Video & Transcript Research : 'resident preference'
Page 17 of 500
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Elections Committee Aug 19th, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- Many of us prefer the old rules. We prefer the agreement we all had to play by those rules, right?
- Ultimately, this is our preferred outcome.
- My name is Yesminda Gray, and I'm a resident here in Sacramento.
- Twenty-five percent of residents, 20% of residents, still couldn't afford it.
- You have now, I have quote and quote the resident, more power now.
Summary:
The Assembly Elections Committee met on August 19, 2025, to consider ACA 8, SB 280, and an informational hearing on AB 604. The meeting began with several failed motions to adjourn, to read public comments into the record, and to recess so members could review the roughly 16,000 public comments submitted through the committee portal. The chair emphasized the hearing’s expedited format, transparency measures, and rules limiting witness testimony, and noted a letter from Speaker Rivas authorizing Assemblymember Berman to present ACA 8.
ACA 8, described by supporters as the “Election Rigging Response Act,” would place before voters a temporary congressional redistricting plan tied to AB 604 and triggered only if another state, especially Texas, adopts a partisan mid-decade redistricting. Supporters, including Assemblymember Berman, labor groups, CTA, Planned Parenthood affiliates, SEIU, and other allied organizations, argued the measure was a response to partisan gerrymandering elsewhere and a defense of democracy, with voters having the final say in a November 4, 2025 special election. Opponents, including current and former redistricting commissioners, good-government groups, business and taxpayer organizations, and many members of the public, argued the proposal undermines California’s independent redistricting model, was rushed without adequate public review, could cost roughly $200 million or more, and would invite litigation and partisan manipulation.
The committee also debated a proposed amendment that would bar legislators who voted for ACA 8 from later running for Congress in districts adopted under the measure. After extended procedural disputes, the committee voted to lay the amendment on the table. The hearing then continued with extensive public testimony, overwhelmingly divided between strong support and strong opposition, but the transcript provided does not show a final committee vote on ACA 8 or SB 280 before the excerpt ends.
VT
Vermont 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Session - 2026-05-21 - 10:00AM
Vermont Senate Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- They would much rather have preferred to have had those positions filled, but because of the $600,000
- They would much rather<00:20:54.720>
have <00:20:54.880>preferred <00:20:55.280>to structure, residents collectively own structure, residents collectively own the<01:15:29.120- to have had those rather have preferred to have had those positions<00:20:57.600>
filled, <00:- c> own
- to have had those rather have preferred to have had those positions<00:20:57.600>
- are managed democratically by a resident are managed democratically by a resident elected<01:15:
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- This organization used various sources to identify voters who no longer resided in Texas.
- But if the challenge is about residents, there's no hearing required.
- You may have been a Texas resident, but you're on that state's death records.
- Then your third preference wouldn't be there.
- So the first time they vote, they've got their preferences for their backups if they need it.
MO
Missouri 2026 Regular Session
Local Government Apr 22nd, 2026
Local Government, Elections and Pensions
Transcript Highlights:
- Like I said, the residents of Poplar Bluff overwhelmingly passed it back in, I believe, 2010 or 2011.
- Where traditionally in 1994, our growth was at where our resident base serves.
- That would be for those residents. ...as part of moving towards a sales tax model.
- That would be for those residents. Now, does that address every individual?
- We serve a community of over 13,000 residents, along with many across Saline County.
Summary:
The Committee on Local Government held a public hearing on Senate Substitute No. 2 for Senate Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 1023, sponsored by Senator Justin Brown. Brown explained that the bill would expand existing authority for certain public library districts to seek voter approval for a sales tax, with property tax reductions tied to the sales tax in some cases. He noted special provisions for Cass and Johnson counties, where the sales tax rate would be capped at 0.33% and would replace real and personal property taxes, and also described a separate provision allowing circuit courts to collect a civil case filing surcharge of up to $15 for law library maintenance.
