Transcript Highlights:

• And look, we've had a great relationship with the federal delegation, with the governor, with the legislature
• Therefore, be it resolved that the Senate of the Legislature of Louisiana does hereby designate Wednesday
• proceedings and mechanisms to disinherit successors without a will and to report its findings to the legislature

Bills: SR110 , SR109 , SCR58 , SCR59 , SCR12 , HB198 , HB225 , HB508 , HB512 , HB599 , HB632 , HB763 , HB909 , HB971 , HB989 , HB1066 , HB1171 , HB1204 , HB1231 , HB1246 , HB1248 , HB1250 , HB221 , HCR41 , HCR63 , HCR76 , HCR77 , HCR86 , HCR92 , HCR93 , HCR58 , SB83 , SB135 , SB143 , SB155 , SB157 , SB202 , SB237 , SB261 , SB276 , SB295 , SB388 , SB450 , SB465 , HB17 , HB21 , HB42 , HB45 , HB51 , HB55 , HB74 , HB106 , HB108 , HB133 , HB140 , HB159 , HB168 , HB215 , HB226 , HB263 , HB296 , HB299 , HB322 , HB324 , HB364 , HB519 , HB535 , HB538 , HB568 , HB571 , HB622 , HB635 , HB676 , HB772 , HB784 , HB821 , HB823 , HB1006 , HB1018 , HB1033 , HB1034 , HB1043 , HB1070 , HB1134 , HB1237 , HB1239 , SB162 , SB382 , SR93 , SCR40 , SCR30 , SB35 , SB65 , SB215 , SB228 , SB246 , SB249 , SB268 , SB269 , SB282 , SB283 , SB296 , SB323 , SB338 , SB363 , SB369 , SB408 , SB431 , SB474 , SB484 , SB490 , SB492 , SB500 , SB501 , SB513 , HCR6 , HCR31 , HB297 , HB305 , HB336 , HB337 , HB351 , HB436 , HB594 , HB789 , HB956 , HB957 , HB995 , HB1040 , HB50 , HB117 , HB120 , HB122 , HB139 , HB148 , HB149 , HB185 , HB247 , HB271 , HB286 , HB301 , HB358 , HB359 , HB384 , HB413 , HB428 , HB450 , HB462 , HB547 , HB613 , HB631 , HB657 , HB669 , HB675 , HB680 , HB691 , HB712 , HB716 , HB720 , HB723 , HB727 , HB728 , HB735 , HB747 , HB759 , HB825 , HB842 , HB845 , HB846 , HB903 , HB904 , HB907 , HB923 , HB929 , HB941 , HB962 , HB965 , HB1036 , HB287 , HB370 , HB515 , HB521 , HB570 , HB1200 , HB29 , HB39 , HB58 , HB67 , HB73 , HB76 , HB77 , HB82 , HB112 , HB121 , HB125 , HB132 , HB134 , HB151 , HB154 , HB155 , HB161 , HB166 , HB187 , HB191 , HB207 , HB211 , HB224 , HB238 , HB241 , HB242 , HB250 , HB260 , HB265 , HB275 , HB300 , HB320 , HB338 , HB339 , HB349 , HB379 , HB399 , HB427 , HB463 , HB464 , HB468 , HB545 , HB550 , HB551 , HB565 , HB588 , HB639 , HB725 , HB782 , HB805 , HB808 , HB834 , HB847 , HB853 , HB858 , HB861 , HB883 , HB916 , HB937 , HB977 , HB1012 , HB1027 , HB1044 , HB1054 , HB1091 , HB1117 , HB90 , HB127 , HB138 , HB150 , HB201 , HB268 , HB273 , HB285 , HB315 , HB354 , HB355 , HB360 , HB376 , HB445 , HB506 , HB606 , HB649 , HB665 , HB681 , HB721 , HB746 , HB757 , HB781 , HB835 , HB844 , HB857 , HB872 , HB886 , HB889 , HB892 , HB972 , HB982 , HB987 , HB1037 , HB1068 , HB1072 , HB1078 , HB1085 , HB1132 , HB1137 , HB1167 , HB1174 , HB1232 , HB1238 , HB36 , HB119 , HB126 , HB129 , HB245 , HB280 , HB677 , HB726 , HB850 , HB966 , SB68 , SB149

Keywords: youth fitness, school achievement, Lafayette Parish, Louisiana Governor's Games, elementary education, Louisiana Arts Day, arts and culture, cultural heritage, artists, musicians, writers, performers, culture bearers, tourism, creative economy, economic impact, cultural sector, Louisiana Partnership for the Arts, festivals, visual arts

Transcript Highlights:

• , wellness, and recovery, and therefore be it resolved that the House of Representatives in the Legislature
• Therefore, be it resolved that the House of Representatives of the Legislature of Louisiana does hereby
• Forming standards and guiding future policy development, and whereas the Legislature is proud to honor
• Therefore, be it resolved that the House of Representatives of the Legislature of Louisiana does hereby
• Okay, so they would have the ability to raise the cap without coming to the legislature?

