Transcript Highlights:

• Our process is not perfect.
• in the process okay all right thank you in the process okay all right thank you and<00:34:42.119>
• This is about a process.
• This is about a process.
• <01:03:22.079> if processes there's a rate case process if processes there's a rate case process

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Energy and Environmental Protection opened its first hearing of the session and heard testimony on several energy and environmental bills. On HB 470, relating to noise and leaf blowers, the Department of Health supported the bill’s intent to reduce noise pollution but raised concerns about using decibel limits alone and suggested using dBA measurements; testimony also noted the bill would regulate future sales rather than current use, and there were three additional testimonies, two in support and one in opposition. No questions were raised before the committee moved on. The committee then heard HB 742 on transit-oriented development, which would require HCDA to prepare a programmatic EIS for Ewa, Kapalama, and West Oahu improvements. UH supported the bill, HHFDC said it was already preparing a master plan and programmatic EIS for the Ewa area, and HCDA explained that the projects are already underway or completed, including infrastructure work funded by prior appropriations. Supporters said the bill would streamline environmental review and potentially reduce costs for future housing, while HCDA emphasized the work is already in progress. On HB 340, concerning a streamlined grid-ready home interconnection process and related cost recovery, DCCA provided comments, the Attorney General suggested changing a deadline to a specific date, and the PUC said it wanted to study the matter further while still meeting the 180-day reporting requirement. Solar and clean energy groups strongly supported the bill as a way to speed interconnection and advance grid-interactive technologies, while Hawaiian Electric supported the goal of more DERs but opposed the process, saying its interconnection performance has improved and that collaboration would be preferable to legislation. Members asked about newer technologies, UL 1741, and ratepayer impacts, and the Consumer Advocate said removing the cost-recovery section would alleviate its concerns. The committee also heard HB 243, requiring PV- and EV-ready new residential construction, which the Hawaii State Energy Office described as a cost-saving no-brainer because installing these features during construction is much cheaper than retrofitting later. The hearing then shifted to HB 350, expanding the water-heater systems that can satisfy building-permit requirements to include heat pump water heaters alongside solar hot water systems. The Energy Office supported the bill, Solar Ray supported the concept but asked for amendments to align efficiency standards and noted the bill’s removal of a 15-year lifespan limit for solar thermal systems, and Hawaii Solar Energy Association raised questions about how heat pump performance should be measured and whether PV-plus-heat-pump combinations should qualify. Committee members asked about impacts on smaller homes and ADUs, and the discussion remained focused on technical standards and possible amendments; no votes or final actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I've listened intently to conversations here, and I've been involved in most of these conversations
• And I've listened intently to conversations here, and I've been involved in most of these conversations
• So, you and I have had some great conversations on this.
• Absolutely, and it’s a vital aspect of our conversations as we move forward with this process.
• And you can serve a lot more students in that process.

Bills: SB 2

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And yes, we are in continued conversations with MDH.
• It took me nine years to complete the process and put me in significant educational debt.
• It took me nine years to complete the process and put me in significant educational debt.
• I would hear from states, why can't we have a separate process for kin and relatives?
• <00:50:28.559> and um that is all part of that process and um that is all part of that process

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So that's how the process works.
• to the substance of the conversation. to the substance of the conversation.
• party to the conversation. Yeah. Yeah. party to the conversation. Yeah. Yeah.
• So that if we do have such a conversation, conversation, conversation, we<04:25:50.240> should
• I should have that<04:26:12.798> conversation that conversation that conversation understanding

