Transcript Highlights:

• We're basically codifying the Bill of Rights but underneath a different label kind of in my in.
• We're just revalidating that that's still the intent of the state of Oklahoma.
• Excuse me, cattle guards at the beginning and the end of that section of County Road.
• problem amounts of money.
• Player of the vote: nay.

Bills: SB504, SB844, SB1209, SB1266, SB1303, SB1448, SB1496, SB1595, SB1597, SB1655, SB1679, SB1621, SB1716, SB1769, SB1827, SB1876, SB1944, SB2072, SB2084, SB2104, SB2112, SB2170, SB2180, SB2182

Keywords: SB504, marriage, child marriage, minor marriage, age of consent, minimum marriage age, underage marriage, teen marriage, parental consent, judicial approval, marriage license, Oklahoma Title 43, family law, juvenile justice, Department of Human Services, DHS custody, incestuous marriage, pregnancy exception, paternity, seduction

Transcript Highlights:

• "It's all of us.
• "It's all of us.
• "It's all of us.
• No sub. of HB 237. Line 11, you see $400 of HB 237.
• of a of some for the state employees of a of some type<01:03:24.320><c> of</c><01:03:24.560><c> bonus

Bills: HB517, HB98, HB235, HB236, HB237, HB238, HB239, HB240, HB241, HB242, HB565, HB517, HB98, HB235, HB236, HB237, HB238, HB239, HB240, HB241, HB242, HB565, SB380

Keywords: underground damage prevention, one-call notification system, utility locating, excavation safety, dig safe, call before you dig, 811, utility lines, underground utilities, pipeline safety, gas pipeline, electric utility, telecommunications, water utility, wastewater, cable television, locate request, premark, tolerance zone, positive response

Transcript Highlights:

• the board relating to you know will of the board relating to you know operations<00:12:05.040><c> policy
• </c><00:13:18.320><c> money</c> operations and large amounts of money operations and large amounts of
• </c> Quark, of course, the Kentucky Wired Operations Company.
• I'm the chief operating officer of Kentucky Wired Operations. >> And Robert, you may want to state your
• </c> of Kentucky Wired Operations. of Kentucky Wired Operations.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Kentucky Office of the Attorney General 00:01:18 LTS Kentucky Managed Technical Services LLC 00:13:41 Kentucky Wired Operations Company 00:34:20, 958, all

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from its May 21 and June 10 meetings, then heard testimony from the Kentucky Office of the Attorney General on the effect of HB 314 on the Kentucky Communications Network Authority (KCNA) board. The Attorney General’s representative said HB 314 changed KCNA’s structure and staffing, but did not alter the statutory duties of the board, which still include developing and implementing strategic plans, providing policy direction, monitoring results, and approving fiscal planning. He argued the board is not merely advisory, has operational and budget authority, and that actions taken outside board approval could be ultra vires and without effect. He also noted the board historically approved settlements and contracts, including matters involving Open Fiber, and said the removal of the executive director position reduced direct personnel control but did not eliminate the board’s broader oversight. The committee then heard from representatives of Kentucky Managed Technical Services/LTS, who described a dispute over the Kentucky Wired network refresh and service-provider transition. They said the project agreement required a market test and acceptance of a proposal for both the network refresh and service-provider role, but that their proposals were rejected and the refresh work was later treated by the parties as a change order issue. They said some equipment worth about $3 million had been delivered, transferred, and paid for, while roughly $7 million in additional equipment was canceled by LTS but reportedly shipped to a KCNA warehouse and not paid for. They also said no refresh installation work has been performed, that they continue providing network maintenance to avoid service disruption, but believe the contract has expired and that there is no current agreement for ongoing service-provider work. Committee members asked whether actions taken without board approval would be invalid, whether the board could alter or terminate contractor arrangements, whether the bond disclosures suggesting a successful contract extension were accurate, and what equipment had been purchased or remained in storage. LTS representatives said they would follow up with the committee on the financial delta between the contracted rate and the month-to-month billing they say has been in effect since the contract expired, and on an inventory of in-service equipment and end-of-life dates. They said they want a commercial resolution, but if no resolution is reached soon they may pursue the formal contractual dispute process, and identified September 1 as their stated target date for resolving the matter and completing the refresh.

