Transcript Highlights:

• Boeing was recruiting them because you put an aspie in front of a computer and tell them to design a
• aspie in<00:54:47.040> front<00:54:47.200> of<00:54:47.280> a<00:54:47.520> computer
• and<00:54:48.160> tell<00:54:48.319> them<00:54:48.559> to in front of a computer
• and tell them to in front of a computer and tell them to design<00:54:48.960> a<00:54:49.200>

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I have not been able to read the focus yet because the focus only came out yesterday, and my computer
• I have not been able to read the focus yet because the focus only came out yesterday, and my computer
• I have not been able to read the focus yet because the focus only came out yesterday, and my computer
• I have not been able to read the focus yet because the focus only came out yesterday, and my computer

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• notice you're not compliant," or is it up to them to know that they didn't, or maybe there was a computer
• <02:55:04.399> there<02:55:04.560> was<02:55:04.640> a<02:55:04.880> computer
• didn't or maybe there was a computer didn't or maybe there was a computer glitch<02:55:05.359>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Education Policy and Administration Committee met to hear a non-germane amendment to House Bill 131, which concerns bullying and cyberbullying prevention. Representative Glenn Cordelli, the prime sponsor, said the amendment was intended to revise and improve language from last year’s SB 210 and to incorporate measures from a cyberbullying bill previously passed by the House. He described changes to school communication requirements, mandatory reporting of bullying and retaliation, stronger investigation and collaboration requirements for cross-district cases, added safety and remediation language, a required conference with the alleged perpetrator and parents if available, updated reporting deadlines, and disciplinary consequences for harassment, intimidation, retaliation, and false reports. He also noted a later amendment would be needed to insert the words “the perpetrator” in one section, and he explained that some changes were meant to align with prior legislation and legislative drafting suggestions. Committee members raised several concerns. Representative Murray questioned the treatment of private and parochial schools, the change from gross negligence to negligence, and the removal of a definition of bullying based on imbalance of power and perceived characteristics. Representative Damon also objected to deleting that definition, arguing it would narrow the scope of bullying too much. Representative Han spoke in opposition, saying the amendment was too broad, unnecessary in parts, and not ready for final action; he criticized the removal of the imbalance-of-power language, the conference requirement when parents may not participate, and the reporting obligations for bus drivers and others. Cordelli responded that some issues were already addressed in prior law or SB 210 and that private schools have their own policies. Michelle Wongran of New Hampshire Legal Assistance testified in opposition, saying the bill was being heard without enough notice and that it does far more than the committee analysis suggests. She said the amendment adds undefined retaliation language, imposes reporting duties on school vendors and contractors, may conflict with FERPA and other federal privacy rules, and includes provisions that could have serious implications for schools and students. She said she supports parental involvement and some conference provisions in concept, but urged the committee to reject the amendment or at least send it through the normal legislative process for fuller review. No vote was taken during the hearing portion described in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• five last four to five years,<02:13:23.440> even<02:13:23.679> with<02:13:24.000> computer
• <02:13:24.400> systems,<02:13:24.800> they years, even with computer systems, they
• years, even with computer systems, they couldn't<02:13:25.679> get<02:13:25.840> the<02
• we take a look at some of the programs we've introduced in the last four to five years, even with computer

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• healthy relationships, and human growth and development, and include a presentation of high-quality computer-generated
• high include a presentation of high high include a presentation of high quality<05:10:53.760> computer
• c><05:10:54.200> generated<05:10:55.000> animation<05:10:56.000> or quality computer
• generated animation or quality computer generated animation or ultrasound<05:10:56.878> video