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• kind of things um but what the process kind of things um but what the process we're<00:47:11.680
• <00:51:18.599> with to have meaningful conversations with to have meaningful conversations
• We're in our conversations, we're trying to focus in on the basic stadium at this point.
• I'll be quick in terms of your process at the city.
• I'll be quick in terms of your process at the city.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committees considered a large number of Senate bills, with many measures advanced either unamended or with technical or substantive amendments. Early action included SB 88 and SB 11 SD1, both passed unamended, and SB 562 SD1 and SB 642 SD1, which were passed with amendments reflecting agency testimony. SB 1133 SD1 was amended to remove duplicative county requirements and clarify tax credit carry-forward eligibility, while SB 1569 SD1 on sports wagering was deferred. Later, SB 933 on nonprofit/federal funding support drew strong testimony from nonprofit and health advocates emphasizing the risk of federal funding freezes and the importance of protecting services such as early learning, domestic violence support, housing, and workforce supports; the committee recommended amendments to define eligible organizations, require reporting, and include the Judiciary. SB 934 and SB 935 were also amended, with SB 934 tying mass transit funding to Honolulu project milestones and SB 935 revising retirement-system language to change “fewer than five years” to “five or more years.” The committees then took up additional measures with targeted amendments. SB 1033 was amended to clarify that the bill applies to legal entities, not individuals, though members noted concerns about closely held family corporations and asked that the issue be reflected in the committee report. SB 1166, SB 1249, and SB 1256 were advanced with amendments or committee-report notes reflecting concerns from the Attorney General, Hawaii Cattlemen’s Council, and Hawaii Farmers Union United, respectively. SB 1432 and SB 137, both relating to electric utilities, were amended to require retention of covered employees after mergers or acquisitions and to direct the PUC to consider whether proposed transactions further state policy goals. SB 157 on antitrust was narrowed to focus on coordinator conduct in rental housing markets, SB 252 on invasive species received a defective effective date, and SB 336 on defense of state employers and employees passed unamended. SB 536 on the Hawaii Community Development Authority was deferred to a later hearing, and SB 1064 on medical cannabis was heavily amended to authorize cultivator licenses with limits on canopy size, license counts, physician fees, and a special-fund appropriation for enforcement. In the Ways and Means portion, the committee passed several bills unamended, including SB 19, SB 124, SB 264, SB 345, SB 422, and SB 741 and SB 747 later in the agenda. SB 361 was amended to remove references to the attorney general and delete an appropriation section, SB 438 was amended to redefine buffer zones and landfill-unit language, and SB 441 and SB 494 were amended to blank appropriations and, in SB 494, assign charter-school audit responsibility to the state auditor. SB 659 was substantially amended to promote local procurement, including county-level geographic preferences and higher thresholds for locally sourced purchases, and SB 732 was amended to adjust film tax credit provisions, including the streaming-platform definition and sunset-related language. SB 819 was amended to replace references to “educators” with “teachers.” Throughout, most measures were adopted without recorded opposition, though several members noted reservations on particular bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• offender over and have a conversation. offender over and have a conversation.
• <01:10:16.080> and procurement procurement process and procurement procurement process and
• <01:18:46.400> do through the eminent domain process do through the eminent domain process
• action in order to further the process action in order to further the process along.<01:19:26.640
• telling me that the mediation process telling me that the mediation process Chair<01:38:12.719><

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee met for its sixth and final interim meeting after a brief technical delay, approved the October 14 minutes, and heard a presentation on a proposed Kentucky hands-free driving bill. The main discussion centered on distracted driving and a draft measure modeled on South Carolina law that would prohibit holding or supporting a mobile electronic device while driving on public roads, while allowing limited exceptions for parked/stopped vehicles, navigation, emergency reporting, dispatch systems, first responders, and certain hands-free call functions. The bill would make a violation a $100 fine plus court costs, with the draft allocating fine revenue to the traumatic brain injury trust fund, Kentucky trauma care system, and veteran program trust fund. The sponsor also said the bill would address prior concerns about enforcement and clarify that officers need a clear, unobstructed visual observation before stopping a driver, and that they may not search or seize devices or make custodial arrests solely for the violation. Alyssa Burns gave emotional testimony in support of the bill, describing the death of her young daughter Kimberly in a crash she attributed to a distracted driver and urging lawmakers to pass the measure to improve roadway safety. The sponsor cited Kentucky traffic fatality statistics, including 814 deaths in 2023 and an estimated 20% involving distracted driving, and argued that the bill could reduce preventable deaths. Several members voiced support and sympathy, including remarks comparing the effort to past seat belt legislation and suggesting possible future additions such as community service. One member raised concerns about enforcement and whether officers could reliably observe phone use inside vehicles, while another asked about the bill’s interaction with existing texting-while-driving penalties and whether points would still apply. The sponsor said the draft was still being refined, acknowledged gray areas, and invited further changes as the bill moves forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• processing processing the<00:07:17.200> bills<00:07:17.680> this<00:07:17.880> year
• transparency with our process this year. transparency with our process this year.
• We don't agree on everything, process.
• Um, and uh, yes, we've had, uh, great conversations, uh, very robust conversations in our committee.
• I would invite those conversations in my office.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill basically strengthens the appeal process.
• This bill basically strengthens the appeal process.
• process.
• We are establishing a board of directors to oversee this process.
• The bonding-out process does have to go to Bond Commission.

