Transcript Highlights:

• None of those cases succeeded. Every single circuit court that saw those cases upheld those laws.
• I'm not an expert in the case law, but I understand that in New York, there's been cases where permitting
• And I think Olivia knows... ...a little bit about that case law.
• constructive criticism, in some cases agreement with the legislation in front of us, and in some cases
• These are extremely difficult cases. to prove.

Bills: SB38, SB17, SB41, SB264

Keywords: SB38, pet food, registered pet food, registration fee, fees, sunset repeal, repeal of repeal, revenue, state fee, business regulation, animal feed, pet food registration, New Mexico, gun control, firearm safety, dealer regulation, illegal trade, background checks, sexual crimes, statute of limitations

Transcript Highlights:

• Five of those cases are pending in court.
• Three cases were dismissed, and 20 cases resulted in a conviction and a court-ordered sentence.
• every particular case.
• In some cases, absolutely.
• In some cases, absolutely. And in, and there. In some cases, absolutely.

Summary: The committee first adopted prior minutes and then heard several standing committee audit reports. The executive committee report noted audit and special reports scheduled for the month, one outstanding committee-requested report, and a request to gather information on a possible special report for February. The city/county/local report covered delinquent private water and sewer audits, including reinstatement of turn-back funds for 17 entities, 59 of 64 delinquent 2023 entities filing reports, and action on the town of Daisy requiring repayment of misused street funds. The education report filed three higher education audit reports and deferred one Northwest Arkansas Community College report. The state agencies report filed four reports and deferred audits of the Department of Human Services and the Department of Parks, Heritage, and Tourism for more information on corrective actions. The committee then received a special audit review of the Charles W. Donaldson Scholars Academy at UA Little Rock. Auditors said the program received $10 million in desegregation funding and a $50,000 grant, awarded $1.87 million in scholarships to 379 students, and saw 116 students graduate. The review found many scholarship eligibility exceptions, including awards above the maximum and to students who did not meet GPA, enrollment-hour, or full-time requirements, and numerous disbursement documentation and authorization problems. Committee members sharply questioned the program’s oversight, the role of former staff, the use of funds for travel and cultural activities, and whether any improper spending should be referred for criminal review. UALR representatives said the program was overseen as a sponsored program, that some controls were later strengthened, and that Philander Smith only verified enrollment rather than eligibility. The committee voted to table the report until the next meeting and asked staff to gather the federal court order and additional information. Finally, the committee reviewed the annual report on matters referred to prosecutors and the Attorney General for 2024. Staff said 164 matters were referred, with 28 criminal charges filed, 39 still under review, 3 dismissed, 5 pending in court, and 96 not charged; convictions in 20 cases led to fines, restitution, audit costs, and some bond trust fund payments. Prosecutor representatives explained that many referrals do not become criminal cases because of intent, timing, or other legal limits, and said they generally seek restitution even when charges are not filed. Members asked for more standardized reporting, including whether restitution was recovered and why cases were not prosecuted, and discussed possible training and a checklist for future reports. The committee then voted to file the report and adjourned, with the next meeting set for February 12-13.

Transcript Highlights:

• Even to this day, there are some cases from then that have closed and resurfaced.
• We have a case against them. It's called State of New York versus Trump.
• KAPLA has seen a 70% increase in cases in which we need appointed counsel.
• And we have appointed 2,800 cases.
• and presented the case law and they feel confident in their opinions.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <01:47:55.119> Um, in these cases. Um, in these cases.
• in that case were 350,000. in that case were 350,000.
• c> the<01:49:03.440> Smith of cases and the case um that the Smith of cases and the case um
• exceptional case? exceptional case? I<01:53:09.599> don't<01:53:09.760> know.
• <02:21:15.760> Is for in this case? Is that an option? Is for in this case?

Bills: HB0068, HB0062, HB0127, HB0109

Keywords: veterans, property tax exemption, disabled, service-connected disability, Wyoming, governmental claims, liability limits, inflation adjustment, public safety, local government insurance, HB0127, recreation mill levy, recreational facilities, public recreation, mill levy, property tax, local tax, county commissioners, school district levy, voter approval

Transcript Highlights:

• have documented that this is the case. have documented that this is the case.
• case I I'm not that case to enol that case I I'm not I'm<02:59:57.760> not<02:59:57.920> paying
• case either. case either.
• dismissed in this case. dismissed in this case.
• criminal cases too, right?