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Education Policy Committee opened a hearing on HB 748, which would establish a local education freedom account (EFA) program. The prime sponsor, Rep. Kevin Verville, described the bill as enabling legislation that would let local voters decide whether to create a local EFA program by petition and ballot vote, with a 60% threshold to approve or repeal it. He argued that public education is about funding rather than a specific school building, said the proposal would expand parental choice, and cited Deerfield’s move from a single high school option to multiple tuitioned options as an example of local flexibility. Verville said the local EFA would be funded at twice the state adequacy amount, with the district matching the state portion, while other aid categories such as free and reduced meals, English language learner, and special education aid would not be doubled. He said students using a local EFA would still count in average daily membership, that unspent EFA funds would revert to the district, and that the bill would prohibit double-dipping with other scholarship or EFA programs. He also said special education services would remain under district discretion and that local EFA participants would still take statewide assessments for accountability. Committee members pressed him on several issues, especially special education, transportation, and fairness. Rep. Woodcock and Rep. Murray asked whether districts would still have to provide special education and transportation services if a student used a local EFA; Verville responded that special education would remain in the local district at district discretion, while transportation would generally become the family’s responsibility unless already required in an IEP. Rep. Cornell raised an equity concern about no income eligibility cap, asking whether higher-income families should receive the same public support; Verville replied that New Hampshire does not means-test public education and that the local EFA is a public funding mechanism, not a tuition subsidy that would cover full private-school costs. No vote or committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• I taught computers.
• bills, you would go to the Gen Court website and do a search for those bills, save them on your computer
• present on the screen, so we'll see if we can get them to move the screen a little bit for us. your computer
• or print them out or your computer or print them out or whatever<00:48:36.960> but<00:48:37.280

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Education Committee held its organizational meeting for the new term, with members introducing themselves and describing their backgrounds in teaching, school boards, special education, administration, law, and related fields. Chair Glenn Cordelli outlined the committee’s goals and procedures, emphasizing civility, professionalism, and respectful treatment of witnesses and members. He also noted that the committee has been split into two this year because of the large volume of bills, and said the committee had already sent three bills to the other education committee, with 36 bills currently assigned and more expected. The chair reviewed committee rules and logistics: hearings should start on time, members should minimize cell phone use and avoid searching during testimony, and questioning of witnesses is limited to one question at a time unless the chair allows a follow-up. Members were told to use the title “Representative,” to sign up on pink cards to testify, and to submit written testimony to the clerk. He also explained that hearings are for listening rather than debating, while executive sessions are where debate and motions occur. Possible motions include ought to pass, inexpedient to legislate, and retain in committee for further work, including subcommittees. Additional procedures covered scheduling, with the committee expected to meet Wednesday and Thursday the following week because of a holiday, and regular meetings generally planned for Monday and Wednesday. The chair also discussed the consent calendar, reports from majority and minority positions, and the expectation that members who testify on a bill should not then question other witnesses on that same bill. No legislation was voted on at this meeting; it was a procedural and orientation session for the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• which, you know, I suppose you could, we can imagine people's personal information being stored on a computer
• <00:50:35.440> stored<00:50:36.000> on<00:50:36.160> a<00:50:36.640> computer
• information being stored on a computer information being stored on a computer that's<00:50:37.880

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee opened with House Bill 242, a liquor bill concerning brew pub licenses. Testimony from the New Hampshire Beer Distributors Association, the New Hampshire Lodging and Restaurant Association, and the Liquor Commission explained that the bill is intended to correct a clerical error from the prior session and restore the agreed-upon language. The bill would allow a brew pub, within the existing 2,500-barrel limit, to self-distribute its own product to one authorized on- or off-premise license; otherwise it must use wholesale distribution. Witnesses said the measure is a narrow fix specific to brew pubs and does not affect other manufacturing licenses. No opposition was raised during the hearing, and the chair closed the hearing after no committee questions remained. The committee then heard House Bill 81, which would allow patrons to take purchased alcoholic beverages into restaurant restrooms. The sponsor argued the current prohibition is outdated and can create safety risks by forcing people to set drinks down, citing concerns about drink tampering and a personal story about a friend who was drugged and assaulted after leaving a drink unattended. Committee members and the sponsor discussed whether the bill would increase liability for restaurants, how enforcement would work, and whether the current law is aimed at preventing underage handoffs or drink spiking. The sponsor said the bill would be permissive for establishments, not mandatory, and that liability would still depend on overservice and Liquor Commission investigations. The New Hampshire Lodging and Restaurant Association testified in opposition, saying the bill could raise liability and create concerns about underage consumption in bathrooms. The hearing ended without a vote, with the chair noting the bill would move on to further committee/subcommittee consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• be the best place for it to emphasize that we understand that data centers, AI, high-performance compute
• there's a lot of private capital coming from data centers because they need the energy to run their computers
• energy to centers because they need the energy to run<02:06:15.880> their<02:06:16.559> computers
• so<02:06:17.880> there<02:06:18.199> there<02:06:18.480> may run their computers
• so there there may run their computers so there there may be<02:06:19.920> if<02:06:20.040>

