax and sales tax underperformed estimates. He also described how the general fund surplus was allocated, with $62 million used for necessary government expenses and $251 million deposited into the budget reserve trust fund, which remained at historically strong levels. For the road fund, he said the surplus would be deposited into the Department of Highways construction account, and he highlighted record motor vehicle usage tax receipts despite lower motor fuels tax revenue due to a rate decline. Members asked questions about the pass-through entity tax, delayed filing deadlines, THC beverage sales, and income tax collection from undocumented workers. Hicks said the pass-through entity tax remains difficult to model because of timing issues and the first year’s unusual filing pattern, and that staff are still working with the Department of Revenue and other states to improve forecasting. He said the delayed filing deadline likely would not require a major restatement and that any related receipts would still be counted in fiscal 2026. On THC beverages, he said the issue would be considered in the next forecasting cycle. On the undocumented-worker question, he said withholding may capture some of the revenue but referred broader collection efforts to the Department of Revenue. The committee then shifted to an overview of the federal reconciliation act’s potential impact on the next biennial budget, with Hicks and Commissioner Lisa Dennis focusing on Medicaid and SNAP. Hicks said the Congressional Budget Office estimated roughly $900 billion in federal savings over 10 years, driven in part by work or community engagement requirements for the Medicaid expansion population and limits on state-directed payments. He emphasized that CMS still must issue regulations to define how the state-directed payment reductions will be calculated, making the exact fiscal impact uncertain. He referred members to a prior Medicaid Oversight Advisory Board presentation for more detail, and the discussion remained informational with no votes or formal actions taken on the federal changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• It will go to a closing process.
• So we have a risk management process.
• We're in a continual learning process.
• project process.
• In round five, we just wrapped up the process and went through the prioritization process.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I look forward to being able to utilize that through this process.
• Zengali, thank you for being here, for being such a fixture in this process. A fixture.
• Zengali, thank you for being here, for being such a fixture in this process. A fixture.
• The commission also processed two staff-assisted rate cases in the water utility sector.
• Additionally, the PSC processed over 10,000 consumer inquiries and complaints.

Summary: The State Administration Budget Subcommittee met for an introductory overview of the agencies under its jurisdiction and their current-year budgets. Chair Vicki Lopez welcomed members and staff, and each member briefly introduced themselves and identified areas of interest, with recurring themes including fiscal restraint, insurance regulation, revenue administration, condominium issues, and government efficiency. The chair then outlined the subcommittee’s overall budget, about $3.1 billion, and noted major recent policy areas affecting the budget such as condominium legislation and emergency communications funding. Agency heads then presented high-level summaries of their missions and budgets. The Department of Revenue described property tax oversight, tax administration, and child support enforcement; the Department of Management Services reviewed state purchasing, telecommunications, fleet, state insurance, retirement, and digital services; DBPR highlighted licensing, enforcement, condominiums, and building code work; DFS covered insurance consumer services, risk management, unclaimed property, fire marshal functions, and criminal investigations; the Gaming Control Commission discussed pari-mutuel and tribal gaming oversight and enforcement; OIR explained insurer solvency and rate review; the Lottery emphasized education funding and record sales; OFR described regulation of banking, securities, lending, and money services; DOAH outlined administrative and workers’ compensation adjudication; PSC covered utility rate regulation and consumer complaints; PERC described labor relations and career service appeals; and FCHR summarized discrimination complaint investigations and outreach. Several members asked questions about utility returns, insurance regulation staffing, DMS’s state employee health plan deficit and prescription drug formulary management, agency recommendations for reducing regulatory burden, and state facilities usage. Responses generally emphasized that utility rates and insurer filings are determined through evidentiary and actuarial processes, that OIR has reduced vacancies but still seeks specialized staff and a Tampa office expansion, and that DMS acknowledged rising health plan costs and said the issue likely requires broader budget-level discussion. The chair also pressed multiple presenters to stay focused on agency operations and budgets rather than broader policy issues. No votes or formal actions were taken in the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Annually, the New Mexico School Board Association initiates a legislative process that enables local
• These opinions are collected through a resolutions development process following a comprehensive analysis
• their federal funding while also providing more transparent oversight because they would get their own audit
• What we've had a problem with is fixing the audit language to make sure our state auditor feels that
• A lot of the workload that they talk about in terms of the MLSS or SAT process, gathering data to support

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Let me ask a question about process.
• Equally troubling is the process by which this map has been...
• Equally troubling is the process by which this map has been brought forward.
• I think it is fair to state that the current process does not meet that standard.
• And that is the trust of this process with the people.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're in the process.
• and go through the licensing process again.
• This was a very involved process.
• We do know we just finished our RFP process.
• All 4 were given the appeal process, and then of those we...

