Transcript Highlights:

• The bill is not about restricting ordinary coffee or tea consumption.
• This educational approach helps families make informed decisions without restricting access.
• then, speaking to what you're saying, is other jurisdictions are going to use the same model to restrict
• They're going to have their... ...model to restrict synthetic?
• Cooperating Underage Witness program, where we take underage kids to see if they can purchase age-restricted

Bills: HB305 , HB395 , HB341

Committee: Senate Health & Social Services

Summary: The committee met in late June with Senators Hansen, Buckson, Siegfried, Townsend, and Huxable present, and first approved the meeting minutes by voice vote. The opening bill, HB 341, would limit DFS from filing child support in foster care cases unless doing so would not hinder reunification; Children’s Department staff said the department has already decided to stop filing in all such cases, with an estimated fiscal impact of about $140,000 annually. Public testimony from the League of Women Voters supported the bill as a compassionate measure to help families reunite. The committee then heard HB 446/related anaphylaxis legislation for colleges and universities, which would allow institutions to stock and use intranasal epinephrine alongside auto-injectors and update training and reporting requirements. The Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America supported the measure, emphasizing the need for needle-free options and faster treatment of anaphylaxis. The committee also took up HS1 for HB 356 on PFAS, which would ban firefighting foam containing PFAS beginning in 2028, require disclosure if PPE contains PFAS, and address recalls; DNREC and the fire service supported it, saying most departments have already transitioned away from PFAS foam. A major portion of the meeting focused on HB 305, a diabetes wellness pilot program that would use continuous glucose monitoring, app-based care coordination, lab testing, and DHIN data analysis to shift care toward prevention and remission. Sponsor Senator Siegfried described the bill as a response to Delaware’s high diabetes costs and prevalence, and the Medical Society of Delaware supported it as a proactive model. The committee also discussed HB 395, which would regulate intoxicating hemp-derived products and synthetic cannabinoids by classifying products over a THC threshold as marijuana and creating penalties for unlicensed sales; the Office of the Marijuana Commissioner supported the bill, while hemp industry representatives and Senator Hoffner warned it could harm legitimate hemp retailers and access to hemp products. The final item, HS1 for HB 332, would ban sales and marketing of kratom products to those under 21 and direct the state to study testing and regulation of kratom and synthetic variants. Supporters, including the Delaware Healthcare Association and several recovery advocates, said age-gating is a reasonable first step and that synthetic products are the main concern; opponents and some senators argued the bill should go further and fully ban kratom or better distinguish synthetic products from natural leaf kratom. No formal roll-call votes were taken on the substantive bills during the transcript, and the meeting adjourned after public comment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, we want to restrict transfers.
• You know, anything that restricts transfers unfairly, we don't want that to happen.
• Anything that imposes Restricts transfers unfairly. We don't want that to happen.
• they reveal the fact that the individual is purchasing an interest instead of the home and the restrictions
• Private schools with absolutely no restrictions whatsoever.

Committee: All HOUSE RULES

Transcript Highlights:

• This restricts the process to individuals with substantial financial resources and expertise.
• This restricts the process to individuals with substantial financial resources and expertise.
• So number one, AB 2005 actually needs a three-year state restriction on this split lot, which is the
• No, there is an official deed restriction that needs to be signed, and the deed restriction needs to
• And I'm not just talking about deed-restrictive, but just affordable options in general.

Committee: House Housing and Community Development

Transcript Highlights:

• Those fees are deposited into a restricted account and used solely for the operation of the commission
• Those fees are deposited into a restricted account and used solely for the operation of the commission
• Those fees are deposited into a restricted account and used solely for the operation of the commission
• Those fees are deposited into a restricted account and used solely for the operation of the commission
• </c> fees are deposited into a restricted fees are deposited into a restricted account<00:08:54.960><

Committee: House Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• In a limited equity cooperative, the resale price of those corporate shares is limited, restricted, to
• And the goal of those restrictions is typically to maintain long-term affordability.
• Where a person is subject to a less restrictive alternative treatment order, a treatment provider may
• The least restrictive administration piece.
• It modifying or tapering off the least restrictive administration pieces, the least restrictive alternative