Bills: SB25, SB250, HB22, HB27, HB33, HB47, HB233, HB290, HB308, HB324, HB382, HB533, HB559, HB575, HB980, HB1157, HB1207, HB1236, HCR45

Keywords: registrar of voters, parish registrar, chief deputy registrar, confidential assistant, election administration, elections, salary schedule, compensation, merit evaluation, population-based pay, census-based pay, Department of State, Secretary of State, State Board of Election Supervisors, redistricting, senate districts, Senate District 33, Senate District 34, Senate District 35, precincts

Transcript Highlights:

• NOT ABOUT IMPROVING PROCESSES THAT REIMAGINING THEM.
• HAVING THESE CONVERSATIONS, THESE ARE IMPORTANT.
• I THINK YOU TOUCHED ON AN APPLICATION PROCESS OR DETERMINING PREMIUMS.
• I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THIS CONVERSATION.
• AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHO IS RESPONSIBLE IN THE CLAIMS HANDLING PROCESS?

Transcript Highlights:

• , throughout the rule making process, throughout the rule making process, working<00:07:08.800>
• So that process would take state.
• process that we use for other kinds of process that we use for other kinds of evidence<00:44:55.920><
• burden to to processing burden to to processing um<00:46:56.160> evidence<00:46:56.560>
• involved in that conversation as well? involved in that conversation as well?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• to work out this conversation. Yes. to work out this conversation. Yes.
• But I will say that conversations—really productive conversations—occur among all stakeholders, both
• /c> know really productive conversations know really productive conversations occur<00:26:21.279>
• And under paragraph D, the process.
• We shouldn't be told to process.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Such as due process or equal protection.
• It's simply a conversation about the threats.
• Is there a process? To conduct audits? Is there a process for doing that?
• They do not approve a process or safeguard.
• So the audit standards require you to do a planning process.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The subcommittee hearing focused on whether the Office of the State Auditor may constitutionally audit the Massachusetts Legislature under Chapter 250 of the Acts of 2024 and what such an audit could include under generally accepted government auditing standards. Chair Cindy Friedman opened by explaining the background: voters approved Ballot Question 1 in November 2024, the law took effect in January 2025, and the Auditor then initiated audits of both chambers. The chair said the subcommittee was seeking expert testimony because the proposed audit scope, constitutionality, and possible bias concerns remained unresolved. Public testimony was invited, but no members of the public pre-registered; written testimony remained open for a short period after the hearing. The hearing then proceeded with invited experts on constitutional law/state government and auditing-related issues. Professor Lawrence Friedman testified that the ballot initiative’s approval by the Attorney General and by voters did not resolve constitutional questions, and he argued Chapter 250 violates the Massachusetts Constitution. He said the Legislature has constitutional authority to set its own rules and manage its proceedings, and that an executive-branch audit would intrude on legislative deliberation, speech and debate protections, and separation of powers. He also warned that even audits of supposedly administrative matters could become a vehicle for repeated document demands and litigation that would indirectly burden legislative functioning. In questioning, senators pressed him on the line between administrative and deliberative functions, the role of the Attorney General versus the courts, the possibility of retroactive audit scope, and whether prior legislative consent to audits mattered; he said prior consent would not bind future legislatures and that constitutionality is ultimately for the courts. Professor Ray La Raja