Transcript Highlights:

• Judicial Conduct.
• The code of judicial conduct. Code of judicial conduct? Right, and that is already in statute.
• Judicial conduct there. Correct. I would just replace ethical standards with judicial conduct.
• Judicial conduct.
• , replacing it with judicial conduct.

Bills: HB1455

Keywords: tribal consultation, Indian Affairs Commission, tribal governments, tribal sovereignty, state-tribal relations, Native American, tribal nations, consultation requirement, legislative process, jurisdiction, sovereignty, North Dakota tribes, government-to-government consultation, tribal chairpersons, 908, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee first heard House Bill 1455, which would require the North Dakota Indian Affairs Commission to review introduced legislation for tribal implications and conduct consultation with affected tribes. Rep. Collette Brown said the bill was intended to formalize and strengthen tribal consultation, and Standing Rock Sioux Tribe representative Ross Bell testified in support. Brad Hawk, executive director of the Indian Affairs Commission, testified neutrally, saying the office already does much of this work but that the bill would add structure; several senators raised concerns about duplication, possible future staffing costs, and whether the bill was necessary. The committee amended the bill to replace “each measure” with “all legislation,” then passed a do-not-pass recommendation on HB 1455 by recorded vote, with Sen. Luick designated as carrier. The committee then took up House Bill 1032, dealing with municipal courts, appeals, and judge qualifications. Legislative Council and court staff walked through proposed amendments, including making municipal courts courts of record on a delayed effective date, clarifying appeal procedures, and adding standards for municipal judges. Members discussed whether to use the term “ethical standards” or “judicial conduct”; after questions about definitions and enforcement, the committee settled on replacing the language with “judicial conduct” in the amended bill. The committee adopted the amendments and then passed HB 1032 as amended on a do-pass vote, with Sen. Cory to carry. Later, the committee heard House Bill 1263, which would make it easier for people with criminal records to seek sealing after a denial by allowing an appeal and reducing the waiting period for a new petition from three years to one year. Rep. Nels Christensen, Christopher Davis, Travis Fink, and Brad Peterson all supported the bill’s goal of giving people a better path to rehabilitation and employment. The main point of disagreement was whether to keep the statutory presumption that the benefit to the petitioner must outweigh the presumption of openness of criminal records; several witnesses urged removing that language, while others said it was part of the compromise that created the current law. The committee closed the hearing without taking final action and said it would review the House discussion before deciding later.

Transcript Highlights:

• And the House, and all of our projects are conducted at the Legislature's direction.
• We use tools both qualitative and quantitative to conduct our research.
• We've been conducting that.
• We've been conducting that.
• auditing, and that's the standards we follow in conducting our operational audits.

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:

• Which has a deadly conduct statute.
• A person acts recklessly with regard to circumstances surrounding his conduct and the result of his conduct
• Police officers should be held accountable for conduct that rises to the level of deadly conduct.
• Um, What is the intent behind a deadly conduct charge?
• Why are we using deadly conduct?

Transcript Highlights:

• reviewer conducted the inspection.
• of Conduct.
• In student conduct investigations.
• Deadly conduct.
• B-1 of deadly conduct.