Transcript Highlights:

• causes of action against nonprofit organizations that was requested, uh, going through the legislative process
• You know, oftentimes we get caught up in the legislative process and the grind of that, we forget how
• act relating to authorizing the payment of certain claims against the state which have been duly audited
• against the state which have been claims against the state which have been duly<00:47:54.800> audited
• and approved according to duly audited and approved according to law<00:47:56.920> and<00:47:

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Let me ask a question about process.
• Equally troubling is the process by which this map has been...
• Equally troubling is the process by which this map has been brought forward.
• I think it is fair to state that the current process does not meet that standard.
• And that is the trust of this process with the people.

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D, later substituted with House Bill 1D, both establishing Florida’s congressional districts. The sponsor, Senator Gates, explained that the Governor had transmitted a proposed redistricting plan on short notice and argued that mid-decade congressional redistricting is legally permissible, citing population growth and the Governor’s view that race-based provisions in the Fair Districts Amendment are unconstitutional. He repeatedly said the Legislature was not being asked to prove the Governor’s legal theory, only to consider the proposal, and noted that no amendments were offered. A lengthy question-and-answer period followed, with senators raising concerns about the rushed process, lack of statewide public hearings, and the map’s effects on minority communities, compactness, communities of interest, and partisan fairness. Senators questioned whether the map cracked Latino and Black communities, whether partisan data was used, whether the Governor’s office had outside consultants, and whether the plan complied with the Florida Constitution, the Fair Districts Amendment, and the Voting Rights Act. Gates generally deferred on legal conclusions, said the Governor’s representatives had testified the map was race-neutral and used political data only as one factor, and emphasized that any constitutional challenge would be for the courts. After a motion to temporarily postpone failed by a recorded vote of 12 yeas to 23 nays, the Senate continued debate. Senators Rouson, Bernard, and others spoke in opposition, arguing the proposal was rushed, partisan, and harmful to communities of interest and minority voting power. Gates maintained that the Governor had a constitutional prerogative to propose the map and that the Legislature could accept, reject, or amend it. The House companion bill was then substituted for the Senate bill, read a third time, and the chamber moved into final debate on the congressional redistricting plan.

Transcript Highlights:

• faster by improving the permitting process.
• faster by a better permitting process.
• Speaker, everyone deserves due process, so House Bill 974.
• I'd like them to stay identical as they move through this process, Mr. Speaker.
• I'd like them to stay identical as they move through this process, Mr. Speaker.

Keywords: March 11, 2026 - Regular Session, 976, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The current audit process is a joke that we have in the state.
• Before we raise the tax, I would love for us to have a process that truly audits these people.
• no trackability the current audit no trackability the current audit process<01:29:36.920> is<
• for us to have a process that truly audits<01:31:43.159> these<01:31:43.679> people<01
• be um this is going to be a process be um this is going to be a process number<02:09:47.559>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The public hearing focused on HB 290, which would raise cigarette and e-cigarette/vaping taxes and create a committee to study tobacco and nicotine tax policy. Representative Jerry Stringham introduced the bill as both a public health and revenue measure, arguing that nicotine use causes health harms and public costs, and that New Hampshire’s cigarette tax has been unchanged at $1.78 per pack since 2013. He said the bill would raise the cigarette tax by $1 per pack to $2.78, still below most New England states, and would also adjust vaping taxes, which he described as having been set as placeholder rates in 2019. He said the bill would also establish a study committee to review broader tobacco and nicotine taxation, including products such as premium cigars. In response to questions, Stringham said the proposed cigarette tax would be roughly equal in real dollars to the 2008 rate after inflation, and he suggested that a smaller annual increase could be considered, though he believed a larger increase would have a stronger public health effect. He explained that the vaping tax structure differs between closed and open systems because one taxes a fixed hardware product while the other taxes reusable liquid, and he said the proposal would move the rates toward a more uniform approach. He also said New Hampshire would remain below neighboring states even after the increase, though members raised concerns about cross-border shopping, business impacts, and preserving the state’s competitive advantage. Several members questioned whether the bill’s main purpose was revenue or reducing smoking and vaping. Stringham said he viewed it primarily as a public health bill, but also as a revenue measure, and said he would consider it successful even if consumption fell enough to reduce revenue. Other members emphasized personal freedom and argued the committee should focus on taxation rather than cessation, while some supported the bill as a way to capture revenue from out-of-state buyers and keep New Hampshire’s rates below surrounding states. The hearing consisted of testimony and questions only; no vote or final action was taken in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Let me ask a question about process.
• Equally troubling is the process by which this map has been Equally troubling is the process by which
• I think it is fair to state that the current process does not meet that standard.
• Sad to say, this is also not a legitimate process. It is not. 56% of voters recently.
• And that is the trust of this process with the people.

Keywords: 998, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Let me ask a question about process.
• Equally troubling is the process by which this map has been Equally troubling is the process by which
• I think it is fair to state that the current process does not meet that standard.
• Sad to say, this is also not a legitimate process. It is not. 56% of voters recently.
• And that is the trust of this process with the people.