Summary: The Civil Rights and Judiciary Committee heard testimony on several bills. House Bill 2445, requested by the Attorney General, would curb “probate for profit” schemes by extending the waiting period before a “suitable person” can be appointed, limiting non-intervention powers and repeat appointments, tightening venue rules, and restricting self-dealing by estate administrators. The sponsor and Attorney General’s Office described cases in which strangers used probate loopholes to control estates, sell property, and profit from heirs; the Northwest Justice Project and other witnesses strongly supported the bill. Members raised questions about whether the bill would complicate probate for laypeople and about the timeline changes, and the sponsor said she was open to amendments. No vote was taken. The committee also heard House Bill 2386, which would replace a statutory garnishment answer form with a form developed by the Washington Pattern Forms Committee or a substantially similar form. The sponsor and a district court judge said the current form causes calculation errors, especially for fluctuating wages, and that the change would make garnishments more accurate and transparent. A collectors’ association supported updating the form but asked for a longer implementation period and flexibility for employers to use their own forms; the judge said a rollout period would not be a problem. The bill was heard but not voted on. House Bill 2585 would create a Washington State False Claims Act modeled on the federal act, allowing the Attorney General and private relators to pursue fraud against state programs, with treble damages, civil penalties, and whistleblower protections. Supporters said it would recover stolen public dollars and deter fraud in areas such as wages, housing, education, and environmental programs. Contractors warned that the bill could sweep in good-faith construction change orders, and a wireless industry group asked for a tax exemption; the Attorney General’s Office said it supported the concept but would provide technical and substantive feedback. The bill was heard without action. Finally, House Bill 2590 would exempt limited equity cooperatives from the Washington Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act unless they elect coverage, while keeping the tax exemption framework for those cooperatives. The sponsor and housing advocates said WUCIOA imposes requirements that do not fit cooperative ownership and can hinder permanently affordable housing, while lenders already impose appropriate reserve and governance standards. Witnesses from cooperative development organizations and community land trusts supported the bill, and committee members asked about resale limits, reserve obligations, and who benefits from appreciation. The hearing concluded without a vote. The committee also heard House Bill 2453, which would allow board-certified psychiatric pharmacists to participate in certain involuntary treatment proceedings and provide concurring medical opinions for involuntary medication under less restrictive alternative orders. Supporters said it would improve workforce capacity and continuity of care; opponents argued it could weaken civil-liberty protections and that pharmacists lack authority for diagnosis and treatment. The hearing ended with no final action on the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• using language that is restrictive and prohibits, as opposed to Viewing it from their position, they
• for the record, I know we have to make a decision, but for the record, I have A lot of problems restricting
• Have restrictions in it, and I would love to take a second to look at that so that I can provide you
• So the particular restriction that you are speaking of is within this policy.
• like we should be able to highlight folks that are doing a phenomenal job and not have so many restrictive

Committee: House Legislative Council

Transcript Highlights:

• back in this regular session, which was passed out of the Senate and passed out of the House as a restriction
• , IKA, and restriction. regulatory and ban on THC at certain points in certain products.
• Are there any restrictions in state law today that prevent these THC products?
• Retaining the legality of CBD and CBG, age-restricted... retail market, prohibits marketing to minors
• Just to clarify, this is Senate Bill 5, hemp product restrictions, not alcohol restrictions. alcohol

Bills: SB5 , SB11 , SB12 , SB9 , SB42 , SB15 , SB5 , SB11 , SB12 , SCR1

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 2776 builds upon current restrictions to keep offenders convicted of sexually related crimes
• This restriction was implemented by the 81st Legislature in 2009.
• always heard that, and I've worked on bills, not alcohol bills, but other bills that say we can't restrict
• So why can't New Mexico—well... ...we can't restrict interstate commerce in the state of Texas.
• But also, how can we restrict interstate commerce into the state of Texas?