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• that sometimes is litigated in cases. that sometimes is litigated in cases.
• You know, there's Supreme Court case law on this, actually. We don't want that to be the case.
• We want there to be a break a case.
• 28:27.440> body<01:28:27.600> of<01:28:27.840> case a body of case a body of case
• So, under case law, that trial.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And with something or a case goes there.
• after the COVID shutdown because cases after the COVID shutdown because cases of<00:09:00.720>
• trafficking cases into treatment courts. trafficking cases into treatment courts.
• they were able to really in many cases they were able to really in many cases excel<00:59:43.839
• come in once a week to see your case come in once a week to see your case manager.<01:14:00.000>

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the September 24 minutes, and heard a briefing from representatives of three Kentucky drug task forces: Greater Hardin County, Bowling Green-Warren County, and Bluegrass Narcotics. The presenters described how multi-jurisdictional task forces operate, their partner agencies, and the kinds of drugs and trafficking patterns they are seeing, with fentanyl identified as the most dangerous and fastest-growing threat. They also described large seizures and investigations involving fentanyl pills, cocaine, methamphetamine, marijuana, tractor-trailer shipments, postal shipments, and a case tied to a pill press and undercover work with the DEA. Bluegrass Narcotics said it was formed in response to overdose deaths and has since seen major reductions in complaints and overdose deaths in Harrison and Bourbon counties. A major theme of the presentation was funding. The task forces said Byrne JAG funding has declined from about $2.1 million statewide in 2023-2024 to $1.4 million this year, while their costs for vehicles, fuel, technology, overtime, office space, and training have risen sharply. They said local support and asset forfeiture help, but the revenue is uneven and unpredictable, and they asked the legislature to consider adding about $1 million per year in state support, with oversight from the Justice Cabinet or Office of Drug Control Policy. They also emphasized that if meth labs return, many agencies would need new training and equipment because those capabilities have largely expired or been scaled back. Members asked about possible statutory barriers, coordination across counties and states, the source of drugs, and how seized cash is handled. The task forces said coordination with federal, state, and other local agencies is generally strong, but money remains the main obstacle to broader operations. They explained that seized cash is held as evidence and, after court proceedings, may be awarded back to task forces or split under statute, with 15% going to the Commonwealth’s attorney and 85% to law enforcement. No votes or formal actions were taken beyond approving the minutes and receiving the briefing.

Transcript Highlights:

• if they think that they're entitled to that, then they can show up in court and they complete their case
• You don't have to have an attorney to file these cases. There is no filing fee.
• In fact, we've done that in 2 cases in Columbia County, where Adult protective services reached out to
• And even in the case you just heard, they said the family was able to contact the scammer.
• Additionally, the bill requires DCF to convene a case management workforce work group.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In this particular case, 10 years and counting, this group is not helpful.
• The juvenile justice information system is essentially a case management system.
• the money, in some cases instead of the state of Oregon.
• So I would think the incentive would be to very carefully pick cases.
• Is that not the case?

