Transcript Highlights:

• The amendment fails. Are there further amendments to the bill?
• The amendment fails. Are there further amendments to the bill?
• The amendment to the amendment is sustained.
• And in terms of the amendment, I support the amendment.
• Are there any amendments to the strike and insert amendment?

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes and then took up House Bill 4852, a strike-and-insert bill revising West Virginia’s food additive restrictions. Counsel explained that it moved the existing additive list into a new code section, kept the 2028 effective date, added exceptions for dietary supplements, alcoholic liquor, non-intoxicating beer, and small sellers under $5,000 per month, and created civil penalties for knowing violations. Testimony split between industry witnesses, who argued the bill and last year’s law would raise costs, burden interstate commerce, and conflict with federal regulation, and advocates who said the law is already prompting companies to reformulate and that the bill clarifies vague language tied to a federal injunction. Several amendments were offered to tie the law to FDA action or exempt soda, pepperoni rolls, frozen confections, and snack foods; some were adopted and others failed. The committee then adopted the strike-and-insert amendment as amended and reported HB 4852 to the full Senate with a do-pass recommendation. The committee next considered House Bill 5484, which creates felony offenses for interfering with a victim’s access to medical treatment or forensic care related to a sexual offense, or for forcing a victim of a sexual offense who becomes pregnant to have an illegal abortion, along with a conspiracy offense. Counsel said the strike-and-insert added clarifying language and definitions. Members raised concerns that the conspiracy language could be read to include the victim herself, and the bill sponsor said the intent was to target traffickers and abusers who keep victims from medical care and force abortions outside medical facilities. An amendment was adopted clarifying that nothing in the subsection imposes criminal liability on the victim of the sexual offense. The committee then adopted the strike-and-insert amendment, reported HB 5484 to the full Senate with a do-pass recommendation, and adopted a title amendment. The final bill discussed in the excerpt was House Bill 4468, which narrows confidentiality protections for victims in criminal complaints by limiting redaction to names and addresses, while still allowing disclosure to other governmental entities and permitting victims to request redaction of addresses from appellate decisions after July 1, 2026. Counsel said the bill would replace broader existing confidentiality language and remove provisions allowing disclosure upon a showing of justice or by subpoena. Members questioned whether the change would weaken victim privacy protections, noting that identifying information can include much more than names and addresses. The committee then began hearing testimony from a county prosecutor on the bill, but the excerpt ends before any vote or final action on HB 4468.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill also has an author's amendment.
• Okay, so it's sort of a technical amendment more or less? It's not a technical amendment.
• So, of the amendment, Madam Chair? It's in the amendment? Should be 2.10 to 2.14 there?
• So, of the amendment, Madam Chair? It's in the amendment? Should be 2.10 to 2.14 there?
• So, of the amendment, Madam Chair? It's in the amendment? Should be 2.10 to 2.14 there?

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: House File 4205, as amended, was heard and then re-referred to the Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee. Representative Tabke said the bill is intended to protect Minnesotans’ private data tied to license plate reader systems by requiring warrants for out-of-state access, limiting dissemination of privately collected data, and adding reporting and oversight. He said the amendment was substantive and was adopted before the bill was discussed. Tabke also said he was open to changes, including revisiting the audit requirement, and noted the bill should still allow law enforcement to use license plate data for investigations. John Beeler of the ACLU of Minnesota testified in support, arguing that automatic license plate reader use has expanded far beyond what the 2015 statute contemplated and that third-party vendors have complicated data practices and accountability. He said the bill would modernize the law, require public disclosure of data-sharing relationships, and ensure private vendors are subject to data obligations. Jeff Potts of the Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association opposed the bill as written, saying LPR technology has been important in investigations, including a recent child abduction case, but that the annual audit requirement would be too costly for small agencies and could make the technology unaffordable. He said the association was open to further discussions on guardrails but opposed the bill in its current form. Members raised questions about what data is actually returned by a license plate query versus an LPR hit, with Representative Duran arguing the bill conflated limited registration information with broader private data. Representative Feist supported the bill, saying the public should not trust Flock and that the issue is the cumulative tracking of people’s movements, not just isolated data points. Representative Hudson said the bill raised valid questions but might unintentionally hinder investigations, and he requested a roll call. The committee ultimately adopted the A1 amendment and moved the bill forward on a roll call vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• The chair's recommendation is to pass this with amendments.
• So we're going to amend this bill to become a study.
• So we're going to amend this bill to become a study.
• The chair's recommendation is to pass this with amendments.
• This hearing is adjourned. defected that's the only amendment we're defected that's the only amendment

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Are we putting ourselves in any kind of constitutional issue?
• So we know it's constitutional. We know that. They're effective.
• So, upon receipt of an expansion amendment.
• 15 to 20 days, and for non-expansion amendments...
• amendment in 2022, reversing the 2006 exclusion.

