Transcript Highlights:

• If the school district was wrong, the school district pays. If the state was wrong, the state pays.
• And if they win, they pay nothing. If they lose, they pay $50. Under current law, yes.
• The district does not pay; the state pays.
• If the district is right, you don't pay. If the state is right, the school district. District pays.
• So that's... so the state would only pay for the state-created test? They pay for those tests.

Bills: HB8 , HB12 , SB 3 , HJR1 , SB 11 , SB 16 , SB 14 , HB8 , HB 12 , SB3 , HJR1 , SB11 , SB16 , SB14

Transcript Highlights:

• Those two things are that the prosecutor is required to establish the identity of the alleged victim,
• Those that want to start paying for it are going to start paying for it.
• Those that want to start paying for it are going to start paying for it so we can start clearing this
• There was a concern raised by another person testifying.
• If they come from you, I actually pay attention. So please do submit.

Committee: House Community Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• They just pay the additional fee, or we pay the additional fee for them. It's just a court cost.
• prosecutor.
• How do you compare pay-wise with the local nursing home? After the recent pay raises, much better.
• How do you compare pay-wise with the local nursing home? After the recent pay raises, much better.
• We do not pay for that. Okay.

Summary: Attorney General Catherine Hanaway presented the Office of the Attorney General’s FY 2027 budget request and outlined her office’s priorities: reducing violent crime, targeting illegal and unregulated activities she described as a “vice squad” focus, protecting Missourians from fraud, and improving the office’s legal work. She highlighted major cases and enforcement efforts, including litigation over insulin pricing, Dollar General pricing practices, a criminal prosecution in Hermann, the Jackson County assessment dispute, and a new lawsuit involving Misha’s board policy. Committee members asked about cybercrime enforcement, cooperation with federal authorities, VLTs, ballot and referendum litigation, and the office’s approach to diversity-related legal issues. Hanaway said cybercrime and no-call enforcement rely heavily on multi-state and federal cooperation, and she emphasized that many cases begin with citizen reports. Members also questioned the cost and scope of ongoing election-related litigation, including redistricting and referendum cases, and Hanaway said her office is defending the laws and ballot processes as required. She estimated roughly $600,000 in staff time over about six months for the referendum/redistricting work combined. Several members raised concerns about the Misha lawsuit and whether similar statutory provisions elsewhere in state government could raise the same legal issues; Hanaway responded that the case involved a board rule, not a statute, and turned on whether the requirement functioned as a quota. The committee also discussed child sexual exploitation, human trafficking, Medicaid fraud, and the use of outside counsel and pro hac vice fees. Hanaway said the office is using non-GR funds where possible and is not requesting pay increases this year. The Missouri Office of Prosecution Services then presented its budget. Officials explained that MOPS trains and supports prosecutors statewide, including on DWIs, child sex cases, and new prosecutor training, and that its budget request matches the governor’s recommendation. Members asked about support for local prosecutors, the nine counties without elected prosecutors, and the new conviction integrity unit; staff said the unit’s positions were shifted between line items and that the office can help answer prosecutorial questions through its general counsel. The committee then moved to the Department of Public Safety budget. DPS reviewed funding for crime victims notification, law enforcement recruitment and retention, drug task forces, academy scholarships, Blue Star grants, local crime prevention, school safety, World Cup security, 988 trainings, wastewater testing in schools, and other programs. Members asked about the $59 million federal FIFA World Cup grant, school safety app funding, and wastewater testing participation; DPS said the World Cup funds require no state match, the app funding is being phased out, and schools opted into the testing program. The committee recessed before finishing the DPS book, with plans to return later.

Transcript Highlights:

• Many counties across the state of Texas allow property owners to split-pay their property taxes by paying
• their first split-pay installment at a later date if their tax bill is mailed out after November 30th
• The Perry is, as the only CP in the Senate, doesn't want to pay enough for it.
• declines to act, and requires a prosecutor to publicly post their decision and reasoning.
• The Perry is, as the only CP in the Senate, doesn't want to pay enough for it.

