Transcript Highlights:

• pilot so we can go back if we need to. pilot so we can go back if we need to.
• That part needs to be addressed. We need to acknowledge that there needs to be better quality.
• That part needs to be process.
• there is a need for increased capacity. there is a need for increased capacity.
• needed. Any comments or concerns? needed. Any comments or concerns?

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard several bills on water, land, housing, permitting, and historic preservation. For SB 746/SD2/HD1 on invasive species, DLNR and the Department of Agriculture supported the intent but warned that a bounty approach for coconut rhinoceros beetle could have unintended consequences, divert resources from biocontrol research, and be vulnerable to abuse; Hawaii Farm Bureau supported the measure. The committee also heard SB 1541 on the WoE water system, with testimony from ADC, Kunia Village Title Holding Company, and Farm Bureau in support, emphasizing the importance of the system for agriculture and the high cost of water on lands already dedicated to farming. The most extensive discussion was on SB 66, relating to building permit review and county permitting authority. DPP opposed the bill, saying the problem is not just agency review time but the broader permitting process, including applicant corrections, outside-agency review, staffing shortages, and low pay that make it hard to fill vacancies. DPP said it already meets or beats existing review deadlines for residential permits and is using tools like electronic plans and AI to help applicants submit better plans. Several supporters, including Iron Workers Local 625, an individual witness, and Hawaii Food Industry Association, backed the bill but urged a pilot program or other safeguards; some also asked for broader permit coverage beyond single-family homes. Committee members questioned DPP about whether applicant correction time should count against the clock, whether self-certification could be used, and whether the state should fund any new mandate. The committee then took up SB 26 on affordable housing, with HHFDC, OPSD, and HCDA in support and no opposition noted. Finally, on SB 1263 relating to historic preservation, HHFDC and DLNR supported the bill, while OHA offered comments and requested amendments, especially on the new risk-based review process for high-, medium-, and low-risk areas. OHA said the new procedure should be implemented carefully and allowed more time, describing it as a pilot that should be done well to be useful while still protecting cultural and historic resources. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• need to do<00:14:26.720> better.
• kids who need the extra support. kids who need the extra support.
• needed funding for our public schools. needed funding for our public schools.
• People need to delve into that I heard. People need to delve into this<00:31:27.039> better.
• We need to be helping work them.

Bills: HF3490, HF4040

Keywords: education finance, scholarship-granting organizations, charitable purposes, student scholarships, nonpublic schools, K-12 education, tax credit, advance payment, Minnesota tax law, child education expenses, taxpayer assistance, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• State funding those who need them.
• <01:27:16.080> a a person comes to you and they need a a person comes to you and they need
• interpreting needs are changing. interpreting needs are changing.
• > finding Addressing these needs and finding Addressing these needs and finding effective<01:36
• The need for school or clinics.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We need these services to be there.
• We need these services to be there.
• his home with the care that he needed his home with the care that he needed and<00:35:05.680>
• <00:39:36.119> to and said you know we really need to and said you know we really need to
• there's still work to do we still need there's still work to do we still need to<00:40:30.839>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So if I need, and I think we've talked about the kind of scale you'd need, you'd need somewhere like
• So if I need, and I think we've talked about the kind of scale you'd need, you'd need somewhere like
• I needed to make— And a wife, I needed to keep my family out of jail.
• We need more education in the state. We need more education on this topic. We need more research.
• That's what we need.

Summary: The House Committee on Public Health heard House Bill 5, a proposal to ban THC products outside the Texas Compassionate Use Program while allowing non-intoxicating CBD and CBG products under tighter regulation. Chair Van Deaver gave a lengthy background on the 2018 federal Farm Bill and Texas’s 2019 hemp law, arguing that the lack of guardrails allowed a large, unregulated THC market to develop. HB 5 would impose licensing fees, product registration, testing and inspection requirements, and restrictions intended to keep products away from children. Invited witnesses from law enforcement strongly supported the bill. Steve Dye of the Texas Police Chiefs Association and Brian Hawthorne of the Sheriffs’ Association of Texas argued that THC consumables are widely mislabeled, often far more potent than advertised, and linked to youth access, impaired driving, and organized crime. Both said regulation would be ineffective and would amount to legalization, while a ban would be easier for officers to enforce. They also emphasized support for the Texas Compassionate Use Program and said medical THC should remain available. Dr. Peter Stout of the Texas Association of Crime Lab Directors and Alice Amelot of Texas DPS testified as resource witnesses about forensic testing. They said current lab resources are already stretched thin, that quantitative testing for THC and related cannabinoids is expensive and time-consuming, and that a ban would simplify enforcement because labs could focus on presence/absence testing rather than concentration. Amelot said DPS labs are neutral on the bill but explained that mislabeled products and inaccurate certificates of analysis are common. Committee members asked about traffic safety, impairment, youth use, and the costs of enforcement and lab testing; witnesses repeatedly said the bill would reduce complexity for law enforcement but that any approach would still require more resources for labs.