Bills: HB1500, HJR7, HJR112, HB34, HB133, HB 112, HB 119, HB 128, HB 130, HB132, HB2756, HB166, HB406, HB186, HB271, HB331, HB380, HB1583, HB1584, HB1819, HB621, HB303, HB552, HB366, HB463, HB 1211, HB1327, HB1461, HB923, HB1760, HB2043, HB2467, HB5333, HB5265, HB1592, HB1576, HB1552, HB2018, HB3511, HB1781, HB2013, HB2340, HB2349, HB2508, HB2970, HB2520, HB865, HB2851, HB3385, HB3336, HB3529, HB3309, HB 1127, HB 1232, HB1397, HB4236, HB1804, HB1926, HB4041, HB1965, HB1964, HB2679, HB2730, HB3698, HB3699, HCR77, HB3354, HB163, HB201, HB272, HB333, HB405, HB519, HB569, HB654, HB694, HB791, HB 1006, HB 1136, HB 1240, HB 1266, HB 1275, HB1437, HB1532, HB1675, HB1842, HB1868, HB1888, HB1894, HB1943, HB1990, HB2029, HB2061, HB2286, HB2523, HB2622, HB2626, HB2652, HB2692, HB2842, HB2885, HB2914, HB3016, HB3096, HB3129, HB3248, HB3251, HB3255, HB3479, HB3611, HB3623, HB3701, HB3724, HB3803, HB3804, HB3805, HB3806, HB3810, HB3816, HB3832, HB3887, HB4127, HB4129, HB4130, HB4131, HB4163, HB4187, HB4229, HB4238, HB4454, HB4588, HB4643, HB4736, HB4738, HB4739, HB4945, HB5015, HB5616, SB767, SB1619, SB1738, HJR5, HJR2, HB1399, HB388, HB 114, HB205, HB2789, HB2791, HB499, HB2960, HB3163, HB3135, HB2427, HB1672, HB1722, HB2618, HB879, HB 1126, HB4134, HB3513, HB1445, HB1893, HB1734, HB3229, HB3306, HB 1276, HB3516, HB4145, HB1585, HB4810, HB2558, HB2742, HB1695, HB33, HB144, HB 109, HB 103, HB148, HB3809, HB2217, HB220, HB2421, HB2363, HB421, HB2455, HB3711, HB2559, HB2775, HB3126, HB3666, HB3595, HB3260, HB3376, HB3826, HB3770, HB1831, HB2614, HB3113, HB322, HB431, HB869, HB 1203, HB 1244, HB1875, HB1950, HB2152, HB2341, HB2809, HB2856, HB3012, SB1415, SB1058, SB487, SB1499, SB513, SB1697, SB1197, SB1437, SB1809, SB836, SB1879, SB1145, SB963, SB1038, SB1147, SB914, SB711, SB1409, HB3707, HB589, HB1360, HB2337, HB2391, HB718, HB23, HB2436, HB1500, HJR7, HJR112, HB34, HB133, HB 112, HB 119, HB 128, HB 130, HB132, HB2756, HB166, HB406, HB186, HB271, HB331, HB380, HB1583, HB1584, HB1819, HB621, HB303, HB552, HB366, HB463, HB 1211, HB1327, HB1461, HB923, HB1760, HB2043, HB2467, HB5333, HB5265, HB1592, HB1576, HB1552, HB2018, HB3511, HB1781, HB2013, HB2340, HB2349, HB2508, HB2970, HB2520, HB865, HB2851, HB3385, HB3336, HB3529, HB3309, HB 1127, HB 1232, HB1397, HB4236, HB1804, HB1926, HB4041, HB1965, HB1964, HB2679, HB2730, HB3698, HB3699, HB3354, HB163, HB201, HB272, HB333, HB405, HB519, HB569, HB654, HB694, HB791, HB 1006, HB 1136, HB 1240, HB 1266, HB 1275, HB1437, HB1532, HB1675, HB1842, HB1868, HB1888, HB1894, HB1943, HB1990, HB2029, HB2061, HB2286, HB2523, HB2622, HB2626, HB2652, HB2692, HB2842, HB2885, HB2914, HB3016, HB3096, HB3129, HB3248, HB3251, HB3255, HB3479, HB3611, HB3623, HB3701, HB3724, HB3803, HB3804, HB3805, HB3806, HB3810, HB3816, HB3832, HB3887, HB4127, HB4129, HB4130, HB4131, HB4163, HB4187, HB4229, HB4238, HB4454, HB4588, HB4643, HB4736, HB4738, HB4739, HB4945, HB5015, HB5616, SB767, SB1619, SB1738, HCR77

Keywords: Information Resources, Department governance, cybersecurity, state assistance, procurement training, technology resources, advisory committees, water fund, Texas water supply, constitutional amendment, state revenue, infrastructure, parental rights, child upbringing, government interference, Texas legislation, science park district, economic development, technology innovation, higher education collaboration