Bills: HB198 , HB303 , HB1535 , HB2742 , HB3305 , HB3348 , HB3505 , HB3711 , HB4753 , HB2715 , HB21 , HB30 , HB21 , HB198 , HB303

Committee: Senate Local Government

Summary: The Committee on Local Government heard and discussed a series of House bills dealing with municipal structure, tax payment timing, local provider participation funds, firefighter cancer screenings, sunset review of the Trinity River Authority, replacement certificates of occupancy, and open meetings enforcement. HB 303 would remove the 501-resident floor so very small type A and B municipalities can convert to type C cities; HB 2742 would give property owners a later first split-payment deadline when tax bills are mailed after November 30; HB 3305 and HB 3348 were local provider participation fund measures with committee substitutes; HB 198 would require political subdivisions to offer occupational cancer screenings for firefighters; HB 1535 was a sunset bill for the Trinity River Authority; HB 4753 would allow a municipality-issued proof of a certificate of occupancy to substitute for a lost original; and HB 3711 would treat certain Open Meetings Act violations as offenses against public administration and require public explanation when prosecutors decline to act. Testimony was generally supportive or limited, with several witnesses and senators emphasizing practical fixes, firefighter health and cost savings, local government transparency, and administrative cleanup. For HB 198, firefighter representatives gave emotional testimony about cancer deaths and the value of early screening. On HB 3711, a witness supported the bill but urged stronger enforcement and broader application. Several senators raised policy concerns on HB 2715 about routing removal proceedings through a regional presiding judge rather than the local county, arguing it could politicize the process. The committee took no public testimony on most bills and repeatedly left them pending subject to call of the chair before later voting them out. HB 21, HB 30, HB 1535, HB 1520, HB 198, HB 303, HB 2742, and HB 4753 were reported to the full Senate, generally by unanimous or near-unanimous votes, and several were also recommended for the local and uncontested calendar. HB 30 passed on a 5-1 vote, while the other reported bills were approved unanimously or with no recorded opposition. The committee then recessed subject to the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• So if you pay, turn to page four.
• So you have to pay $250,000 before we pay our $250,000.
• So a jury told them what to pay, or they agreed to pay something to a plaintiff. That's page nine.
• they end up paying out in settlements.
• Also, and I'm surprised the prosecutors' offices want this, is because prosecutors' offices deal in a

Bills: HB99 , HJR5 , HM39 , HB206 , HB213 , SB41 , SB153 , SB165 , SB261 , SB264

Committee: Senate House Judiciary

Summary: The committee first took up a lengthy informational presentation on the Patient Compensation Fund (PCF) and New Mexico medical malpractice insurance. Teresa Hassey, a plaintiffs’ attorney, described the PCF’s origin in the 1976 Medical Malpractice Act, its role as a state-backed excess coverage system, and her view that it was mismanaged when hospital participation expanded without individualized risk assessments. She argued that hospitals underpaid surcharges, that the fund was depleted by claims, and that the 2021 amendments and later legislative infusions were meant to shore up deficits and phase hospitals out. Superintendent of Insurance Alice Kane and LFC analyst Julia Rodriguez presented a different perspective, emphasizing recent general fund infusions, current surcharge collections, the use of actuarial reviews, and the PCF’s budget and settlement activity. Kane said the market is highly concentrated, New Mexico’s malpractice costs and defense expenses are high, and the fund still provides lower-cost coverage than the open market, while also noting ongoing issues with future medical claims, TPA transition, and investment management. Committee members questioned the presenters at length about why New Mexico malpractice premiums are so high, whether defense costs were being conflated with claim payouts, how the PCF works with primary coverage and excess coverage, and whether hospitals were properly assessed when they entered the fund. Several senators raised concerns about punitive damages, corporate practice of medicine, and whether the state’s legal environment is driving doctors away. Others challenged the data comparisons, noting differences between one-year figures and multi-year averages, and asked why New Mexico’s costs remain far above neighboring states. Kane and Hassey disagreed on the causes, with Kane pointing to high claims and defense costs over time and Hassey arguing that hospital participation and punitive-damage exposure distorted the market. The chair concluded the discussion by saying the committee had not exhausted the topic and that he still wanted a clear path to reducing doctors’ insurance costs. After a break, the committee moved on to Senate Bill 41. Senator Charlie introduced the bill, which would eliminate the statute of limitations for the most serious sexual crimes in New Mexico. He argued that trauma, coercion, fear, and delayed disclosure often prevent survivors from reporting promptly, and said the law should reflect that reality. The bill was presented as a response to survivor testimony heard in a prior hearing, and the sponsor framed it as part of a broader effort to modernize the justice system for sexual violence cases.