Bills: SB1798, SB1835, SB1319, SB2942, SB2928, SB784, SB1049

Keywords: higher education, tuition rates, financial support, immigration status, Texas law, SB 1835, resident tuition, nonresident students, scholarship students, public higher education, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, Education Code Section 54.213, tuition waiver, in-state tuition, out-of-state students, higher education finance, enrollment cap, capacity limit, workforce development area, nonimmigrant visa

Transcript Highlights:

• , House Bill 183 as amended, House Bill 368, House Bill 4, House Bill 269 as amended without emergency
• Speaker: We're on adoption of favorable report for House Bills 352 as amended, 183 as amended, 368, 269
• as amended without an emergency clause, and 143 as amended.
• , 183 as amended, 368, 269 as amended without an emergency clause, and 143 as amended were signed by
• Speaker, gentlemen, I believe the case touches on the Constitutional First Amendment rights, which include

Transcript Highlights:

• Are we putting ourselves in any kind of constitutional issue?
• We've known this is constitutional since 1952.
• 30 to a floating 30-day window after receipt of the amendment.
• days, and that these would be expansion amendments.
• amendment in 2022 reversing the 2006 exclusion.

Summary: The committee heard several education bills, with most of the discussion focused on Senate Bill 1835, Senate Bill 784, Senate Bill 1049, Senate Bill 2942, and Senate Bill 2928. SB 1835 would raise from 5% to 20% the cap on nonresident students who can receive resident tuition and fees through competitive scholarships at certain regional universities in slower-growing workforce development areas, provided the schools have capacity as determined by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. Supporters, including West Texas A&M University, said the bill would help fill underused capacity, attract students who may stay and work in Texas, and support regional workforce needs. SB 784 would strengthen a prior law allowing peace officers’ children to transfer between public school districts for safety reasons by requiring both districts’ approval, making clear that districts of innovation are not exempt, and prohibiting tuition charges. SB 1049 would require districts and open-enrollment charters to excuse students, at a parent’s request, for religious release-time instruction for up to one hour per day and five hours per week; witnesses said the program is constitutional, voluntary, and already operating in other states and some Texas districts. Each of these bills was left pending after testimony, with no public witnesses opposing them. SB 2942 would expand and adjust the state’s adult charter high school pilot program. Senator Creighton said the bill is intended to help the estimated 7 million Texas adults without a high school diploma by removing barriers to expansion, aligning legal protections with ISDs, changing TEA’s disapproval window for expansion amendments to a 30-day period after receipt, and updating funding to reflect part-year attendance. A committee substitute kept the upper enrollment age at 50 and removed a proposed testing change. Testimony from New Heights students and leadership described the program as life-changing, emphasizing that it combines diplomas with career credentials, childcare, transportation, and other supports to help adults stabilize their families and enter better-paying work. TEA witnesses explained the expansion process and said adult charter schools are overseen by the commissioner rather than the SBOE. The committee substitute was adopted, public testimony closed, and the bill was left pending. SB 2928 would set a uniform school start date for public school districts at the third Wednesday in August, while preserving existing district-of-innovation flexibility for current DOI districts and allowing year-round systems to continue. Senator Creighton argued the bill would reduce the patchwork created by DOI exemptions, support students and families, and preserve summer employment and tourism revenue. A committee substitute was adopted. Testimony came largely from tourism, hospitality, and recreation interests, including hotel, water park, zoo, chamber of commerce, and camp representatives, who said later start dates would extend the summer travel season, improve staffing and revenue, and give students more opportunities for summer jobs and camps. Several witnesses cited large economic impacts from tourism and said early school starts reduce August business. Some senators raised concerns about charter schools being excluded and about year-round calendars, but the bill was left pending after testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair. >> There's an amendment to the amendment.
• The amendment to the amendment, Bakeberg moves to amend the Schultz amendment, Center for file number
• The amendment to the Amendment bakeberg moves to amend the Schultz Amendment Center fall number. 34 32
• the 30 Grossman as amended the amendment to the The amendment is called.
• The amendment is adopted. There's an amendment at the desk. The clerk will report the amendment.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House took up Senate File 3432, a public safety bill requiring identifying equipment and insignia to be removed from emergency vehicles sold to the public. The chamber first adopted a House language amendment, then debated a broader security package that would fund judicial and courthouse security, Capitol security measures, short-term protection for legislators facing credible threats, State Patrol deficiency funding, and additional BCA analysts and investigators to assess threats statewide. Supporters framed the bill as necessary to protect public safety, democracy, and First Amendment activity at the Capitol and courthouses; they also said the package was pared down from larger requests and based on security reviews. The House adopted an A-1 amendment clarifying that BCA staff could investigate threats statewide, and later rejected a Schultz A-3 amendment that would have eliminated all appropriations in the bill. The A-3 was defeated on a 37-94 vote after the House upheld the Speaker’s ruling that a proposed school-safety secondary amendment was not germane, with that appeal decided 69-62. A major theme of debate was whether the Legislature should prioritize security for members and the Capitol before passing school safety funding. Several members argued they could not support spending tens of millions on Capitol and legislative security without first funding school safety for all students, including public, charter, private, and tribal schools. Others defended the bill as necessary because of recent threats and violence, including the June 14 tragedy, and said the Capitol security changes were based on professional recommendations. Some members also criticized the new security setup as overly restrictive or “security theater,” while supporters said the measures were needed to keep the public, staff, and lawmakers safe. After the A-3 was defeated, the bill was read for third time and members continued floor debate. The discussion remained split between those emphasizing immediate Capitol and legislative security needs and those insisting school safety should come first. Representative Agbaje then moved to table the bill, and the clerk began a roll call on that motion.

