Transcript Highlights:

• The next bill on today's agenda is House File 3405, Chair Mhler's bill.
• support this bill. Thanks. support this bill. Thanks.
• Are we on the main bill or the bill as amended? Oh, we are on the bill as amended. As amended.
• Are we on the main bill or the bill as amended? Oh, we are on the bill as amended. As amended.
• Are we on the main bill or the bill as amended? Oh, we are on the bill as amended. As amended.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The last bill on the agenda today is House File 16.
• Please explain your bill. Thank you, Mr.
• This bill accomplishes two main things.
• That is what this bill does.
• This bill accomplishes two main things...

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House File 16, and the chair moved the bill with a recommendation that it be re-referred to Elections Finance and Government Operations. Representative Rymer said the bill would require reporting to ICE when an illegal immigrant is arrested on suspicion of a violent crime, even if the county attorney does not prosecute, and would bar state and local entities from blocking federal immigration enforcement. He described the bill as narrowly focused on serious offenses such as murder, assault, robbery, kidnapping, and criminal sexual conduct, and said it was intended to improve communication with federal authorities about dangerous offenders. Supporters argued the bill would improve public safety and cooperation with federal law enforcement. David Zimmer, a former local law enforcement official, said cooperation with ICE is consistent with law enforcement practice and helps with information-sharing, warrants, consulate notifications, and locating individuals. Several other supporters, including a crime victim family member and a security officer, said the bill would help identify dangerous criminals and protect communities. Opponents said the bill would reduce trust in local law enforcement and discourage victims and witnesses from reporting crimes. Testifiers from the Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota, The Advocates for Human Rights, Violence Free Minnesota, the Minnesota Council on Latino Affairs, the Northstar Alliance, the City of Minneapolis, and others said mandatory ICE notification could deter domestic violence and trafficking victims from seeking help, harm due process, and undermine community safety. Some also warned it would interfere with local separation policies, burden local agencies, and have negative economic and civil rights impacts. The committee also heard emotional testimony from individuals describing domestic abuse and immigration-related fears, and from family members of a murder victim who supported the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to go first, actually, to our bills. We'll go with Senate Bill 152.
• We coordinated with them in drafting this bill, and it's using the existing funds at the State Rural
• Bill... 132.
• the original bill. bill.
• House Bill 180 and Pacific, and then Senate Bill 273 and 274.

Bills: HB2, SB152

Keywords: general appropriation, budget, Medicaid, education funding, public safety, telecommunications, low-income assistance, lifeline, broadband, rural broadband, universal service fund, public regulation commission, PRC, 911 surcharge, telecommunications relay service, VoIP, mobile service, internet affordability, digital equity, digital inclusion

Transcript Highlights:

• So, that's one of the additions to this bill.
• And um there uh additions to this bill.
• And then that number uh for this bill?
• motion for this bill? motion for this bill?
• I know that this this bill forward.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• It is House Bill 2571, Representative Nail Blase, House Bill 2696, Representative Margaret Scarsdale,
• Senate Bill 1650, Senate Bill 1696, Representative Margaret Scarsdale, Senate Bill 1650 for Senator
• We have done a survey when we first filed this bill sessions ago. We filed this bill sessions ago.
• That's what these bills do, and they stand out from some of the other bills for a couple of reasons.
• I support the bill. It’s Grammy. Everyone supports the bill? What’s your name?