Transcript Highlights:

• The word information, so I can—my prosecutor can do that.
• In Florida, we have less than 2,000 prosecutors.
• It comes down to 2,000 prosecutors.
• Once again, 2,000 prosecutors cannot night.
• Because ultimately, the prosecutor, if they get out and hurt somebody, that's on me.

Summary: The Criminal Justice Subcommittee held its first meeting of 2025, took roll, confirmed a quorum, and heard member introductions before turning to an informational panel on how a criminal case moves through Florida’s system. The chair emphasized respectful committee process and introduced staff, then invited the panel to explain the path from arrest through prosecution, first appearance, arraignment, discovery, trial, plea negotiations, and sentencing. Sheriff Bob Gualtieri described law enforcement discretion, probable cause, misdemeanor and felony arrest rules, pre-arrest diversion, jail operations, and the statewide uniform bond schedule. He also discussed jail overcrowding, supervised release, mental health and substance abuse issues in jails, and the need for better case management and diversion resources. Judge Frank Allman explained first appearance, bond setting, arraignment, trial procedures, plea colloquies, and sentencing under Florida’s punishment code, including downward departures and victim impact statements. State Attorney Jack Campbell outlined charging decisions, the higher proof burden prosecutors must meet, coordination with law enforcement, Baker Act proceedings, victim notification, informations versus grand jury indictments, and the role of diversion and treatment courts. Public Defender Matthew Mets described indigency screening, discovery, the growing volume and technical complexity of evidence, mitigation work, and the importance of treatment-based resolutions. Members asked about time-served credit for supervised release, mental health recidivism, homelessness enforcement, ICE holds, and sentencing discretion; no votes were taken and the meeting ended after the informational presentation and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• They lose the ticket, so they didn't pay the first time. They didn't pay the ticket.
• They lose the ticket, so they didn't pay the first time. They didn't pay the ticket.
• So the taxpayer is paying because I got defrauded.
• So each individual would pay $15.
• Yeah, what's the maximum I can raise it? Do it. When can I raise it again? Do it.

Committee: House Special Committee on Intergovernmental Affairs

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 1087 from Senator Joe Nicola, which would update limited driving privileges and create a process to suspend licenses after repeated failures to appear or pay for minor moving traffic violations. Nicola said the bill was intended to improve public safety and municipal court compliance without restoring the pre-2015 system of fines and fees. Supporters, including officials from Independence, O’Fallon, and the Missouri Municipal League, argued that municipal court reform had sharply reduced citations and increased failure-to-appear rates, leaving courts with too little leverage to ensure compliance and creating safety problems for repeat offenders. They said the bill would preserve discretion, protect work and basic travel needs, and help law enforcement and courts address chronic noncompliance. Opponents, including the State Public Advocate, argued the bill would restore a cash-cow system, burden low-income residents, and create harsh consequences for missed notices or address problems. The hearing closed without a vote on SB 1087. The committee then moved into executive session and reconsidered House Bill 2288, ultimately voting to reconsider and then voting the bill due pass by a 10-5 margin. The committee also adopted a substitute and passed House Bill 3006 due pass by 13-1, passed House Bill 2289 due pass by 10-3 with one present, and passed House Bill 2906 due pass by 13-1 after adopting an amendment and rolling it into a substitute. Members discussed procedural issues about quorum and the reconsideration motion during the HB 2288 vote. Later, the committee heard House Bill 3491 from Representative Don Mayhew, which would codify English-language proficiency requirements for commercial driver’s license holders and impose penalties on drivers and motor carriers when those requirements are violated. Mayhew and a Lincoln County prosecutor described a recent Highway 61 incident involving a Minnesota CDL holder who could not communicate in English, could not identify his location, and was taken out of service after a Highway Patrol proficiency test. Supporters said the bill would mirror federal rules in state statute, improve safety, and hold both drivers and carriers accountable. Some members questioned whether the bill was redundant with federal law, whether it would be enforceable before an accident, and whether the language was too broad, especially the phrase about conversing with the general public. The prosecutor said the current tools are mostly reactive and that the bill would help remove dangerous drivers and penalize carriers, but no final action was taken on HB 3491 in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• prosecutor in Anoka County for the last decade of his career.
• </c> Minesota thank you for your time pay Minesota thank you for your time pay attention<00:58:56.599
• any</c><01:00:57.079><c> of</c><01:00:57.319><c> those</c> to pay for any of those to pay for any of
• </c> police officers judges and prosecutors police officers judges and prosecutors about<01:09:43.159
• </c> drafts are police officers prosecutors drafts are police officers prosecutors and<01:14:17.800><