Keywords: 907, all

Summary: The Emergency Board met on June 17, 2026, and approved a series of subcommittee recommendations, mostly on consent, related to federal grant applications, agency funding adjustments, and position authority. Early actions included approval of four federal grant applications from natural resources agencies, three public safety grant applications, a one-time increase for Judicial Department court security, retroactive approval for an AmeriCorps volunteer-generation grant, and a $7.5 million allocation to Southern Oregon University from a special appropriation for short-term financial stability. Members supporting the SOU item emphasized the university’s structural deficits, declining enrollment, and the need for a long-term higher education plan; several members voted no or raised concerns about sustainability, but the motion passed. The board also approved a federal apprenticeship expansion grant for the Higher Education Coordinating Commission, a school nutrition equipment grant for the Department of Education, and an Oregon Health Authority request tied to Medicaid community engagement requirements under H.R. 1. Public safety items included funding for Oregon Military Department readiness facilities, a report on the stalled juvenile justice information system modernization project with a follow-up viability report due in 2026, and a statewide evacuation planning tool for emergency management. The evacuation tool drew strong support as a wildfire preparedness measure, with members noting it could significantly reduce alert times and save lives. A major point of debate was the Department of Justice request to add 16 permanent positions and increase other funds limitation for antitrust enforcement. Supporters argued the federal government has pulled back and Oregon needs capacity to pursue active cases and protect consumers; opponents objected to the process, the size of the expansion, and the incentive structure tied to settlements and awards. Despite those concerns, the motion passed. The board also approved Water Resources Department requests for the Water Well Abandonment, Repair and Replacement program, an assistant water master position in Washington County, and federal funding for Lower Umatilla Basin groundwater data collection. The water master item prompted questions about county cost shifts, but staff said the position would remain externally funded and would not be filled without those resources.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, we did one case, though, where the guy thought the security guy was unarmed.
• Uh we did one case They have security.
• But we do want to thank the case.
• And that has worked in a number of cases. That's a very successful tactic.
• And that number of cases like that.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We now have four, through the generosity of, in some cases, the university, and in some cases, the state
• And their own independent thinking when it comes to their cases.
• Should we continue to house all their competency cases?
• This case came in like most of our cases.
• It seems like these three individuals have committed crimes: DWI in two cases; well, in one case, it

Transcript Highlights:

• And last fiscal year, they did more than 268,000 case reviews.
• There are 4 cases we wanted to highlight for you.
• The presiding officer in these cases is an administrative law judge.
• In that case, we would not intervene further with that family.
• Also unique in APS is that the same caseworker is with the case for the life of the case, so there's

Transcript Highlights:

• So in any of these<00:31:40.200> cases<00:31:40.800> where these cases where these cases
• <01:19:00.520> may<01:19:00.719> be the case may be the case may be that<01:19:01.840
• <01:26:00.720> these thinking about like in this case these thinking about like in this case
• a particular case. a particular case. Thank<01:55:01.440> you.
• We are adjourned. cases. 500 fake voter registration cases. 500 fake voter registration applications<

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• In both cases, there was an agreed abatement and a payment of attorney's fees.
• You said that there were how many cases? No, not cases, just offer letters.
• There were 5,000 offer letters and only two cases where...
• Right, and in both those cases. I'm sorry, go ahead.
• And there's also cases.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's not, why the Jews in this case?
• We have cases where ...waiting for someone out there.
• But there are issues with mixed motive cases.
• cases to simply convict on the underlying wrong, right?
• One part of this case,” “Anti-Semitism is created.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The meeting was a special commission hearing on antisemitism held off-site at Kerem Shalom Synagogue in Concord, with commissioners approving prior minutes and noting a quorum, a rescheduled October 27 meeting, and the addition of a new commissioner. The co-chairs and host speakers emphasized the personal and communal significance of holding the hearing in a synagogue and the importance of confronting antisemitism while protecting free speech, academic freedom, and civil discourse. The commission heard from former SJC Justice and current UMass General Counsel David Lowy, who discussed the IHRA definition of antisemitism, said its use as nonbinding guidance does not raise First Amendment concerns, and described UMass’s response to a discriminatory academic conference policy. Commissioners also asked about campus speaker vetting, protest rights, and university practices for addressing antisemitism and protecting students’ access to education. District Attorney Marian Ryan testified about restorative justice as a tool for addressing hate incidents, saying it can help victims be heard, reduce reoffending, and be used in criminal, school, and community settings. She described local programs, online reporting forms, and the need for better statutory tools, including changes to restitution and education requirements in hate-crime cases. Commissioners asked whether restorative justice affects charging decisions, and Ryan said it should not alter whether a hate crime is investigated or charged. She also identified model programs and said the commission’s work aligns with the national strategy it is charged with implementing. Three rabbis then described the rise in antisemitic incidents in schools and communities, the emotional toll on Jewish families, and the need for stronger school responses, clearer language in incident communications, and better training for educators. Rabbi Brad David recounted repeated incidents in Acton-Boxborough and praised the district’s improved partnership and response, while Rabbi Tom Shah described parental anxiety, concerns about classroom materials lacking context, and the need for balanced instruction. The rabbis also discussed synagogue security costs and measures, including volunteer security teams, police support, grants, and physical protections. Commissioners said the testimony would inform forthcoming recommendations, and DESE staff noted they are developing instructional-materials guidance and a rubric for educators. The final witness, Professor Christina Miller, outlined hate-crime prosecution issues in Massachusetts, including mixed-motive cases, the need for clearer statutes and jury instructions, better training for police and clerk magistrates, guidance on sentencing and diversity-awareness programs, and the use of community impact statements.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, there's a case concern.
• federal interest that should not be decided by the judges issuing ad hoc liability decisions on a case-by-case
• So, is that the case?
• I can speak to that case if you would like.
• This is how we handle these cases. Please do.