Bills: HR91 , HR92 , HR93 , HCR44 , HR84 , HR85 , HR86 , HR87 , HR88 , HR89 , HR90 , HCR42 , HCR43 , SCR21 , HB483 , HB484 , HB893 , HB1087 , HB1088 , HB1089 , HB1090 , HB1091 , HB1092 , HB1093 , HB1094 , HB1095 , HB1096 , HB1097 , HB1098 , HB1099 , HB1100 , HB1101 , HB1102 , HB1103 , HB1104 , HB1105 , HB1106 , HB1107 , HB1108 , HB1109 , HB1110 , HB1111 , HB1112 , HB1113 , HB1114 , HB1116 , HB1117 , HB1118 , HB1119 , HB1120 , HB1121 , HB1122 , HB1123 , HB1124 , HB1125 , HB1126 , HB1127 , HB1128 , HB1129 , HB1130 , HB1131 , HB1132 , HB1133 , HB1134 , HB1135 , HB1136 , HB1137 , HB1138 , HB1139 , HB1140 , HB1141 , HB1142 , HB1143 , HB1144 , HB1145 , HB1146 , HB1147 , HB1148 , HB1149 , HB1150 , HB1151 , HB1152 , HB1153 , HB1154 , HB1155 , HB1156 , HB1157 , HB1158 , HB1159 , HB1160 , HB1161 , HB1162 , HB1163 , HB1164 , HB1165 , HB1166 , HB1167 , HB1168 , HB1169 , HB1170 , HB1171 , HB1172 , HB1173 , HB1174 , HB1175 , HB1176 , HB1177 , HB1178 , HB1179 , HB1180 , HB1181 , HB1182 , HB1183 , HB1184 , HB1185 , HB1186 , HB1187 , HB1188 , HB1189 , HB1190 , HB1191 , HB1192 , HB1193 , HB1194 , HB1195 , HB1196 , HB1197 , HB1198 , HB1199 , HB1200 , HB1201 , HB1202 , HB1203 , HB1204 , HB1205 , HB1206 , HB1207 , HB1208 , HB1209 , HB1210 , HB1211 , HB1212 , HB1213 , HB1214 , HB1215 , HB1216 , HB1217 , HB1218 , HB1219 , HB1220 , HB1221 , HB1222 , HB1223 , HB1224 , HB1225 , HB1226 , HB1227 , HB1228 , HB1229 , HB1230 , HB1231 , SB1 , SB54 , SB82 , SB87 , SB92 , SB93 , SB99 , SB104 , SB113 , SB114 , SB115 , SB123 , SB129 , SB133 , SB161 , SB162 , SB224 , SB236 , SB275 , SB280 , SB289 , SB305 , SB310 , SB325 , SB330 , SB339 , SB350 , SB359 , SB382 , SB410 , SB412 , HCR10 , HB54 , HB55 , HB67 , HB73 , HB125 , HB133 , HB158 , HB168 , HB169 , HB191 , HB195 , HB205 , HB225 , HB245 , HB280 , HB283 , HB296 , HB319 , HB325 , HB339 , HB399 , HB407 , HB448 , HB482 , HB550 , HB591 , HB821 , HB826 , HB992 , HB995 , HB1085 , HB1086 , HR15 , HR20 , HCR14 , HCR6 , HCR19 , HB861 , HB889 , HB904 , HB907 , HB908 , HB929 , HB1009 , HB13 , HB23 , HB25 , HB32 , HB41 , HB90 , HB120 , HB121 , HB122 , HB127 , HB138 , HB139 , HB141 , HB179 , HB187 , HB213 , HB247 , HB286 , HB332 , HB344 , HB357 , HB367 , HB370 , HB462 , HB505 , HB527 , HB537 , HB605 , HB680 , HB681 , HB725 , HB780 , HB782 , HB847 , HB892 , HB911 , HB916 , HB1012 , HB81 , HB134 , HB154 , HB163 , HB170 , HB194 , HB217 , HB220 , HB254 , HB259 , HB290 , HB308 , HB311 , HB360 , HB382 , HB401 , HB410 , HB417 , HB463 , HB575 , HB592 , HB718 , HB723 , HB750 , HB755 , HB776 , HB812 , HB844 , HB882 , HB888 , HB961 , HB966 , HB980 , HB228 , HB289 , HB735 , HB796 , HB284 , HB301 , HB722 , HB468 , HB546 , HB746 , HB842 , HB923 , HB46 , HB166 , HB349 , HB352 , HB436 , HB588 , HB140 , HB429 , HB827 , HB953 , HB901 , HB9 , HB52 , HB58 , HB193 , HB400 , HB570 , HB577 , HB582 , HB733 , HB747 , HB868 , HB952

