Transcript Highlights:

• So this just changes the language on page 3 and Section 137.1077 in line 47.
• And Section 137.1077 in line 47, which in the bill said the veterans shall have $5,000.
• And first, I'll start with: so your original bill filed was the Veterans Benefit Assistance section,
• However, Section 42.028 raises serious concerns and should be removed and replaced.
• In support of certain sections of 974. We strongly oppose 42.028. Okay, so you oppose portions.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 558.16, the first sentence says the court may sentence a person who has been found guilty of
• On page 8, under the juvenile section, on line 15, the reference to age is 17.
• Those compliance sections can't be met. So it's probably something that can be cleaned up.
• Let's start with page 8 under Section 211. The bill defines a juvenile detention facility.
• It says Bill 888, page 84, section 568.045, line 39.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And so inside state code, we have a section for what we call direct primary care, where providers can
• this section even exists at all is because, again, when providers start to work into agreements with
• Looking at the section mentioned, she read: “Foster child safety.
• I'm concerned when I read section one; nowhere above it does it say this is a new section.
• It just says section one, and this is intent.

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 754, which would add physical therapists to Idaho’s direct primary care statute so they can enter direct payment agreements with patients without those arrangements being treated as insurance contracts. The sponsor and supporters said the bill would improve access, especially for patients who need frequent therapy or live in underserved areas, and emphasized that it would not expand physical therapists’ scope of practice. One member objected that the bill’s wording could blur the definition of primary care and create scope confusion. After testimony from a physical therapy association representative and a small business health care provider, the committee voted to send the bill to the floor with a do-pass recommendation, with several members recording no votes. The committee then took up House Bill 724, which would add and clarify safety-related rights for children in foster care, including safe placement, access to medical and forensic exams after abuse disclosures, basic necessities, and consideration of safety in visitation and placement decisions. The sponsor said the bill is a narrow child-safety measure that does not alter parental rights or removal standards, while foster parents, a psychologist, former foster youth, and others testified in support with accounts of abuse, unsafe placements, and inadequate oversight. Some members raised concerns about enumerating rights in statute and about broad language that could have unintended future consequences; a substitute motion to send the bill to amending order failed on a roll call vote, and the original motion to send the bill to the floor with a do-pass recommendation passed. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 759, a budget-related measure to reduce Medicaid residential habilitation funding and require a new audit/rate study of home and community-based services. The sponsor said the reduction reflects a governor’s budget recommendation and that the audit would help determine appropriate rates and spending. Providers and family members of people with disabilities testified that the bill was too vague, that prior rate studies were not fully followed, and that any reductions could harm staffing and services; they asked for clearer standards, collaboration, and assurance that rate-study results would actually be used. A motion to hold the bill until a later date was offered, but the sponsor opposed delaying the budget item and the committee continued discussion toward a floor recommendation.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill as currently drafted has a performance metric section, but it does say that it would be jointly
• The bill as currently drafted has a performance metric section, but it does say that it would be jointly
• The bill as currently drafted has a performance metric section, but it does say that it would be jointly
• The bill as currently drafted has a performance metric section, but it does say that it would be jointly
• The bill as currently drafted has a performance metric section, but it does say that it would be jointly