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• last week my internet went down and I took a trip, packed up, went to the library, signed on to the computer

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused on several bills related to access to library materials, including measures addressing book bans and censorship in public and school libraries, as well as legislation on digital library collections and e-book licensing. Committee leaders said testimony would be limited to three minutes and encouraged written submissions. Early testimony from Chair Brian Murray highlighted H. 3595, which would address challenges facing public libraries and digital resource collections by limiting restrictive publisher-library contract terms, protecting patron confidentiality, and creating a special legislative commission to study the issue. A large number of legislators, librarians, authors, students, publishers, and advocacy groups testified in support of the free expression bills, including H. 3594 and S. 2328, arguing that book challenges in Massachusetts disproportionately target LGBTQ+ and BIPOC titles and that librarians and educators need protection from retaliation and harassment. Witnesses described local incidents of book removals, threats, and pressure campaigns, and several said the bills would create transparent challenge procedures, keep materials available during reviews, and ensure decisions are made by trained professionals rather than political actors. Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley’s office also submitted support, and multiple speakers cited national trends and Massachusetts-specific censorship attempts. Testimony on the digital access bills emphasized that e-books and audiobooks are essential for readers with disabilities, homebound patrons, students, and others who rely on accessible formats, but that current licensing terms are far more expensive and restrictive than print purchasing. Library representatives said libraries spend millions on digital content, face long wait times for popular titles, and often must repeatedly re-rent the same materials. Legal and library experts supported the proposed commission as a practical step toward fairer licensing and stronger bargaining power for libraries. The hearing ended after extensive testimony; no votes or final committee action were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that’s part of updating all of the rooms, and then keeping them updated, because, as my computer that

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills related to open meeting law, municipal meetings, town meetings, and remote participation. Senator Rausch supported S. 2205 and S. 2206, and House companion H. 3382, saying they would make remote participation in public bodies permanent and streamline open meeting law and public records complaint processes to reduce burdens on local officials. Committee members and the senator discussed concerns about complaints being weaponized, the role of the Attorney General, and whether public testimony should be presumed allowed unless a chair limits it with justification. The senator said the bills do not change public records fees and are meant to improve process and transparency. A large portion of the hearing focused on H. 3342 and S. 2197, which would modernize municipal meetings, town meetings, and local elections by allowing permanent remote or hybrid participation. Supporters included Wayland officials, the Massachusetts Municipal Association, Newton Mayor Ruthanne Fuller, MAPC, MACC, and others, who argued that hybrid and remote options increase participation, help parents, caregivers, people with disabilities, and residents with travel or work constraints, and have worked well during the pandemic-era extensions. Municipal officials emphasized that a mandate would be costly and difficult for smaller communities because of staffing, technology, room design, cybersecurity, and uneven internet access, especially in western Massachusetts. Committee members asked about equal access, funding, and whether local discretion should remain; the chair said the committee wants a permanent solution beyond emergency rules but must balance access with local capacity. The committee also heard testimony on H. 3328, which would allow remote participation to count toward quorum for statewide appointed bodies such as commissions on women and LGBTQ issues. Supporters argued this would improve regional equity and make it easier for people outside Greater Boston to serve, while committee members noted it is a separate issue from municipal meetings and may be easier to address than broader local-government changes. Another bill, H. 4351, was supported by Rep. Brandy Fluker Reed, who described it as creating an Office of Freedmen Affairs to address longstanding racial wealth disparities affecting descendants of enslaved Americans. The hearing also included testimony on H. 3299 from Common Cause and MASSPIRG in favor of guaranteed hybrid access for public meetings with public participation components, with advocates saying it would improve transparency, accessibility, and civic engagement.

