Transcript Highlights:

• And that's an additional technical change. And maybe, is that a technical change, or is that a...
• Is a chair a technical change? What is a technical change?
• And they come in and say we were gonna make a technical change to the building and/or a technical change
• And we'll see that change completely.
• Changes just for the legislature.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:05:30.440> on here experts in some of the changes on here experts in some of the changes
• Nothing has changed about that.
• Okay, but there's no changes in... I thought you mentioned he mentioned section seven change those.
• Okay, but there's no changes in... I thought you mentioned he mentioned section seven change those.
• Okay, but there's no changes in... I thought you mentioned he mentioned section seven change those.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Education met with a quorum and first took up Senate Bill 68, which was presented by Kentucky Department of Education staff as a cleanup measure to reduce duplicative or outdated reporting requirements. The bill, as amended by a committee substitute, would streamline reporting on local wellness policies, school breakfast programs, school budgets, audits, and school nutrition assessments, while preserving existing requirements to adopt wellness and physical activity policies and maintain audit obligations. Members asked whether removing reporting on physical activity and related topics would weaken oversight; KDE responded that districts would still have to adopt the policies and be reviewed under federal nutrition monitoring, but the state reports were often incomplete, hard to compare, and not especially useful. The committee adopted the substitute and passed SB 68 unanimously. The committee then heard Senate Bill 207, the School Innovation Act, sponsored by Senator West. The bill would create an optional program allowing school districts to apply to the Kentucky Board of Education for waivers from certain administrative regulations and establish three-year “schools of innovation,” potentially with third-party partners, to give struggling schools more flexibility and a fresh start. Senator West said the model was inspired by a visit to a school of innovation in South Carolina and by examples from South Carolina and Indiana, and he argued that the bill would let districts try new approaches without mandating participation. He also said existing “district of innovation” language in statute is a relic and that the bill would replace it with a school-based model. Committee members asked about fiscal impact, eligibility, and whether the bill was limited to failing schools. Senator West said the fiscal note was indeterminate because participation is voluntary and could range from none to many districts, but he expected little direct budget change and possible outside philanthropic funding if a district chose to participate. He said the bill does not limit participation to the bottom 5% of schools and would be left to local district discretion. Members also raised whether high-performing or specialized schools could use the model; West said yes, if a district chose. Supportive testimony emphasized that the bill could reduce burdensome oversight and allow schools more flexibility to innovate. The discussion ended with continued questions and no final action recorded in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill makes changes to Step 7 of the school aid formula.
• This bill would change that allocation.
• This bill would change that allocation.
• Changed two things. The bill as introduced provided for... Changed. It changed two things.
• These changes do not apply to existing wells.