Transcript Highlights:

• We in Massachusetts must contemplate where we stand based on previous laws we passed and where we need
• Third, we need to protect data associated with the provision of legally protected care.
• emergency abortion care when needed.
• What kind of enforcement power or ability will the AG need to be able to create a protection umbrella
• They are very much in need of having that protection.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Steering and Policy held a public hearing on potential updates to Massachusetts’ 2022 Shield Law to strengthen protections for reproductive and gender-affirming health care. Chair Cindy Friedman said the hearing was prompted by escalating federal and out-of-state threats, and testimony was sought on loopholes and clarifications involving emergency abortion care, limits on cooperation with outside investigations, protection of patient data, and safeguarding licenses of providers and attorneys involved in this care. The Attorney General’s Office, ACLU of Massachusetts, GLBTQ Legal Advocates and Defenders, Reproductive Equity Now, the Massachusetts Medical Society, TransHealth, and Health Imperatives all supported strengthening the law. Witnesses urged broader bans on sharing health data with hostile states, explicit AG enforcement authority, exclusion of reproductive and gender-affirming prescriptions from the prescription monitoring program, protections for electronic medical records, and allowing clinicians to use practice names on prescription labels. Several speakers also called for protections for parents of transgender youth, attorneys, and nonprofit organizations, and some raised related concerns about insurance discrimination and the burden of post-24-week abortion restrictions. Committee members asked questions about enforcement mechanisms, data privacy, patient consent, and how to balance interoperability with privacy protections in electronic records. Witnesses said the goal was to prevent immediate harm while preserving patient control and access to care. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chair closed by inviting written testimony and then moved to adjourn the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• We need to do better. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Stone of Boston.
• it, that we need to do more to limit ...address it, that we need to do more to limit folks who are coming
• We're using a lot of one-time resources as it is just to get by on this, so it needs to stop.
• We need to put a stop to it, and we can by adopting this amendment.
• because there's a lot of resources that our communities need.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The House considered House No. 57, a $425 million supplemental appropriations bill for fiscal year 2025 to fund the emergency shelter/emergency housing assistance system and related activities. The bill, as described by the chair of Ways and Means, included major policy changes requested by the Governor: immediate residency verification at intake, limits on eligibility, required criminal history disclosures and CORI checks, a reduced maximum shelter stay from nine months to six months with hardship waivers, temporary respite sites for 30 days, and a cap on system capacity. Supporters argued the changes were needed to preserve the right-to-shelter system amid fiscal strain and federal inaction; opponents said the bill still did not go far enough or, in some cases, went too far and risked harming families and children. The House debated and voted on numerous amendments, mostly focused on tightening eligibility or changing shelter operations. Several Republican amendments to reduce funding, impose a one-year residency requirement, require broader background checks, limit eligibility to homelessness caused within Massachusetts, and require cooperation with ICE were rejected, often after roll call votes. A point of order was sustained on multiple amendments as beyond the scope of the bill, including proposals affecting court officers, law enforcement, and ICE-related provisions. The House also rejected amendments to cut the appropriation from $425 million to $200 million and to add other restrictions on eligibility and administration. Some amendments were adopted. A redrafted Amendment 27, offered by Rep. Decker, was adopted 25-25 on a tie vote and expanded protections to children under age six and added related hardship/extension language. A subsequent amendment by Rep. Consalvo was adopted unanimously to add disability-related protections and extend benefits in certain cases. Another amendment by Rep. Finn was adopted to modify language about seeking federal reimbursement, and Amendment 9 was adopted to require competitive bidding for certain service funds. After debate and roll call, the bill was passed to be engrossed by a vote of 126-26. The House then observed a moment of tribute for Doug Selfick and adjourned to meet again Monday at 11 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• need from zero to three.
• And so we needed to stop that program.
• And that is something that we do need to focus on, in my opinion, and we need to pay attention.
• I think that I just need to...
• What's the need in the state?