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Higher Education met on February 18, 2026, and heard four bills. HB 2519 would shift University of Hawaii funding toward block appropriations, a stabilization fund, limited procurement and fiscal exemptions, performance-based metrics, and annual reporting. UH supported the bill, saying line-item budgeting hampers systemwide efficiency across its 10 campuses; the State Procurement Office commented on the procurement exemption. The chair proposed amendments to address concerns from Budget and Finance and procurement, including capping UH’s retained funds at 10%, requiring lapse after three fiscal years, removing CIP-to-operating transfers, narrowing procurement exemptions while keeping Chapter 103B principles, shifting performance metric-setting to the Board of Regents, and requiring annual reporting. The committee then voted to pass HB 2519 with amendments. HB 2409 would establish the Hawaii Geological Survey in Hilo and designate its director as the state geologist. UH Hilo supported the concept but said it would need sufficient general-fund support, estimating roughly $200,000 to start. DLNR and the Attorney General offered comments, with the AG calling it a matter of statewide concern. The chair said the DNR testimony raised public safety concerns and that UH Hilo had not identified a firm funding amount, so the committee voted to defer the bill. HB 2141 HD1 concerned state enterprise zones and would expand eligible business activities and allow DBED to designate up to two areas as enterprise zones with gubernatorial approval. DBED, the Tax Foundation, and other organizations submitted support or comments. After discussion, the chair said the current version no longer fit the higher education committee’s focus and recommended reverting to the original bill, which would limit the zone to Kakaʻako Makai for a biomedical health innovation hub near JABSOM and the Queen’s Cancer Center, with a defective date. The committee voted to pass HB 2141 HD1 with amendments. HB 2233 HD1 would appropriate funds to continue the SNAP-Ed program through UH and the Department of Health. DOH supported the bill and said it had been working on nutrition education and environmental changes; it estimated about $600,000 each for DOH and SEAR, or $1.2 million total. Testimony in support also came from several organizations and individuals, including a senior advocate who described the program’s practical benefits. The chair said the committee would reflect the $600,000-per-entity estimate in its report, and the committee voted to pass HB 2233 HD1 as is before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• The amendment simply strikes Section 3 of House Bill 322, and that's the section that deals with taking
• 13-4D-3, Section A.
• Section 13-4D-3, Section A, NMSA 1978, which defines the approved training programs as applying to, quote
• And so this bill right now doesn't address that section. It's the previous section.
• I want to call your attention to page 3 under the Special Section 9 appropriations, and...

Summary: The committee first took up HB 322, as amended, which would create a transportation trust fund and transportation program fund. The sponsor explained that the amendment removed a proposed 1% gross receipts tax on electricity sales, while leaving the broader financing structure in place, including a $400 million seed appropriation and future transfers from motor vehicle excise tax revenues into the new funds and related road accounts. Associated Contractors of New Mexico and the Asphalt Pavement Association testified in support, and there was no opposition. The committee adopted the amendment and then passed the bill on a do-pass vote. The committee then heard HB 270, a public works/apprenticeship bill that would require contributions to approved apprenticeship and training programs or the Public Works Apprentice and Training Fund for certain public works projects, while preserving a zero contribution rate where no approved program exists for a classification. Supporters, including union carpenters, electrical workers, and building trades representatives, argued the bill would close loopholes, expand training opportunities, and strengthen the workforce. Opponents, including utility contractors, highway contractors, and Associated Contractors of New Mexico, argued it would raise project costs, duplicate existing federally approved training programs such as TTCP, and unfairly require payments from contractors who already train workers in-house or cannot access approved programs. Members debated whether the bill would affect existing in-house programs, rural access to training, and whether the language conflicted with existing law. An amendment to limit the bill to projects of $50 million or less was tabled, and the committee then passed HB 270 on a 6-5 do-pass vote. After the bill vote, the committee received a District 3 New Mexico Department of Transportation presentation covering project status, funding, and equipment needs in Bernalillo, Valencia, and parts of Sandoval and Socorro counties. DOT staff reviewed completed and upcoming maintenance and STIP projects, local government and school district cooperative projects, and equipment requests. Members asked about delays on the Rio Bravo Bridge project, which DOT said were caused by utility coordination issues, and about the I-25/Gibson interchange, which remains in design and development with later-year funding anticipated. The presentation also addressed specific local projects such as Paseo del Norte and Paseo del Volcán.

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 7, Article 4 reserves the state's right to withhold the sex of a person from courts and other
• Sections three and four have a very big concern for me.
• This is just sections three and four have a very big concern of me.
• Sections three and four. And also, we'd like the tribal liaison in statute.
• Article 1, Section 1, political power.