Keywords: Tulane University, education, research, economic impact, healthcare, Louisiana, condolences, memorial, community service, faith, legacy, centenarian, tribute, honor, longevity, philanthropy, youth leadership, fundraising, nonprofits, physical therapy

Transcript Highlights:

• To this date, the legislature has spoken three times, saying it believes the law is alive.
• And so it becomes a responsibility, in my mind, for the legislature to come up with that.
• A great deal of time as a legislature is spent trying to figure out ways to lower property taxes.
• That is the goal of our legislature every time we pass a law. And yes, that is right.
• The law that we passed in the 86th Legislature, it's time to get a little bit more stern.

Bills: SB31 , SB33 , SB20 , SB217 , SB264 , SB269 , SB650 , SB681 , SB528 , SB502 , SB740 , SB916 , SB995 , SB10 , SB2581 , SB2570 , SB3031 , SB24 , SB379 , SB1171 , SB1121 , SB1120 , SB1061 , SB1036 , SB1019 , SB890 , SB11 , SB868 , SB1188 , SB1254 , SB2778 , SB2543 , SB2443 , SB1333 , SB1259 , SB1401 , SB1404 , SB2139 , SB2165 , SB2237 , SB2268 , SB1202 , SB1198 , SB1212 , SB1451 , SB1470 , SB1498 , SB965 , SB1547 , SB1667 , SB1818 , SB1902 , SB2129 , SB2078 , SB2069 , SB1737 , SB1589 , SB1318 , SB387 , SB1150 , SB1574 , SB2127 , SB3034 , SB860 , SB1278 , SCR5 , SCR32 , SB4 , SB23 , SB1762 , SB34 , SB60 , SB706 , SB1814 , SB1220 , SB523 , SB565 , SB1253 , SB840 , SB764 , SB2383 , SB2155 , SB1535 , SB1423 , SB1566 , SB1804 , SB1728 , SB1816 , SB1952 , SB75 , SB2068 , SB1455 , SB213 , SB627 , SB2037 , SB670 , SB896 , SB917 , SB1184 , SB971 , SB1255 , SB1261 , SB1283 , SB991 , SB1733 , SB21 , SB231 , SB739 , SB1252 , SB1371 , SB646 , SB3 , SCR27 , SB552 , SB1405 , SB1948 , SB243 , SJR1 , SB31 , SB33 , SB20 , SB217 , SB264 , SB269 , SB650 , SB681 , SB528 , SB502 , SB740 , SB916 , SB995 , SB10 , SB2581 , SB2570 , SB3031 , SB24 , SB379 , SB1171 , SB1121 , SB1120 , SB1061 , SB1036 , SB1019 , SB890 , SB11 , SB868 , SB1188 , SB1254 , SB2778 , SB2543 , SB2443 , SB1333 , SB1259 , SB1401 , SB1404 , SB2139 , SB2165 , SB2237 , SB2268 , SB1202 , SB1198 , SB1212 , SB1451 , SB1470 , SB1498 , SB965 , SB1547 , SB1667 , SB1818 , SB1902 , SB2129 , SB2078 , SB2069 , SB1737 , SB1589 , SB1318 , SB387 , SB1150 , SB1574 , SB2127 , SB3034 , SB860 , SB1278 , SCR5 , SCR32 , SB546 , SB647 , SB648 , SB1493 , SB1709 , SB2001 , HB5669 , HB3115 , HB5655 , HB5675 , HB5689 , HB5690 , HB5653 , HB3228 , HB2802 , HB45 , HB1318 , HB5560 , HB2894 , HB4344 , HB2775 , HB33 , HB 12 , HB148

Keywords: SB 31, Life of the Mother Act, Texas abortion law, medical emergency, reasonable medical judgment, pregnancy complications, maternal health, life-threatening condition, ectopic pregnancy, spontaneous abortion, miscarriage, unborn child, abortion exception, abortion ban, physician liability, health care liability claim, aiding and abetting, Texas Medical Board, State Bar of Texas, continuing medical education

Transcript Highlights:

• To audit the Legislature, there wouldn't be a check on the Legislature.
• And the legislature, the check and balance on the legislature is also the ballot box. Yes.
• Powers of the auditor can be enhanced by the legislature and only the legislature?
• Legislature.
• The state legislature.

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:

• From my recollection during my time in the legislature, about the legislature being subject to the public
• I was in the legislature...
• when I was in the Legislature.
• This is an easy one for the Legislature.
• This is an easy one for the Legislature.