Summary: The Early Childhood Committee met for an update from the Office of Early Childhood within the Department of Education. Members heard that the office’s goals under the LEARNS Act are to improve kindergarten readiness, support families, ensure quality providers, and expand affordable, accessible child care. Staff reviewed the local lead system, licensing, quality efforts such as CLASS and QRIS, and the two main funding streams: School Readiness Assistance (SRA), a federal CCDF-funded voucher program serving about 14,600 children with a wait list of a little over 3,000, and Arkansas Better Chance (ABC), a state-funded program serving about 21,000 children with authority recently increased to 24,000 slots. A major topic was the difference between market rate surveys and cost analysis studies. Officials said the department is procuring both through an RFP, hoping to begin by August and have results by late in the year. Members pressed for current reimbursement levels, the gap between ABC and SRA funding, and whether ABC funding should be increased to better match costs. Staff explained that SRA rates are set at 75% of the market rate, while ABC per-child funding is much lower, and that ABC slots are limited by the overall allocation. They also explained that some ABC slots were increased by moving children from a discontinued federal pre-K arrangement into ABC to preserve continuity of care. Committee members raised concerns about rural access, infant and toddler shortages, provider stability, workforce pay, and communication with families and providers. Officials said local leads are now helping identify underserved areas, that no county with absolutely no care is known, and that the department is trying to get a truer statewide count of children and providers. They also described efforts to improve communication through monthly provider calls, website postings, and direct case contacts with families. Members discussed possible funding increases, including ideas to reduce the SRA wait list and raise ABC funding, but no formal vote or action was taken beyond approving prior meeting minutes and receiving the update.

Transcript Highlights:

• So appropriation is needed for projects like this.
• So appropriation is needed for projects like this.
• So appropriation is needed for projects like this.
• So appropriation is needed for projects like this.
• Uh, honibus bill that need to be passed.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't need all this extra stuff out here.
• So that's why we need that investigation.
• So that's why it's important for them to absolutely give us a call if they need records or need information
• Would that be helpful or is that just as on a needed basis? Probably as needed. OK.
• Then I would have to be against the bill and I need to find out, do we need Part B or is it truly a training

Bills: HB 741, HB 1199, HB 2070, HB 2402, HB 2542, HB 2665, HB 2789, HB 3096, HB 3396, HB 3595, HB 3747, HB 4116, HB 4127

Keywords: child welfare, relative caregiver, monetary assistance, Department of Family and Protective Services, child custody, family law, emergency power, nursing facilities, assisted living, generator requirements, health and safety, emergency generators, power outage, emergency generator, assisted living facilities, power source, child abuse, neglect registry, court findings, Medicaid

Transcript Highlights:

• Do we need maybe less seats and more money? Do we need more seats, more money?
• And we look for need, all right?
• I think that there's a real need here.
• And we need to come up with strategies and recommendations. We need to pull some data.
• How do we need to address what adequacy?