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee met with a quorum present, approved the prior meeting minutes, and then considered a series of House bills and committee substitutes. House Bill 5438, dealing with changes to Step 7 of the school aid formula and allowable uses of certain education allocations, was amended to adopt the Education Committee’s changes and then reported to the full Senate. House Bill 4087 creating the West Virginia-Ireland Education Alliance was also reported, as was House Bill 4191, which expands child care tax credit eligibility for employer-sponsored facilities and changes subsidy payments from attendance-based to enrollment-based reimbursement; senators emphasized its workforce and economic development benefits. House Bill 5074, which reallocates medical cannabis fund balances and future revenues, was amended to increase the Child Protective Commission pilot funding from $3 million to $5 million and remove proposed ibogaine research funding for Marshall and WVU before being reported. House Bill 5353, regulating virtual currency kiosks and money transmission licensure, and House Bill 5527, creating licensure and oversight for wellness reimbursement program administrators, both received strike-and-insert amendments and were reported. House Bill 5687, which phases down the metallurgical coal severance tax and adds a temporary oil and gas tax reduction with county/municipal revenue adjustments, was amended and reported. House Bill 4418, creating an electronic system for municipal business and occupation tax filing and collection with a 1% administrative fee and a participation threshold, was also reported. The committee then took up House Bill 4245, the Revenue Rules Bundle, which bundles 26 legislative rules from the Department of Revenue and related agencies. The bundle included alcohol, banking, insurance, racing, and tax rules, with several sunset extensions and repeals of outdated rules; the committee adopted a strike-and-insert amendment affecting a lottery consumer protection rule and a pre-need cemetery company rule, then reported the bill. House Bill 5168, providing a $12 million lottery-funded stream for emergency medical services, was amended to clarify the uses of the funds, rename one fund, require a 30% county match for mental health treatment spending, and create two additional county-based EMS funds; senators described it as a needed permanent funding source for EMS, and it was reported. Throughout the meeting, members generally supported the measures, with some discussion on technical details, funding allocations, and the impact of the bills on local services and workforce needs. At the end of the meeting, the chair announced that Senate House Bills 4004, 4006, and 4009 would not be taken up that day, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, change in the bill.
• Thank you. change. I respectfully urge you to change.
• Um and this does not change that. cases. Um and this does not change that.
• required change of correction. required change of correction.
• those changes. those changes.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• piece of paper and say these changes piece of paper and say these changes that<00:34:30.159>
• And even in today's world, if there is such a thing as moderate change contracts, a change order.
• change orders, upgrades, whatever. change orders, upgrades, whatever.
• So there needs to be a change.
• “So there needs to be a change.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first held a public hearing on Senate Bill 25, which would allow state-chartered credit unions to compensate board members if the membership approves it. Prime sponsor Senator Dan Innis said the bill is enabling only, intended to help credit unions recruit and retain qualified directors and align New Hampshire with other states that already allow such compensation. Credit union representatives from the Cooperative Credit Union Association and St. Mary’s Bank supported the bill, saying board service has become more complex because of cybersecurity, asset-liability management, and other regulatory demands, and that compensation could be modest and take forms such as meeting fees or educational reimbursement. In response to committee questions, they said compensation would be set by the membership, disclosed in advance, and subject to bylaws and internal policies; they also noted that board members must be credit union members and that voting procedures vary by institution, with some using mailed ballots rather than proxy voting. Members raised questions about why credit union boards were historically excluded, what kinds of compensation were contemplated, whether there would be a cap, and how voting and confidentiality would work. Testimony explained that the historical rationale was the nonprofit, volunteer mission of credit unions, but witnesses argued that the modern environment and competition for talent justify a change. They also said the bill would not mandate compensation and would not create a salary structure comparable to banks, but would allow members to approve modest compensation or reimbursements. After no further testimony, the chair closed the public hearing on Senate Bill 25. The committee then opened a public hearing on Senate Bill 26, sponsored by Senator Howard Pearl, concerning the definition of deposits in land sales and escrowed accounts. Pearl said the bill would clarify that buyer funds for upgrades and luxury items in new-home construction are not treated as refundable deposits that must be held in escrow, arguing that the current Attorney General interpretation raises builder costs, increases home prices, and can limit buyer choices. He said the proposal would allow those upgrade funds to be paid directly to builders for construction, with signed disclosures making clear that the buyer requested the items and bears the risk if financing falls through. The hearing on Senate Bill 26 had just begun when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• secondhand um all of those uh changes secondhand um all of those uh changes have<00:11:50.360>
• Hopefully that will change.
• the um the sh or it does does change the um the sh or it does change<00:53:12.280> and<00:53:
• You know, times have changed, uses have changed, needs have changed.
• :18.080> changed<01:20:18.960> we uses have changed needs have changed we uses have changed

Bills: HF1746, HF2585, HF1159, HF2574, HF2839, HF157, HF158, HF160, HF338, HF512

Keywords: Oakdale, tax increment financing, local government, funding, urban development, tax increment, St. Paul, redevelopment, housing authority, housing trust fund, low-income housing, property taxation, Minnesota statutes, vacant property, housing, commercial to residential conversion, Minneapolis, urban redevelopment, public parks, tax capacity

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:10:01.680> or consideration of you know changes or consideration of you know changes or
• Um politics to make those changes.
• changing time frames.
• to the federal level, including changes to the federal level, including changes to Medicaid,<00:
• <00:57:23.440> in impacts of potential changes in impacts of potential changes in coverage