Transcript Highlights:

• I would certainly welcome any amendment to expand that to include acceptance and rejection, if that's
• Follow the constitutional obligation.
• That is our constitutional duty.
• So we're nowhere near providing this constitutional level of education until you do that.
• I think the issue is that the state is mandated by the Constitution to fund the public schools.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• amendments. Chair and vice chair vote I. amendments. Chair and vice chair vote I.
• pass with amendments. Any reservations? pass with amendments. Any reservations?
• <02:38:53.760> Any to pass with amendments. Any to pass with amendments.
• Um, additional two amendments.
• amendments. Any reservations? amendments. Any reservations?

Bills: HB2611, HB2102, HB1710, HB1868, HB1920, HB1812, HB1733, HB1715, HB1723, HB1724, HB1727, HB1711

Keywords: HB2611, Hawaii antitrust, rental housing, rent price-fixing, algorithmic pricing, algorithmic rent-setting, property management software, pricing algorithms, rent coordination, price-fixing, collusion, cartel, multifamily housing, landlord software, occupancy levels, lease terms, Attorney General, public education program, consumer protection, housing affordability

Summary: The committee first took up HB 2611, which would prohibit algorithmic price-setting in Hawaii’s rental market, require public education by the Attorney General, and establish fines and penalties. The Department of the Attorney General opposed the bill, saying its language was too unclear and could expose landlords and agents to criminal and civil liability for ordinary rent-setting practices based on public information or assistance from property professionals. Members asked about antitrust standards, tacit agreement, and whether using county-published affordable-rent schedules would be unlawful; the AG said that would not be unlawful if based on public information and without collusion. Testimony was mixed, with the chair noting support from the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, Hawaii Realtors with comments, 50501 Hawaii and General Strike Hawaii, Haloha Project, 13 individuals, and one opponent. The committee then heard HB 2102, which clarifies that residential projects involving ground disturbance in high-risk areas remain subject to state historic preservation review and removes an exemption for lands presumed nominally sensitive. The Office of Planning and Sustainable Development and the Department of Planning and Permitting supported the measure, saying it would improve clarity and ensure review focuses on projects most likely to affect historic properties or iwi kupuna, while also urging language refinements to better define sensitive sandy-soil areas and balance preservation with housing timelines. NAP Hawaii opposed the bill, arguing it would undo progress made last session and that the current process already includes protections for inadvertent discoveries and efficiency for lower-risk areas. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs strongly supported HB 2102, explaining it was responding to beneficiary complaints about late-added language in last year’s law and saying the nominally sensitive-area language should be removed because it was adopted without sufficient stakeholder input and could be harmful to iwi kupuna protections. Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation and several individuals also supported the bill. Committee discussion focused on how “nominally sensitive” areas are determined, whether project proponents could self-certify areas as exempt, and how high-density residential projects should be treated; SHPD said it uses survey and monitoring data to map sensitivity, that highly sensitive areas like Kīauea are not nominally sensitive, and that some high-density projects should remain exempt if they do not involve new ground disturbance. The hearing included no final vote in the portion provided, but the chair noted 48 individuals in support and continued questioning on the bill’s definitions and implementation.