Transcript Highlights:

• if you take the train to an office or if you just sit down at your kitchen table and log into a computer

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Labor and Workforce Development held a lengthy hearing on June 18 focused on workers’ compensation, independent contractor and classification issues, workplace safety, warehouse worker protections, extreme temperature protections, retaliation against injured workers, and workplace bullying. Committee chairs outlined procedures for the hybrid hearing and noted that members would be leaving intermittently for floor votes. Testimony also touched on a bill to expand workers’ compensation disfigurement benefits by removing the current $15,000 cap and extending coverage beyond scars on the hands, neck, and face. A major theme was workplace safety in warehouses and in extreme heat or cold. Teamsters, warehouse workers, and labor advocates described high injury rates, strict quotas, lack of water, inadequate ventilation, frozen or missing safety equipment, and pressure to work through heat waves and snowstorms. Supporters urged favorable reports on bills protecting warehouse workers and requiring employers to adopt heat- and cold-safety plans, while the NFIB opposed the temperature bill as overly prescriptive and burdensome for small businesses. Sen. Edwards, Sen. Roche, Rep. O’Day, and others argued that the measures are needed to prevent heat illness, provide shade, water, rest breaks, training, and emergency plans, and to cover all workers regardless of immigration status. Another major subject was the “Act to Protect Injured Workers,” backed by labor groups, immigrant worker centers, legal services organizations, and individual workers. Witnesses said employers often retaliate after injuries by threatening deportation, lying about how injuries occurred, delaying care, or firing workers, and they supported stronger anti-retaliation enforcement, multilingual notices, and a rebuttable presumption of retaliation within 90 days of protected activity. The Mass AFL-CIO and immigrant advocacy groups supported the bill and opposed measures they said would weaken employee classification standards. Testimony also supported a funeral-benefits bill to raise workers’ compensation death-benefit reimbursement for burial and funeral costs, based on a family’s experience after a workplace fatality. The committee heard additional testimony on workplace bullying bills, with some witnesses urging a new legal duty for employers to prevent and respond to bullying, while others described the harms of toxic workplaces and the lack of effective remedies.

Transcript Highlights:

• I have a friend operating the computer. Now I'll say good morning to everyone here today.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing of the Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure opened with logistical remarks about testimony procedures, time limits, accessibility supports, and the large number of witnesses. The first bill discussed was H. 451, which would allow professional license applicants who do not have a Social Security number to use an ITIN instead. Supporters said the bill would help qualified workers, especially immigrants, enter licensed trades and professions without lowering training or testing standards, while addressing workforce shortages. Committee members asked a few questions, and the bill was framed as a uniform statewide licensing reform. The bulk of the hearing focused on S. 210 and H. 1278, two bills aimed at improving wheelchair repair and warranty protections. Supporters included the Attorney General’s Office, disability advocates, wheelchair users, clinicians, and legislators, who described long repair delays, missed work and medical appointments, loss of independence, hospitalizations, pressure injuries, and other harms caused by broken wheelchairs and slow service. They argued for stronger timelines, two-year warranties, required parts availability, loaner chairs, and enforcement mechanisms, with H. 1278 modeled on a Connecticut-style repair deadline and S. 210 focused on warranty protections. Several witnesses emphasized that wheelchairs are essential medical equipment, not ordinary consumer goods. Opposition came from NCart, which said it supports solutions but raised concerns that the bills, as written, could be difficult to implement for complex rehab technology. NCart said some warranty provisions may not fit wear-and-tear components and noted that MassHealth has already taken steps such as preventive maintenance, reduced prior authorization, and transportation support. Other witnesses and advocates countered that the current market is dominated by a few profitable companies and that the legislature needs to impose clear standards because voluntary fixes have not worked. The committee also heard testimony on S. 195, a toxic-free kids bill from Senator Comerford and Representative Hawkins, which would restrict PFAS and other toxic chemicals in children’s products and create disclosure and phase-out requirements. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Bully referenced as EMTALA, which is the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, but I have a computer

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So the closed-loop cooling system is really the water directly used to cool the computers.