Keywords: NH House of Representatives Committee Streaming, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IK-WP-F8dVM, 2026-07-02T03:40:21+00:00, 2.2.24, Data collected via generic collector engine, 928, house, all, 2.2.42, 2.1.47

Keywords: NH House of Representatives Committee Streaming, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IK-WP-F8dVM, 2026-06-14T02:39:20+00:00, 2.2.23, Data collected via generic collector engine, 928, house, all, 2.2.40, 2.1.47

Transcript Highlights:

• . >> Well, I'll take care of it. >> Well, I'll take care of it. >> Well, I'll take care of it. >> There
• The markup can be no more than 16.99% of the cost of merchandise plus freight cost.
• pays for case lots of liquor.
• And this pays for case lots of liquor.
• Got refill shop out of my house. I'm got refill shop out of my house.

Bills: SB289, HB395

Keywords: economic development, tax credits, local organizations, Growing Alabama Act, infrastructure improvements, intermodal facilities, agricultural centers, liquor, mark up fee, Alcoholic Beverage Control, wholesale sales, state regulation, cost of merchandise, 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So what that means is that they will only operate based off of what they were designed to operate.
• ><01:25:34.639><c> they</c><01:25:34.960><c> were</c> operate based off of what they were operate based
• That's anywhere from a 2-hour to 3-hour class that we do, and we do over a hundred of them every election
• That's anywhere from a 2-hour to 3-hour class that we do, and we do over a hundred of them every election
• That's anywhere from a 2-hour to 3-hour class that we do, and we do over a hundred of them every election

Keywords: Discussion of BR 25 (2026 RS) 04:15 Presentation on voting systems by ES&S 48:14 Presentation on voting systems by Hart InterCivic and Harp Enterprises 01:13:07, 958, all

Summary: The committee met to approve the October 21 minutes and then took up BR 25 for the 2026 regular session, a proposal relating to prohibited uses of tax dollars and public resources. The sponsors said the bill is intended to strengthen existing law by adding civil and criminal penalties for taxpayer-funded advocacy on ballot questions, especially in light of controversies during the 2024 election over school officials and districts using public resources to oppose a constitutional amendment. They also described related concerns about school districts hiring third-party lobbyists and public relations firms, particularly in Fayette County, and said the proposal was meant to keep tax dollars focused on public services rather than political persuasion. Committee members raised several concerns about scope and drafting. Some asked whether the bill should specifically mention schools, school boards, and school employees, and the sponsors said they would add that language. Others questioned whether the measure would also affect local government lobbying through groups like KLC and KCO, and the sponsors said they intended to focus narrowly on schools while exempting certain advocacy organizations and internal government lobbyists. Members also asked whether public employees could still speak as private individuals, and the sponsors said yes. Several members suggested splitting the lobbying and ballot-advocacy issues into separate bills, and the sponsors said they would consider that. Members also pressed for clarification on how the bill would apply in practice, including whether it would cover legal challenges to petition drives or only advocacy after a question is on the ballot. Counsel for the sponsors said the bill would not cover some petition-related litigation as drafted, though they believed it should. The sponsors and supporters argued the proposal was needed to give the existing prohibition real enforcement, while some members warned that the language could unintentionally limit legitimate public representation or be too broad if not carefully drafted. No final vote was taken during the discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• We continue to invest in the strength of our operations, the resilience of our technology, and the expertise
• </c><00:58:04.799><c> our</c> invest in the strength of our invest in the strength of our operations,
• </c> operations, the resilience of our operations, the resilience of our technology,<00:58:07.920><c>
• So what that means is that they will only operate based off of what they were designed to operate.
• ><01:25:38.639><c> they</c><01:25:38.960><c> were</c> operate based off of what they were operate based