Bills: SCR12, HB221, HB509, HCR58, SB78, SB25, SB80, SB132, SB155, SB157, SB202, SB228, SB250, SB414, SB433, SB479, SB513, SCR9, SCR58, SB65, SB215, SB249, SB269, SB282, SB296, SB323, SB363, SB369, SB474, SB490, SB492, SB500, SB514, HCR32, HB17, HB41, HB73, HB223, HB244, HB759, HB906, HB966, HB1006, HB1009, HB1086, HB1107, HB1112, HB1215, HB1242, SB217, SB283, SB469, HB36, HB42, HB74, HB119, HB159, HB259, HB302, HB414, HB459, HB776, HB848, HB956, HB1017, HB1028, HB1095, SB208, SB312, SB382, SB389, HB210, HB258, HB359, HB368, HB468, HB552, HB732, HB784, HB870, HB953, HB1117, HB1236

Keywords: logging, recognition, John Keith, environment, safety, Mississippi River bridge, Trump Expressway, transportation, federal funding, Louisiana highways, injection wells, public hearing, geologic sequestration, environmental impact, public comment, Ascension Parish, state capitol, economic development, community partnership, celebration day

Bills: SCR12, HB221, HB509, HCR58, SB78, SB25, SB80, SB132, SB155, SB157, SB202, SB228, SB250, SB414, SB433, SB479, SB513, SCR9, SCR58, SB65, SB215, SB249, SB269, SB282, SB296, SB323, SB363, SB369, SB474, SB490, SB492, SB500, SB514, HCR32, HB17, HB41, HB73, HB223, HB244, HB759, HB906, HB966, HB1006, HB1009, HB1086, HB1107, HB1112, HB1215, HB1242, SB217, SB283, SB469, HB36, HB42, HB74, HB119, HB159, HB259, HB302, HB414, HB459, HB776, HB848, HB956, HB1017, HB1028, HB1095, SB208, SB312, SB382, SB389, HB210, HB258, HB359, HB368, HB468, HB552, HB732, HB784, HB870, HB953, HB1117, HB1236

Keywords: logging, recognition, John Keith, environment, safety, Mississippi River bridge, Trump Expressway, transportation, federal funding, Louisiana highways, injection wells, public hearing, geologic sequestration, environmental impact, public comment, Ascension Parish, state capitol, economic development, community partnership, celebration day

Summary: The Senate met with 29 members present, heard a prayer and national anthem presentation, and approved the journal without objection. The chamber then received multiple messages from the House on conference committee reports and concurrence actions, and took up a long calendar of Senate resolutions and House/Senate bills returned from the House with amendments. Several resolutions were adopted without objection, including commendations and requests for reports or studies, while others were left over or returned to the calendar. The Senate concurred in or adopted amendments on a series of bills covering registrar compensation (SB 25), broadband administration and reimbursement (SB 80), school safety master key boxes (SB 132), dental coverage for cancer treatment (SB 155), paid parental leave for educators (SB 157), election supervisor compensation days (SB 202), water utility service line replacement funding (SB 228), weight management services through the Office of Group Benefits (SB 250), medical debt protection (SB 414), Medicaid coverage of weight-loss medication (SB 443), and design-build authority for vertiport facilities (SB 513). It also adopted a House concurrent resolution urging backup motors for the St. Claude Avenue Bridge (HCR 32). One bill, SB 479 on removal of certain judges, had its amendments rejected and was sent to conference. The chamber then considered conference committee reports on several measures. Reports were adopted on SB 312 (labor organization dues and fees), SB 208 (veterans services and VA-related restrictions), SB 382 (workers’ compensation advisory council and reimbursement schedule timing), SB 389 (agent and athlete registration and fee review), and multiple House bills including HB 359 (party primary qualifying rules), HB 368 (New Orleans historic preservation lien procedures), HB 468 (wholesale residential real estate definitions), HB 552 (DWI-related responsive verdict language), HB 732 (motor vehicle fines/fees and hybrids), HB 870 and HB 1236 (pharmacy benefit manager and insurance provisions), and HB 1117 (prescription period issues). HB 210 on retroactivity was also adopted after debate. Several conference reports were temporarily passed over or returned to the calendar, including HB 953, and the Senate adjourned to reconvene the next morning for final work.