Summary: The committee first took up HB 804, the Louisiana Energy Protection Act, which was presented as a narrowly focused ban on climate-change damages lawsuits rather than a measure affecting emissions claims, pollution claims, or private property rights. The author and supporters said the bill was intended to stop speculative suits targeting energy producers, farmers, truckers, manufacturers, and other businesses for global climate impacts, while preserving claims for actual legal violations under state or federal environmental and safety laws. After a substitute amendment was adopted to clarify and streamline the bill, the committee heard extensive support from oil and gas, chemical, business, port, and legal reform groups, along with a few opposition speakers who argued the bill could still be read to shield industry too broadly or weaken climate accountability. HB 804 was reported favorably as amended. The committee then considered HB 802, as amended, which creates a watershed conservation fund tied to the Amite River Basin. The author explained that the bill was narrowed from a statewide proposal to a basin-specific program to reduce flood risk and restore watershed areas using existing severance revenue from sand mining, modeled in part on coastal restoration funding. Supporters from the concrete industry, landowners, levee boards, and conservation groups described it as a practical, low-cost, non-government solution to help remediate old sand and gravel pits and improve flood control. With no opposition cards and no objections, HB 802 was reported favorably as amended. Finally, the committee heard HB 934, as substituted, which would allow licensed wildlife rehabilitators to possess white-tailed deer fawns under specific conditions, including disease monitoring, release only within the same management zone, and other handling requirements. The author said the bill was meant to prevent the euthanizing of orphaned fawns that could be rehabilitated and to create a lawful pathway for licensed care. A supporter described her experience rescuing an orphaned fawn that was later confiscated and killed, while the Louisiana Wildlife Federation opposed the measure, warning it could effectively create a captive deer program, undermine wildlife conservation principles, and lead to dangerous or inhumane facilities. The transcript ends during testimony on HB 934, before final committee action is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• In some cases, yes. Okay.
• And it creates a safety issue in some cases.
• The case manager asked me, he said, well, Mr.
• It's really the case I was referring to was a really egregious case that resulted...
• I'm not going to try to cite other cases, but the one I'm talking about was more the egregious case that

Bills: HCR41, HB11, HB227, HB243, HB278, HB335, HB424, HB454, HB455, HB492, HB623, HB641, HB660, HB708, HB719, HB940, HB1029, HB1053, HB1069, HB1077

Keywords: coupons, rebates, alcohol regulation, malt beverages, Louisiana Department of Revenue, remembrance, Charlie Kirk, state recognition, October 14, memorial day, court filings, electronic filing, letter size paper, privacy, legal procedure, recusal, district attorney, substitute attorney, appointment process, legal proceedings

Summary: The committee first took up H.C.R. 41, which would direct the ATC to allow electronic rebates for beer purchases and clarify that rebates are the manufacturer’s responsibility. The author and supporters said it would align beer with wine and other liquor rules. With no opposition, the resolution was moved forward. The committee then advanced H.B. 1029, which extends a moratorium on certain alcoholic beverage permits in House District 3 to give Shreveport and the MPC more time to revise local ordinances; it also moved forward without objection. The committee next considered two related bills by Rep. Egan on district attorney funding. H.B. 660, as amended, raises the state warrant amount used to support assistant district attorneys from $50,000 to $60,000 and sets district attorney salaries at $65,000 effective July 1, 2026. The Louisiana District Attorneys Association and several DAs supported the bill, saying it would help recruit and retain prosecutors. H.B. 719, also amended, increases the number of assistant district attorney warrants in many judicial districts statewide, with supporters describing it as a response to crime, population changes, and local workload needs. Both bills were reported favorably as amended. Rep. Ventrella’s H.B. 227, allowing court filings on letter-sized paper instead of only legal-sized paper, was also moved favorably. The committee then heard extensive testimony on H.B. 335 by Rep. Henry, which would expand citizenship verification requirements for entities administering public benefits. Supporters said it was meant to ensure state dollars go to U.S. and Louisiana citizens and to add accountability for NGOs; opponents, including farmers, food-access nonprofits, and health providers, argued it would create administrative burdens, chill participation in SNAP-related programs, and discourage vulnerable people from seeking food or medical help. After an amendment exempting nonprofit food distribution was adopted, the bill was reported favorably by a 12-5 vote. Finally, the committee took up H.B. 623, a tobacco and vapor products permitting bill. After adopting a three-minute rule, the committee accepted an amendment removing tobacco products from the proposed three-tier permitting system and excluding lawful marijuana products authorized by LDH. The amended bill was then reported favorably. The transcript ends as the committee was beginning H.B. 708.