Keywords: Discussion of BR 25 (2026 RS) 04:15 Presentation on voting systems by ES&S 48:14 Presentation on voting systems by Hart InterCivic and Harp Enterprises 01:13:07, 958, all

Summary: The committee met, approved the October 21 minutes, and then took up BR 25 for the 2026 regular session, a proposal to prohibit the use of tax dollars and public resources to advocate for or against ballot questions, including constitutional amendments. Senator Rawlings and the other presenters argued the current law already bars such advocacy but lacks meaningful enforcement, citing the 2024 school choice amendment campaign and other examples where public officials and school systems allegedly used taxpayer-funded resources to influence voters. They said the bill would add civil and criminal penalties, while preserving First Amendment rights for public employees acting in their personal capacities. Much of the discussion focused on whether the bill should be limited to school districts or broadened to cover other public entities, and on how to define terms such as “advocating in impartial terms.” Members raised concerns about possible effects on county and city lobbying through groups like KLC and KCO, on legitimate factual explanations by public officials, and on whether the bill could unintentionally restrict needed representation for local governments. The sponsors said the measure was intended to be narrow, would be vetted further, and would not bar individuals from speaking on their own behalf. Several members suggested revisions. Representative Lockett asked that schools and school employees be specifically named, and suggested separating the lobbying restrictions from the ballot-measure provisions into different bills. Representative Layman questioned the meaning of the bill’s language and whether it would cover factual testimony by officials. Representative Heen asked about a Jefferson County example involving legal fees used to challenge petition signatures; counsel said that situation would likely be allowable under the bill as drafted, though some members thought it should be covered. No final vote was taken on BR 25 during this discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• The more operations, the more likely you are to get a grant. >> Now, on the $200,000, one of the caveats
• of the Advanced Air Mobility Task Force, and they all testified to the fact that their operations rebounded
• rail line facility and allow expansion of operations into agricultural transport.
• one of those things that is kind of out of sight, out of mind with a lot of folks, but it's very important
• <c> this</c> &gt;&gt; One of the one of the aspects of this &gt;&gt; One of the one of the aspects of

Keywords: 00:01 Call to Order and Roll Call 00:47 Approval of Minutes 01:07 Airport Projects 12:17 Riverport Projects 38:27 Electric Vehicle Charging Program 54:10 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Transportation met on July 15, 2025, approved the June 4 minutes, and heard updates on aviation and riverport funding programs. Commissioner Mark Carter of the Kentucky Department of Aviation reported on the $200,000 grants for general aviation airports included in House Bill 1, saying the money is being used mainly for hangar projects, fuel trucks, parking lot resurfacing, airport equipment, crew cars, and public education efforts. He said about 25 hangar-related projects were reported, with an estimated 60 T-hangars and four or five box hangars supported, and noted that the grants are often used to match federal funds. He also said the state’s jet fuel tax revenue generates about $23 million annually, up from about $19 million in 2021, and that most airports are now compliant with the ADS-B/VOR-related reporting system required in budget language, which has improved reported operations and may help airports qualify for FAA grants. Members asked about the pace of airport projects, the limited number of contractors for hangar construction, and whether airports could finance hangars themselves. Carter said timing has generally been good, though federal projects have slowed somewhat and contractor capacity remains a challenge, and he said there is no statute preventing airports from financing part or all of a hangar project. Questions also focused on the long-term need for hangars and the effect of the jet fuel cap, with Carter saying general aviation airports still have significant hangar demand and rely on state assistance because hangars are a key revenue source. Jeremy Edgeworth of the Transportation Cabinet and Brian Wright of the Kentucky Association of Riverports then reviewed riverport projects funded through House Bill 265 and House Bill 1. Edgeworth said the cabinet’s riverport grant program awarded $500,000 in each of fiscal years 2025 and 2026 for 13 projects under an 80/20 match, and that House Bill 1 provided $7.5 million per year for public riverports with no local match. He described completed or underway projects at multiple ports, including equipment replacements, dock and road repairs, material handling upgrades, mooring cell rehabilitation, and a waterline loop at Owensboro. He said $12.6 million of the KPRCM funds had been awarded across 20 projects, with about $2.4 million still to be awarded later in the fall. Wright said the riverport investments are helping ports replace aging assets, expand capacity, and match federal dollars, but he also said the statewide capital need remains large, with the current list of top projects already in the $90 million range and longer-term needs still estimated at $60 million to $90 million. Members asked about timelines and future needs, and Edgeworth said many of the larger projects will take two to five years because of permitting and coordination with the Army Corps of Engineers. No additional votes or formal actions were taken beyond approving the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• If you wish to provide testimony, please register on one of the kiosks located outside of the chamber
• Well, in support of support. Chair: OK, you're right. In support of this.
• 120 acts of vandalism of personal property of employees and caseworkers by youth wards of the state
• of those findings is clear.
• of need.