Bills: HB 1301 , HB2278 , HB2776 , HB2820 , HB3848 , HB3920 , HB4172 , HB4215 , HB4284 , HB4285 , HB4463 , HB4517 , HB4690 , HB4765 , HB4766 , HB4767 , HB4768 , HB4769 , HB4773 , HB4830 , HB5506

Committee: House Licensing & Administrative Procedures

Keywords: alcohol, beverages, winery permit, restaurant, malt beverages, Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code, alcohol production, home brewing, family use, craft beverages, massage therapy, licensing, criminal offenses, sexually oriented businesses, public safety, bingo, charitable gaming, operating capital, regulation, funding

Summary: The Committee on Licensing and Administrative Procedures met with a quorum present, corrected the minutes from April 8, and then took up a long list of pending bills, most of which were reported favorably or left pending after hearing testimony. Early action included HB 1764 (accounting practice for certain out-of-state CPAs), HB 1788 (continuing education for barbers and cosmetologists on recognizing and assisting victims of sexual assault, domestic violence, and human trafficking), HB 2204 (land surveyor regulation), HB 2885 (local option elections on alcohol sales), HB 2996 (gambling offense definitions and prosecution), HB 3250 (real estate appraisals and appraisal management companies), HB 3352 (driver education on work zones), HB 3385 (farm winery permit), HB 3756 (powers of certain nonresident sellers’ permit holders who also hold a winery permit), HB 3816 (cruelty to livestock animals), HB 3913 (real estate licensing), and HB 3928 (electronic notice of towed vehicles), all of which were advanced with unanimous or near-unanimous votes. Several of these bills were reported with committee substitutes, and some were also sent to the Committee on Local and Consent Calendars. The committee then heard testimony on HB 2278, which would legalize limited home distilling of spirits for personal or family use and add honey as an approved ingredient; supporters framed it as a consistency and freedom issue, and the bill was left pending. HB 3920, a TDLR workforce/CTE bill, and HB 1301, which would allow beer or malt beverages to be sold at certain wineries with on-site restaurants, were also laid out and left pending after discussion. HB 2776, aimed at tightening massage therapy licensing restrictions for people convicted of sexual and trafficking-related offenses and strengthening TDLR enforcement, and HB 3848, which would allow electronic filing of elevator and escalator inspection reports, were both heard and left pending as well. A major portion of the meeting focused on alcohol-related bills. HB 4215 would place delivery network companies under a statewide TDLR regulatory framework; Favor Delivery supported it, and it was left pending after the committee substitute was withdrawn. HB 4172 and HB 2820 would raise bingo reserve limits and update charitable bingo rules; supporters from veterans and nonprofit groups argued the changes would help charities, but both bills were left pending after the substitutes were withdrawn. HB 4463, a broadly supported bill allowing contract brewing and alternating brewery proprietorships, was also left pending. HB 4284 would remove the “excessive discount” prohibition in alcohol sales, HB 4285 would allow airlines to store alcohol within five miles of an airport in the same county, HB 4517 would create a complaint process for Texas distillers not paid by wholesalers, and HB 4773 would let breweries and brewpubs transport their own beer between facilities; HB 4773 drew the most debate, with supporters citing efficiency and opponents warning about unintended consequences and possible effects on the three-tier system, but it too was left pending. The committee also heard and left pending a series of TDLR cleanup bills and other measures, including HB 4765 through HB 4769, HB 4830 on service contracts for lease vehicles, HB 5506 giving civil immunity to ringside physicians at combative sports events, and HB 4690 on gasoline vapor pressure compliance. The meeting ended after all business was completed and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• But the bill imposes those restrictions only on the initial issuer, not on the other key players who
• If additional explicit restrictions on executive compensation are necessary, they can be addressed in
• This bill is probably too restrictive to encourage stablecoin issuer Tether to onshore its business.
• This is a very restrictive bill when it comes to their business model so I urge my colleagues not to
• It must tighten up restrictions related to national security and unregistered foreign stablecoin issuers

Bills: SB875

Committee: Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee

Keywords: banking regulation, federal agencies, reputational risk, financial services, supervision, FIRM Act, bank supervision, depository institutions, federal banking agencies, FDIC, OCC, Federal Reserve, NCUA, CFPB, credit unions, Operation Choke Point, financial discrimination, safety and soundness, supervisory guidance, examination manual

Summary: This meeting focused on the markup of the Genius Act and the FIRM Act, two significant pieces of legislation addressing stablecoin regulation and the financial industry's regulatory framework. The Chairman noted the importance of providing clarity to the digital asset community and protecting American consumers, while also promoting innovation and competition within the financial sector. Members of both parties expressed varying viewpoints, with some highlighting concerns related to national security and the potential risks associated with stablecoins.