Library representatives and supporters testified in favor. They argued that libraries rely heavily on property tax revenue, that the bill would let local voters choose a more diversified funding mix, and that it would help libraries respond to growth and facility needs. Witnesses from Scenic Regional Library, St. Charles City-County Library, Marshall Public Library, the Missouri Library Association, and the Kansas City Public Library described local circumstances, including St. Charles County’s three-year phase-out and rollback requirement, Marshall’s voter-approved sales tax and concerns about county reclassification, and Kansas City’s request for fiscal-year flexibility. Committee members raised questions about the fairness of shifting library funding to sales tax, especially for nonresidents, and one member objected to the tone of the senator’s questioning during the hearing.
No one testified in opposition, and the chair closed the public hearing. The committee announced it planned to executive the bill on Monday, with notice to follow. The meeting then adjourned.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- Given the preference of a homestead exemption or a compression model, which is your preference?
- The U or every Texan prefers homestead exemptions over compression. And I missed the reason why.
- And we can achieve this by providing maximum tax relief, preferably of no less than $10 billion.
- I prefer Hammer, but... Okay. Glenn Hammer.
- Without being made whole, that's really going to be the cost to your residence.
Keywords:
HB 8, school finance, compressed tax rate, maximum compressed tax rate, MCR, PYMCR, property tax, school district taxes, Education Code, Tax Code, state aid, school funding formula, local school taxes, Texas school finance, tax rate compression, public education funding, ad valorem tax, tangible personal property, income-producing property, business personal property
MN
Transcript Highlights:
- <00:02:54.480>
for additional proofs of residency for additional proofs of residency for students - on residency address of residence on residency address of residence on affidavits<00:06:03.080><
- <00:07:24.720>
that's <00:07:24.960>private residence that's private residence that's private - <00:37:39.520>
allowed additional proofs of residence allowed additional proofs of residence - utility bill as evidence of residency utility bill as evidence of residency for<00:42:52.440>
KY
Kentucky 2025 Regular Session
Senate Standing Committee on Health Services (3-3-25) - Reupload
Transcript Highlights:
- some people here who have some stories and some people who have expertise in this area, and I would prefer
- Because he has a bunch of other residents there training who are easily willing to do that.
- Because he has a bunch of other residents there training who are easily willing to do that.
- Because he has a bunch of other residents there training who are easily willing to do that.
- <00:47:17.520>
that throughout the state we do prefer that throughout the state we do prefer
Keywords:
Discussion on SB 132 - 00:06
Vote on SB 132 - 04:41
Discussion on HB 219 - 43:49
Vote on HB 219 – 49:00
Discussion on HCR 20 – 50:08
Vote on HCR 20 – 51:28, 958, all
Summary:
The committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 132, which would create conscience protections for health care professionals who object to participating in certain procedures or services on religious, moral, or ethical grounds. Senator Donald Douglas and several supporters argued the bill is a recruitment and retention tool for Kentucky’s health care workforce, emphasizing provider shortages, maldistribution, and the need to protect individual conscience rights. Supporters said the bill would not apply to emergency care, would not permit denial of care based on a patient’s identity, and would mainly protect professionals from being forced to perform procedures they believe are unethical. They also cited similar laws in six other states and said the bill would have a cause of action to give it enforcement teeth.
Supportive testimony came from an emergency physician, a registered nurse, and others who described personal experiences or examples involving objections to abortion-related care, opioid prescribing, and pressure to participate in procedures that conflicted with conscience. They said conscience protections would help attract providers, preserve ethical integrity, and allow clinicians to make professional judgments without corporate or institutional coercion. In questioning, senators asked about practical examples, the scope of the bill, whether it would cover hypothetical cases involving patients of particular religions or identities, and which states have similar laws. The sponsor and supporters repeatedly said the bill is about procedures, not patients, and that it should not be read to allow discrimination against individuals.