Summary: The committee held public hearings on six bills. SB 6081 would protect sex designation information and related records from public disclosure, limit sharing of such information by the Department of Licensing and Department of Health, and allow denial of records requests when disclosure could cause harm or disenfranchisement. The sponsor and many supporters, including transgender Washingtonians, privacy advocates, and allied organizations, said the bill would close a privacy gap and reduce doxing, harassment, and targeting; one witness opposed it on grounds of record accuracy, law enforcement, and concerns about sports and public safety. No vote was taken. SB 5902 would update voter notification and address-change procedures by allowing more flexible forms of voter registration updates, reducing mailed notices in some automatic registration situations, and expanding electronic communication options. The sponsor and county auditors said it would improve efficiency, reduce confusion, and save counties money; testimony was generally supportive. The hearing then moved to SB 6034, which would codify the Governor’s Office of Indian Affairs as a cabinet-level agency and require ongoing training and reporting on government-to-government relations with tribes. The sponsor and tribal representatives supported the bill as a technical fix and a commitment to tribal sovereignty, and no action was taken. SB 6035 would require regular county and state meetings with tribes on election access and authorize an electronic ballot return portal for certain voters, including military, overseas, disabled, and some tribal voters. Supporters said it would improve access and collaboration, while the Secretary of State, Verified Voting, and others raised cybersecurity and secret-ballot concerns about the electronic portal; several witnesses also opposed that portion while supporting tribal outreach and drop boxes. SB 5892 would centralize requests for voter registration database records through the Secretary of State and make unauthorized disclosure of protected voter data a felony; supporters framed it as protecting voter privacy and resisting federal overreach, while opponents argued it would hinder voter-roll maintenance and transparency. Finally, SB 5973 would ban pay-per-signature compensation for initiative and referendum signature gathering and require 1,000 supporting signatures before a ballot title is issued; supporters said it would reduce fraud, misleading tactics, and ballot-title shopping, while opponents called it an added barrier to direct democracy. The committee heard extensive testimony on all bills, but the transcript does not show any votes or executive action taken during this meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I'll also dig into those transfers so we can see what exactly is going on in that section of the
• This is not a slide in your packet, but I did want to pull up on the screen the sections of language
• So it's Section 4 and Section 8 of Senate Bill 1108 from last year's session.
• Section 4 and Section 8 of Senate Bill 1108 from last year's session.
• Section 4 and Section 8 of Senate Bill 1108 from last year's session.

Summary: The committee first received a presentation on the state general fund and the JFAC “green sheet” from Legislative Services analyst Christopher LaHosette. He explained the general fund’s main revenue sources, how appropriations and transfers are tracked, how the green sheet is used to reconcile projected revenues against expenditures, and how structural balance is measured. Members asked about continuously appropriated funds, federal dollars, sales tax exemptions, and cash reconciliation issues tied to the state’s Luma system and interest allocations. The presentation emphasized that the green sheet is a cash reconciliation tool and that the committee would use it throughout session to track budget actions and policy bill impacts. The committee then began its Department of Health and Welfare budget hearings with an overall agency presentation from analyst Alex Williamson. She reviewed the department’s size, structure, vacancy rate, five-year spending trends, and the role of continuously appropriated funds such as the Idaho Children’s Trust Fund and Rural Physician Fund. Members asked about personnel vacancies, unspent personnel dollars, and the department’s large trustee and benefit payments. Department officials later explained that vacancies reflected a department-wide review, hiring freeze, and reallocation of FTP to better match funding, with some positions being reverted and others moved to areas such as State Hospital South and Medicaid-related work. The committee then heard the first division-level budget presentation for Indirect Support Services. Williamson outlined the division’s administrative functions, its FTP and vacancy picture, historical spending, and budget changes tied to reorganizations, the ombudsman office, and IT consolidation. The division’s 2027 requests included a dedicated-fund irrigation project at State Hospital West, a background-check unit fund adjustment, removal of special transfer restrictions, and the transfer of 58 FTP to the Office of Information Technology as part of modernization. Members also discussed the new Rural Health Transformation Program, including Idaho’s $925 million federal award, the governor’s proposed 12 limited-service FTP and related spending, and whether the department could use AI or other efficiencies. Additional questions covered the definition of rural, the mechanics of the IT transfer, and a constituent question about bathroom upgrades, which the department said was handled by the Department of Administration rather than Health and Welfare.