Transcript Highlights:

• talking about transfer funds within these groups, and releasing funds, moving funds around, the least restrictive
• application process that gives preference to projects at 30% of the area median income. the least restrictive
• process is going the least restrictive process is going to<00:11:46.600><c> be</c><00:11:46.720><c>
• the</c><00:11:46.839><c> most</c><00:11:47.040><c> restrictive</c><00:11:48.000><c> was</c><00:11:48.160
• ><c> going</c><00:11:48.279><c> to</c> to be the most restrictive was going to to be the most restrictive

Committee: Senate Housing

Summary: The Committee on Housing heard testimony on several housing-related measures. Senate Bill 65 would appropriate funds to the Hawaii Public Housing Authority for rehabilitation and repair of public housing units. Testifiers from the Department of Human Services, HPHA, Catholic Charities Hawaii, and Roar Cares supported the bill, emphasizing that repairing vacant units is a fast, cost-effective way to increase available housing for homeless and elderly residents. HPHA later told the committee it had 139 vacant units, with an estimated average repair cost of about $73,000 per unit. In decision-making, the committee recommended passage of SB 65 with amendments, including an appropriation of $10,147,000, and the motion passed. The committee also considered Senate Bill 40, which would allow HHFDC to secure a line of credit or other indebtedness for the bond volume cap recycling program. HHFDC supported the measure and explained that Act 35 had provided a $150 million line of credit for fiscal year 2025 only, so this bill would extend that authority; HHFDC said the bonds involved would be revenue bonds. Roar Cares supported the bill, while the chair asked whether the Legislature would need to pass such a bill annually. In decision-making, the committee recommended passage with amendments to specify revenue bonds and noted the administration should study other ways to secure the line of credit without annual legislation. For Senate Bill 35, which would create a Housing Efficiency and Innovation subaccount within the rental housing revolving fund and allow fund transfers without legislative approval, HHFDC and several others supported the measure, arguing that more flexible fund movement would improve efficiency. The committee adopted a recommendation to pass SB 35 with amendments, including language prioritizing projects on state or county land or projects by entities required to reinvest surplus into housing, and noting nonprofit developers could qualify for prioritization. Senate Bill 42, which would repeal certain 30% AMI set-aside and preference requirements for rental housing revolving fund projects, drew opposition from Catholic Charities Hawaii, which argued the bill would reduce the supply of the most vulnerable housing units, while HHFDC warned it could reduce production of 30% AMI units. The committee deferred SB 42. The final bill discussed was Senate Bill 75, which would establish a working group to revise the state’s qualified allocation plan and related rental housing revolving fund loan terms and report back to the Legislature. HHFDC and others offered comments, while Catholic Charities asked that the bill be deferred, saying HHFDC already had the capacity to work with the community without a new law. Roar Cares supported the concept but urged broader stakeholder inclusion. In decision-making, the chair said the committee report would note concerns about prior QAP revisions and the need for more transparent, ongoing stakeholder participation, and the committee recommended passage of SB 75 without amendments. All recommendations were adopted, and the hearing adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I would think that if there were any deeds in place that would have restricted airboats, period,
• It adds a restriction on the use of airboats in the wildlife management area from March 1st to September
• It restricts the use to pipeline and power line rights-of-way, sloughs, and pull-boat runs existing as
• We want it restricted. We want to work with the department to do what's good for the environment.
• But again, I don't want to affect anything, you know, with any kind of deed restrictions, which I was