Bills: HB4420, HB3974, HB3016, HB3062, HB3021, HB3145, HB4128, HB3131, HB3015, HB3472, HB3453, HB1638, HB4126, HB2696, HB2710, HB3552, HB3031, HB3544, HB3521, HB4490, HB4488, HB1746, HJR1069, HB4428, HB4429, HB1170, HB3538, HB4124, HB3904, HB4106, HB2999, HB3982, HJR1077, HB3464, HB2588, HB3462, HB4440, HB3674, HB3345, HJR1067, HB4326, HB4331, HB4337, HB4338, HB4359, HB4392, HB3557, HJR1076, HB4003, HB3495, HB3497, HB3501, HB3505, HB3749, HB3011, HB4336, HB4346, HJR1087, HB3240, HB3647, HB3796, HB3969, HB3972, HB3983, HB3984, HB3989, HB3383, HB3130, HB4358, HB3327, HJR1055, HB3386, HJR1089, HB3087, HB2970, HB3314, HB4129, HB4199

Keywords: reading, intervention, literacy, education, third grade retention, teacher training, funding, Strong Readers Act, tort claims, inmate housing, government immunity, public trust, private prison, emergency legislation, vision screening, binocular vision, kindergarten, elementary education, health, firearm rights

Bills: HB4420, HB3974, HB3016, HB3062, HB3021, HB3145, HB4128, HB3131, HB3015, HB3472, HB3453, HB1638, HB4126, HB2696, HB2710, HB3552, HB3031, HB3544, HB3521, HB4490, HB4488, HB1746, HJR1069, HB4428, HB4429, HB1170, HB3538, HB4124, HB3904, HB4106, HB2999, HB3982, HJR1077, HB3464, HB2588, HB3462, HB4440, HB3674, HB3345, HJR1067, HB4326, HB4331, HB4337, HB4338, HB4359, HB4392, HB3557, HJR1076, HB4003, HB3495, HB3497, HB3501, HB3505, HB3749, HB3011, HB4336, HB4346, HJR1087, HB3240, HB3647, HB3796, HB3969, HB3972, HB3983, HB3984, HB3989, HB3383, HB3130, HB4358, HB3327, HJR1055, HB3386, HJR1089, HB3087, HB2970, HB3314, HB4129, HB4199

Keywords: reading, intervention, literacy, education, third grade retention, teacher training, funding, Strong Readers Act, tort claims, inmate housing, government immunity, public trust, private prison, emergency legislation, vision screening, binocular vision, kindergarten, elementary education, health, firearm rights

Bills: HB4420, HB3974, HB3016, HB3062, HB3021, HB3145, HB4128, HB3131, HB3015, HB3472, HB3453, HB1638, HB4126, HB2696, HB2710, HB3552, HB3031, HB3544, HB3521, HB4490, HB4488, HB1746, HJR1069, HB4428, HB4429, HB1170, HB3538, HB4124, HB3904, HB4106, HB2999, HB3982, HJR1077, HB3464, HB2588, HB3462, HB4440, HB3674, HB3345, HJR1067, HB4326, HB4331, HB4337, HB4338, HB4359, HB4392, HB3557, HJR1076, HB4003, HB3495, HB3497, HB3501, HB3505, HB3749, HB3011, HB4336, HB4346, HJR1087, HB3240, HB3647, HB3796, HB3969, HB3972, HB3983, HB3984, HB3989, HB3383, HB3130, HB4358, HB3327, HJR1055, HB3386, HJR1089, HB3087, HB2970, HB3314, HB4129, HB4199

Keywords: reading, intervention, literacy, education, third grade retention, teacher training, funding, Strong Readers Act, tort claims, inmate housing, government immunity, public trust, private prison, emergency legislation, vision screening, binocular vision, kindergarten, elementary education, health, firearm rights