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D / House Bill 1D, which would establish Florida’s congressional districts. The sponsor, Sen. Gates, explained that the Governor had transmitted a redistricting plan two days earlier and argued that mid-decade redistricting is legally permissible, citing population growth and the Governor’s view that race-based districting is unconstitutional. Much of the floor time was spent in extended questioning about the process, the lack of public hearings compared with prior redistricting cycles, the use of population estimates from the Census/EDR/ACS, compactness scores, and whether the Governor’s office used partisan data or outside consultants. Gates repeatedly said he was relaying the Governor’s proposal and legal theory rather than offering his own legal opinion, and he said any constitutional challenge would be for the courts. A major portion of the debate focused on the U.S. Supreme Court’s newly issued Calais decision and its implications for the Fair Districts Amendment and the Voting Rights Act. Senators questioned whether the decision struck down Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, whether it affected Florida’s constitutional ban on partisan gerrymandering, and whether the Legislature should postpone action to review the ruling. A motion to temporarily postpone the bill failed by voice vote and then by recorded vote, 12 yeas to 23 nays. Senators also raised concerns that the proposed map cracked minority communities, including Latino and Black populations in Central Florida and Tampa Bay, and that it would produce a heavily Republican-leaning map despite the state’s voter registration mix. After debate on the Senate bill, the chamber substituted the identical House companion bill, read it a third time, and proceeded to final debate. Opponents argued the map was an illegal partisan gerrymander, was based on assumptions rather than verified data, and would likely lead to litigation. Supporters maintained that the Governor had authority to propose a congressional map, that the plan was race-neutral, and that the Legislature could accept, reject, or amend it. The transcript ends during continued debate on House Bill 1D, with no final vote shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• The school board signs off monthly when bills are being paid through payroll and similar processes.
• There's also the issue that it's hard to audit, and a very limited audit found an alarmingly high percentage
• There's also the issue that it's hard to audit, and a very limited audit found an alarmingly high percentage
• Department plays in the processing and Department plays in the processing and what<03:33:20.920>
• They did present at HB 15, sorry. reports the audits the the information reports the audits the the information

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard HB 295, which would make school building aid funds non-lapsing/non-APS. Representative Cahill said the bill was intended to keep any unused building aid money available for future projects, potentially helping move projects up the priority list or provide a little more funding for school construction. Members asked about how much money has lapsed in past years, whether the education trust fund and building aid are separate, and whether any lapsing dollars could be used to pay down debt. Department of Education official Jim Carney said about $29.1 million would be available if building aid is funded to the $50 million maximum in FY26, confirmed that the fund currently lapses, and said the department would gather historical lapse data. Committee members also discussed whether a dedicated fund structure could achieve the same goal, and the chair noted that the education trust fund statute includes school building aid as one of its uses. No vote was taken; the hearing was closed and the committee said it would later hold a work session after receiving more information. The committee then took up HB 237, introduced by Representative Dan McGuire, which would prohibit the use of special education state funds and differentiated aid for students not receiving special education services. The New Hampshire School Boards Association, through Becky Wilson, opposed the bill as written, saying it was unclear, potentially unnecessary, and difficult to implement because adequacy and differentiated aid are distributed as part of a districtwide lump sum rather than as student-specific dollars. She explained that special education costs are embedded across district budgets, including staffing, training, transportation, and instruction, and that some staff and services benefit both special education and general education students. Wilson also said differentiated aid is not tied to a specific pupil and is used at the district’s discretion, though it is intended to support students with greater needs. Committee members pressed on whether the bill would require districts to track money by individual student, whether it could conflict with federal special education law, and whether it would affect least restrictive environment requirements. Wilson said making the funds student-specific could create privacy and accounting problems and could make it difficult to staff inclusive classrooms, though she did not give a definitive legal opinion on federal compliance. She agreed that students who are not eligible for special education would not be included in the separate catastrophic/special education aid reimbursement program. The discussion continued into the second section of the bill, with members exploring how adequacy aid and differentiated aid are used in practice, but no action was taken during the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• That is not a one-time event; it's a process that can take years.
• I mean, it's a process that can take years.
• So I just kind of wanted to know what your process was for developing the proposal.
• I was just curious what the process was for developing these recommendations felt some good.
• So but I just kind of what your process was for developing the proposal. Thanks.

Bills: HF3489, HF3990, HF3825, HF3826, HF3827, HF3822

Keywords: grooming, child protection, student safety, sexual exploitation, educator licensing, teacher discipline, mandatory reporting, mandated reporter training, school misconduct, predatory offender, child abuse, sexual abuse, sex trafficking, child sexual abuse material, child pornography, position of authority, school employee, school administrator, license revocation, license suspension