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• You'll see in the it says change items.
• The House is also making a change to that appropriation, and that change is $2 million in FY 26-27 and
• Line 38, 39, 40, and 41 are changes Line 38, 39, 40, and 41 are changes related<00:13:57.519>
• Uh additional change items for there.
• Representative Burkel. might see like uh minor changes, but might see like uh minor changes, but they

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Agriculture Conference Committee met for an initial organizational and comparison session on House File 2446, the agriculture broadband and rural development bill. Members introduced themselves, noted that no conference target had yet been set, and agreed to begin with a side-by-side review of House and Senate positions. No oral testimony was taken; instead, the chair listed written testimony submitted by a wide range of agricultural, environmental, local government, food bank, and industry groups. Nonpartisan fiscal staff walked through the major funding differences. Both bills included some shared items such as operating adjustments, wolf and elk damage compensation, and certain technical changes, but they differed on several major appropriations. The House generally proposed larger increases for meat inspection, local food purchasing, and the Board of Animal Health, and added items such as county inspector grants, biofertilizer innovation, a biosolids/PFAS-related study, a soil health study, broadband installation study funding, an Agri Works program, an Agri Support program, a milk grant program, and several House-only transfers and grants. The Senate included items such as a climate coordinator position, biofuel-related reductions and policy changes, livestock processing funding, farm-to-school and urban agriculture changes, MARL funding, cottage foods licensing updates, and several Senate-only pass-through grants and transfers. Staff also noted differences in the agriculture emergency account transfer approach and in how the two bodies handled the Second Harvest Heartland and related food distribution provisions. House Research then reviewed the policy language differences in the bill. The House language included provisions allowing more flexible use of grant administration funds, unpaid prior-year claims, county inspector grants, and updates tied to its own policy article, while the Senate language included the climate coordinator, PFAS-related commercialization language, cooperative development grant permissive language, and other Senate policy changes. The committee did not take any votes or final actions at this meeting; the session was informational and focused on identifying differences for later negotiation.