Opponents, including pediatricians and a registered nurse/minister, warned that the bill is overly broad and could allow refusals of care by not only physicians but also pharmacists, clerks, and ambulance drivers. They argued it could delay treatment, increase discrimination, and worsen access problems in rural areas, especially for contraception, Plan B, blood transfusions, and other services. Critics said existing professional ethics already require patient care and that the bill could undermine evidence-based medicine and worsen Kentucky’s provider shortage. The committee took testimony and questions; no final vote or disposition was announced in the portion provided.
FL
Florida 2026 4th Special Session
February 10, 2026 - 09:00 AM
Transcript Highlights:
- It's not a matter of consumer preference because I am a gun guy, and every consumer firearm I know has
- a Roger Helms: preference not to get shot by the gun.
- I am responsible to my hundred thousand residents - I have to answer to them.
- Local government exists to reflect the needs of residents.
- I am speaking in opposition to SB 1134 as a resident of Duval County.
HI
Hawaii 2025 Regular Session
WTL Public Hearing 03-17-2025
Transcript Highlights:
- We prefer the bill.
- We prefer the bill.
- 06.040>
preferred <00:49:06.960>and what the administrator preferred and what the administrator - Well, that's the engineering preference. I mean, sandbags are temporary.
- I am a resident of Kahana. Uh, just a minute—there's another Shurling.
Summary:
The Committee on Water and Land heard SR 18, which asks DLNR to transfer active agricultural land leases to the Department of Agriculture to support agriculture. DLNR, through Don Chang, opposed the resolution, saying the department has already been transferring parcels by mutual agreement and should not be required to transfer lands it does not consent to. Ranchers and agricultural advocates strongly supported the measure, arguing that the lands are active production areas, that partial transfers would undermine ranching operations, and that water infrastructure built by ranchers must be protected. Testimony from the Hawaii Farm Bureau and others emphasized the importance of preserving agricultural land for food production, wildfire management, and long-term ranch viability. Committee members pressed both sides on acreage, specific parcels, and whether negotiations were still ongoing, with DLNR later clarifying that some parcels remain under negotiation and that some proposed transfers have been narrowed or adjusted.
Several specific ranches and parcels were discussed, including Batello, Diamond B, Delo, Nobriga, and Kapala Ranch. Witnesses described the operational importance of water systems, grazing areas, and access routes, and said that losing productive acreage would threaten business viability. Some members expressed concern that the proposal appeared to transfer productive land while leaving less useful land with ranchers, and urged the department to continue transparent negotiations and consider the practical impact on agriculture and conservation. A DLNR representative said some transfers were tied to other needs, such as transportation mitigation, and not to a broader effort to take more land. The Department of Agriculture later stated it supports the intent of the measure, but suggested its concerns would likely be addressed if the resolution were narrowed to the specific parcels at issue.
The chair also announced that the related House bill on the same subject remains alive and will be heard by Water and Land on Thursday. After concluding SR 18, the committee moved on to SCR 51 and SR 33, which seek a working group to evaluate establishing and administratively placing an Office of Resilience and Recovery. The Office of Planning and Sustainable Development indicated support for the concept, noting the office’s value in Maui wildfire recovery efforts.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Committee on Energy, Utilities, Environment and Climate - 03/25/26
Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate
Transcript Highlights:
- programs, you have to be a resident programs, you have to be a resident within<00:06:55.240>
- So, my preference<00:24:58.760>
would <00:24:58.920>be preference would be preference would - Do you prefer me to do the A1 first, or request moving the A1, please?
- Fitzky testify if you prefer. prefer. prefer.
- Any preference who goes first? Any preference who goes first?
WY
Transcript Highlights:
- My preference would be instead of mandating to the counties what they must pay, my preference would be
- He was a resident of the neighboring county.
- wasn't even a resident of their county. wasn't even a resident of their county.
- My preference would be to leave the...
- And I would prefer not...