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security heard testimony on several bills, with strong support expressed for a proposed municipal and public safety building authority (H. 2571/S. 1650). Municipal officials, fire chiefs, the Massachusetts Municipal Association, regional planning leaders, and Senator Comerford described aging town halls, fire stations, DPW facilities, and other local buildings, especially in small towns and gateway cities, and argued that local budgets and Proposition 2 1/2 make major capital projects difficult to fund. Testimony emphasized the need for a dedicated revenue stream, with the bill proposing a share of marijuana excise tax revenue and a rural funding set-aside. Committee members asked about prioritization and funding levels, and witnesses said even a modest start would help address a large statewide backlog. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the committee later adjourned unanimously. The committee also heard testimony on H. 2689, requiring fuel gas alarms/detectors in residential dwellings using explosive gases. Representative Jeff Roy, Susan Brown, Jason Cohn, and representatives from NEMA and Kidde supported the bill, describing it as a life-saving measure similar to carbon monoxide detector requirements. Witnesses cited the 2015 Franklin propane explosion that killed Nancy and Robert Brown, the Merrimack Valley gas explosions, and national fire data showing fatalities and property damage from gas leaks. They said detectors are affordable, commercially available, and should be required where gas is used; one witness noted battery-backed or battery-operated options exist. Committee questions focused on cost, battery power, outdoor propane setups, and whether the bill would cover private databases or only residential safety devices. Another major topic was S. 1755 on missing and abducted children. Senator Pavel Payano testified in favor, citing the case of Lee Manuel Villoria Paolino and arguing that misclassification of missing children as runaways can delay urgent response and worsen outcomes, especially for Black and brown youth. He said the bill would set minimum law enforcement response standards, require training, and expand multilingual intake forms. The committee also heard support for expanding the state DNA database through familial DNA searching, with Dr. Amory Myers explaining that the technology could help solve long-unsolved cases while including guardrails to prevent use of private consumer DNA databases. Finally, the committee heard extensive testimony on H. 2740, “Colby’s Law,” establishing safety standards for BMX and motocross tracks. Colby Lippincott’s family, community members, and industry representatives described his fatal crash and urged requirements for medical staff, insurance, inspections, warning systems, barriers, and access roads. Witnesses said the bill would not end the sport but would create basic protections, and the committee heard that Massachusetts would join a number of other states with similar standards. The hearing ended with a motion to adjourn, which passed unanimously.

Transcript Highlights:

• It was a one page bill that turn into 184 page Bill.
• The other is a citizenship bill, both in the the vote by mail bill and the technology.
• one-day voting bill.
• The bill that it was just mentioned, the citizenship bill really brings home to me.
• I really hope you support to citizenship Bill that is in drafting currently so that we can ensure only

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• uh this bill this this section. uh this bill this this section.
• just so we can discuss the bill just so we can discuss the bill otherwise<02:24:37.960> we'll
• just file a bill in the fall?
• "If the Senate kills a House bill, we will not accept it on any bill coming over, because that's the
• "And if our bill just dies, it dies and not try to jam it into other bills.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The meeting began as a Committee of Conference on House Bill 194, but the discussion quickly centered on whether to remove an attached bill, 504, because of concerns about a possible fee or tax and a House rule issue. Members debated the procedural posture of the bill, whether the House version had been non-concurred, and whether the conference committee could still resolve the issue by adopting the House amendment or reconsidering the non-concur. The exchange became tense, with one side warning that failing to pass the measure could jeopardize a linked rural health transformation grant worth about $20 million. The committee ultimately recessed without resolving the 194/504 dispute and planned to return the next day. The committee then opened conference on House Bill 609, which dealt with use-of-force/self-defense language and restraint/seclusion authority in health care settings. On the self-defense portion, House members argued strongly for restoring vehicle language, saying people should be able to defend themselves in a car the same way they can in a home, especially in carjacking or assault situations where no weapon is displayed. Senate members expressed concern about expanding deadly-force protections too broadly and suggested narrowing the language to focus on imminent harm to the person, not property, while also questioning where the provision should be placed in statute. The second major topic in HB 609 was who may order restraint or seclusion in clinical settings. House members argued that physicians are not always immediately available, especially in hospitals and emergency settings, and that APRNs and physician associates should be able to act in crises if properly trained and credentialed. Senate members raised concerns about scope of practice and asked whether the language implied patient consent was required; the Senate side explained that consent language was intended to address capacity and informed decision-making, not to require voluntary consent to restraint. The discussion ended with the sides still apart, though the Senate floated a compromise allowing physician associates to order restraint when no doctor is physically on the premises, while not yet extending that authority to APRNs. The committee took a short break to continue negotiations on the firearm/self-defense piece.

Transcript Highlights:

• Motion on the bill.
• <00:18:40.559> every long time since I looked at bills every long time since I looked at bills
• our Quorum here that came to get a bill our Quorum here that came to get a bill heard<00:25:10.080
• <00:27:02.440> bill<00:27:02.720> also bill endorses this bill the bill also bill endorses
• this bill the bill also carves<00:27:03.720> out<00:27:04.159> emergency<00:27:04.679>

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:44 Introduction of Guests 01:21 HB 137 Discussion 02:11 HB 137 Roll Call Vote 25:35 HB 346 Discussion 26:15 HB 346 Roll Call Vote 27:24, 958, all