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't think there's any changes. I think that's all there is for changes on that.
• think there's any changes. think there's any changes.
• Is that the change? Is that the change?
• Not much of a change in line 33.
• changes, with a couple of changes.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee of conference on HB 751 reviewed amendment 2026-1904H page by page, focusing on open enrollment rules, capacity definitions, statewide enrollment limits, denial criteria, transportation, and funding. Members discussed clarifying that districts may set capacity at zero if they truly have no room, creating a statewide enrollment cap of 500 that can increase by 25% if it reaches 90% utilization, and exempting seats already used by open enrollment students before October 1, 2026. They also discussed how the Department of Education would allocate seats through rulemaking, while local districts would still set capacity, with grandfathered seats preserved where districts already allow open enrollment. A substantial portion of the meeting centered on when districts may deny open enrollment applications. The amendment would allow denials for reasons such as chronic absenteeism or disciplinary history, while requiring districts to consider whether those issues are tied to disability, McKinney-Vento status, foster care, or bullying. Members emphasized that such factors are to be considered, not used as the sole basis for rejection, and noted that the bill separately prohibits receiving schools from accepting or rejecting applicants based on pupil needs, special education needs, disability, aptitude, or athletic achievement. There was also discussion of whether interdistrict transfers should count toward open enrollment capacity, with a suggestion that a carve-out may be needed. The committee also reviewed provisions on program-specific capacity, continuous enrollment, and transportation. It was explained that capacity can apply to a school, grade, program, or class, including CTE programs, and that students may be denied if a specific program is full or if they do not meet prerequisites. The group clarified that open enrollment pupils would maintain continuous enrollment without reapplying, though there was concern about how that would work if district capacity changes over time. Transportation would generally be the parent’s responsibility unless required by an IEP or 504 plan, though students may use an existing bus route if seats are available and the receiving district allows it. On funding, the committee noted that the amendment changes the earlier HB 751 approach and instead ties open enrollment funding to base adequacy, differentiated aid, and an additional grant modeled on charter school funding, with dates removed at the department’s request. Members also raised concerns about how open enrollment would interact with existing tuition agreements and whether districts could use the new pathway to alter or pressure those arrangements. Department staff said districts would still be required to maintain a school of record and provide an adequate education free of charge outside the open enrollment program, and that if open enrollment enrollment became unusually large relative to district adequacy enrollment, the issue could be brought to the state board. No votes were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:08:25.759> at oversight that doesn't change at oversight that doesn't change at all all
• will I guess change will I guess change the<00:24:19.200> perception<00:24:19.919> and
• > change<00:24:53.679> the<00:24:53.760> way going to dramatically change the way
• Going to be this sort of change is really a corporate change for the three existing organizations
• doesn't change doesn't change so<00:49:04.480> um<00:49:04.720> that<00:49:04.880>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The work session focused on HB 54, which would allow New Hampshire’s alternative treatment centers to operate for profit. Chair David Nagel opened by identifying the main concerns: whether members agreed with the bill conceptually, whether the proposal could be shaped to avoid a gubernatorial veto, and whether it could lead to “big cannabis” taking over. He also emphasized that the bill would not change the existing oversight structure, which remained under RSA 126-X. Representative Wendy Thomas said the governor’s objections in past sessions appeared to center on the state’s preference for a state-run model and broader policy concerns, but no one present knew the current governor’s position. Several speakers argued the bill was primarily about financing and access, not expanding the number of dispensaries. Matt Simon of Granite Leaf Cannabis said the current nonprofit structure makes it difficult to raise capital, pay down debt, and open additional access points, and that the bill would be a corporate restructuring rather than a change in day-to-day regulation. Brandon Pollock of TASCAL Wellness said medical cannabis programs in most other states are for-profit, and that New Hampshire’s nonprofit requirement has left ATCs burdened with high-interest debt and higher prices that push patients to Maine, Vermont, or the street market. He said converting to for-profit status could allow conventional financing, lower prices, and help keep patients in the regulated program. Members also discussed whether for-profit ownership would invite outside corporate control. Witnesses said the bill would not open the market to new operators, would not change advertising rules, and would include restrictions on ownership transfers for a period of time; “foreign corporation” was explained as an out-of-state entity. One speaker noted that the bill is similar to earlier versions that passed both chambers with strong support but never became law. No vote was taken during the work session; the discussion was informational and aimed at addressing concerns before the bill moved forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• those changes centralized as much as I could.
• The biggest change with that was in South Florida.
• And if you're making changes in Southeast Florida to comply with state law and the changes in state law
• , you can make other changes there in an effort to do...
• And if you're making changes in Southeast Florida to comply with state law and the changes in state law

Summary: The Committee on Rules met with a quorum present and took up a presentation from the Governor’s office on proposed congressional reapportionment. Executive Office of the Governor counsel Mo Jazeel argued that mid-cycle congressional redistricting is legally permissible, that race should not be used in drawing districts, and that the Florida Fair Districts provisions are inconsistent with federal equal protection principles and, in the executive branch’s view, are inseverable. Jason Parada then presented the proposed map, explaining that it was drawn using 2020 census block data, with county growth estimates used only as a guide, and that the plan was designed to be race-neutral while also considering compactness, county and municipal boundaries, and other traditional redistricting criteria. He said the map keeps 48 counties and 382 municipalities whole, has compactness scores comparable to the current map, and makes the largest changes in South Florida, with some districts remaining unchanged and others reconfigured around population shifts and geographic boundaries. Members questioned both presenters extensively about the legal basis for disregarding the Fair Districts Amendment, the use of partisan data, the absence of racial analysis, and whether the map truly reflects population growth. Jazeel said the executive branch’s position is that race-based provisions in the state constitution cannot be used if they conflict with the U.S. Constitution, and that the forthcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision in Louisiana v. Calais could further clarify the law. Parada said he did not use race in drawing the map, did use partisan information as one of several traditional criteria, and relied on 2020 census data for population equality. Senators also pressed him on who reviewed the map, why the public and legislators had limited time to review it, and whether the plan was intended to favor Republicans; Parada denied partisan intent and said he was the only person who moved lines on the map, though he consulted with other Executive Office of the Governor staff and counsel. Several senators raised concerns that the map did not clearly reflect Florida’s recent population growth, that some districts remained highly irregular, and that the plan appeared to be based on a legal theory contingent on future court rulings. The presenters responded that congressional districts must be equal to the person, that growth estimates can only guide orientation rather than replace census data, and that the map was designed to preserve as much of the existing structure as possible while making the largest adjustments in South Florida. No vote or final action on the map was taken during the excerpted portion of the meeting, and the committee continued with questions and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Substances are not changed; they are either... ...changing substances on a schedule of controlled substances
• Medicare has very strict rules about changing reimbursement terms for Part D plans or changing formulary
• Medicare has very strict rules about changing reimbursement terms for Part D plans or changing formulary
• And then you could just change the rules? So these changes may be a number of things.
• Changes may be a number of things.