Summary: The committee met in Fargo and approved the minutes from the March 31 meeting before hearing a series of informational presentations focused on North Dakota agriculture, water, and research. NDSU President David Cook opened with remarks about NDSU’s land-grant mission, emphasizing statewide service through research, teaching, and extension, and highlighting examples such as the Lilac Agriculture startup and the university’s role in applying research to real-world problems. He said he intends to spend time listening across the state to better understand local needs. The committee then received a detailed presentation on a state irrigation and drainage study from Tom Bodine on behalf of Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring. The study projected significant potential for expanded irrigation acreage, especially in counties such as McLean, Williams, Sargent, Burleigh, Mountrail, McKenzie, McIntosh, Dunn, and Bottineau, and estimated major economic gains from irrigation, including higher farm returns and support for value-added agriculture. Members discussed water permits, surface water versus aquifers, infrastructure, drought resilience, and the role of legal drains in improving productivity and generating economic activity. The presenters also noted that the full report is available online. Dr. Greg Lardy followed with NDSU’s required interim report, outlining the university’s agricultural research and extension system, including the State Board of Agricultural Research and Education, seven research-extension centers, and the economic importance of agriculture to the state. He highlighted recent research impacts such as new crop varieties, potato breeding successes, virtual fencing, AI-assisted weed control, weather-network tools, and 4-H programming. He also described NDSU’s budget priorities: restoring the governor’s proposed 10% cuts, additional operating support, and deferred maintenance funding. Committee members asked about the new agricultural field lab, storage sheds, and NDSU’s partnership with Grand Farm. The committee also heard from the North Dakota Water Resources Research Institute and a professor presenting water-related research, including data center cooling, water reuse, smart irrigation, and a feasibility study on co-locating data centers with greenhouse and aquaculture production. Members asked about water use, ownership, and whether the concepts were operational or still speculative. Finally, North Dakota AgTech presented its NSF-funded innovation engine work, describing startup commercialization, on-farm trials, workforce development, and partnerships with NDSU, UND, tribal colleges, and other land-grant institutions. No formal votes were taken beyond approval of the prior meeting minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Naomi Padraud, on behalf of the Computer and Communications Industry Association, we have an opposed-unless-amended

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The committee heard SB 911, which would require notification to fire agencies when a home in a high wildfire severity zone is sold with an agreement to complete defensible space work after closing. The author and supporters, including fire chiefs, insurers, and UC experts, said the bill would improve wildfire resilience and help verify compliance. The California Assessors Association opposed the bill unless amended, arguing the preliminary change of ownership report is the wrong document for this purpose and suggesting a separate recorded acknowledgment instead. Members generally supported the bill but raised questions about the 12-month compliance period and the form used; the bill was held for later action. Members then took up SB 1016, which would create a pathway for a court to order a higher-level mental health evaluation when a Care Court petition is dismissed because the person is too ill to participate. Supporters, including psychiatrists, family members, cities, and district attorneys, said Care Court is leaving many severely ill people without treatment and that the bill would connect them to existing LPS evaluation processes. Opponents, including Disability Rights California, county behavioral health directors, counties, and other advocacy groups, argued the bill would make Care Court more coercive, bypass existing pre-petition screening safeguards, and risk unnecessary involuntary detention. After extensive debate over due process, family input, and the role of judges versus clinicians, the committee voted to pass the bill to the Health Committee, with several members supporting it and others expressing serious concerns. The committee also heard SB 1112, which would create a faster court process for vehicle owners to recover cars held by “bandit towing” operators by posting a bond and seeking a release certificate while the tow dispute is litigated. The author and Enterprise Mobility said the bill targets rogue towers that charge excessive fees and leaves consumers stuck without their vehicles for weeks or months. The California Auto Body Association sought an amendment to exclude repair shops regulated by the Bureau of Automotive Repair. The bill was moved forward as amended to Appropriations and placed on call. Finally, the committee heard SB 1119, a child-safety bill regulating AI chatbots. The author described the bill as a response to harms from chatbot companionship and cited the death of Adam Raine, whose mother gave emotional testimony about prolonged interactions with ChatGPT that she said encouraged suicide. Supporters said the bill would require risk assessments, parental controls, crisis-response measures, and oversight. Tech and business groups opposed unless amended, saying the bill overlaps with SB 243, uses vague standards, and is too prescriptive; civil justice advocates also raised concerns about the private right of action and litigation exposure. Members expressed sympathy and support for the goal but urged tighter definitions and continued negotiations; the bill was passed to the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee and held on call.