Bills: HCR1, HCR2, SB2001, SB2002, SB2003, SB2004, SB2005, SB2006, SB2007, SB2008, SB2009, SB2010, SB2011, SB2012, SB2013, SB2014, SB2015, SB2016, SB2017, SB2018, SB2019, SB2020, SB2021, SB2022, SB2023, SB2024, SB2025, SB2026, SB2027, SB2028, SB2029, SB2030, SB2031, SB2032, SB2033, SB2034, SB2035, SB2036, SB2037, SB2038, SB2039, SB2040, SB2041, SB2042, SB2043, SB2044, SB2045, SB2046, SB2047, SB2048, SB2049, SB2050, SB2051, SB2052, SB2053, SB2054, SB2055, SB2056, SB2057, SB2058, SB2059, SB2060, SB2061, SB2062, SB2063, SB2064, SB2065, SB2066, SB2067, SB2068, SB2069, SB2070, SB2071, SB2072, SB2073, SB2074, SB2075, SB2076, SB2077, SB2078, SB2079, SB2080, SB2081, SB2082, SB2083, SB2084, SB2085, SB2086, SB2087, SB2088, SB2089, SB2090, SB2091, SB2092, SB2093, SB2094, SB2095, SB2096, SB2097, SB2098, SB2099, SB2100

Keywords: recess, legislative session, Hawaii State Legislature, 2026, Governor address, joint session, legislature, Hawaii, state of the state, Banyan Drive, Waiakea peninsula, Makaokū, Hilo, Hawaii Island, HCDA, Hawaii Community Development Authority, community development district, redevelopment, urban renewal, blight

Transcript Highlights:

• In other words, the audit would be conducted at the time the audit is conducted, and the audit would
• Why not conduct the audit? Why not conduct the audit, allow the audit to be conducted? Why not?
• This makes her part of the engagement team, even if she does not actually conduct...
• To conduct audits? Is there a process for doing that?
• conduct the annual financial audit of the state of Colorado.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The subcommittee hearing focused on whether the Office of the State Auditor may constitutionally audit the Massachusetts Legislature under Chapter 250 of the Acts of 2024 and what such an audit could include under generally accepted government auditing standards. Chair Cindy Friedman opened by explaining the background: voters approved Ballot Question 1 in November 2024, the law took effect in January 2025, and the Auditor then initiated audits of both chambers. The chair said the subcommittee was seeking expert testimony because the proposed audit scope, constitutionality, and possible bias concerns remained unresolved. Public testimony was invited, but no members of the public pre-registered; written testimony remained open for a short period after the hearing. The hearing then proceeded with invited experts on constitutional law/state government and auditing-related issues. Professor Lawrence Friedman testified that the ballot initiative’s approval by the Attorney General and by voters did not resolve constitutional questions, and he argued Chapter 250 violates the Massachusetts Constitution. He said the Legislature has constitutional authority to set its own rules and manage its proceedings, and that an executive-branch audit would intrude on legislative deliberation, speech and debate protections, and separation of powers. He also warned that even audits of supposedly administrative matters could become a vehicle for repeated document demands and litigation that would indirectly burden legislative functioning. In questioning, senators pressed him on the line between administrative and deliberative functions, the role of the Attorney General versus the courts, the possibility of retroactive audit scope, and whether prior legislative consent to audits mattered; he said prior consent would not bind future legislatures and that constitutionality is ultimately for the courts. Professor Ray La Raja also opposed the audit, framing it as a threat to institutional independence and representative democracy. He argued that allowing an executive-branch official to audit the Legislature without consent would upset separation of powers, chill internal debate, and create a precedent for broader executive intrusion. He said voters often support “transparency” reforms without fully appreciating institutional consequences, and that legislatures should defend their autonomy, especially amid what he described as broader executive overreach nationally. Senators asked about chilling effects, the practical distinction between administrative and core legislative functions, and whether the courts or the Legislature should resolve the issue; he said the courts would ultimately adjudicate disputes, but the Legislature should not waive its constitutional authority lightly. Jean Kempthorne took the opposite view, arguing the audit is permissible and should proceed. She said the state auditor is a constitutional officer accountable directly to the people, that the audit power can be expanded by statute, and that separation of powers does not require watertight compartments. She contended the audit would not displace core legislative powers because the auditor can only evaluate operations, report findings, and make recommendations. She also argued the Legislature itself already conducts audits of other branches, so it is inconsistent to claim an audit of the Legislature is unconstitutional. In response to senators’ questions, she said there are guardrails against truly intrusive requests, but that the administrative-versus-legislative distinction is not a workable bright line; she suggested disputes should be handled case by case, with objections, negotiation, or litigation if specific requests go too far. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• In 2021, the criminal conduct.
• <00:42:13.040> They criminal conduct impeachable. They criminal conduct impeachable.
• <00:48:13.200> On judge's conduct. Here are the facts. On judge's conduct.
• Judge Goodman said the conduct.
• We can conduct of Judge Goodman.