also opposed the audit, framing it as a threat to institutional independence and representative democracy. He argued that allowing an executive-branch official to audit the Legislature without consent would upset separation of powers, chill internal debate, and create a precedent for broader executive intrusion. He said voters often support “transparency” reforms without fully appreciating institutional consequences, and that legislatures should defend their autonomy, especially amid what he described as broader executive overreach nationally. Senators asked about chilling effects, the practical distinction between administrative and core legislative functions, and whether the courts or the Legislature should resolve the issue; he said the courts would ultimately adjudicate disputes, but the Legislature should not waive its constitutional authority lightly. Jean Kempthorne took the opposite view, arguing the audit is permissible and should proceed. She said the state auditor is a constitutional officer accountable directly to the people, that the audit power can be expanded by statute, and that separation of powers does not require watertight compartments. She contended the audit would not displace core legislative powers because the auditor can only evaluate operations, report findings, and make recommendations. She also argued the Legislature itself already conducts audits of other branches, so it is inconsistent to claim an audit of the Legislature is unconstitutional. In response to senators’ questions, she said there are guardrails against truly intrusive requests, but that the administrative-versus-legislative distinction is not a workable bright line; she suggested disputes should be handled case by case, with objections, negotiation, or litigation if specific requests go too far. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Paris's testimony with one comment: you know, including labor's voice in his process will ensure that
• Paris's testimony with one comment: you know, including labor's voice in his process will ensure that
• will ensure that any his process will ensure that any decision decision decision uh<00:19:58.640>
• It centers Native Hawaiian voices in conversations where we have always belonged. The U.S.
• It centers Native Hawaiian voices in conversations where we have always belonged. The U.S.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So that is a very important part of the matching process. Again, I have concerns.
• And we had some conversations I think that resolved concerns.
• Of the committee for the conversation. We do realize that this has been rushed.
• When we first started these processes, these conversations, we were presented with absolutely no changes
• I have been engaged in these conversations since January 19th.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Right, and we have started working on that process already.
• As the bill travels through the process...
• So, I'm just not sure what the vetting process is.
• We look forward to continuing that conversation.
• We're going to be fully engaged in this process.

Bills: SB604, SB843, SB1636, SB2395, SB571, SB1224, SB1832, SB2392, SB747, SB2623, SB2624, SB2185

Keywords: bonds, education funding, Texas Permanent School Fund, financial transparency, speculative rating, school funding, deferred maintenance, tax revenue, education budget, school districts, education, finance, Texas Education Code, misconduct, child abuse, educators, investigation, criminal offense, education law, suspension

Transcript Highlights:

• getting rid of the equalization process getting rid of the equalization process um<01:03:47.760>
• <01:04:55.359> um as the equalization process um as the equalization process um definitely
• before the get toe process uh before the equalization<01:05:38.039> process<01:05:38.319> is
• c> can through the process and people can through the process and people can challenge<01:06:21.760
• <03:41:57.399> but this morning for the conversation but this morning for the conversation