Summary: The Natural Resources Committee met with prayer and the Pledge, approved the prior minutes, and recognized visiting guests, including representatives from Nucor Steel and students from Eastern Kentucky University. The main business was House Bill 137, which would require air-pollution enforcement actions by the Energy and Environment Cabinet and Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control District to rely on EPA-approved monitoring methods or scientifically defensible, quality-assured data. The sponsor and industry supporters argued the bill would ensure reliable evidence and protect manufacturers from enforcement based on questionable data. Opponents, including the Kentucky Resources Council, the West Jefferson County Community Task Force, and a former cabinet employee, argued the bill would conflict with the Clean Air Act’s allowance for “any credible evidence,” could exclude community air-monitoring data and citizen complaints, and might weaken enforcement by limiting the use of lower-cost sensors, photos, video, and other nontraditional evidence. Committee members questioned how credible evidence and the Daubert standard would apply, and supporters and opponents debated whether the bill would simply set evidentiary rules or improperly narrow enforcement authority. One member also raised concerns that the bill’s title and scope could be read as affecting the broader air program. House Bill 137 was ultimately approved favorably by roll call vote, with Senator Webb’s aye vote later clarified for the record. The committee then took up House Bill 346, as amended by a subcommittee. The bill was described as helping about 708 companies and carving out emergency generators used for safety purposes in distilleries, with support from the Kentucky Chamber. The subcommittee amendment was adopted, and the bill passed the committee favorably by roll call vote. The meeting ended with an attempted adjournment and a brief record correction on the vote for House Bill 137.

Transcript Highlights:

• Second Reading House Bill 341. Second Reading House Bill 1163. Second Reading House Bill 1295.
• Second Reading House Bill 1378. Second Reading House Bill 1703. Second Reading House Bill 1722.
• Second Reading House Bill 1998. Second Reading House Bill 2052. Second Reading House Bill 21.
• Introduction of bills.
• the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• The next one is House Bill 271, dwelling unit size.
• Next one is multiplex housing, House Bill 2071.
• A couple bills were introduced in 25, didn't make it out of committee. substitute bill.
• That is the intent of House Bill 1110.
• We sort of have similar concerns about the lot splitting bill, which was 2025 House Bill 1096.

Summary: The committee held a work session on local government issues, beginning with an update from the State Building Code Council on four legislatively mandated code amendments now in CR-102 rulemaking: temporary emergency shelters, reduced minimum dwelling unit size, multiplex housing up to three stories and six units, and single-exit apartment buildings up to six stories. Council staff also described a separate embodied-carbon appendix proposal that remains under public review, with testimony both supporting and opposing it. Members asked about the rationale for some of the code limits, including the restriction on connecting multiplex buildings. The committee then heard a panel on annexations from MRSC, Pierce County, and the Association of Washington Cities. Witnesses reviewed annexation methods, including petition, election, and interlocal agreement approaches, and said larger annexations are increasingly using interlocal agreements because they can address infrastructure, revenue sharing, and public process concerns. They described barriers such as inconsistent local standards, the cost of infrastructure, referendum risk, census requirements, and the difficulty of persuading residents and local officials to support annexation. Members asked about the five-year restriction on residential zoning changes in one annexation method and whether a hearing examiner could reduce political pressure on local decision-makers. A second panel discussed subdivision reform. The Master Builders Association urged raising the short-plat threshold within urban growth areas to 30 lots as a simpler first step, citing permitting delays and added housing costs. The City of Spokane described implementation problems with recent housing laws, including uncertainty about how to review plats under HB 1110, lot-splitting administration, and added notice requirements for unit lot subdivisions. AWC said there was broad agreement that subdivision decisions should be more administrative, but public hearings remained a point of disagreement. The committee also heard from FutureWise, the Washington State Association of Counties, and Lewis County on county development regulation and enforcement, with witnesses emphasizing underfunded code enforcement, inconsistent standards between counties and cities, and the need for better coordination, incentives, and possibly stronger enforcement tools. No votes were taken; the chair said the committee would continue working on possible solutions in future sessions.