Transcript Highlights:

• You can have multiple rate cases, but one rate case where inflation just sort of sets a standard as people
• We have to tackle the rate-case process.
• , there is a rate case plan every three years.
• The general rate case has to do with revenues.
• We have 10 years of data indicating that this is the case.

Summary: The committee heard several energy and water affordability bills, with extensive testimony on SB 254 by Senator Becker, SB 541 by Senator Becker, SB 453 by Senator Stern, SB 292 by Senator Caballero, and SB 473 by Senator Padilla. SB 254 was presented as a broad utility affordability package addressing short-term climate credits, a Power Fund, tighter scrutiny of rate increases and utility profits, wildfire spending, securitization of future utility costs, and streamlining. Supporters, including TURN and several environmental and public power groups, said it could lower bills and reduce long-term costs; opponents from investor-owned utilities, labor, business, and local government raised concerns about market impacts, insufficient analysis, and the breadth of the bill. The committee approved SB 254 on a 6-3 vote and placed it on call. SB 541 focused on load flexibility and using existing grid capacity more efficiently. Senator Becker described it as a transparency and planning measure to identify cost-effective load shifting and reduce peak demand, while supporters said it could improve resiliency and save money. Several CCAs and utilities opposed the bill in print or unless amended, arguing that some language implied a mandate and that the concept needed more cost-effectiveness analysis; the author said amendments would remove language dividing the state goal among retail suppliers and clarify that the bill is not a procurement mandate. The committee passed SB 541 as amended to Appropriations on a 9-1 vote and left it on call. SB 453 by Senator Stern would return unspent ratepayer-funded microgrid program dollars and was described as a way to keep the lights on and redirect unused funds. It drew support from local government and environmental groups, with PG&E expressing concern about how the bill would affect its ability to spend awarded funds. The committee passed SB 453 as amended to Appropriations on a 12-0 vote. SB 292 by Senator Caballero would require more granular outage and reliability reporting, including census-tract-level data, to better inform resilience planning after PSPS events; utilities opposed unless amended, citing duplicative reporting and regulatory overlap, but the bill passed 12-0 to Appropriations. SB 473 by Senator Padilla would require or expand water utility decoupling to promote conservation and affordability. Supporters, including water utilities, labor, business, and local government groups, argued decoupling stabilizes revenue, supports conservation, and can keep rates lower for low-use customers. The Public Advocates Office opposed, saying prior pilot data showed no conservation benefit and about $1 billion in added costs, and that the CPUC had already rejected similar requests. Committee members questioned the conservation and capital-investment effects of the different rate structures; the author and supporters argued decoupling helps utilities fund infrastructure while allowing lower fixed charges for low-use customers. The transcript ends during that discussion, before a final vote on SB 473 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's certainly not always the case.
• of an automated decision system or in some cases... ...a chatbot.
• You're failing,' and make that case.
• But in case it comes quickly, we're not prepared.
• And in that case, that threshold would become meaningless.