Summary: The hearing opened with committee chairs explaining the Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions’ role under Article 48 and outlining the process for initiative petition 25-14, H5-004, an act to improve access to public records. The first panel consisted of subject-matter experts. William Clark of the National Conference of State Legislatures gave an overview of public records laws across states, noting that all states have some form of open-records law but that exemptions for legislatures vary widely. He discussed common legislative exemptions, legislative privilege, and court cases showing that outcomes often turn on specific constitutional and statutory language. Rebecca Murray, General Counsel for the Secretary of the Commonwealth, described Massachusetts public records trends, saying state agency requests and appeals have risen sharply since the 2017 law update, with 2025 setting a record for appeals. She said the initiative would extend the public records law to the General Court and the Governor’s Office and add exemptions specific to those offices, while also noting resource concerns from the growing volume of requests and appeals.

Transcript Highlights:

• From my recollection during my time in the legislature, about the legislature being subject to the public
• I believe that this legislature is trying to do some really important work on a lot of... ...legislature
• I was in the legislature...
• when I was in the Legislature.
• This is an easy one for the legislature.

Bills: H5004

Committee: Joint Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-14, H 5-004, “an act to improve access to public records.” Chairs Cindy Friedman and Alice Peisch outlined the Article 48 process and explained that the committee was hearing expert testimony, then proponents, then opponents, before any public testimony. The first expert, Will Clark of the National Conference of State Legislatures, gave a general overview of public records laws across the states, emphasizing that all states have some form of open-records law but that exemptions, timelines, fees, and coverage of legislatures vary widely. He discussed legislative exemptions, legislative privilege, and court cases showing that outcomes often turn on the exact language of state constitutions, statutes, and chamber rules. Rebecca Murray, General Counsel for the Secretary of the Commonwealth, testified about Massachusetts public records administration, saying requests and appeals have risen sharply since the 2017 law update, with state agency requests increasing from 22,572 in 2017 to 47,776 in 2025 and appeals reaching a record 4,051 cases in 2025. She said the initiative would extend the law to the General Court and the Governor’s office and add exemptions for those branches, while warning that the volume and complexity of requests could require more resources. The proponents, led by Jesse Littlewood of the Coalition for Healthy Democracy, Scotia Hila of Act on Mass, and Auditor Diana DiZoglio, argued that Massachusetts is an outlier for exempting the legislature and governor from public records law and that the proposal would create needed accountability without exposing personal constituent communications or internal deliberations. They said the measure would make records such as committee votes, final bill drafts, amendments, expenditures, attendance records, minutes, and public testimony available, while preserving exemptions for constituent services, draft legislation, internal staff communications, and policy development discussions. DiZoglio emphasized that the initiative is aimed at basic administrative and financial records, citing her own difficulty obtaining receipts, contracts, and procurement documents, and said the public should be able to see how taxpayer dollars are spent. Committee members questioned the witnesses extensively about the scope of exemptions, constituent privacy, legislative privilege, and whether the measure could reach communications with nonprofits or lobbying-type interactions; proponents responded that privacy and constituent-service exemptions were intended to remain in place, though some members pressed for clearer statutory language. The hearing also included a contentious exchange over whether the initiative could affect legislative communications and whether the Senate had already taken a position against the measure. Some members raised concerns about separation of powers, legislative privilege, and the possibility of exposing constituent communications or internal deliberations, while proponents argued that the initiative was narrowly tailored and that any legal disputes could be resolved in court. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing. The committee concluded the testimony portion after hearing from the proponents and their questions, with the matter left pending for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• In 2005, the legislature also enacted the Main Street tax credit.
• Also, the 2026 legislature narrowed the exemption.
• That's an item that the legislature stated it was interested in.
• That's an item that the legislature stated it was interested in.
• Creates difficulty in JLARC staff reporting to the legislature this item that the legislature is interested

Committee: Joint Citizen Commission for Performance Measurement of Tax Preferences