Transcript Highlights:

• To receive funding, the, the state constitution and our state statute require funds be appropriated.
• Specifically, the Constitution says that except for interest or other payment on the public debt, money
• a general election, which at this point they can't because they're partisan elections and the Constitution
• And so we, um, we, we do support that constitutional amendment.
• Chair and, and Senator, we need to get that constitutional amendment on the ballot. Thank you, Mr.

Transcript Highlights:

• Data brokerage can present serious risk to the exercise of constitutional rights, including making the
• constitutional right through protest, or a wide variety of other things available for purchase.
• Data brokerage can present serious risk to the exercise of constitutional rights, including making the
• constitutional right through protest, or a wide variety of other things available for purchase by state
• As such, Fourth Amendment warrant requirements no longer apply if the government wants to obtain it.

Keywords: 907, all

Summary: The committee held a series of informational briefings on information management and technology issues. It first heard from ACLU representatives on data privacy, who argued that Oregon should strengthen protections against private data brokers, government purchases of personal data, reverse warrants, automatic license plate readers, and local police surveillance. They urged data minimization, limits on data sales and retention, and broader transparency and accountability measures. Members asked about practical uses of license plate readers, state sales of data, and how Oregon’s approach compares with other states; the presenters said similar proposals have been adopted elsewhere, including data minimization in Maryland and a state version of the Fourth Amendment Is Not for Sale Act in Montana. The committee then received a detailed update from the Department of Administrative Services and Enterprise Information Services on licensing system modernization for 14 boards and commissions with the most immediate need. DAS said it is seeking a shared procurement approach through an RFP that would create either one scalable system or two tiers of systems, depending on agency needs and security requirements, with contracts expected by September. Committee members emphasized the need for a more unified, user-friendly statewide login and service experience for businesses and residents, and raised concerns about small agencies “figuring it out on their own” without sufficient cybersecurity or technical expertise. EIS said it is overseeing the investment review, security and architecture review, and future implementation planning, and noted that multiple agency requests may still come back to the legislature in the next session. The committee also discussed a revised cybersecurity incident notification concept. Staff explained that the earlier bill had raised stakeholder concerns, so the co-chairs directed further interim work with the Oregon Cybersecurity Advisory Council and other local government and K-12 stakeholders. The goal is a narrower, voluntary “911-style” notification process that would let public bodies alert peers and potentially receive assistance after cyber incidents; a temporary voluntary process is being tested now, with a work group developing language for possible 2027 consideration. Finally, the committee heard updates from the new state chief data officer on data governance, data sharing, geospatial work, and the state transparency website, followed by a briefing on data centers from NCSL and the Technology Association of Oregon. The data officer described efforts to expand data inventories, data governance plans, data literacy, and interagency sharing, along with statewide aerial imagery, geospatial standards, and the open data portal. The data center discussion focused on national and state trends, including rapid growth in data centers, rising electricity and water demand, and legislative responses such as new rate classes, reporting requirements, and cost-allocation rules to protect ratepayers. No votes were taken; the meeting was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• railing against a balanced budget amendment?
• I'm for a balanced budget amendment. Sign me up. I've co-sponsored it.
• in the Constitution that says we must balance the budget?
• no I'm not I'm for a balanced amendment no I'm not I'm for a balanced budget budget budget amendment
• that<08:12:39.878> says amendment in the Constitution that says amendment in the Constitution

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Wednesday, January 15, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Foote has decided that the Senate's role of confirmation hearings isn't important, that the Constitution
• , Of confirmation hearings isn't important, that the constitutional duty of the Senate to conduct these
• Johnston, thank you for having the respect for the Constitution and the forthrightness to actually be
• Supreme Court ruled that this law violated the First Amendment.
• Salazar case, the First Amendment prohibits the government from requiring gender-affirming...