Committee: Senate Natural Resources

Summary: The Senate Natural Resources Committee met on May 21 with a quorum, approved the May 14 minutes, and then took up a series of natural resources, wildlife, flood control, and transportation-related measures. HB 841 on expropriation procedures was amended to strip most of its substantive language and then deferred. The committee also adopted a technical amendment and reported SCR 54 favorably, which memorializes Congress to fully fund the Mississippi River Basin Fishery Commission Act to help address invasive carp and other aquatic invasive species. Several wildlife bills were heard and reported favorably. HB 1248 allows licensed wildlife rehabilitators to possess white-tailed deer for rehabilitation, and HB 1258 codifies a policy for sick, injured, or orphaned wildlife so the department does not automatically euthanize animals that can be rehabilitated or released. HCR 5, which allows limited red drum harvest at certain established rodeos under strict guardrails, drew opposition from a fishing guide concerned about impacts to redfish recovery, but the committee still reported it favorably. HB 688 adds Atlantic tarpon to the definition of saltwater game fish, with support from the Louisiana Wildlife Federation and others, and it was also reported favorably. The committee also advanced several infrastructure and flood-related measures. HB 595 requires local governments to respond within 30 days to certain road-use permit requests tied to natural resource development, and it was reported favorably after testimony from oil and gas and industry representatives. HB 802 creates a watershed restoration and conservation fund, narrowed to the Amite River Basin, and was reported favorably with support from conservation and levee interests. SCR 59, urging Congress to ensure FEMA lowers flood insurance rates once the Comite Diversion Canal project reaches 50% completion, was amended and reported favorably, and HCR 62, asking FEMA to review Louisiana flood maps every five years, was also reported favorably. The committee deferred HB 1171, which would have authorized airboats in the Maripaw Swamp Wildlife Management Area, after extensive testimony from supporters and from LDWF officials who raised concerns about habitat sensitivity, migratory birds, user conflicts, and deed restrictions. Finally, HB 1161, transferring certain state property in Lafourche and Jefferson parishes to local governments, HCR 78 supporting the American Seafood Competitive Act, HCR 86 supporting a migratory waterfowl study, and HB 1189 requiring charter boat guides on certain waters to hold U.S. Coast Guard licenses were all reported favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• “And if there would have been any deeds in place that would have restricted airboats, period, end type
• It adds a, it restricts use of airboats in the wildlife management area from March 1st to September 1st
• It restricts the use to pipeline and power line rights-of-way sloughs and pull-boat runs existing as
• We want it restricted. We want to work with the department to do what’s good for the environment.
• But again, I don’t want to affect anything, you know, with any kind of deed restrictions, which I was

Bills: SCR54 , SCR59 , HCR5 , HCR62 , HCR78 , HCR86 , HB595 , HB688 , HB802 , HB841 , HB1161 , HB1171 , HB1189 , HB1248 , HB1258

Committee: Senate Natural Resources

Keywords: red drum, fishing regulations, tournament permits, wildlife management, recreational fishing, flood management, FEMA, floodplain maps, environmental risks, Louisiana, flood insurance, risk assessment, community planning, seafood, commercial fishing, USDA programs, economic impact, Louisiana economy, waterfowl, habitat loss

Transcript Highlights:

• I believe the state of California did impose a restriction on manufacturers from collecting data.
• I believe the state of California did impose a restriction on manufacturers from collecting data.
• But what this bill would do, it imposes data restrictions, or I should say restrictions on accessing
• This bill imposes data restrictions, or I should say restrictions on accessing or holding data when,

Committees: House Insurance , House Insurance and Banking

Transcript Highlights:

• This is a presentation and comments will be restricted to the members on the panel that are surrounding
• This restriction can apply when considering exemptions to property tax levies.
• Almost all major property tax requirements and restrictions are found in the state constitution, and
• This restriction cannot treat its own citizens more favorably than the citizens of other states.
• This restriction can apply when considering exemptions to property tax levies.