Bills: HB50

Keywords: constitutional amendment, ballot language, fiscal note, fiscal impact, cost estimate, savings estimate, Legislative Budget Board, LBB, secretary of state, Election Code, Government Code, voter information, ballot proposition, state budget, election administration, Texas

Keywords: NH House of Representatives Committee Streaming, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74-l40CFG-Q, 2026-07-02T03:39:58+00:00, 2.2.24, Data collected via generic collector engine, 928, house, all, 2.2.42, 2.1.47

Keywords: NH House of Representatives Committee Streaming, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Swx_Nh3YGbs, 2026-07-02T03:39:53+00:00, 2.2.24, Data collected via generic collector engine, Exec Sessions, 928, house, all, 2.2.42, 2.1.47

Keywords: NH House of Representatives Committee Streaming, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEg-nmIU8-E, 2026-07-02T03:39:47+00:00, 2.2.24, Data collected via generic collector engine, 928, house, all, 2.2.42, 2.1.47

Keywords: NH House of Representatives Committee Streaming, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGRGXi-H5-c, 2026-07-02T03:39:47+00:00, 2.2.24, Data collected via generic collector engine, 928, house, all, 2.2.42, 2.1.47

Keywords: NH House of Representatives Committee Streaming, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=la6HGrrk5rQ, 2026-07-02T03:39:41+00:00, 2.2.24, Data collected via generic collector engine, HB 258, 928, house, all, 2.2.42, 2.1.47

Keywords: NH House of Representatives Committee Streaming, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3--t-6PNe8, 2026-07-02T03:39:40+00:00, 2.2.24, Data collected via generic collector engine, 928, house, all, 2.2.42, 2.1.47

Keywords: NH House of Representatives Committee Streaming, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1M-vG-EzhAY, 2026-07-02T03:39:40+00:00, 2.2.24, Data collected via generic collector engine, 928, house, all, 2.2.42, 2.1.47

Keywords: NH House of Representatives Committee Streaming, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gs5mg2REmI, 2026-07-02T03:39:34+00:00, 2.2.24, Data collected via generic collector engine, HB 1661, 928, house, all, 2.2.42, 2.1.47

Keywords: NH House of Representatives Committee Streaming, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jm6MNPJcpYc, 2026-06-14T02:39:03+00:00, 2.2.23, Data collected via generic collector engine, HB 1397, 928, house, all, 2.2.40, 2.1.47

Keywords: NH House of Representatives Committee Streaming, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jm6MNPJcpYc, 2026-07-02T03:39:34+00:00, 2.2.24, Data collected via generic collector engine, HB 1397, 928, house, all, 2.2.42, 2.1.47