Transcript Highlights:

• Naomi Padraud, on behalf of the Computer and Communications Industry Association, we have an opposed

Summary: The committee heard several bills. SB 911, by Senator Becker, would require notification and verification of defensible-space compliance when homes in high wildfire severity zones are transferred, using the preliminary change of ownership report; supporters said it would improve wildfire resilience and insurance availability, while county assessors opposed the use of the PCOR and urged a different recorded document. Members generally supported the bill but raised concerns about the 12-month compliance window and the need to keep working with assessors; the bill was held pending a quorum and later placed on call. SB 1016, by Senator Blakespear, would create a pathway for a higher-level mental health evaluation when a Care Court petition is dismissed because the person is too ill to participate or otherwise needs more intensive care. Supporters, including psychiatrists, family members, and local officials, said Care Court is leaving many severely ill people untreated and that the bill would connect them to existing LPS processes. Opponents, including Disability Rights California, county behavioral health directors, counties, and other advocacy groups, argued it would expand involuntary detention, bypass existing pre-petition screening safeguards, and undermine Care Court’s voluntary nature. The bill passed the committee on a roll call vote and was placed on call. SB 1112, by Senator Archuleta, would create a faster court process for victims of illegal or excessive “bandit towing” to recover their vehicles by posting a bond and obtaining a release certificate. Support came from Enterprise Mobility and the author, who said the bill targets bad actors and helps equalize leverage for vehicle owners; the California Auto Body Association sought an amendment to exclude auto repair shops. The committee passed the bill as amended to Appropriations and placed it on call. SB 1119, by Senator Padilla, would impose child-safety requirements on AI chatbots, including risk assessments, crisis-response protocols, parental controls, limits on time and data use, reporting, audits, and a private right of action. The bill was driven by testimony from the mother of a teenager who died by suicide after prolonged chatbot interactions; industry and business groups opposed or sought amendments, citing overlap with recent law, vague standards, and prescriptive design mandates. Members expressed strong support for the bill’s goals while urging tighter definitions, and the bill was moved on a roll call vote and placed on call.

Transcript Highlights:

• will make that audio available to the parties as soon as this hearing concludes and as soon as my computer

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The hearing resumed on day two of the Legislative Ethics Board fact-finding matter involving Representative Tara Simmons. After opening remarks and confirmation that board members had not engaged in outside research or ex parte communications, Simmons’s counsel moved to dismiss two allegations at the close of the board staff’s case: that Simmons pressured the Administrative Office of the Courts to alter a contract in favor of her employer, and that she improperly combined a legislative proviso for AEJG with a personal donation to the organization. Board staff opposed the motion, arguing the evidence showed Simmons’s legislative and private conduct were intertwined and that the board had enough evidence to require a defense. After deliberation, the board denied the motion to dismiss and proceeded to hear defense testimony. The first defense witness, Sharon Navas, testified that she met Simmons through advocacy work, later hired her at the Equity and Education Coalition (EEC), and maintained written employment policies intended to separate Simmons’s legislative role from her work for EEC. Navas said Simmons was never compensated for lobbying or legislative acts, that EEC paid her from unrestricted funds, and that Simmons did not work on the AEJG dashboard project or participate in the contract dispute with Anthony Powers and Chris Stanley. Navas described the proviso request and later contract issues as separate from Simmons’s legislative duties, and said she continued to pay invoices while the project was being completed. Simmons then testified about her background, legislative career, disability accommodations, and extensive efforts to seek ethics advice before taking outside employment or pursuing provisos. She said she repeatedly consulted House ethics counsel and reviewed prior board decisions to ensure her outside work and legislative actions were separated. Simmons described her relationship with Anthony Powers, the dashboard project, the proviso process, and her understanding that the work was distinct from her legislative role. The hearing paused for lunch after part of Simmons’s direct examination, with testimony set to continue after the break.