Committee: House Public Safety Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• Under the current law, prosecutors have, as they stated, a duty to seek justice, which means they have
• Today, the prosecutors have to tell... us who is the attorney on record.
• A prosecutor made a mistake and decided that it was not relevant.
• This raises serious critical questions.
• If you do, please raise your hand or let us know if you have a card.

Bills: SB552 , SB1099 , SB1124 , SB1208 , SB1372 , SB1506 , SB1667 , SB1804 , SB1806 , SB1870 , SB1936 , SB1937 , SB2180 , SB2405 , SB2569 , SB2570 , SB1646

Committee: Senate Criminal Justice

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair and, and, uh, uh, DA Macias, what, what amount of money do you think paying a prosecutor would
• Keep prosecutors in place.
• And so we've got to look at better ways to pay these young people to pay off this immense student loan
• Um, it's not just a pay issue.
• Um, and I raised that issue and, and raised that, that up because.

Committee: House Courts, Corrections & Justice Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• I mean, they're not going to pay a dime out of pocket.
• And I'm not paying them a fee.
• She ultimately became elected prosecutor.
• I've been a prosecutor for 11 years. Ms. Price-Smith has been a prosecutor for over 20.
• I appreciate what the prosecutor talked about.

Committee: House Health and Mental Health

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:04:56.560><c> which</c> I started in 2007 as a prosecutor which I started in 2007 as a prosecutor
• </c><00:05:13.039><c> and</c> state employees are getting a raise and state employees are getting a raise
• We are the felony prosecutor.
• Uh, there was a slight, uh, well, it was a good raise in 2022 because we got the same raise that everybody
• ><c> everybody</c> we got the same raise that everybody we got the same raise that everybody else<00:

Summary: The meeting began with testimony from representatives of the Prosecutor’s Advisory Council, including county and commonwealth attorneys, on their proposed budget. They described the scope of their work in district and circuit court, juvenile and dependency cases, specialty courts, guardianship, involuntary hospitalization, and the Rocket Docket program. The witnesses emphasized that their budgets are overwhelmingly personnel costs and warned that proposed cuts could lead to layoffs, reduced retention, and loss of recently added positions. They also said the General Assembly’s recent salary classification plan had improved recruitment and retention, and that underfunding could reverse those gains. A major topic was the Rocket Docket program, which they said speeds lower-level cases through the system, reduces jail costs, and saves money for both counties and the state. They reported that in one circuit, average jail time for certain cases dropped from about 50 days to about 6 days. They also raised concerns that the Rocket Docket line item may not be clearly included in the committee substitute and asked for clarification on how the budget would treat it. In response, the chair said the intent was to move some of those items into the base budget, though the exact structure was still uncertain. The presenters also discussed a 2022 subsidy for county attorney employees tied to retirement contributions, saying it totals about $1.3 million and should not be reduced because the obligation remains. They said the budget would need to support the salary classification plan extensions, House Bill 8 subsidies, and a new case management system that they described as essential to modernizing operations and improving communication with victims and law enforcement. The chair thanked them for the testimony and indicated the committee would continue reviewing the budget. The committee then heard from Deputy State Treasurer Russell Weber, who reported that the treasury has now returned more than $90 million in unclaimed property to Kentuckians. He said the office faces ongoing fraud issues and requested funding for a dedicated legal counsel and a fraud investigator, along with outreach money to educate the public about unclaimed property. He also outlined several capital requests, including the final year of a printer-system lease and replacement of HVAC equipment in the treasury building. Members briefly joked with him about a mineral-rights bill and coal, but no votes or formal actions were taken beyond approving the minutes and adjourning the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• They'd pay the same. You're a nice additional question. Thank you.
• You're going to be able to pay this if you start your education.
• Now you have to pay three or four times more.
• That would be paying the same amount? You recognize. Thank you.
• a state of opportunity, where we work hard and then perseverance pays off.