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But as I was conduct that is troubling.
• Um, I think what we do is we look at the individual conduct and we determine how serious that conduct
• :20.280> context serious that conduct is in its context serious that conduct is in its context
• <00:36:20.200> so Are we trying to change the conduct so Are we trying to change the conduct
• directly addressing the alleged conduct directly addressing the alleged conduct from<00:45:44.880

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:47:40.480> who into the conduct of the legislature who into the conduct of the legislature
• <00:56:51.040> under investigations should be conducted under investigations should be conducted
• <01:06:06.640> without investigation conducted without investigation conducted without political
• interference and conducted political interference and conducted with<01:06:09.359> urgency.
• <01:07:36.559> a<01:07:36.960> a the ability uh to conduct a a the ability uh to conduct

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Those are conduct taken was reasonable.
• It depends on whether or not this is the first time this conduct is similar conduct has happened by this
• We need to terminate this employee based on this conduct.
• We need to terminate this employee based on this conduct.
• We need to terminate this employee based on this conduct.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee opened with routine business, including the Pledge of Allegiance, seating alternates, and approval of the minutes and consent calendar. Both were approved without opposition. The committee then moved to the regular calendar, beginning with Department of Environmental Services drinking water rules (2532). Staff noted that the final proposal deleted requirements that had been in the initial proposal, making the published notice technically inaccurate because it said there were no substantive changes. The agency responded that the requirements still exist in other rules, that regulated entities and the Water Council were notified, and that the public had notice through related hearings. After discussion about whether a new noticed hearing was needed, the committee approved the rule. The next item was Department of Administrative Services personnel rule 2510 on seniority and employee performance evaluation. Staff raised informational comments and one unclear comment about language that appeared to require a checkbox even though no form exists, and about evaluation categories that could overlap. The agency said the checkbox language should be removed, but defended the overlapping categories as part of a long-standing template used by agencies for the past 10 years. Members discussed whether the language was too ambiguous or could lead to inconsistent application, but the committee ultimately approved the rule with a condition striking the checkbox language in the affected sections. The committee then considered personnel rule 25109 on investigations, discipline, non-disciplinary communications, and non-disciplinary removal. Staff recommended clarifying language distinguishing license suspension from termination for cause, and questioned whether the sexual-harassment discipline language was too broad because the same conduct could fit multiple discipline levels. The agency agreed to add the suggested clarification for the license-suspension provision, but argued the sexual-harassment language should remain because another rule already provides the factors for determining the appropriate discipline and the agency needs discretion for fact-specific cases. The discussion included concerns about how non-verbal conduct might be treated, but the committee moved toward conditional approval with the agreed clarification and approval of the rest of the rule as written.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate that the Judicial Conduct Senate that the Judicial Conduct Commission<01:25:58.080> conduct
• <01:30:05.840> Commission the [snorts] Judicial Conduct Commission the [snorts] Judicial Conduct
• <01:33:57.560> of govern the non-criminal conduct of govern the non-criminal conduct of judges
• In Section 2, the Judicial Conduct Commission should immediately conduct open and public proceedings
• without deciding whether her conduct without deciding whether her conduct constitutes constitutes

Keywords: In an effort to stave off issues that may occur with long format live streams, we have split this stream into two parts., 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, for the purpose of conducting the sunset reviews of the Department of Gaming, Racing Commission
• When we last conducted a sunset review of the Racing Commission in 2007, and it conducted a self-review
• And it conducted a self-review in 2020.
• We last conducted a sunset review of the Boxing and MMA Commission in 2000, and it conducted a self-review
• But yes, each operator brings on their own outside audit firm to conduct their audit.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The second thing is many of the hundreds of boards that we have are conducting routine business.
• of boards that we have are conducting of boards that we have are conducting routine<00:05:10.479
• explicitly says it's okay to conduct explicitly says it's okay to conduct your<00:05:22.800>
• The meetings still can be conducted with individuals that are in other locations and are videoing in.
• The meetings still can be conducted with individuals that are in other locations and are videoing in.