Transcript Highlights:

• Forest Service through their Section 106 consultation process.
• Forest Service again through their Section 106 consultation process.
• There's two sections of Forest Service land, one section of state.
• Land office managed land, and one section of private land.
• Chair, I was learning about this Section 106 tribal consultation.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> 92F Section 92F Section 133<00:08:40.240><c> uh</c><00:08:40.360><c> so</c><00:08:40.560><c> again
• So we'd be offering amendments to change what's articulated in Section 16 as a new section.
• Under Section 7, change the affected date to July 1, 2077.
• Under Section 7, change the affected date to July 1, 2077.
• Under Section 7, change the affected date to July 1, 2077.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Public Safety and Military Affairs met on its 3:15 p.m. reconsideration and hearing agenda. The committee first reconsidered SB 1379 on emergency preparedness and voted to pass it with amendments. The amendments would require HEMA to submit a report to the Legislature on a community readiness centers plan, including public and private sites, funding sources, partnerships, stakeholder coordination, and projected annual funding, due 20 days before the 2026 Legislature convenes. The committee also made technical and fiscal-related changes, including blanking out certain amounts in the bill and committee report while retaining recommended amounts there, and changing the effective date language. The committee then voted unanimously to adopt the amended recommendation. The committee heard SB 1364, which makes emergency appropriations for law enforcement personnel costs. The Department of Budget and Finance supported the bill but said the figures in oral testimony would be slightly higher than those in written testimony and that updated numbers would be emailed later in the week. Because the exact figures were not yet available, the chair deferred decision-making to February 7, 2025. The committee also heard SB 1451 on critical infrastructure, SB 1452 on the Uniform Controlled Substances Act, SB 1149 on hate crimes reporting, SB 1321 on the Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission, and SB 1341 on energy industry information reporting. For SB 1451, testimony was split, with support from state law enforcement and opposition from the Public First Law Center, which argued the information was already protected under existing law; the committee later adopted a motion to pass the bill with amendments, including a narrower definition of critical infrastructure information and a revised effective date. SB 1452 received support from law enforcement and prosecutors, with a requested cleanup amendment to correct a federal drug-name spelling issue; decision-making was postponed to allow the department to provide language. SB 1149 drew substantial testimony both for and against; supporters emphasized better hate-crime data collection and transparency, while opponents raised concerns about definitions and free speech. The committee adopted amendments and passed the bill, with the chair summarizing the move from the older UCR system to NIBRS and noting a public dashboard expected by September 30, 2025. SB 1321 was passed with amendments shortening the oversight coordinator term from four years to three years, though one senator voted with reservations in favor of a longer term. SB 1341 was passed as is after brief support testimony, and the committee adjourned after completing the agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• of education uh to amend the sections of education uh to amend the sections of the code uh to further
• is going to read page that section is going to read page that section is going to read page certain
• that you added on right so the section that you added on right so the section that you added on line
• line line 37 it says section 1528 what was the 37 it says section 1528 what was the 37 it says section
• section section 15-20 a-201 so you moved you removed from a-201 so you moved you removed from Shell

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• If you look on section one, subparagraph five, on page one, and then again on section five, subparagraph
• And you find that in section four, paragraph one, on page five.
• by section, could you conceivably end up with someone who comes in and I don't know how many sections
• by section, could you conceivably end up with someone who comes in and I don't know how many sections
• by section, could you conceivably end up with someone who comes in and I don't know how many sections

Keywords: Call to Order 00:00:00 Roll Call 00:00:35 SB 22 Discussion 00:01:20 SB 22 Vote 00:11:45 SB 100 Discussion 00:15:07 SB 100 Vote 00:38:53 SB 88 Discussion Only 00:42:11 Adjournment 01:03:52, 958, all