Committee: Senate Appropriations

Summary: The Senate Appropriations Committee took up SB 2-C, a major immigration enforcement bill sponsored by Senator Gruters and co-introduced by Senator Fine. Gruters described the measure as a broad crackdown on illegal immigration that would replace a single immigration officer with a State Board of Immigration Enforcement, create a $250 million grant program for local law enforcement, fund additional Department of Agriculture interdiction staff and facilities, expand pretrial detention for certain unauthorized immigrants, increase criminal penalties, require more cooperation with ICE, and eliminate in-state tuition eligibility for undocumented students. He and supporters framed the bill as a way to support law enforcement, deter illegal immigration, and align Florida with federal enforcement efforts. Committee questioning focused heavily on the bill’s education, detention, and enforcement provisions. Senators pressed Gruters and Fine on why the bill did not address employer sanctions or E-Verify, whether the tuition changes would affect students who had grown up in Florida, how sanctuary-policy enforcement would work, and whether the bill would create practical burdens for prosecutors, jails, and local officials. Gruters said he was open to working on E-Verify in regular session but not to amending this bill, and Fine argued the tuition repeal would apply to undocumented students who had qualified under existing law. Sheriff Bob Gualtieri testified in support, saying ICE bed capacity was still insufficient and that county jails needed more resources to honor detainers. Mark Schlachman of FSU Law offered historical context, noting prior state-federal cooperation efforts and warning of unintended consequences, while several public witnesses opposed the bill as unconstitutional, costly, and harmful to immigrant families and the economy. Opponents from the Southern Poverty Law Center, ACLU of Florida, Florida Center for Fiscal and Economic Policy, Florida Policy Institute, AFL-CIO, and immigrant advocacy groups argued the bill would invite litigation, encourage racial profiling, harm the workforce and higher education, and punish law-abiding immigrants and their families. They emphasized that immigration is a federal matter, that K-12 education must be provided regardless of status, and that removing in-state tuition would reduce access to college and hurt Florida’s economy. Some speakers urged the committee to grandfather current students if the tuition waiver is repealed. The meeting ended with continued public testimony and no final vote reflected in the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill requires greater public disclosure of who pays bills or who pays the bail to get someone out
• </c> Corporation funded escrow account to pay Corporation funded escrow account to pay for<00:37:33.240
• , what’s going on with prosecutors.
• </c> making the appointments um prosecutors making the appointments um prosecutors what's<00:56:32.960
• </c> think it's so important for prosecutors think it's so important for prosecutors and<01:10:13.040

Bills: HF7

Committee: House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law

Transcript Highlights:

• And they said, well, pay it this year and pay it next year.
• And they indicated their assessor had raised values 11% in their county.
• Under current law, individuals who are living in our communities, working jobs, paying taxes, raising
• You're a lawyer and I'm a youth pastor, but the process is passed on to a prosecutor and that prosecutor
• They sent that to a prosecutor, and that case is still being adjudicated.