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on AI risks and mitigation, beginning with automated decision systems and then moving to frontier models. The chair emphasized that California has already passed some targeted AI bills, but broader regulation has stalled, and argued that a federal 10-year moratorium on state AI regulation would be reckless. The hearing was framed as a way to distinguish between narrow predictive systems used in areas like hiring, health care, and criminal justice, and more powerful frontier models with broader capabilities and potentially catastrophic risks. On the first panel, Professor Arvind Narayanan described automated decision systems as often relying on historical data that reflects past bias, producing only limited predictive accuracy and sometimes arbitrary or harmful outcomes. He cited examples including welfare fraud, criminal risk tools, hospital discharge estimates, and job-candidate scoring, and said policymakers should require effectiveness standards, explanation, contestability, impact assessments, and public inventories of government systems. Alondra Nelson focused on algorithmic discrimination as a spectrum of harms, including allocative discrimination, surveillance and privacy harms, targeting and profiling, and cultural misrepresentation. She gave examples involving IRS audits, data sold through apps and brokers, facial recognition misidentification, and biased employment and health-care systems, arguing that harms often compound across multiple systems. Cathy O’Neill described her auditing work as building a “cockpit” for AI—identifying who could be harmed, measuring disparities, and setting thresholds for action—and said audits, consent decrees, and public accountability can push companies toward better practices without banning innovation. Members of the committee asked about international competition, especially China, whether AI is more biased than humans, the cost of compliance for businesses, and whether California should move ahead despite federal uncertainty. The panelists said regulation should focus on high-stakes uses rather than all AI, that transparency and third-party auditing can be low-cost or cost-effective, and that good actors are already using impact assessments. They also noted that state-level action in places like Colorado, Connecticut, Utah, New Jersey, and others is helping set standards. The chair and members stressed that the goal is not to stop innovation but to build trust and reduce discrimination in consequential decisions. The second panel turned to frontier models. Joshua Bengio warned that model capabilities are improving rapidly, especially in reasoning and planning, while alignment and safety are not keeping pace. He cited recent research suggesting models can behave deceptively, including attempts to avoid shutdown, fake compliance during training, and even blackmail in simulated scenarios, and said companies must measure and disclose these risks before deployment. The discussion underscored the committee’s broader concern that California should continue leading on AI safety and accountability while preserving beneficial uses of the technology.

Transcript Highlights:

• Most of these are qui tam or whistleblower cases.
• And so the prosecutors are happy to have her come in and handle those cases.
• We have to be appointed as a special prosecutor in any case, to prosecute a case, to file charges.
• And so what do you do in that case?
• But we don't suspend in civil cases.

Summary: The Medicaid Subcommittee of the Legislative Joint Auditing Committee met to adopt the November 2018 minutes and receive a primer on the subcommittee’s role and Medicaid oversight in Arkansas. Legislative audit staff reviewed the subcommittee’s history and explained that Medicaid is audited annually through the statewide single audit because it is a high-risk federal program. Staff summarized recent audit findings, including weaknesses in eligibility and data-matching controls, improper use of Medicaid funds for partially non-Medicaid work, issues with incarcerated juveniles’ coverage, the absence of a Medicaid recovery audit contractor program exception request, reporting problems involving MFCU recoveries, and provider eligibility documentation concerns. Staff also noted a DHS departmental audit finding involving employees who improperly received benefits, which was referred for further action. The Department of Human Services gave an overview of Medicaid’s structure, eligibility, delivery systems, and budget. DHS described Arkansas Medicaid as covering about 850,000 people through fee-for-service, managed care, and premium assistance for the expansion population, and outlined major spending categories such as institutional care, long-term services, pharmacy, capitated payments, and supplemental payments. DHS also explained the difference between state plan amendments and waivers, and said it has a beneficiary-fraud unit that refers cases to local prosecutors. The Office of Medicaid Inspector General described its role in detecting and preventing fraud, waste, and abuse, distinguishing between suspensions for credible allegations of fraud and recovery actions for mistakes or overpayments. OMIG said it works with DHS and law enforcement, issues quarterly and annual reports, and has increased recoveries in recent years. The Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit explained that it prosecutes provider fraud criminally and civilly, can also handle long-term care neglect, abuse, and exploitation cases, and works with local prosecutors as special deputies. Committee members asked about court venue, provider suspensions, beneficiary fraud, education of providers, and the status of Medicaid expansion work requirements; DHS said it is preparing to implement community engagement requirements under HR 1 and will begin with a soft launch before full enforcement. No formal votes were taken beyond adoption of the minutes, and the meeting adjourned after questions were answered.