Transcript Highlights:

• General Billing Manual, and additionally<00:10:08.360> other<00:10:08.600> rules<00:10
• We have started drafting, but we want approved language, of course, first.
• We have started drafting, five rules?
• Uh, yes, we are drafting as well.
• That is a table that just allows for folks, licensees, to reference, but we are drafting it.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee first handled routine business, approving the minutes and consent calendar, then moved to the regular calendar of administrative rules. Department of Energy rule 25-220 was postponed until June at the sponsor’s request so stakeholders would have more time to review revised language. Several Department of Health and Human Services Medicaid-related rules were then considered, including 25-240, 25-265, and 26-33, each of which drew staff comments mainly about expired rule provisions and the agencies’ reliance on federal law, the Medicaid state plan, or other manuals. The committee approved those rules after brief questions, with the agencies stating they were already operating under the relevant federal or state-plan authority and, in one case, that rulemaking was underway to update an expired citation. The most extended discussion was on HHS Bureau of Aging rule 25-304, which had an amended conditional approval request. Staff explained the amendments clarified how case management agencies accept or deny cases, how telehealth participation is evaluated, and that the department sets the timing for accepting or denying cases under its existing authority. Staff also noted a separate issue about whether reimbursement rates must be in rule, but said the agency had long interpreted the statute to allow its approach and that any change would likely require legislation rather than committee objection. A provider representative testified against parts of the rule, arguing the case management agencies should not be required to accept referrals before contacting the participant, that telehealth decisions for other providers should remain with those providers, and that the quality-management section was duplicative and burdensome. Committee members questioned whether the telehealth language merely allowed case managers to say a service fit the client’s plan or instead gave them authority over another provider’s delivery method. The agency responded that case managers may determine what services an individual needs, but should not control how another licensed provider delivers those services. The discussion continued with no final action shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• One and House Bill 4410. He's got to have two bills though, right? Yeah. Yeah, he'll be.
• I'm sorry, Representative Cantre, you're still laying your bill, one of Your bills are over, correct?
• You have two more bills. I'm pre I'm presenting those other two bills. OK, great, that's.
• House Bill 4430 is just some cleanup language from the PA bill that was passed last legislative session
• House Bill 4431 is similar to the bill we just passed.

Bills: HB4423, HB3342, HB3645, HB3647, HB3887, HB4430, HB4431, HB2964, HB3834

Keywords: Oklahoma Health Care Authority, Medicaid, immigration verification, healthcare access, federal reporting, health care providers, auditing, patient rights, claims, protection from fraud, audit process, error correction, hospice care, physician determination, healthcare standards, symptom management, health information exchange, all-payer claims database, health care transparency, health care costs

Transcript Highlights:

• Introduction and reference of bills will be deferred.
• Assembly Bill 1533, Senate Bills 410, 57 with amendments, 332 with amendments, 533 with amendments, 544
• And in it, that big bill, the big BS bill, is the largest transference of wealth from the poor to the
• The clerk will read the remaining items on the consent calendar: Senate Bill 521 and Senate Bill 863.
• Senate Bill 521. 0-0. And Senate Bill 863. 71-0.

Summary: The Assembly convened after a quorum call, adopted the previous day’s journal, and handled several procedural motions, including suspending rules to allow committee notices and moving some bills and items on and off the file. Members also introduced a number of guests and fellows on the floor, including Equality California Comcast Fellows, tribal youth visitors, interns, local officials, and community representatives. On the floor file, the Assembly concurred in Senate amendments to AB 1216 (TK-12 omnibus education technical changes), AB 377 (high-speed rail), and AB 951 (health care coverage), and adopted ACR 103 declaring July 14-18, 2025 as California Western Monarch Protection Week. The body also adopted AJR 18, a resolution calling for an official legislative apology to California Native Americans for historic injustices and affirming support for healing and reconciliation, and ACR 71 designating a portion of State Route 101 as the Little Saigon Freeway. Each of these measures drew supportive remarks from multiple members, and co-author rolls were opened before final adoption. The Assembly also adopted SCR 66 proclaiming Law Day, after a lengthy partisan debate over the rule of law, executive power, and recent federal and state actions; the resolution was ultimately adopted by voice vote after 51 co-authors were added. Members then adopted SJR 3 urging Congress to reverse SNAP cuts and protect CalFresh benefits, with debate focused on food insecurity, fraud, work requirements, and the impact on low-income Californians; the resolution passed with 69 ayes and no noes after 70 co-authors were added. SB 757, authorizing local governments to use nuisance abatement liens or special assessments to collect abatement costs, also passed 68-0, and ACR 94 on anti-microbial resistance was adopted on the consent calendar. The session concluded with adjournments in memory honoring Jane Day, agricultural leader John C. Harris, and Willie Earl Arno, followed by announcements of committee meetings and the schedule for the next floor session. The Assembly adjourned until Thursday, July 17, 2025, at 9 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, Chair Quam, if you want to speak of your bill and the DE1 amendment. Thank you.
• And the basic premise behind this bill is to try to have some information.
• Chair Quam, sorry, do you want to speak to the bill first?
• with which the understanding of the bill with which the understanding of the bill is<00:14:24.480
• Is there any further discussion on the bill? It's fine.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Harris, you are recognized to explain House Bill 3748.
• And the bill that you just described was the PCS? Yes. Any questions? Any questions on the bill?
• Would you like to use the PCS as the working draft? Yes, sir.
• me to go into the bill, I can.
• What House Bill 3913 does...