Summary: The Select Committee on Property Taxes held its first meeting with opening remarks from the co-chairs and ranking member framing the committee’s task as developing property tax legislation for next session. Staff then gave a high-level overview of Florida property taxes, explaining how ad valorem taxes work, the roles of property appraisers, tax collectors, taxing authorities, value adjustment boards, and the Department of Revenue, and reviewing key concepts such as just value, assessed value, exemptions, taxable value, millage rates, homestead exemptions, Save Our Homes, and portability. The presentation also emphasized that property tax law is largely rooted in the Florida Constitution and that local governments choose millage rates, which affects collections. No public comment was taken. The committee then discussed five Speaker-proposed concepts. Proposal 1 would require cities, counties, and special districts to hold a referendum on eliminating property taxes on homestead properties; members raised concerns about local funding, public safety, special districts, renters, and the need for extensive voter education, with some suggesting countywide elections or town halls instead. Proposal 2 would create a new $500,000 homestead exemption for non-school taxes and a $1 million exemption for seniors 65+ or long-term homesteaders; members split between seeing it as meaningful relief for seniors and warning it could devastate local tax bases, especially in lower-value or rural counties, while also potentially trapping older homeowners in place. Proposal 3 would authorize the Legislature to raise homestead exemptions by general law; some liked the flexibility, but others worried about statewide one-size-fits-all impacts, political difficulty in reversing changes, and the need for local revenue replacement. Proposal 4 would change assessment caps for homestead and non-homestead property; several members said it would not provide enough relief and could shift burdens to rental properties and non-homestead owners. Proposal 5, eliminating foreclosure on homestead property for tax liens, drew the strongest opposition, with members saying it would undermine lien priority, mortgage and title systems, and incentives to pay taxes. Throughout the meeting, members repeatedly stressed the need to understand local fiscal impacts, including police, fire, infrastructure, and other services funded by property taxes, and to consider alternative revenue sources or offsets if taxes are reduced. The co-chairs said the committee is still in the information-gathering stage, that all ideas remain on the table, and that members should do “homework” by meeting with local taxing authorities and learning how property taxes are set and spent in their districts. The meeting ended with no votes on the proposals and adjournment after a motion to rise.

Transcript Highlights:

• A 2024 Mercatus study counted over 250... 50,000 instances of restrictive language required, shall not
• The only states with more instances of restrictive language are California, New York, New Jersey, and
• I think that, you know, every law that is passed, unless it's repealing another law, generally restricts
• And so any state agency rule can restrict freedom.
• And so I think that any time you're restricting the freedom of Texans or Texas businesses, that should

Bills: HB565 , HB3743 , HB4310 , HB5083 , HB5129 , HB5195 , HB5331 , HB5469 , SB21 , HB3185 , SB 21

Committee: House Delivery of Government Efficiency

Keywords: constitutional amendment, fiscal impact, state budget, ballot measure, transparency in voting, management-to-staff ratio, state agencies, employee regulations, government efficiency, workforce management, public information, governing board, transparency, confidentiality, access rights, privacy, identifying information, state agency, consent, occupational license

Transcript Highlights:

• Some of them are far less restrictive than the one that we went to in Carlsbad.
• My bill removes one common restriction used by some libraries that simply shouldn't be there.
• Before you get started, I would like to have the Secretary... restrictive than the one that we went to
• My bill removes one common restriction used by some libraries that simply shouldn't be there.
• SB 965 is important to me because I've dealt firsthand with the effects of the restricted access to library

Committee: House Education

Transcript Highlights:

• It's supported by a transfer from the Restricted Reserve Fund, which will be requested later in the agenda
• It's supported by a previous transfer from the Restricted Reserve Fund.
• This is supported by a Restricted Reserve Fund transfer that will be requested later in the agenda.
• Section G is the Restricted Reserve Fund Transfer Request section.
• Section G, this is the Restricted Reserve Fund Transfer Request section.