Bills: SB331, SB883, SB926, SB1137, SB1138, SB1144, SB1151, SB1236, SB1270, SB1522, SB1869, SB2207, SB2422

Keywords: healthcare, cost disclosure, transparency, administrative penalties, health facility compliance, COVID-19, off-label use, prescription drugs, patient access, medical standards, insurance, physician ranking, incentives, fiduciary duty, health plan issuers, SB 1137, group home, assisted living, residential care, board and care

Summary: The committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 883, which would protect physicians’ ability to prescribe off-label medications and treatments, framed by the author as a “Right to Treat” measure tied to COVID-19 care. Supporters, including physicians and patient-choice advocates, said the bill would safeguard the doctor-patient relationship and prevent interference by boards, pharmacies, or hospitals. Several witnesses described using hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, budesonide, antibiotics, steroids, and monoclonal antibodies during the pandemic, and said they faced complaints, board scrutiny, or pharmacy refusals for those prescriptions. The bill was left pending after public testimony closed. The committee then took up Senate Bill 331, which would extend hospital price-transparency requirements to additional health care facilities such as freestanding ERs, urgent care and retail clinics, ambulatory surgical centers, outpatient clinics, and birthing centers. Proponents argued that broader disclosure of prices for shoppable services would help consumers compare costs and reduce surprise billing, while opponents from ambulatory surgery centers said the bill would impose costly compliance burdens on small providers and that insurers or the state already have much of the needed data. The bill was also left pending. Senate Bill 2422 would expunge Texas Medical Board records and impose reparations for disciplinary actions tied to COVID-era treatment decisions, including references to ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, budesonide, and masks. The author and supporters argued that doctors were unfairly targeted for trying to save patients and should be made whole; the Texas Medical Board representative said most pandemic complaints were dismissed, that actions generally involved broader issues such as privileges, documentation, or informed consent, and that no physician was disciplined solely for prescribing off-label COVID medications. The bill was left pending. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 2207, which would loosen Texas Medical Board rules on physicians advertising themselves as board certified, especially by reducing barriers tied to maintenance of certification requirements. Supporters said the current rule is overly restrictive, inconsistent, and costly, and that it drives physicians out of practice; they also said Texas is one of only a few states with such a rule. Witnesses described hospitals using the rule against physicians and said the change would improve transparency and competition. The bill remained pending after testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Past session, the parameters changed.
• around us, whether you like it or not, it's changing rapidly.
• Things change. So, yes, to your point, it is something to...
• And within the last five years, there's a 5% change overall.
• at potential changes.