AL
Transcript Highlights:
- while we're making sure that we're... ...need while we're making sure that we're protecting the residents
- .the board because I also know this can be done through Administrative Code, which is really my preference
- Language pathologists, speech language pathology assistants, and audiologists who practice and reside
- is akin to telling someone they can have a small beer but no higher alcohol options, even if they prefer
- Just like some people prefer low alcohol beer or wine for a lighter experience, others may prefer stronger
Keywords:
speech-language pathology, licensure, clinical supervision, educational qualifications, healthcare assistant, hemp-derived cannabinoids, CBD, THC, delta-8, delta-9, delta-10, consumable hemp products, psychoactive cannabinoids, cannabinoid regulation, hemp licensing, ABC Board, Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, retail hemp sales, wholesale hemp distribution, hemp tax
FL
Transcript Highlights:
- and if other senators prefer.
- This section by a resident of the county.
- I reside in Senator Passidomo's district.
- And also, the residency requirement, it doesn't say you've got to be a resident for a year, a day, a
- So the residency requirement, it doesn't say you've got to be a resident for a year, a day, a month,
Summary:
The committee first heard SB 1134, which would extend the use of qualified private providers in the building permit process to residential solar energy systems and certain single-trade inspections, and would allow computer-based plan review tools. The sponsor said the bill is intended to reduce long solar permitting delays and lower costs. A late amendment clarifying the word “application” was adopted, and after some discussion about local permitting problems and the need to work with municipalities, CS/SB 1134 was reported favorably, with Senator Pizzo voting no.
The committee then took up SB 784, dealing with issuance of addresses and parcel identification numbers for plats. The bill sets a 14-day timeframe, and an amendment was adopted that would allow use of a private provider if the deadline is missed and would limit fee collection if verification is not completed. Members discussed whether the bill should include more flexibility and whether private providers are appropriate for this function, but the committee ultimately reported CS/SB 784 favorably. SB 1738, allowing counties that previously opted out of transportation concurrency to opt back in while maintaining current levels of service, was also reported favorably without significant opposition.
Next, SB 1080 on local government land regulation was presented as a measure to speed up development permit and order approvals, limit repeated information requests, prevent hearing delays, and impose penalties for noncompliance. Local government testimony argued it would rush planning and weaken public input, while supporters called it common-sense streamlining. After debate, the bill was reported favorably, with several no votes. SB 1260, which clarifies county constitutional officer budget procedures and creates an appeal process for clerks and supervisors of elections similar to that used by sheriffs, was also reported favorably after members raised concerns about county budget timelines.
Finally, the committee considered SB 420, as amended by a strike-all, which would prohibit counties and municipalities from adopting or funding DEI-related ordinances, programs, or policies, while carving out compliance with state and federal law and defining DEI-related terms. The amendment removed retroactivity and delayed the effective date, but members from both parties raised concerns about vague definitions, impacts on women- and minority-owned business programs, local commemorations, and the loss of attorney’s fees for prevailing counties. Public testimony was sharply divided, with many speakers opposing the bill as an attack on local control and inclusion, and a few supporting it as a merit-based standard. The amendment was adopted, but the bill drew extensive opposition in debate and was not yet reported in the portion of the transcript provided.
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
Senate Election Law and Municipal Affairs (03/11/2025)
Election Law and Municipal Affairs
Transcript Highlights:
- I reside in the town of Loudon and I represent the voters of District 17.
- <00:34:27.280>
or <00:34:27.440>do residents or do residents or do iile<00:34:29.480>- I am a resident of Exeter, and I have come to speak in opposition to SB 222.
- <00:46:07.400>
of name is Kevin Khan I'm a resident of name is Kevin Khan I'm a resident of- Whose political preferences lie outside the existing political parties.
HI
Transcript Highlights:
- is the automatic approval of a preferred is the automatic approval of a preferred rate<00:13:21.880
- Hawaiʻi residents are about ʻohana first.
- <00:55:38.599>
are your testimony yep Hawaii residents are your testimony yep Hawaii residents - Do you have a preference? Well, not right now.
- Do you have a preference? Well, not right now. Okay, no, we could talk about that later.
ND
North Dakota 2026 1st Special Session
Administrative Rules Committee Jun 11th, 2026 at 10:00 am
Administrative Rules Committee
Transcript Highlights:
- Chairman, do you have a preference of how I go through these?