Summary: The Citizen Commission for Performance Measurement of Tax Preferences met on August 4, 2026, with all five commissioners present. The commission approved the May 26, 2026 minutes, welcomed new commissioner Diane Tabilius, and re-elected Andy Knopfsiger Meadows as chair and Dr. Sharon Keiko as vice chair. JLARC staff also introduced two Evans School interns who are assisting with preliminary research for the 2027 review cycle. JLARC presented preliminary findings on seven tax preference reviews, focusing most heavily on the Main Street communities credit, the Equitable Access to Credit Program, and the urban data center exemption. Staff concluded that the Main Street preference has helped increase the number of communities and businesses and recommended continuing it, while also recommending that DAHP collect more detailed and standardized business-count data. The Equitable Access to Credit Program was found to support underserved communities and was also recommended for continuation. The urban data center exemption was found to have been used only for refurbishment projects, not new construction, and staff recommended letting it expire; commissioners and Representative Paulette discussed the need for better performance measures, cost-per-job analysis, and clearer legislative intent language in tax preference statements. Staff then reviewed airplane modification, landfill biogas, automotive adaptive equipment, and housing for people with developmental disabilities. The airplane modification preference was found to likely support jobs and state tax revenue and was recommended for continuation. The landfill biogas preference was also recommended for continuation, with a suggestion for more detailed reporting on use and renewable natural gas production. The automotive adaptive equipment exemption was found to continue providing relief to disabled veterans and service members and was recommended for continuation, while the housing transfer exemption for adults with developmental disabilities had not been used and was recommended to expire. No public testimony was taken at this meeting, and the commission noted that public testimony would be heard at its September meeting before final comments are adopted in October.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> the legislature the legislature &gt;&gt; all<00:05:00.520><c> the</c><00:05:00.600><c> requirements
• </c> upon this legislature upon this legislature &gt;&gt; and<00:05:03.680><c> I</c><00:05:03.760><c>
• </c> &gt;&gt; of any other member of this legislature &gt;&gt; of any other member of this legislature
• </c> &gt;&gt; of any other member of this legislature &gt;&gt; of any other member of this legislature
• </c> &gt;&gt; of any other member of the legislature &gt;&gt; of any other member of the legislature

Summary: The meeting was a ceremonial swearing-in for newly elected Mississippi senators, with family members and guests present for photos and congratulations after each oath. The presiding officer repeatedly administered the standard oath of office, which included pledges to support the U.S. and state constitutions, faithfully discharge legislative duties, and not vote based on promises from other legislators. Senators Johnny DuPree, Don Harkness, Teresa Gillespie Eason, Kamasha B. Mumford, and Senator Pope were among those introduced and sworn in. The transcript is largely focused on the formal oath-taking, brief remarks of welcome, and photo opportunities, rather than legislative debate or policy discussion. No bills were discussed, and no votes or substantive committee actions were taken in this segment.

Transcript Highlights:

• In 2005, the legislature also enacted the Main Street tax credit.
• Also, the 2026 legislature narrowed the exemption.
• That's an item that the legislature stated it was interested in.
• That's an item that the legislature stated it was interested in.
• Creates difficulty in JLARC staff reporting to the legislature this item that the legislature is interested

Committee: Joint Citizen Commission for Performance Measurement of Tax Preferences

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, that's not the Legislature. That's not the elected representatives.
• That was also approved by the legislature and signed by the Governor.
• So if the Legislature authorizes additional resources...
• I understand that's a concern of the Legislature.
• from GDRF to Prop 4 when the legislature and voters approved Prop 4.

Summary: The committee hearing focused heavily on CARB’s broad trailer bill request for regulatory fee authority. Finance and CARB argued the proposal would let CARB develop fees to recover reasonable costs for implementing and enforcing regulations, while the LAO recommended rejection because the authority was too broad, could apply to an entire division of code, and would delegate core legislative taxing/fee-setting power without enough guardrails. Members from both parties raised concerns about the breadth of the authority, accountability, affordability impacts, and whether the Legislature would be put in an up-or-down position after CARB had already developed regulations. CARB responded that fees would still go through a budget change proposal and legislative approval before collection, and cited existing examples such as transport refrigeration units and commercial harborcraft fees. The committee then reviewed CARB’s request for permanent resources to implement SB 905 on carbon capture, utilization, storage, and carbon dioxide removal. CARB said the Legislature had previously authorized limited-term positions and funding, but it had struggled to recruit and retain staff with specialized regulatory and technical expertise, and that the work had included pre-rulemaking contracts, technology review, and permit-related preparation. Members questioned the pace of work, the use of limited-term positions, and whether additional permitting authority would be needed. CARB said it hoped to begin rulemaking later in the year if permanent resources were approved. Members also discussed the cap-and-trade spending plan, noting lower-than-expected auction revenues but higher interest earnings, and the need to monitor the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and possible May Revision changes. The committee then heard overviews of the zero-emission vehicle package, the Community Air Protection Program, demand-side grid support, and e-bike incentives. CARB described ongoing investments in community-based transportation equity, drayage trucks, harbor craft, and other clean technology demonstrations, while members pressed on affordability, program duplication, and whether enough funding was being directed to incentive programs. No formal votes were taken during the portion provided, and the chair repeatedly indicated that the hearing was intended to surface concerns for later budget negotiations.

Transcript Highlights:

• The legislature in 2022 decided it would not reenact that district.
• So what the legislature needs to do in this situation is just to attempt to... what the legislature needs
• a question really for this body, for the committee, and for the legislature.
• That's something that this legislature can consider. Do we need to redraw?
• Those are things that the legislature can consider.