Summary: The meeting began with approval of the previous minutes and then focused on an update from the Department of Education on early childhood programs, especially the state-funded Arkansas Better Chance (ABC) program. Secretary Jacob Oliva and Deputy Commissioner Stacey Smith said Arkansas had received a federal Preschool Development Grant and described ongoing work to review ABC slots, which have been flat for years at about 23,800 slots and roughly $114 million. They said about 1,000 slots statewide are currently unfilled despite a waiting list of more than 2,000 families, and the department is shifting toward paying based on enrollment rather than guaranteed slots. Members asked about school choice, income eligibility, year-round access, curriculum flexibility, transportation, and whether funding should be increased or rebalanced; the department said it is collecting data, may survey providers more formally, and is considering whether to modernize income thresholds, daily rates, and other program rules. The committee agreed to form an early childhood subcommittee and asked the Bureau of Legislative Research to help gather historical information on income limits and other program details. The second major portion of the meeting was a legal presentation on the framework for Arkansas school adequacy by BLR education attorney Taylor Lloyd. She reviewed the constitutional basis for a “general, suitable, and efficient” public school system, the Dupree and Lake View cases, and the principle that adequacy and equity are different but related: adequacy asks what resources are needed, while equity asks whether those resources are distributed fairly. She explained that the General Assembly must define adequacy, study it, and react to evidence over time, and that the current adequacy definition includes curriculum and career/technical frameworks, the 38 mandatory Carnegie units, state testing standards, and sufficient funding. She also described the matrix as a funding tool, not a spending mandate, and noted that categorical funds are separate from the matrix. BLR’s Elizabeth Bynum then gave the historical framework, tracing legislative responses from Dupree through Lake View and into the present. She highlighted major changes such as the creation of equalization funding, fiscal distress and academic distress laws, the adequacy study process, the Educational Adequacy Fund, facilities and transportation changes, declining enrollment and student growth funding, and later adjustments to teacher salaries, isolated funding, and categorical programs. She explained that the adequacy study has evolved through committee hearings, surveys, site visits, and outside consultants, and that recent changes include updates to accountability references and the addition or removal of certain funding categories. Members asked follow-up questions about how the matrix is used, whether homeschool or private-school funding raises comparable issues, whether stakeholders include private and homeschool participants, whether school board members should be surveyed, and whether the state should revisit average daily membership versus attendance-based funding. No votes were taken on the adequacy presentations, but the committee did agree to continue the early childhood discussion in a future subcommittee meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Butler, that consent still needed to be addressed. He said Mr.
• There's a lot that we need, and we need more clarity and more transparency.
• We just, I think we've hit on an issue that needs to be addressed.
• And I just wouldn't know why we would even need that. So I don't think it needs to move forward.
• So anything that needs to happen for these patients to receive cancer care, it's just what they need

Keywords: 965, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We need this money. Thank you. Nora Angelis, with Children Now.
• So I do think that is a needed issue right now.
• We really need to think about that more coherently.
• —is because that's where we need the real work.
• There's additional data I'm happy to provide as needed.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We don't need to have it, right?
• And so we certainly need certainty on that.
• And, of course, somebody has to run that equipment, so you need skilled labor, you need skilled workers
• I find it surprising that we hear that we need a balance, ...surprising that we hear that we need a balanced
• And you would need to know that to do that.

Bills: HB2011, HB2089, HB2090, HB2092, HB2477, HB2785

Keywords: individual income tax, subtraction, Arizona Revised Statutes, retirement benefits, adoption costs, charitable contributions, health insurance, premium payment, Arizona State Retirement System, contingent annuitant, long-term disability, benefits limitations, disability compensation, social security, retirement system, elected officials, ASRS, eligibility waiver, age 65, education savings

Transcript Highlights:

• So there was a need for parks, there were needs for expanded road facilities.
• It identifies the facilities needed to accommodate that growth.
• built out, and so there's no need for impact fees.
• So, bottom line, everybody has budget needs, right?
• I think the bill needs to be very clear.

Summary: The Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee met for its first meeting of the 2026 session and took up impact fees, with an opening overview from Eric Poole of the Florida Association of Counties. Poole explained that impact fees are one-time charges on new development used only for new infrastructure capacity, not existing deficiencies or maintenance, and must satisfy the dual rational nexus test. He traced their history in Florida and described how comprehensive plans, concurrency, and later mobility fees relate to local infrastructure funding. He argued that impact fees are restricted, tied to capital improvements, and are one tool for paying for growth. Panelists representing counties, cities, builders, and community developers largely agreed that growth creates real infrastructure costs but differed on how those costs should be allocated. County and city representatives said impact fees are a necessary, targeted way to fund roads, water, sewer, fire, schools, and parks without spreading costs across all taxpayers. They pointed to long periods without fee updates, rising construction costs, and examples of large increases justified by studies. Builder and developer representatives argued that fees are often unpredictable, can be doubled or tripled, and contribute to housing affordability problems; they also said the system can be inconsistent across jurisdictions and may encourage sprawl. Several witnesses emphasized that fees must be transparent, proportional, and tied to actual benefits, and some suggested a statewide framework or mobility-fee model with more consistency and peer review. Members asked about how long local governments can hold fee revenue, whether fees can generate profit, what they can be spent on, and whether they can pay for police stations, fire stations, or other public safety facilities. Witnesses said the funds must be used for capital projects and cannot be used for salaries or unrelated purchases, and that refunds may be required if money is not spent within the local ordinance’s timeframe. The discussion also covered examples of local fee increases, the use of impact fees versus direct construction or “pipelining” of infrastructure, and concerns about level-of-service changes and extraordinary-circumstance increases. No votes were taken; the meeting ended after the panel discussion and member questions, with the chair noting the conversation would continue.