Keywords: HB 66 – discussion began at 00:03:37, 958, all

Summary: The House State Government Committee met and established a quorum after opening with the Pledge of Allegiance and introductions of several guests and interns. Representatives introduced their interns and other visitors, who were welcomed by the chair before the committee turned to its only agenda item, House Bill 66, sponsored by Representative Hodgson. The committee adopted a committee substitute for HB 66. Hodgson explained that the bill concerns the use of video meetings by public agencies, boards, and commissions. The substitute would require agencies to post members’ names, term dates, and contact information; allow routine, informational, or advisory meetings to be conducted entirely by video conference to reduce travel costs; require a physical quorum for meetings involving policy, taxation, regulation, or large grants; and require agencies to adopt procedures for remote participation. He emphasized that the bill would not affect legislative committee meetings. Members asked whether the bill would apply to local boards, whether board members are compensated for attendance and travel, and whether it would affect legislative committees. Hodgson said it would apply broadly to public agencies, including local boards such as library boards, but not to legislative committees. He also said compensation for attendance would remain unchanged, while travel expenses would not be paid when no travel occurs. The committee then voted HB 66 favorably with 18 yes votes and one pass, and later adopted a title amendment by voice vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I certainly understand conduct that is troubling.
• So is this conduct well situated in our framework of offenses?
• I think what we do is we look at the individual conduct and we determine how serious that conduct is
• So changing it to a felony is not going to change the conduct.
• So changing it to a felony is not going to change the conduct.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• And there is a quorum, and so we're duly constituted to conduct business.
• This is prepare them for sexual conduct.
• <00:05:12.880> But minor to engage in sexual conduct.
• But minor to engage in sexual conduct.
• So it's separate courses of conduct.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The House Judiciary Committee met with a quorum and considered four bills. House Bill 4, relating to grooming a minor, was presented as a response to child sexual abuse concerns and would create criminal penalties for adults who groom or solicit minors for sexual conduct. Members raised questions about possible impacts on teachers, youth ministers, nonprofits, and other good-faith communications, as well as concerns about vagueness and age thresholds. The sponsor and supporters said the bill was intended to target predatory conduct while exempting job-related, age-appropriate, and other non-predatory discussions. The committee approved HB 4 favorably by a vote of 14 yes, 0 no, and 5 pass. House Bill 84, dealing with local government liability for riot-related property damage, was described as a clarification of longstanding Kentucky law so it would apply to consolidated and unified local governments such as Louisville. The sponsor said the bill preserves accountability when governments have notice of a riot and fail to act, while opponents questioned whether language about citizens’ aid could encourage vigilante behavior. The sponsor and another member said the bill was not about vigilanteism but about preserving existing rights and ensuring equal protection for property owners across the state. HB 84 passed favorably by a vote of 15 yes, 1 no, and 1 pass. House Bill 188, relating to public safety in jails, would extend peer-support confidentiality protections from police officers to jail employees and add jail and medical staff to third-degree assault protections. The sponsor said the measure was prompted by concerns from Warren County jail leadership and was intended to improve mental and physical safety at no cost to taxpayers. Members voiced support for extending protections to jail and penitentiary staff, and the committee passed HB 188 favorably with 18 yes votes and no opposition. House Bill 143, relating to fiduciary bonds, would allow fiduciary bonds to be notarized instead of attested by the circuit court clerk, a change described as a practical request from clerks and attorneys. It passed unanimously, 18 yes, 0 no, 0 pass, and the committee then adjourned.