Summary: The Select Committee on Congressional Redistricting met for an informational presentation from outside counsel Andy Bartos on the legal standards governing congressional redistricting. He reviewed federal Equal Protection principles, Florida’s non-diminishment provision, and Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, explaining how race can be considered in redistricting but generally cannot be the predominant factor. He also discussed the Florida Constitution’s tiered standards, including the prohibition on intentional political favoritism, compactness, and the requirement to use existing political and geographical boundaries where feasible. Bartos focused on two recent or pending cases: the Florida Supreme Court’s Black Voters Matter decision, which upheld the legislature’s 2022 congressional map and held that the non-diminishment clause does not justify making race predominant absent specific identifiable discrimination, and Louisiana v. Callais, pending before the U.S. Supreme Court, which may further clarify whether race may be used predominantly to comply with the Voting Rights Act or whether Section 2 remains constitutional as applied. He also explained how courts assess compactness and intent, and how data such as the 2020 census, voter registration, turnout, and election results are used for voting-rights analysis. Members asked about what triggers redistricting, whether the legislature must redraw maps now, what data is available in the mapping tool, how intent is measured, and whether public input opportunities will be provided. Bartos said redistricting timing is largely a legislative judgment unless a court requires changes, that the committee can consider whether BVM or the eventual Callais decision warrants revisions, and that the Callais ruling will bind Louisiana directly but serve as precedent for other courts. No votes or legislative actions were taken, and the meeting adjourned after the presentation and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• They were overturned by the state legislature.
• Second, a few areas of common impact themes of where legislatures have really felt.
• Utah's term limits were adopted in 1994 by the legislature.
• Fewer long-serving legislators are appearing in nearly every legislature.
• We'll talk about a few themes in how we see term limits impacting legislatures.

Summary: The Legislative Procedure and Arrangements Committee met with a quorum, approved the previous meeting minutes, and heard an update from Garty Consulting on the interim study of legislative term limits. The consultants outlined their research plan and preliminary themes, including loss of institutional knowledge, shifts in power toward executive agencies and lobbyists, reduced long-term policy capacity, faster leadership turnover, and recruitment/support challenges. They also described possible recommendation categories ranging from constitutional and statutory changes to procedural and cultural adjustments. Committee members asked about how other states repealed term limits, how the public survey would address perceptions of term limits, and how stakeholder focus groups would be selected. The committee also heard a presentation from NCSL on term limits in other states, including examples from Nevada, Montana, and Colorado, with discussion of training programs, staffing changes, annual-session debates, bill limits, and impacts on decorum and leadership continuity. Several members requested follow-up data on part-time versus full-time legislatures, taxpayer costs, and nonpartisan staff devoted to oversight. The committee then considered revisions to the legislature’s workplace harassment policy and related forms. Legislative Council explained changes that clarified the definition of harassment, added captions for readability, extended several deadlines, allowed informal resolution before a review panel is appointed, clarified the role of Legislative Council in intake and documentation, and updated confidentiality/open-records language. Members, especially Senator Hogan, said the revisions better formalize the role of counsel and provide a less intimidating path for resolving complaints. The committee adopted the revised policy and forms by roll call vote. Finally, the committee approved a motion to enter executive session at 1:00 p.m. to review the results of a capital threat assessment and discuss legislator security, citing the applicable open-meetings exemptions. Members were instructed to limit discussion to the stated purpose and not take final action until returning to open session.

Transcript Highlights:

• The legislature? That's essentially what this does.
• Now we're going to write a BCP to ask the legislature for.
• That, I think, kind of puts the onus on the legislature.
• It's a challenging request on the part of the legislature.
• I understand that's a concern for the legislature.

Transcript Highlights:

• But my first thought was that we often move very slow in the Legislature, and so... ...the Legislature
• And that would be that after the Legislature, And that would be that after the Legislature, I'm sorry
• Ability to say, okay, it comes to the Legislature. The Legislature then votes for it.
• And so the Legislature can have some feedback on it so that when 2037 does come around, the Legislature
• And so the Legislature can have some feedback on it so that when 2037 does come around, the Legislature