Committee: All ALC-PEER

Transcript Highlights:

• continuous appropriation authority for the State Treasurer, providing conditions, limitations, and restrictions
• continuous appropriation authority for the State Treasurer, providing conditions, limitations, and restrictions
• distributions; providing for accountability reports; providing for conditions, limitations, and restrictions
• fiscal year 2027, directing the use of appropriations, providing conditions, limitations, and restrictions
• program transfer limitations, providing for accountability reports, providing for conditions and restrictions

Transcript Highlights:

• Does this proposed amendment relieve the fund from those restrictions, or is it still subject to the
• same restrictions?
• It relieves it from government obligation restrictions because those are for different purposes.
• It relieves it from government obligation restrictions because those are for different purposes.
• mean, I suspect that may mean that it allows investment other than the current constitutional restrictions

Committee: House Special Committee on Intergovernmental Affairs

Summary: The Special Committee on Intergovernmental Affairs held public hearings on three measures. House Bill 2289, sponsored by Rep. Owen, would create a real estate fund to let the state more quickly sell and buy property, with proceeds from sales and other monies deposited for future real property acquisitions. Rep. Owen and Office of Administration witness Hanna-Swan said the current process is too slow and cumbersome, especially when the state needs to consolidate or relocate offices; Rep. Walshmore raised concerns about siloing funds during tight budget years, while supporters said the fund would improve flexibility and efficiency. No vote was taken. The committee then heard House Joint Resolution 189, sponsored by Rep. Wellenkamp, proposing a Missouri sovereign wealth fund, or “Show Me Prosperity Fund.” Wellenkamp argued the state needs a long-term investment vehicle to address infrastructure and fiscal pressures, with the Treasurer investing in private markets under strict controls and the fund eventually replacing tax revenue once it matures. Members questioned the source of initial funding, the investment rules, the audit provisions, and whether the fund could be used for broader state spending; no witnesses testified in opposition or support, and no action was taken. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 2906, sponsored by Rep. Mayhew, which would raise dollar limits for certain Office of Administration construction, renovation, maintenance, and repair contracts and authorize master agreements for architecture, engineering, and land surveying services. Mayhew and OA said the changes would account for inflation and reduce delays by prequalifying vendors for two-year periods instead of repeating the RFQ process for small projects. An engineering industry witness supported the bill as an efficiency measure, and committee members asked about the contract limits, the master agreement structure, and how the numbers were chosen. The hearing concluded without a vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• occupied and affordable for our local residents by allowing rentals and removing property ownership restrictions
• occupied and affordable for our local residents by allowing rentals and removing property ownership restrictions
• occupied and affordable for our local residents by allowing rentals and removing property ownership restrictions
• Thank you. restrictions, potentially enabling restrictions, potentially enabling investor<00:30:59.919

Bills: HB1952 , HB1951 , HB1929 , HB2497 , HB2208 , HB2572 , HB1953 , HB2551 , HB2549 , HB1737 , HB1628 , HB1769 , HB2493 , HB2264 , HB1997 , HB2168 , HB2427 , HB1805 , HB2180 , HB2184 , HB2219 , HB2469 , HB2233 , HB2519 , HB2141 , HB1904 , HB2201 , HB2410 , HB2007 , HB2385 , HB2444 , HB2349 , HB2235 , HB1872 , HB2416 , HB2291 , HB2292 , HB2263 , HB2359 , HB2455 , HB1509 , HB1514 , HB1515 , HB1648 , HB2164 , HB2323 , HB1825 , HB2172 , HB1888 , HB2005 , HB2387 , HB2358 , HB2119 , HB2276 , HB2472 , HB1714 , HB2325 , HB1541 , HB1960 , HB2140 , HB2315 , HB2367 , HB2388 , HB1696 , HB2333 , HB2138 , HB2332 , HB2283 , HB2059 , HB2057 , HB2589 , HB2417 , HB2337 , HB1588 , HB2217 , HB2020 , HB1915 , HB1742 , HB2026 , HB1965 , HB1546 , HB2360 , HB1563 , HB1749 , HB2614 , HB1511 , HB1753 , HB1849 , HB1641 , HB2161 , HB2194 , HB1721 , HB2284 , HB2188 , HB1897 , HB1880 , HB1573 , HB1876 , HB20 , HB2137