Summary: The Committee on Director Nominations met with four members present and approved the prior minutes without objection. Chair Jay Kaufman outlined the committee’s role in reviewing executive nominations and explained the hearing process for three nominees: Mary Foote for the Office of Economic Opportunity, Debbie Johnston for the Department of Health Services, and Chuck Bassett. Foote did not appear for her hearing, and members discussed her absence and alleged omissions in her disclosure materials, including prior service with Planned Parenthood-related organizations. The committee then moved to reject her nomination, and the motion passed 3-2, recommending that the full Senate reject Mary Foote. Debbie Johnston, nominee to lead the Department of Health Services, appeared and gave an opening statement describing her Arizona background, prior Senate staff work, and more than 20 years with the Arizona Hospital and Health Care Association. She said her priorities at ADHS include rebuilding trust in public health licensing, improving stakeholder engagement, standardizing rulemaking communication, addressing alleged religious discrimination and retaliation concerns in licensing, and using technology and AI to improve efficiency. In questioning, senators pressed her on her management style, conflict-of-interest safeguards given her prior industry role, enforcement priorities, budget pressures, behavioral health and assisted living oversight, and the department’s response to COVID-19. Johnston said she would follow statutes, recuse herself from enforcement matters involving former contacts, and resign if directed to carry out an unlawful policy. She also said the department does not regulate therapy itself, only facilities, and that it would rely on legal counsel regarding the governor’s conversion-therapy executive order and related federal civil-rights allegations. Several senators focused on public health trust and the department’s pandemic response, with Johnston acknowledging concerns about closures, data collection, and communication during COVID-19 while saying she would review past after-action materials and be better prepared in the future. Public testimony from stakeholders in aging services and health care strongly supported her confirmation, praising her accessibility, responsiveness, and collaborative approach. After testimony, the vice chair moved to recommend Johnston’s confirmation to the full Senate. The roll call was underway when the transcript ended, with several members voting aye and one member expressing reservations about her not reviewing the pandemic after-action report before another crisis occurs.

Transcript Highlights:

• the legislature on each petition filed in advance of the deadline listed in Article 48 of the Constitution
• Article 48 of the amendments to the Constitution of the Commonwealth authorizes voters to propose an
• initiative petition for a new law or an initiative petition for a constitutional amendment.
• Following this process required by Article 48 of the Constitution, there is an additional signature-gathering

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-10, House Bill 5002, titled “An Act to Restore a Sensible Marijuana Policy,” which would repeal Massachusetts’ adult-use cannabis legalization framework. Chairs Brendan Crighton and Kate Hogan outlined the Article 48 initiative process and explained that the committee is gathering testimony for a report to the legislature. The hearing was organized into expert, proponent, opponent, and public testimony, with written testimony accepted through March 27. The first witness, Jessica Trow of MassBudget, testified in opposition to repeal and focused on cannabis-related revenue and social equity. She said legalization has generated nearly $2 billion statewide since adult-use sales began, with revenue flowing through the Marijuana Regulation Fund, the state sales tax, and local taxes and fees. She emphasized that funds support public health, the Cannabis Control Commission’s social equity work, the Cannabis Social Equity Fund, and municipal budgets, and argued that legalization has created pathways for communities harmed by prohibition. The petition’s spokesperson, Wendy Wakeman, argued in favor of repeal, saying legalization has worsened public health, safety, and quality of life, citing higher potency, addiction, youth use, impaired driving, workplace positives, and black-market concerns. Committee members questioned her about the data sources, the will of the voters, the role of paid signature gatherers, and the petition’s funding, including out-of-state and dark-money concerns. Opponents of the initiative then testified that repeal would harm a regulated industry that has created jobs, tax revenue, and social equity opportunities. Caroline Pino of STEM, Kristen Rogers of Levia, Judith Ledbetter of Project De-Stigmatized Healthcare, and Armani White of Firehouse Dispensary/EON described their businesses, community investments, and personal reliance on cannabis, and warned that repeal would push consumers back to the illicit market and undermine equity programs. In public testimony, Lucas Thayer of the Massachusetts Cannabis Reform Coalition and Jeff Rawson, a chemist and consumer protection advocate, also opposed the measure, arguing that regulated cannabis is safer than unregulated products and that repeal would damage investments and public safety. The hearing ended after the public testimony, and the committee voted to close the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• I know it's nothing extraordinary to see a lot of amendments in a floor session like today's.
• I do think we added an amendment today to the elections bill that talked about this issue.
• ><00:11:55.320> abide<00:11:55.600> by<00:11:55.720> the<00:11:55.800> Constitution
• <00:11:56.520> and<00:11:56.680> a that we abide by the Constitution and a that we
• abide by the Constitution and a president<00:11:57.160> should<00:11:57.360> only<00:11