Summary: The committee heard several bills focused largely on regulatory oversight, food insecurity, state symbols, immigration-related funding, and ethnic media outreach. SB 885 and SB 986 would require major regulations with estimated economic impacts over $50 million to come back to the Legislature for review; supporters said this would restore accountability and help address affordability, while opponents warned it would delay health, safety, and worker protections. SB 1025 would create an Office of Food Security and Affordability to coordinate food programs across state departments, expand outreach, run a hunger hotline, and analyze service gaps; members generally supported the goal but urged stronger reporting and oversight language. SB 1214 would designate the Western monarch as California’s state butterfly, and SB 1178 would designate the California yellow jacket as the state wasp, with testimony emphasizing conservation, ecology, and agricultural benefits. SB 1286 would recognize the California sea lion as the state pinniped, with supporters citing its role as a sentinel species and conservation success story. SB 1171 would make private entities that contract with ICE ineligible for state-funded grants or loans; supporters framed it as a response to ICE conduct, while opponents raised concerns about unintended impacts on contractors providing essential services and possible federal retaliation. SB 1358 would create the Ethnic and Community Media Equity Act to improve state advertising and outreach to ethnic and community media through a database and contracting requirements, with supporters arguing it would improve effectiveness and reach underserved communities. Several bills were advanced on committee votes, many with roll calls held open for absent members. SB 885, SB 986, SB 1025, SB 1214, SB 1178, SB 1286, and SB 1171 all received motions to do pass, with some members noting support but also urging amendments or guardrails, especially on timing, reporting, and oversight. The committee also took up a consent calendar of multiple items after quorum was established.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, the legislature requires a recurring review, Evaluations.
• In 2014, the legislature enacted four preferences related to In 2014, the legislature enacted four preferences
• The legislature set four objectives for these preferences.
• The legislature should continue the preference.
• And the legislature could Senior centers like government-owned centers.

Committee: Joint Citizen Commission for Performance Measurement of Tax Preferences

Summary: The Citizens Commission for Performance Measurement of Tax Preferences met on August 6, 2025, established a quorum, approved the May 7, 2025 minutes, and welcomed new commissioner Scott Edwards. Staff also noted the September meeting was moved to September 22 at 10 a.m. to accommodate his schedule, with written comments due beforehand for the October meeting. JLARC staff then presented preliminary 2025 tax preference performance reviews covering nine tax preferences. For natural gas used as transportation fuel, staff said the preferences reduce fuel costs but did not meet emissions-reduction goals because fewer vehicles and vessels converted to natural gas than anticipated; the auditor recommended continuing the utility and use tax exemptions, modifying reporting requirements, and continuing the marine-use exemption while considering a Department of Revenue work group’s recommendations. For travel agents and tour operators, staff said the preferences provide tax relief but that savings and beneficiary counts are shifting toward larger firms; the auditor recommended continuing the small-business rate with added objectives and metrics, and reviewing the higher rate for larger beneficiaries. For nonprofit low-income housing development, staff concluded the preference helps build homes for low-income households but that the current spending-based metric does not align well with the objective and reporting is inconsistent; the auditor recommended the legislature decide whether to continue it and, if so, consider a better metric and annual renewal. For multipurpose senior centers, staff said the preference meets its objective and recommended continuing it, with possible consideration of making it permanent. For disabled veteran adapted housing, staff said very few eligible veterans claim the remittance and recommended continuing it but modifying it, in consultation with the Department of Veterans Affairs, to improve use. For trade convention attendance, agricultural fertilizer and seed wholesaling, and agricultural crop protection products, staff recommended continuation, with some clarification or revised metrics where appropriate. For energy sales to a silicon smelter, staff said the preferences were unused because the facility was never built in Washington and recommended allowing them to expire. Commissioners asked several questions about the housing, senior center, and veteran-related preferences, focusing on reporting problems, the effect of grants and timing on housing metrics, and whether the veteran remittance is underused because federal grants already cover the tax. The commission also reviewed the public testimony questions to be used at the September meeting, where testimony on the preliminary reports will be heard.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think in this legislature, particularly in a divided, so closely divided legislature, we can't
• And I think in this legislature, particularly in a divided, so closely divided legislature, we can't
• And I think in this legislature, particularly in a divided, so closely divided legislature, we can't
• And I think in this legislature, particularly in a divided, so closely divided legislature, we can't
• </c><00:03:31.920><c> right</c> And the makeup of the legislature right And the makeup of the legislature

Transcript Highlights:

• But how would this benefit the Legislature? What's in it for us?
• That was done by the Legislature.
• Patel, about what's in it for the Legislature?
• I think the Legislature has really done a fantastic job.
• Closely with the Legislature.