Transcript Highlights:

• will make that audio available to the parties as soon as this hearing concludes and as soon as my computer

Summary: The hearing resumed in the Legislative Ethics Board matter involving Tara Simmons after the board confirmed no ex parte communications had occurred overnight. Respondent’s counsel moved to dismiss two allegations at the close of the board staff’s case: that Simmons pressured the Administrative Office of the Courts to alter a contract in favor of her employer, and that she violated ethics rules by combining legislative support for AEJG with a personal donation to the organization. Board staff opposed the motion, arguing the evidence showed Simmons’s legislative and personal dealings were intertwined. After a recess for deliberation, the board denied the motion to dismiss, and the hearing moved into the defense case. The first defense witness was Sharon Navas, executive director of the Equity and Education Coalition (EEC). Navas testified that she met Simmons in 2018, later hired her, and took steps to separate Simmons’s legislative duties from her work for EEC. She said Simmons was never paid for lobbying or legislative acts, that her compensation came from unrestricted funds, and that the organization used written ethics-compliance language and a formal scope of work. Navas also described the proviso-funded dashboard project involving Anthony Powers and Chris Stanley, testifying that Simmons was not involved in the project’s day-to-day work, did not attend the meetings about the dispute, and was not part of the alleged contract disagreement. On cross-examination, staff focused on the contract documents, the dashboard work, and whether the scope of work matched the parties’ understanding. Tara Simmons then testified in her own defense. She described her background, legislative career, disability accommodations, and extensive efforts to seek ethics guidance from House counsel and board-related materials before taking outside employment or supporting provisos. She said she relied on prior ethics advice when separating her legislative role from outside work and when seeking provisos for AEJG and EEC. Simmons also addressed her relationship with Anthony Powers, describing it as a friendship rooted in criminal justice reform work and prior collaboration. The hearing was still in the middle of Simmons’s direct testimony when the transcript excerpt ended, with no final ruling on the merits or disposition of the allegations.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have better computers, better software, better record keeping, I hope.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have better computers, better software, better record keeping, I hope.

Summary: The Higher Education Funding Review Committee met to continue work on a draft higher education funding formula and related capital building fund changes. Lisa Johnson of the North Dakota University System updated the committee on the board’s developing policy for low-producing academic programs. She said the board is using a five-year rolling window, with thresholds of fewer than 10 undergraduate graduates or fewer than 5 graduate graduates, and that programs flagged in three consecutive review cycles would go to the board for review. Possible outcomes include continuation, continuation with modifications, inactivation, or termination. Members asked about how the policy would account for enrollment, program costs, workforce need, and programs that serve students outside their major. Johnson said the board would likely use an accompanying procedure to consider those factors. She also reported that about 200 programs could potentially be reviewed under current guidance, with 135 inactivated and 112 terminated, and said the process is intended to support quality and stewardship rather than simply cut programs. Jamie Wilkie then reported on the Capital Building Fund. He reviewed the fund’s history, matching requirements, and use for extraordinary repairs, deferred maintenance, and some legislatively authorized projects. He said about $334 million in state and matching dollars has been invested overall, with roughly 78.7% going to deferred maintenance and extraordinary repairs. Committee members pressed for updated information on how much deferred maintenance has actually been reduced, and several members said they wanted clearer reporting on the return on investment from new buildings versus repairs. NDSU representatives said the tier funding has helped significantly reduce deferred maintenance and allowed demolition and renovation work on campus. The committee also discussed the need for updated five-year facility plans and space-utilization information from the institutions. The committee then began a section-by-section review of a draft bill that would replace the current higher education funding formula with an FTE-based model and restructure the capital building fund. The draft would fund UND and NDSU differently from the other nine institutions, use fall enrollment rather than completed credits, add performance funding for completions in in-demand fields, create research incentives for UND and NDSU, and combine capital building fund tiers while changing matching requirements and eligible uses. Members raised concerns about the treatment of professional students, the use of CIP codes, incentives for waivers, and whether the formula should rely on more current data. The committee did not take final action on the draft during this meeting, but it continued detailed discussion and indicated more review would follow.