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Licensing and Occupations met on February 18, 2025, and first took up Senate Bill 22 by Senator Reginald Thomas, which was presented as a cleanup measure following prior cosmetology reforms and a Legislative Oversight and Investigations report. The bill would allow cosmetologists to retake exams multiple times with a one-month wait, authorize the Board of Cosmetology to immediately close facilities that intentionally use unlicensed workers while preserving due process, give the board flexibility to hire an executive director based on qualifications rather than licensure, and recognize certain out-of-state or territorial cosmetology licenses. Board officials said the changes were intended to improve fairness, equality, and administrative due process. Senators asked about retesting fees and whether partial retests could dilute standards; Thomas clarified that the exam is cumulative and must be retaken in full. The committee approved SB 22 with all favorable votes, and Senator Meredith explained his support as a workforce and fairness issue. The committee then heard Senate Bill 100 by Senator Jimmy Higdon, as substituted, concerning tobacco, nicotine, and vapor product retail licensing and enforcement. Youth advocates from the University of Kentucky testified in support, describing youth nicotine use as a public health crisis and urging stronger enforcement, annual compliance checks, retailer licensing, and tougher penalties for illegal sales to minors. Higdon said the bill would create a Division of Tobacco, Nicotine, and Vapor Products Licensing within ABC, require licenses for retailers, authorize inspections and confiscation of contraband, impose escalating criminal and civil penalties for unlicensed sales and sales to minors, publish a list of licensed retailers, and dedicate fine revenue to enforcement and youth education. He said the measure targeted bad actors rather than responsible retailers. A retailer witness also supported licensing but raised concerns about contradictory product definitions that could sweep in hemp and medical marijuana vapor products, and asked that the bill be delayed until after an expected Supreme Court decision affecting federal vapor-product rules. The transcript ends during discussion of SB 100, before any committee vote on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• It then points you to another section of the statute saying, okay, let's define serious impairment.
• very clearly again there's even section very clearly again there's even a<00:33:12.200><c> change</c
• We did actually take out a section during that fall working on institutional child abuse because the
• during that fall take out a section during that fall working<00:41:03.000><c> Section</c><00:41:03.480
• I want to make sure we have that section under wraps too.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee met on House Bill 553, which concerns the definitions of child abuse and neglect in RSA 169-C, including psychological maltreatment and the rebuttable presumption of harm. The chair and members emphasized that the bill is intended to clarify definitions rather than create punishments, and they discussed concerns that had arisen after the bill’s earlier drafting. Representative Eimon stated his view that the bill is constitutional, citing case law, and members noted that amendment 114 would restore language refined by the prior study committee and address trauma-informed wording, especially around substance use disorder and newborns. A major portion of the discussion focused on whether the bill could be read to treat ordinary parental discipline or disagreements with a child—such as grounding, taking away car keys or a phone, or refusing gender-affirming care—as abuse or neglect. DCF Deputy Director Jen Ross explained that screeners look at the nature of the allegation and whether the parent’s conduct is likely to cause serious psychological or emotional harm; she said routine discipline or prudent parenting would not be screened in, while persistent ridiculing, terrorizing, bullying, isolating, threats, or similar conduct could qualify. She also said that denial of gender-affirming care, by itself, would not be treated as neglect, but the agency would consider the full context and any resulting harm or need for mental health care. DCF General Counsel Susan Larby added that the legislature’s earlier definition of psychological maltreatment and related policy already focus on pervasive emotionally abusive behavior, and that the bill is meant to make the statute more understandable and transparent, not to change the core neglect standard. She and other speakers said the goal is to identify serious harm and provide services, not to remove children for ordinary parental decisions. Lisa Massio of the Office of the Child Advocate said the bill and related placement language are intended to preserve family unity and fill gaps where courts have interpreted neglect too narrowly or inconsistently. Members also discussed a proposed concise analysis from Representative Maral and asked about CPSW qualifications and training; DCF said staff generally have backgrounds in human services, social work, psychology, or education and receive a 12-week Core Academy on policy, law, investigations, and family engagement. No vote was taken in the portion provided, and members indicated they wanted to continue refining the amendment before sending anything to the Office of Legislative Services.