Summary: The Assembly Education Committee first heard two bills. AB 1665 by Assemblymember Pacheco would require school sports coaches to complete approved mental health training. Supporters said coaches are trusted adults who are often first to notice student-athlete distress, and a witness described personal experience with body image and disordered eating pressures in athletics. There was no opposition, and the bill was moved out of committee on a due pass as amended motion to Appropriations, ultimately passing 9-0 after add-on votes. AB 2316 by Assemblymember Hoover would allow charter schools to apply for the same financial hardship relief in the state school facilities program that traditional districts can seek. Supporters argued this would improve parity and help smaller and low-income charter schools access permanent facilities; some initially opposed agencies said their concerns were addressed by amendments. The bill also passed unanimously, 9-0, to Appropriations. The committee then took up a consent calendar containing 12 additional measures, including bills on education funding, facilities, and other school-related matters, plus a resolution. Those items were approved on a 7-0 vote, with the roll left open for add-on votes. After the bill hearing portion was recessed and later reconvened, additional members added votes to AB 1665, AB 2316, and the consent calendar, bringing each to 9-0. The committee then held an informational hearing on state-level education governance, centered on Governor Newsom’s proposal to restructure the California Department of Education and the role of the elected Superintendent of Public Instruction, with AB 2117 serving as a policy vehicle carrying the same language and no action to be taken. Testimony came from the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the Education Commission of the States, and former CDE chief deputy Richard Zager. Witnesses reviewed the history of California’s governance structure, compared it with other states, and discussed accountability, legislative oversight, and the role of the superintendent under the proposal. Committee members raised concerns about preserving checks and balances, the fiscal implementation plan, county-office relationships, and whether the superintendent’s role would be reduced too far; no vote was taken at the informational hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• lead a Is independent of both the governor and the legislature.
• That was done by the Legislature.
• That was done by the Legislature.
• Patel, about what's in it for the Legislature?
• I think the Legislature has really done a fantastic job.

Committee: House Education

Transcript Highlights:

• We have three recommendations to help the legislature put the budget back on firm footing.
• We are open to discussing further reporting requirements with the Legislature as well.
• However, we acknowledge the importance of that topic to the Legislature.
• And as you recall, the state Legislature, the what our allocation was going to be.
• But we're open to continuing the dialogue with the Legislature.

Summary: Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 6 heard the Governor’s May Revision proposals for the judicial branch, the Board of State and Community Corrections, the Department of Justice, and the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. The Legislative Analyst’s Office opened with a warning that the state budget remains structurally imbalanced and urged the Legislature to avoid new ongoing spending unless offset by reductions elsewhere. In the judicial branch discussion, the Judicial Council highlighted language access funding, appellate court security, a backfill for the state court facilities construction fund, and an extension of the lactation room mandate; Finance supported most items but suggested reporting language on interpreter costs and reducing the General Fund backfill. Members raised concerns about judicial vacancies, long-term salary freezes, remote hearings, and the lack of progress on court staffing in some counties. For the Board of State and Community Corrections, the administration proposed $10 million one-time each for the Missing and Murdered Indigenous People grant program and a human trafficking vertical prosecution grant program. The LAO said both should be weighed against other priorities and suggested the Legislature consider whether the Tribal Nations Grant Fund could support MMIP work, while Finance said it preferred General Fund support and wanted more review before any fund swap. Members strongly supported MMIP funding and asked whether ongoing support would be considered. On the human trafficking grant, Finance said BSC was a good fit because of its grant administration experience and prior vertical prosecution work, while legislators asked why the program was not placed with the Office of Emergency Services as originally contemplated in prior legislation. The Department of Justice presented antitrust litigation funding, Medi-Cal Fraud and Elder Abuse staffing, completion of organized retail criminal enterprise cases, and trailer bill language for a continuous appropriation from the Victims of Consumer Fraud Restitution Fund. The LAO supported the antitrust account use but questioned the Unfair Competition Law Fund’s ability to cover the full request without General Fund repayment, and recommended against a continuous appropriation for the restitution fund in favor of a more limited mechanism with legislative oversight. Finance said the fund would remain solvent and defended the continuous appropriation as necessary to pay victims promptly. In the CDCR portion, the largest discussion centered on the Boston Consulting Group efficiency review and sharply reduced savings estimates; LAO said the department had not fully explained the proposed position eliminations or future $100 million savings target, while Finance said the work reflected deeper analysis and ongoing efforts to find savings. Members repeatedly pressed CDCR and Finance on the gap between earlier promised savings and the revised figures. CDCR also outlined population projections showing continued declines in prison and parole populations, while LAO again urged the state to close an additional prison to save ongoing costs. The department then walked through several May Revision items, including workers’ compensation funding, a Corcoran honor housing dorm, incarcerated firefighter pay implementation, an incarcerated menopause program, mental health receiver staffing, mental health resource teams and crisis intervention teams, medical classification staffing changes, and AI note-taking for the electronic health record. LAO generally recommended limiting-term funding and more reporting for many of these proposals, while Finance defended them as necessary ongoing investments or court-ordered obligations. Members questioned the cost of workers’ compensation, the need for more prison closures, the lack of funding for women’s facility violence prevention, and the timing and transparency of the BCG savings process. No votes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• And, you know, it's the Nebraska Legislature as the Nebraska Legislature turns, you know, but I would
• the Governor may have for the Legislature.
• people who work for us in the Legislature.
• And that is the way I think the Legislature should work.
• I move that the One Hundred Ninth Legislature, Second Session of the Nebraska Legislature, having finished

Bills: LR509 , LR510 , LR511