Summary: The House first established a quorum after a quorum call and also welcomed guests from the Gateway Bleeding Disorders Association in recognition of Bleeding Disorders Awareness Month. The chamber then took up House Bill 2780, a major property tax reform measure, and adopted House Committee Substitute No. 2 before ordering it perfected and printed. The bill’s sponsor described four main provisions: applying Hancock rollback limits by subclass, adjusting the school levy floor from 2.75 to 2.20 while preserving current districts below 2.75 at that level for now, extending physical inspection protections to commercial property when assessments rise 15% or more, and requiring an old levy to expire before a new levy can take effect. Members from both parties largely supported the bill, though several raised concerns about the school levy floor and its interaction with the foundation formula; the sponsor said the bill was intended to stabilize taxes and send the issue to the Senate for further work. The substitute was adopted and the bill was perfected and printed. The House then considered a combined substitute for House Bills 2592, 2787, and 2834, which would restore voting rights to Missourians on probation or parole who are not incarcerated. The sponsor said the bill reflects accountability and reentry, and members discussed how election officials would determine eligibility, what happens if a voter later violates parole, and whether the measure could affect elections. Supporters, including members with corrections and election administration experience, said many people on supervision are working, paying taxes, and should be able to vote; opponents or skeptics focused on the seriousness of criminal penalties and the need to preserve public confidence. The substitute was adopted and the combined bill was ordered perfected and printed. Finally, the House took up House Bill 2125. The sponsor said it has three provisions: codifying the sharing of citizenship-status information in an existing Department of Revenue/Secretary of State data exchange, removing a sunset on the Secretary of State’s authority to seek court relief and subpoena records in credible election-violation investigations, and extending a technology fee sunset for another five years. The sponsor said the subpoena authority had been used only twice since 2020 and was intended to gather information, not automatically bring charges. Discussion on the bill began after the sponsor’s presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Like, I need an apartment, and I'm not paying them a fee.
• She ultimately became the elected prosecutor.
• She ultimately became the elected prosecutor.
• I've been a prosecutor for 11 years. Ms. Price-Smith has been a prosecutor for over 20.
• That is a term that we're very familiar with as prosecutors.

Committee: House Health and Mental Health

Summary: The House Committee on Health and Mental Health met in executive session and advanced several bills. HB 1881 was voted do pass without discussion. HB 3010 was amended with a committee substitute that removed a subsection allowing payers to remove “gold carding” based on procedure volume changes, then passed 10-0. HB 2355, the “Food is Medicine” bill, received a committee amendment to align terminology with other partnerships and then passed 11-0. HB 1855, dealing with alpha-gal reporting, was substantially revised: the substitute narrowed the bill to alpha-gal, removed Lyme disease, changed a department duty from mandatory to discretionary in one section, and delayed reporting implementation; it then passed 14-0 after members discussed the need for better disease tracking and the department’s workload. The committee then heard testimony on HB 2034, which would require insurance coverage for activity-based prostheses, orthotics, and high-performance or mobility-supportive wheelchairs. Sponsor Representative Carolyn Caton said the bill is intended to cover devices that help people live, exercise, and avoid secondary health problems, while preserving prior authorization and medical-necessity review. Supporters included clinicians, parents, amputees, and athletes who described being denied running blades, water-safe prostheses, or durable wheelchairs and said the devices are essential for health, independence, mental well-being, and participation in school, work, and sports. Several witnesses said the bill would reduce long-term costs and reliance on charity. Opponents, including the Missouri Insurance Coalition and America’s Health Insurance Plans, argued the bill is an expansion of coverage with unclear definitions and potentially significant costs, especially for Medicaid and other state-regulated plans. They cited the fiscal note, warned about possible federal ACA rule changes that could shift costs to states, and questioned whether the bill’s language on Medicare supplemental coverage and “perceived disability” was workable or preempted. Committee members pressed both sides on cost savings, definitions of “normal” activity, and whether the bill could be narrowed or otherwise revised, and several said they were willing to keep working on the issue. The hearing on HB 2034 was left open and then recessed after testimony, with no vote taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Whatever the time frame is, they have to pay the fine, and that's the main thing.
• Once they get out of prison, they have to pay the fine.
• , you've done your time, you pay back to the community.
• So yes, in 90% of cases, it is up to the prosecutor.
• So, Madam Chair, so because prosecutors can... Do not act like you don't.