Transcript Highlights:

• In that section, it adds two terms to paragraph D: new entrant safety audit and compliance review.
• Actually, I’m a little confused on the first section in terms of automotive equipment inspectors.
• Line three is a new section. This is where addressing the asylees begins. That's a new section.
• Line three is a new section. This is where addressing the asylees begins.
• That's a new section.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 758, which would establish a study committee on airport operation hours and possible noise abatement measures, including whether New Hampshire should prohibit departures between midnight and 6 a.m. The sponsor said the committee would examine the pros and cons and consult stakeholders. The Bureau of Aeronautics testified neutrally, noting that New Hampshire has 25 public airports, 12 with federal funding and grant assurances that may require them to remain open during those hours, and that cargo operations, including at Manchester, commonly occur overnight. Members also discussed existing noise abatement programs and how mitigation is determined by noise contours and FAA funding decisions. No vote was taken; the chair closed the hearing after testimony. The committee then heard House Bill 489, allowing voluntary emergency workers to use rear-facing blue lights on private vehicles when responding to emergencies. The sponsor said the bill corrects an oversight in existing law, would not cost the state or towns money, and would improve visibility and safety, especially in rural areas. Supportive testimony from a volunteer responder emphasized that blue lights help cut through fog, snow, and nighttime conditions, and that the bill would only add a single rear-facing blue light to existing red, amber, and white emergency lighting. The New Hampshire State Police opposed the bill, arguing that expanding blue lights to private vehicles would confuse the public and desensitize drivers to blue lights, which are associated with law enforcement. The hearing closed without action. Finally, the committee took up House Bill 533, which the sponsor and State Police clarified is actually two separate changes: one authorizing civilian automotive equipment inspectors to assist with vehicle inspection work, and another expanding language in motor carrier enforcement to include new entrant safety audits and compliance reviews. The State Police explained that civilian inspectors are hired and trained through the department and that any findings of state-law violations would be referred to troopers; they also said the new motor carrier language was requested to satisfy federal audit concerns about right of entry. The New Hampshire Motor Transport Association said it had no position if the civilian inspectors were not doing commercial truck inspections, but would oppose the bill if they were. Members asked about the difference between audits and compliance reviews, and the State Police said audits are for newer carriers and are non-enforcement, while compliance reviews look for violations. The chair then closed the hearing on HB 533. After a brief reset, the committee opened House Bill 594, which would repeal an alternate definition of “way” for the driving-after-suspension statute. The sponsor said the change was requested by the Department of Justice. Representative Erica Leon opposed the repeal, explaining that the prior language was intended to avoid criminalizing people who mow lawns or perform similar work near property edges while suspended, but she worried the repeal could create a loophole allowing driving on places like highway medians. Members questioned whether the issue was limited to mowing or broader vehicle use on property edges, and Leon said she would work with agencies to clarify the language so it protects lawful mowing without allowing misuse. No vote was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Instead of having a new section in Section 1B, we've asked that biosimilars just be added to Section
• A, to sub-sub A on that section.
• received any answer why biosimilars is being separated from generics and interchangeables in this section
• And that's where we believe, especially Section 2 of this bill, is important.
• So, again, we believe that adding biosimilars back into Section 1A alone will help expand patient access