Summary: The Tax Reform and Relief Advisory Committee met with a quorum, approved the March 17, 2026 minutes, and heard a lengthy update from Tax Commissioner Brian Croshys on property tax relief programs. He reviewed the Homestead Property Tax Credit, Disabled Veteran Credit, and Primary Residence Credit, noting increased relief after House Bill 1158 and House Bill 1176, but also discussing how some households “income adjust out” of eligibility over time. Members asked about indexing income thresholds, expanding eligibility by age alone, simplifying administration, county-level notices, and whether the county and state systems could be streamlined. Croshys said the programs are heavily used, largely administered at the county level, and that the department is still refining compliance and reporting; he also said there were no material findings or overarching concerns in the latest review. The committee agreed more detailed PRC information would likely come back in a September meeting, and the chair announced an afternoon recess for lunch before later reconvening. Shelly Myers then presented the statewide property tax increase report, the zero-growth report, and a statistical report on property values and tax levies by class. She explained how county auditors report levy and valuation data, how increases and decreases are counted, and identified counties and cities with the largest percentage changes in growth or decline. She also summarized recent trends: agricultural values remain relatively flat, while residential, commercial, and centrally assessed values have risen over the last five years; in 2025, residential property accounted for the largest share of statewide property tax levies, followed by commercial, agriculture, and centrally assessed property. Committee members asked about unusual zero-growth figures, the effect of annexation and land-use changes, and whether the 3% levy cap was forcing political subdivisions to use reserves or defer spending. Myers said many counties complied by using reserves, delaying capital projects, or limiting increases, and that some counties had not used their full cap. The committee then moved to the stripper oil extraction tax exemption. Commissioner Croshys reviewed the state’s oil tax structure and estimated the revenue impact of keeping stripper wells exempt from extraction tax while still paying production tax. He said the exemption saves operators hundreds of millions of dollars over a biennium, while the state still collects production tax on those wells. He also discussed projected impacts if the exemption were changed for future wells and noted that future outcomes depend on oil prices, production declines, and technology such as CO2 enhanced oil recovery. Nathan Anderson of the Department of Mineral Resources briefly explained the historical difference between the 35-barrel and 30-barrel thresholds for certain wells, citing differences in completion costs and lateral lengths. The committee then heard from EERC CEO Charles Gorecki, who presented an analysis of oil well life cycles and said most oil is produced before wells reach stripper status, but that refracturing or other reinvestment can significantly extend production and keep wells above the threshold for years.

Transcript Highlights:

• Why is the intent to make such major changes to this program?
• Like, you know, what kind of changes are they going to see?
• So the change by the Todd decision actually changed that, or throughout the program there have been others
• What if we change those time limitations and eliminate those cases?
• the associated legislative change.

Summary: The Budget Subcommittee on State Administration heard presentations on the Department of Industrial Relations’ labor-related budget items, with the main focus on proposed trailer bill language to reform the Subsequent Injury Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF) and a related budget change proposal for staffing. DIR said SIBTF has grown far beyond its original purpose, citing the 2020 Todd decision, expanded eligibility based on chronic or asymptomatic conditions, and a backlog that has grown to more than 30,000 pending cases. The administration argued the reforms would restore guardrails, reduce liabilities and employer assessments, and speed processing for severely injured workers; the LAO said the proposal was largely consistent with its prior recommendations. Members raised concerns about using trailer bill language for major policy changes, the retroactive application to open cases, and the impact on workers already in the queue, while supporters from employer groups and public agencies backed the proposal as necessary to control costs and restore sustainability. Public comment was split, with injured-worker advocates opposing the retroactive changes and business/public employer representatives supporting the reforms. The committee then heard the SIBTF workload request, which would phase in 177 positions over five years at a cost of $36.5 million, including staff for the Division of Workers’ Compensation, the Office of the Director Legal Unit, and administrative support. DIR said the additional staffing is intended to address very high caseloads and reduce processing times, but emphasized that the request assumes the reform package is adopted; LAO agreed the staffing increase made sense if paired with reforms. Members asked about vacancy rates, current staffing, and whether the workload request would become the new normal, and DIR said it would monitor caseload trends and adjust future requests as needed. Finally, the committee received an update on the California Workplace Outreach Program (CWOP), which DIR described as a partnership with community-based organizations to educate workers and help employers comply with labor laws. DIR reported that CWOP has reached 1.75 million workers and employers and made 8 million touchpoints since 2020, with the current round awarding $50.7 million to 87 partners for a two-year period through June 2027. Members and public commenters highlighted the program’s role in reaching immigrant, farmworker, janitorial, nail salon, and other vulnerable communities, and several speakers urged continued funding at $30 million per year for five years. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Change there at the bottom of that table.
• All we've really done is change the accounting, and it's...
• But the underlying taxation hasn't changed, so therefore the underlying volatility hasn't changed.
• And I just wanted to know, do you forecast downsides with climate change? change in mind.
• To affect change in some way.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those are the changes, Mr. Chair. >> Vice Chair, do you have a testifier with you?
• And I do appreciate the fact that changing the gravity of the offense changes the dynamics of how it's
• And I do appreciate the fact that changing the gravity of the offense changes the dynamics of how it's
• So changing it to a felony is not going to change the conduct.
• So changing it to a felony is not going to change the conduct.