Bills: HB3091, HB3314, HB3435, HB3748, HB3913, HB3919, HB4132, HB4203, HB4303

Keywords: county officials, residency requirement, dereliction of duty, removal process, government accountability, marijuana tax, public service impact tax, county funding, voter approval, local government, municipal bonds, ballot proposals, voting process, fund allocation, county government, administration, local resources, public institutions, construction, maintenance

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 5337 and Senate Bill 16 do not protect our democracy.
• So today we're here to stand against House Bill 5337 and Senate Bill 16.
• So we'll fight this bill and similar bills every step of the way. Thank you all for being here.
• And finally, let's dispel the myth that this bill addresses a real problem. This bill does not.
• These bills are silly.

Transcript Highlights:

• For example, under Senate Bill 410, and Assembly Bill 50, we adopted new statewide targets to reduce
• So those costs are starting to hit bills at the same time that over time they fall off bills.
• may go up some because you're not paying your gasoline bill.
• The proposal is to maintain the trailer bill language, or the trailer bill language proposes to maintain
• The bill with minimal requirements for the state, all right?

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• On page 2, what if there's a bill that I think has 7 no votes registered?
• We've got a couple of authors who weren't here for their bills.
• The chair lays out Senate Bill 2375 and recognizes Senator Cook to lay out Senator Johnson's bill.
• This bill, we call it our general code update bill.
• pass bill, otherwise the statutes get very messy, so that's all I have.

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to get back to the bill. >> The bill as written is giving us an avenue to request a meeting be
• I mean, this bill is a simple bill. It's, you know, five lines. >> It should be.
• > simple<00:14:24.160> bill.
• <00:14:24.399> It's,<00:14:25.040> you this bill is a simple bill.
• It's, you this bill is a simple bill.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee held a work session on HB 313, a bill dealing with non-public sessions and when a person discussed in such a session should be notified or allowed to request that the meeting be open. The chair opened the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance and invited public comment before committee discussion. The main public testimony came from Phil Jaru, who described a personal dispute with local officials and said the bill should ensure people are notified when they are being discussed in closed session and can request an open meeting. He also argued for limits on non-public sessions, saying they should not be used for matters outside the board’s authority or for what he characterized as gossip, while also trying to avoid interfering with investigations. Committee members focused on the practical and legal problems with the proposal. Several members questioned whether a person should have a right to attend, to demand an open meeting, or simply to receive notice, and whether that right should apply before the meeting or only once the discussion begins. Members raised concerns about situations involving multiple people, children, victims, or other confidentiality interests, and whether a request to open the meeting could conflict when one person wants openness and another wants privacy. One member suggested the bill may be too broad and proposed narrowing it to simple advance notification, possibly by email, rather than an automatic right to open the meeting. The discussion also touched on existing law governing non-public sessions, including the narrow “reputation” exception and Supreme Court cases interpreting it. Members noted that the current statute already limits non-public discussion to the matters stated in the motion, and some suggested that if the concern is boards using non-public sessions for unrelated discussion, that issue may be better addressed by clarifying the existing statute rather than expanding the bill. No vote or final action was taken; the committee appeared to continue working through possible amendments and whether the bill should be narrowed to notification or a right to attend rather than a right to force the meeting open.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, as to the bill eventuality.
• House Bill 283.
• this bill together.
• <00:31:51.440> this<00:31:51.720> bill Cell director and we drafted this bill Cell
• director and we drafted this bill together.<00:31:53.240> And<00:31:53.600> to<00:31:53.720

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Call to Order and Roll Call: 00:01:36 Homeland Security: 00:03:46 Kentucky Manufacturing Extension Partnership: 00:36:29, 958, all