- Section 40-7-0507, Veterans Preference.
- Section 407-0507, Veterans Preference. We Section 407-0507, Veterans Preference.
- Well, to be a North Dakota resident, it could be...
- Somebody just said, I would prefer it after the 12th.
MA
Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session
Joint Committee on Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity Jun 21st, 2026 at 01:00 pm
Joint Committee on Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity
Transcript Highlights:
- or how residents were having to interview for jobs...
- I know this bill focuses on the public housing aspect. ...residents.
- We connect residents to their schools, town halls, zoning boards, and elections.
- This is a $104 million industry employing over 1,000 residents.
- I'm also a resident of Sudbury and a big fan of Sudbury TV.
Summary:
The committee held its second hearing on a large docket of technology, internet, cybersecurity, broadband, and media bills. Early testimony focused on community media funding legislation, with lawmakers and local access advocates arguing that as cable subscriptions decline and streaming grows, revenue tied to cable franchises no longer supports community television and PEG programming. Supporters said community media remains a key source of local news, government meeting coverage, and civic transparency as newspapers disappear or consolidate. A related bill on cable contract oversight also drew support, with testimony that the Department of Telecommunications and Cable is backlogged and should more actively review municipal-provider agreements and report its workload to the committee.
Another major topic was a proposal to create a Massachusetts Innovation Fund for state IT modernization. The Alliance for Digital Innovation backed the bill, saying agencies need flexible upfront capital to replace outdated systems and improve cybersecurity, and pointing to the federal Technology Modernization Fund as a model. The witness noted that funding for the state program still needs to be identified. The committee also heard strong support for a bill requiring free broadband in public housing, with Rep. Emmela Goodwin and MAPC describing internet access as essential for jobs, school, telehealth, and civic participation. They said the digital divide in Massachusetts is driven largely by affordability rather than infrastructure, though questions were raised about costs, wiring, and whether all housing sites already have broadband access available at the curb.
A substantial portion of the hearing centered on bills to limit addictive social media feeds for minors. Supporters, including lawmakers, parents, teens, and advocacy groups, argued that algorithmic feeds contribute to addiction, anxiety, body image problems, and other harms, and said the bills would restrict surveillance-based curation and overnight notifications while leaving search and followed accounts available. Opponents, including FIRE, CCIA, and the Taxpayers Protection Alliance, argued the bills would require invasive age verification, threaten privacy and cybersecurity, burden adults’ anonymity, and likely face First Amendment challenges. They also warned the measures could disadvantage smaller businesses and may be unconstitutional based on recent court rulings in other states. The committee also heard support for blockchain-related bills creating a commission, a pilot program, and consumer education efforts, with testimony that Massachusetts has the talent but needs a coordinated state strategy. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.
TX
Texas 89th 1st C.S.
Senate Special Committee on Congressional Redistricting Jul 25th, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- He takes... ...Texan, Virginia resident who drew the current map.
- -born citizen and a resident of Texas for more than 30 years.
- I'm currently a resident of Maverick County.
- I'm a proud resident of Austin, Texas. I'm representing myself.
- I'm a resident of District 37 in Texas, and I'm speaking for myself.
Summary:
The Senate Special Committee on Congressional Redistricting held its first regional hearing, focused on South and Central Texas, including Bexar County, Travis County, and the Rio Grande Valley. After establishing a quorum, the committee adopted its rules on a 6-3 roll-call vote, with Senators Alvarado and Miles voting no. Chair Phil King explained the regional-hearing format, the use of 2020 census data, the online testimony process, and the availability of written comments and future hearings. Several members then gave opening remarks, with Republicans emphasizing public input and Democrats arguing the special session and mid-decade redistricting were unnecessary and aimed at minority districts.