Bills: HF3489, HF3990, HF3825, HF3826, HF3827, HF3822

Keywords: grooming, child protection, student safety, sexual exploitation, educator licensing, teacher discipline, mandatory reporting, mandated reporter training, school misconduct, predatory offender, child abuse, sexual abuse, sex trafficking, child sexual abuse material, child pornography, position of authority, school employee, school administrator, license revocation, license suspension

Transcript Highlights:

• And the changes that I'm asking for are to change the deadline for appeals to be heard at that local
• And the changes that I'm asking for are to change the deadline for appeals to be heard at that local
• So to make the change holistically, it has to be changed in various parts.
• It would change the calculation. It would change the calculation.
• I have seen many changes over time.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• climate change be measurable?
• And so I’m not saying that the climate has not changed. It’s going to continue to change.
• change. might attribute or one might not to climate change be measurable.
• And so I'm not saying that the climate has not changed. It's going to continue to change.
• Change. It's going to continue to change.

Bills: HR1046, SB1733, SB1439

Keywords: Oklahoma City, terrorism, Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, memorial, remembrance, first responders, community support, child abuse, reporting requirements, sexual misconduct, law enforcement, school personnel, confidentiality, student safety, fossil fuels, liability protection, climate change, energy independence, oil and gas

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and several special recognitions tied to the 31st anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing. The chamber honored the 138th Fighter Wing Civil Engineer Squadron Fire Department as Veterans of the Week, and also recognized Dr. Camissa Stewart as Doctor of the Day and Tammy Powell as Nurse of the Day for their roles in the 1995 bombing response. A lengthy floor presentation followed, featuring remarks from legislators, Lieutenant Governor Matt Pinnell, memorial museum leaders, Justice Stephen Taylor, and Pastor Ronnie Fields, all focused on remembrance, the Oklahoma standard, the victims and survivors, and the importance of hope, civility, and the rule of law. On legislation, Senate Bill 1733 was presented and debated. The bill requires school personnel who have reason to believe a student is a victim of child sexual abuse or sexual misconduct to report it to law enforcement within 24 hours. Supporters said it clarifies and strengthens reporting requirements to protect children, while opponents warned it could trigger harmful public accusations and undermine trust in educators and administrators. The House passed the bill 92-1, and the emergency clause also passed 92-1. The House also considered Senate Bill 1439, an oil and gas measure intended to bar speculative climate-related lawsuits and limit liability to actual violations and provable harm. Supporters argued it would prevent frivolous litigation, protect the state’s energy economy, and keep costs down for consumers; opponents said it would create a special legal carve-out for industry and shift costs to taxpayers and families. The bill passed 74-16. In addition, Senate Bill 2184 was assigned to Rules, and H.J.R. 1078 and H.J.R. 1079 were withdrawn from Rules and sent to appropriations and budget committees. The House adjourned after announcements and introductions.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are no notable changes to those provisions.
• The remainder of those sections relate to changes to...
• Not only was it calming me right away, it literally changed my life.
• Nine years ago, everything changed.
• Without making changes to the medical cannabis market... it will collapse.

Bills: HF1545, HF2426, HF1615, HF2403

Keywords: medical cannabis, cultivation, cannabinoid products, plant canopy, Minnesota statutes, cannabis, hemp, lower-potency, edibles, regulations, licensing, local control, consumer safety, age restrictions, commerce policy, financial institutions, insurance regulation, limited long-term care insurance, Medicare supplement, health insurance

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, we don't anticipate any change.
• based on their award language change.
• This is an award language change.
• You know, you have to change tables and do all that stuff.
• So, prior to this award request, language change, we were.