Transcript Highlights:

• need to be made to balance the budget.
• And I just needed to say, please give us good information, man.
• 20 steps that maybe only needs 10 and so we need somebody to come in and help them look at that the things
• It starts with meeting people. with meeting people's basic needs.
• KAPLA has seen a 70% increase in cases in which we need appointed counsel.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We need maybe any kind of clarity will help.
• We need maybe any kind of clarity will help.
• Okay, so we don't need to work that one.
• Yeah, we need $147,000 accounted for.
• You don't need to worry about carryover.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee took up Senate Bill 2025, the Veterans Home/Veterans Affairs budget, and worked through the long sheet line by line. Members discussed base payroll, salary and health insurance increases, FTE pool adjustments, IT rate increases, operating expenses, transportation grants, the PTSD service dog program, salary equity requests, temporary help/intern funding, a Veterans Benefit Specialist FTE, accrued leave, and several one-time or carryover items including the Fisher House, document scanning, and veterans medical transportation. The committee also reviewed proposed policy language that would shift governance authority for the Veterans Home and Department of Veterans Affairs from the Administrative Committee on Veterans Affairs to the governor, and would remove board authority over salary-setting and related hiring powers. A major portion of the meeting focused on clarifying the commissioner salary equity line and how the agency had shifted operating dollars to fund the commissioner’s current salary increase. After discussion with agency staff and Lonnie, the committee voted to remove the separate commissioner salary equity increase line and instead restore operating funding, ultimately setting the operating line at $50,000 above the prior amount rather than fully funding the executive request. The committee also approved funding for the Veterans Benefit Specialist FTE, approved a carryforward/exemption for accrued leave, approved authority to accept $200,000 in federal transportation grant funds, approved the $500,000 transfers related to veterans homelessness, and approved the exemption language for certain federal/state fiscal recovery funds after discussing whether the funds were properly obligated. On the governance amendment, members expressed concern about making a major policy change in an appropriations bill, but also frustration over the board’s salary actions. After debate, the committee adopted the amendment transferring governance authority to the governor by a 7-1 vote. The committee also approved a smaller amount for veteran service officer salary equity than requested, and rejected funding for temporary salaries and an intern. The chair then directed staff to prepare the amended bill for further action, with the committee planning to revisit it once the revised version was ready.

Transcript Highlights:

• and need one-on-one.
• <00:17:49.120> and<00:17:49.360> need people who have profound needs and need people
• CFSS needs a complete far enough.
• It just needs to be fair, and it needs to be in statute. I'm not set on an exact number.
• to get what they needed.

Bills: HF3797, HF3780, HF4068, HF3935

Keywords: long-term care, insurance policy, healthcare, partnership policy, Minnesota, human services, wage increase, support workers, shared services, community first services, medical assistance, sanctions, healthcare services, monetary recovery, government accountability, assisted living, training, unlicensed personnel, resident rights, safety regulations

Transcript Highlights:

• need to look more at Casey's law. need to look more at Casey's law.
• It does need reforming. It needs help.
• It does need reforming. It needs help. I'd love to talk more about that when I have time.
• I think it's needed. Thank you table. I think it's needed.
• No roll call needed. call on that? No. No roll call needed. Okay. Okay. Okay.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The subcommittee first heard from the Justice and Public Safety Cabinet’s Grants Management Division on federal victim-services funding. Staff described the main grant programs they administer, including STOP VAWA, VOCA victim assistance, sexual assault services, Byrne state crisis intervention, and Project Safe Neighborhoods. They emphasized that VOCA is especially volatile because it is funded by the federal Crime Victims Fund, which has declined sharply in recent years, reducing Kentucky’s available awards and forcing cuts to state, local, and nonprofit subgrants. They also outlined steps the cabinet has taken to stabilize funding, including changing the subaward formula, aligning the grant period with the state fiscal year, subawarding one year behind the federal cycle, and retaining a reserve. Members asked about how funds reach victims, how subgrantee amounts are determined, and requested a breakdown of grant recipients and amounts; staff said they would provide that information later. The committee then received a detailed presentation from the Department of Juvenile Justice on alternatives to detention. Commissioner Randy White and staff explained that ATDs are short-term, less restrictive placements for low-risk youth, including electronic monitoring, home supervision, group homes, foster care, private child care, community programs, mentoring, evening reporting centers, and in-home wraparound services. They described the referral and approval process involving court-designated workers, detention alternative coordinators, courts, and county attorneys, and said DJJ currently has 16 ATD-related contracts, with placements, programs, and electronic monitoring among them. They also reported that between July 1, 2024, and July 30, 2025, 1,652 juveniles were involved in the process, including 168 diversion cases. Members questioned the cost of juvenile detention versus adult incarceration, whether families pay for electronic monitoring, whether there is a national model for juvenile detention, and what alternatives exist for truancy and contempt cases. DJJ said families do not generally reimburse for electronic monitoring, there is no single national model, and day treatment centers are an important alternative for some youth. The department also said it builds daily routines and wellness education into its facilities, and that more than two-thirds of its programs are evidence-based. Officials said they currently monitor vendor performance through quarterly reviews and can end contracts for poor performance, but that data tracking is still largely manual. They said the new JCOM system, now in pilot in the eastern region, should improve reporting and help identify outcomes and recidivism more effectively.

Transcript Highlights:

• it just for me, because I needed something.
• <01:03:23.680> for realize there is an enormous need for realize there is an enormous need
• You don't need an additional pharmacist.
• don't need an additional pharmacist the don't need an additional pharmacist the business<01:06:06.599
• Next up, Consumer Technology Association in support. need to be set in place our laws from 13 need to

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard several measures, beginning with SB 1046 SD1 on condominiums. Testimony on that bill focused on reserve funding and enforcement of reserve study requirements. The Community Associations Institute opposed the bill, saying it would create hardship, confusion, and be difficult to administer, while also urging stronger penalties for boards that fail to comply with reserve study rules. The Real Estate Commission offered comments, and one testifier spoke in support. No vote was taken during the portion provided. The committee then heard SB 532 SD2 HD1 relating to the Department of Education, which would improve access to pre-approved medications for students with health conditions at school and during off-campus activities. The Department of Health, University of Hawaiʻi nursing and medical programs, and the Department of Education all supported the measure, with DOH suggesting amendments to better identify the correct student and improve medication safety. Members had no questions, and the bill moved on. Next was SB 1245 SD2 HD1 relating to pharmacists, a bill to allow reimbursement for clinical services pharmacists are already trained and licensed to provide. The University of Hawaiʻi, Board of Pharmacy, Walgreens, Mikai Drugs, and the Hawaiʻi Pharmacists Association supported the bill, emphasizing improved access to care, recruitment and retention of pharmacists, and better chronic disease management. The Hawaiʻi Pharmacists Association also discussed proposed amendments to prevent plans from denying coverage or network participation when pharmacists meet credentialing requirements. Members questioned whether insurers would actually use pharmacists and how the bill would affect pay and contracting; no vote was taken in the excerpt. The committee also heard SB 1279 SD2 HD1, another pharmacists bill focused on telepharmacy and 340B-related issues. The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation supported it, saying telehealth could reduce costs and avoid travel for audits, while the Board of Pharmacy opposed it. Lānaʻi representatives opposed the bill and asked for an exemption, arguing the island already has close in-person access to a resident pharmacist and clinics. The Hawaiʻi Primary Care Association supported the measure, citing large patient savings from 340B pricing, while Mikai Drugs opposed it, arguing that mail-order and telepharmacy are not necessary on some islands and can create delivery and medication-safety problems. Members asked questions about insurer participation, scope of practice, and whether the bill would meaningfully change reimbursement; the transcript ends before any final action or vote.