A major procedural issue arose over whether the committee should invite or subpoena the DOJ attorney who authored the July 7 letter that prompted the redistricting discussion. Senator Miles moved to subpoena the attorney; the motion was seconded but then set aside after the chair said the committee could not take formal action on a non-procedural matter during a regional hearing under the adopted rules. The chair said he would consult legal counsel about issuing an invitation, and members discussed the August 7 deadline referenced in the DOJ letter. The committee then moved on to public testimony.
Witnesses, including Congresswoman Sylvia Garcia, law professor Ellen Katz, and Texas NAACP president Gary Bledsoe, argued that the DOJ letter misread the law and that the targeted districts were lawful opportunity or coalition districts. They said the Fifth Circuit’s Pettway decision was limited to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and did not declare coalition districts unconstitutional, and they cited Bartlett v. Strickland as warning against intentionally dismantling effective minority districts. Garcia and Bledsoe said the hearing was politically motivated and would harm Black and Latino representation; Katz said Texas would act illegally if it followed the DOJ letter’s instructions. Members asked questions about the legal status of coalition districts, the 2021 map-drawing process, and the difference between opportunity, coalition, and crossover districts. The hearing continued with additional public witnesses, including labor representative Emily Amps, who said workers and communities of color were being harmed by the proposed redistricting effort.
HI
Transcript Highlights:
- Okay, so the other challenges are on different topics, different things like citizenship or residency
- , if we have to split the difference, take a misdemeanor, we would prefer that over having nothing to
- , if we have to split the difference, take a misdemeanor, we would prefer that over having nothing to
- um you know if we mean we would prefer um you know if we have<00:10:58.440>
to <00:10:58.560>< - we would prefer that over having<00:11:01.360>
nothing <00:11:01.600>to <00:11:01.800><
Summary:
The Judiciary Committee heard testimony on several bills. SB 335 would route objections by political party officers to candidate nomination papers through the Office of Elections. The State Election Director testified that his office was not the right venue for party-membership challenges because it could create conflicts and force the Attorney General to represent the chief election officer in court; members discussed whether all objections should instead go directly to Circuit Court, but no action was taken.
SB 280 would expand first-degree negligent injury to cover injuries negligently caused by intoxicated drivers. The Public Defender opposed the bill as too harsh and urged either a lower penalty or clearer statutory definitions of “under the influence,” while the Prosecuting Attorney supported it as a needed increase in accountability for drunk drivers who actually injure someone. Committee members raised concerns about overlap with existing offenses, proportionality, and whether the change would increase jury-trial volume; the prosecutor responded that the bill would apply to a smaller subset of cases involving actual injury and would help ensure more serious treatment of those cases.
The committee also heard SB 292, establishing Safe Harbor protections for survivors of sexual exploitation who seek medical or law enforcement assistance, with testimony in support from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, HPD, U Alliance, and others, and no opposition. SB 31, concerning an additional penalty for dog owners whose dogs destroy property on agricultural land, drew only supportive testimony. SB 356 would require restitution in the form of financial support to the minor children of victims killed or disabled by an intoxicated driver; the Public Defender opposed it as better suited to civil court and questioned enforcement after probation, while the Prosecuting Attorney supported it and said courts can issue enforceable restitution orders. Testimony also strongly supported SB 1284, a proposed constitutional amendment prohibiting discrimination based on ethnicity, age, disability, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, pregnancy, and pregnancy outcomes, with supporters arguing it would strengthen protections in response to current political conditions. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the excerpt.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- The election code says... ...that a challenge to a voter registration not based on residence must be
- But if the challenge is about residency, there's a need for a different approach.
- What we saw in the 2021 New York mayoral primary, there were a total of nine rounds of preferences. .
- With ranked-choice voting or instant runoff voting, the winner would have reflected the preference of
- Then your third preference wouldn't be there, but not voting at all is just like our current ballot;
Keywords:
HB 817, Texas Election Code, majority vote, majority threshold, ranked-choice voting, preferential voting, instant runoff voting, vote reassignment, ballot ranking, election administration, public office election, Election Code Section 2.0215, runoff elections, plurality vs majority, voting systems, education reform, budget allocation, teacher retention, student performance, accountability measures