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a work session focused on school funding formulas, adequacy aid, and special education aid, with the chair outlining a schedule for the next several Tuesdays and noting that the committee would likely need multiple executive sessions to narrow down the bills. Members discussed the FY 26 formula, including base cost, differentiated aid, extraordinary needs grants, hold harmless provisions, and the roughly $28 million in excess statewide education property tax (SWP) funds that are not currently returned to the state under the existing formula. The first bill discussed was HB 137, which would allow excess SWP funds to remain with the local municipality for school and municipal purposes. Representative Spilsbury argued the issue is fundamental and suggested the state should require excess funds to be remitted back to the state, while Representative Damon said the bill appears to codify current practice and may be unnecessary, especially given possible court action. The discussion then shifted to a related bill from Representative Fellas that would redefine SWP as local money rather than state money and keep the current adequacy aid numbers revenue-neutral for now. Representative Fellas explained that SWP was created in 1999 after the Claremont lawsuit as part of the state’s effort to show increased school aid, but that it effectively labeled part of the local property tax as state money without changing property tax bills. She argued the state should not be tapping local property tax revenue and said her bill would preserve the current distribution while removing the SWP tax label, with future work possible on a different measure of local capacity such as income, home values, or poverty rate. Members also referenced prior discussions of fiscal capacity aid, relief aid, and other formula changes as part of the broader effort to restructure school funding.

Transcript Highlights:

• Discharge planning affecting the overall recovery process.
• And I think that's where we can have these conversations.
• I don't want DWI to be at the top of every conversation in New Mexico.
• But, you know, it's all part of the trial process as a trial attorney.
• It's not uncommon for that to happen in our conversation.

Transcript Highlights:

• I know we had that conversation yesterday.
• I know we had that conversation yesterday.
• I have not daily, but, uh, I know we had that conversation yesterday.
• And when was the last time you had that conversation?
• It has been through the Senate and the process over there, been through committees.

Summary: The Committee on Professional Registration and Licensing heard Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 1083, which combines several professional licensing changes. The senator presenting the bill explained that the respiratory therapy section would require an active RRT credential to practice in Missouri, while preserving a grandfather clause for current CRT licensees, and would add random renewal audits to confirm active credentials. The Senate-added provisions also addressed interior designers, physician licensure background checks and disclosure of out-of-state discipline, reduced the required experience for social worker supervisors from five years to three, and allowed speech-language pathologists to complete clinical fellowships under supervision of licensed SLPs in good standing from any state. During questioning, Representative Nolte disputed the claim that the interior design board was in full agreement with the bill, while the sponsor and an industry witness said the profession had negotiated changes through board-related channels. Testimony in support came from representatives of the Missouri Society for Respiratory Care, the Interior Designers Association, the Missouri Speech-Language and Hearing Association, the National Association of Social Workers–Missouri Chapter, Burrell Behavioral Health, and FGA Action. Supporters described the respiratory therapy language as a patient-safety measure, the interior design language as a scope-of-practice and business-cost reduction measure, the speech-language pathologist provision as a technical fix to ease licensure and compact participation, and the social work change as a needed response to supervisor shortages, especially in rural areas. No opposition testimony was offered. The committee then went into executive session on SB 1083, adopted an amendment that included additional cleanup and related licensing changes, rolled the amendment into the committee substitute, and voted the House Committee Substitute for Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 1083 do pass. The roll call passed 21-1, with Representative Nolte voting no. The chair announced there were no further bills before the committee and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• These conversations, also known as meeting confer conversations, are desperately needed in Harris County
• This non-binding process helps improve retention recruitment.
• To the music that is 100 yards away, 200 yards away, you cannot hear a conversation.
• You can't have a conversation in your own house. You can't sit down to dinner.
• Use payment if there were issues with the procurement process.

Transcript Highlights:

• They don't live at home, but they haven't finished the process yet.
• I mean, the whole point is to be able to have those conversations with somebody that...
• I have every right to know about the conversations that are happening.
• That means if you are blocked, then there's a certain process you can follow.
• blocked," and there's this whole process under the federal guideline.

Bills: HB368, HB3311, HB1734, HB2495, HB2716, HB793, HB3376, HB2524, HB3421, HB3446, HB3181

Keywords: electronic devices, family violence, criminal prosecution, protective orders, tracking, harassment, family allowance, decedent's estate, surviving spouse, minor children, inheritance, child support, maintenance, HB 1734, Family Code, Section 155.207, suit affecting the parent-child relationship, SAPCR, continuing exclusive jurisdiction, jurisdiction transfer