Summary: The Health Care and Wellness Committee met on February 10 at 8:30 a.m. and heard two bills. On Engrossed Second Substitute Senate Bill 5594, staff explained that the bill would expand state policy on biosimilars by allowing health carriers to require patients to try a biosimilar before covering the equivalent brand drug starting in 2027, directing exchange plans to increase biosimilar utilization, and changing pharmacist substitution rules so substitution is generally allowed unless the prescriber says not to substitute. The prime sponsor, Sen. Harris, said the bill would lower costs and noted many other states already allow similar substitution. Supporters from health plans and generic/biosimilar manufacturers said biosimilars are safe, effective, and can save consumers and the system money, while a patient advocate raised concerns that the bill may not guarantee lower out-of-pocket costs at the pharmacy counter and suggested preferred formulary placement as a fix. AAM supported the bill with a technical amendment to place biosimilars in the same section as generics and interchangeable products, and the hearing on the bill was closed with no vote taken. The committee also heard Engrossed Senate Bill 5142 on Medicaid network adequacy for post-acute care. Staff said the bill would require the Health Care Authority to adopt network adequacy standards for nursing homes and inpatient rehabilitation facilities, considering community access, regional availability, timeliness, and federal Medicaid rules, with standards due by January 1, 2028 and implementation by July 1, 2028. Sen. Muzzall described it as a follow-up to last year’s bill that would create a pre-approved pathway for patients who are difficult to discharge because continuing care is hard to secure. Testimony from hospital and health system representatives strongly supported the bill, saying patients often remain in hospitals longer than medically necessary because of delays in finding skilled nursing or rehab placements and because single-case agreements are time-consuming and unpredictable, especially in rural areas. Public testimony on SB 5142 was then closed, and the meeting adjourned without any recorded votes or other action.

Transcript Highlights:

• Article 3, Section 10 and 11, um, addresses it. Section 10 actually talks about the quorum.
• Sure, I, I don't disagree that there's a section on punishments.
• It's page 4, Section A of that ruling from 2021, where they say that the Texas Constitution enables quorum
• Page 2, section B says you can't use campaign dollars. Uh, for items such as travel, food, lodging.
• The, uh, Article 3 of the Constitution, sections 10 and 11 address quorum and also, uh, the applicable

Bills: HB18

Keywords: HB 18, Texas Legislature, quorum break, quorum-busting, legislative walkout, absent legislators, political contributions, campaign finance, political expenditures, legislative caucus, specific-purpose committee, Texas Ethics Commission, civil penalty, show cause order, district court, Fifteenth Court of Appeals, session fundraising, travel lodging food expenses, legislative session, compelled attendance

Transcript Highlights:

• So on page 10 of your bill, Section 1, you have rewritten a series of affirmative defenses into that
• It's sections H-1 and H-2 of the bill. H-1 being...
• H-1 and H-2 of the bill, H-1 being, it's an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section that
• And I hope you would consider removing sections, or at least significantly modifying section H-1.
• And I hope you would consider removing sections, or at least significantly modifying section H-1.

Summary: The Subcommittee on New Offenses and Changed Penalties met with a quorum present and first handled witness-registration corrections for House Bill 2461, changing one witness from support to neutral and deleting another registration; HB 2461 was left pending. The subcommittee then heard House Bill 3507, which would create a tiered penalty structure for repeat theft offenders by increasing penalties for those with five or more prior theft convictions. Representative Wharton and Walker County District Attorney Will Durham testified in support, arguing current law treats chronic shoplifters the same regardless of how many prior convictions they have. No opposition was presented, and HB 3507 was left pending. The committee next heard House Bill 1871, which would increase penalties for attempted capital murder of a peace officer, raise the minimum sentence to 25 years, and deny parole and mandatory supervision for those convicted. Representative Dyson, Brazos County District Attorney Jarvis Parsons, Lieutenant Ed Ramirez, and Chief Deputy Constable Calder Lively testified in support, describing attacks on officers and arguing the bill would provide stronger deterrence and truth in sentencing. No questions or opposition were recorded, and HB 1871 was left pending. House Bill 4911 followed, updating child exploitation laws to address AI-generated and deepfake child sexual abuse material by expanding definitions and criminalizing knowing possession or viewing of fake or computer-generated images depicting minors. Representative Fairly and Harris County DA’s Office division chief Steven Driver supported the bill, saying technology had outpaced existing law and that the measure would help protect children. A committee member raised concerns about broad affirmative defenses in the bill, and Representative Fairly said the office would work on an amendment. HB 4911 was left pending. Finally, on HB 795, Representative Bowers moved that the subcommittee report completion of deliberations and recommend the bill for full committee consideration; the motion passed 3-2, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• notification by certified mail, return receipt requested, and add independent administrators to sections
• However, one Estates Code section refers to a certificate of the clerk in addition to letters testamentary
• 2048 that was passed unanimously by the Senate and the House in 2023, except that we exempted the sections
• 2048 that was passed unanimously by the Senate and the House in 2023, except that we exempted the sections
• And this is regarding Government Code Section 51.901.