Bills: HB2244 , HB2364 , HB2573 , HB2749 , HB2862 , HB2870 , HB4117 , HCR2004

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Elections

Keywords: evictions, judgment satisfaction, tenant rights, landlord obligations, court procedures, abortion-inducing drugs, medical abortion, pharmaceutical regulation, felonies, state law, DUI, ignition interlock, substance abuse treatment, driving privileges, alcohol education, felony conviction, misdemeanor designation, court judgment, criminal justice reform, rehabilitation

Transcript Highlights:

• They do not receive overtime pay.
• We pay according to those rates. >> Thank you.
• Those additional courtrooms are band, and we are still asking to raise our minimum pay for attorneys
• Our pay plan still shows $47,000 as the minimum, and we don't pay anybody $47,000.
• So the minimum we actually pay is $65,000 in most cases.

Transcript Highlights:

• FLORIDA'S CLIMATE WOULD EAT THROUGH THESE MACHINES AND PROSECUTORS WOULD LOSE THE EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE
• THEY PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE. THEY TREAT THEIR CUSTOMERS CORRECTLY AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW.
• LAW ENFORCEMENT TIMES ARE LIMITED AND SO ARE PROSECUTORS.
• THEY PAY THE FINES AND CASH. $20,000 IN CASH.
• YOU GO THROUGH, YOU BAIL OUT AND THEY COME OUT AND YOU PAY A $250 FINE BUT YOU MADE THAT IN 5 MINUTES

Transcript Highlights:

• raises at the time that I was voluntarily furlowing employees.
• Others have left to take higher-paying opportunities.
• I'm one of the attorneys that's seeking a $40 an hour raise.
• I can easily give myself a raise by doing that.
• A $10 an hour raise doesn't change the calculus; a $40 an hour raise does. Thank you.

Summary: The committee heard extensive testimony on Proposition 36 and its implementation, with judicial and budget officials describing it as a major shift from misdemeanor to felony processing for repeat drug possession and certain theft offenses. Witnesses explained that the law creates a treatment-mandated felony process that can lead to dismissal if a defendant completes treatment, but also requires evaluations, court monitoring, and potentially long, open-ended supervision. Judicial representatives said the new law is already generating large numbers of filings, creating workload, staffing, courtroom, and facility pressures, and that access to treatment beds, housing, and evaluation capacity is limiting participation. Several speakers emphasized that collaborative courts are effective but are not a perfect fit for Prop. 36 because those programs are typically probation-based and serve different risk/need populations. Court officials from San Bernardino and Orange counties said the impacts vary by county but are severe, with some counties seeing hundreds or more filings in a short period and others moving more slowly to build treatment infrastructure first. They argued that Prop. 36 is effectively an unfunded mandate unless the state provides more resources for judges, staff, facilities, treatment, housing, and supervision. The Legislative Analyst’s Office noted that Prop. 36 will reduce the Proposition 47 savings that fund mental health and substance use treatment grants, but said the near-term reduction is relatively modest and that the full effect will take time to appear because of the way those savings are calculated. Members of the committee repeatedly raised concerns that the state is underfunding the courts and counties needed to carry out the new law. The committee also reviewed the Governor’s proposed trial court operations budget, including a partial restoration of a prior $97 million cut and additional ongoing funding. Judicial branch officials said the restoration helped avoid furloughs, hiring freezes, and service reductions, and supported cybersecurity, technology, staffing, and records management. The LAO recommended that the Legislature seek more detail on how midyear restorations are handled and consider clarifying language for transferring unspent trial court trust fund monies to the General Fund. Finance said the flexibility in the ongoing funding was intentional and would be taken back for consideration. In a separate item, the committee heard testimony on a $6.3 million increase for Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal appointed counsel programs. Judicial officials and appellate project representatives said the system is facing a crisis because indigent appeals have risen sharply while the number of panel attorneys has fallen, leaving many cases waiting months for counsel. They argued the proposed increase would help but is still below what is needed to recruit and retain attorneys and prevent delays that affect criminal, juvenile, and child welfare cases. The committee also discussed the Tracy courthouse project in San Joaquin County, where local officials said reopening a courthouse closed since 2011 is necessary to serve a growing population and relieve overcrowding elsewhere. The LAO and Finance both noted the project is next in line under the facilities plan, though LAO suggested the Legislature could consider whether other facility priorities should come first.