Bills: SB302, SB1335, SB1734, SB1760, SB1975, SB2127

Keywords: probate court, statutory judge, reimbursement, court costs, court proceedings, judicial assignments, judge assignment, cost reimbursement, judicial expenses, estate management, statutory requirement, court expenses, estates, inheritance, representative duties, court authority, personal representative, real property, deed fraud, title fraud

Summary: The committee heard several probate, family law, judicial, property, and contract-related bills. Senate Bill 1335, relating to decedents’ estates, would remove outdated references to a clerk’s certificate, allow courts to remove personal representatives on their own motion with notice by qualified delivery method, and add independent administrators to provisions that referenced only independent executors; an estate-planning attorney testified in support, and the bill was left pending. Senate Bill 1760, concerning guardianship transfer fees and procedures, was described as setting a $45 filing fee for transferred guardianship cases and clarifying completion and dismissal procedures; it received no testimony and was left pending. Senate Bill 2127 would shorten the eligibility period for retired judges to serve as visiting judges from eight years to six, restrict practice in their assigned region for two years, and require conflict-related certification; it also was left pending without testimony. Senate Bill 302 would shift the cost of a traveling probate judge to the requesting estate or parties rather than the county; one witness registered in favor, no one testified, and the bill was left pending. The committee then considered a committee substitute for Senate Bill 252, which would clarify the parental presumption in conservatorship cases, require non-parents seeking relief against a parent to file an affidavit showing significant impairment to the child if relief is denied, require courts to state specific findings when overcoming the presumption, confirm the clear-and-convincing standard, and clarify that agreed prior orders do not defeat the presumption. The substitute was explained as consensus language from a work group, public testimony was reopened, and the bill was left pending. Senate Bill 1734, on deed fraud, would create a streamlined ex parte process for property owners to have fraudulent deeds declared void, modeled on the fraudulent lien statute; county clerk and title association representatives testified that it would provide a low-cost self-help remedy for a growing problem, and the bill was left pending subject to the chair. Senate Bill 1975 would prevent Texas contractors from being forced to litigate disputes in foreign jurisdictions and require disputes to be handled in the county where the project is located; it was presented as a repeat of a previously vetoed bill and was left pending. Finally, the committee took up a substitute for Senate Bill 1940, concerning transfer-on-death style beneficiary designations for manufactured homes. The substitute would allow one or more beneficiaries instead of only one, transfer the interest to surviving designated beneficiaries who survive by 120 hours, extend the application period for transfer to 365 days, void the designation if not timely filed, and require mailing by certified or registered mail with return receipt requested. The substitute was adopted without objection. The committee then recessed subject to the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• Nothing in this section numeral 2.
• </c> cross-section of disability and aging. cross-section of disability and aging.
• </c><05:05:32.878><c> section</c> This section uh the next section This section uh the next section starting
• , section one on top of page two.
• , section one on top of page two.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, that's requested by DPS. section 8. section 8.
• Sorry about that. read uh section 197.447. read uh section 197.447.
• </c> section? 197.447. section? 197.447. Oh,<00:56:24.240><c> Mr.</c> Oh, Mr. Oh, Mr. Who? Who?
• So, in section this? Okay.
• </c><00:58:16.800><c> 1,</c><00:58:17.760><c> section</c> sub- section 10, subdivision 1, section sub

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> by</c><00:43:13.839><c> a</c><00:43:14.079><c> simple</c> section are approved by a simple section
• Section 8 establishes a process for approving lease agreements that do not qualify under section 7.
• </c> section 7 establishes a prohibition. section 7 establishes a prohibition.
• c> process</c><01:05:52.559><c> for</c> Section 8 establishes a process for Section 8 establishes a process
• HB 1066 contains new section article.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all