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: Senate leaders said they were in the final weeks of session, moving long days of floor and finance work focused on priorities they described as affecting Minnesotans’ cost of living, safety, and security. They said next week would bring major packages to the floor, including public safety, health and human services, Metro Surge, and a gun violence package, while negotiations continued with House leaders and the administration. They also highlighted a human services bill from Sen. John Hoffman as the final item completed that day. A major topic was the Senate’s response to H.R. 1, which leaders said would require about $1 billion in state budget adjustments to avoid federal penalties and Medicaid losses. They said the proposal would address federal compliance issues, support hospitals such as HCMC and other distressed providers through uncompensated care funding, and include food support for SNAP-related needs, food shelves, food grants, and prepared food. They also emphasized system modernization, especially IT upgrades, as both an implementation and anti-fraud measure. Leaders said several items appeared to have bipartisan support, including HCMC relief, the Office of the Inspector General, bonding, and IT modernization. They said they were arranging a meeting with House and Senate leaders and the governor to work through bonding differences, but noted that IT modernization and HCMC were unlikely to be financed through general obligation bonds this year. They also said the Senate would take up a bill on prediction markets after Sen. Klein’s recent platform suspension, describing the issue as a violation of platform rules and saying the chamber may need updated rules or statutes. In response to a question about an elections bill provision, they said the measure reaffirmed that a president should serve only two terms and that the language had moved through the normal committee process.

Transcript Highlights:

• to that amendment.
• So we did it as an amendment to the amendment.
• to the amendment is a is this amendment to the amendment is a is a<00:07:14.880> fiscal<00:07
• So we did it as an amendment to the amendment.
• for this amendment. for this amendment.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The Permanent University Fund is a constitutional fund.
• And the Constitution... Created.
• And the Constitution requires that that fund, that land was put into that fund.
• reclamation amendments.
• Yeah, but that's how the constitutional amendment was written, yes.

Summary: The committee heard testimony first from the Texas General Land Office and School Land Board. GLO officials described the agency’s role in managing more than 13 million acres of state lands and mineral interests for the Permanent School Fund, overseeing the Alamo, coastal programs, veterans’ services, and federal disaster recovery. They said the agency has generated about $6 billion for the Permanent School Fund since Commissioner Buckingham took office, and that its disaster recovery portfolio is about $14 billion across multiple events, with more than 22,000 housing units rebuilt or reconstructed since Hurricane Harvey. Members asked about land purchases such as Brewster Ranch, rare earth mineral leasing, SpaceX-related beach access, and whether the lands are public access lands; GLO staff said the holdings are managed to maximize revenue for education, that most land is leased rather than open to public access, and that they are coordinating on coastal access and compliance. On the School Land Board, members sought clarification on the difference between GLO-managed lands and the Permanent School Fund Corporation’s investment role, and staff explained that GLO generates the revenue while the separate corporation invests it. No votes or formal actions were taken. The Board for Lease of University Lands then testified. University Lands officials explained that they steward 2.1 million acres of surface and mineral interests in West Texas for the Permanent University Fund, which supports UT and Texas A&M institutions. They said a 2025 lease sale produced about $50 million in bonus revenue from 28,000 acres, and described the Board for Lease’s role in approving lease forms, lease sales, and development agreements. Members asked about the size and use of the PUF, how distributions work through UTIMCO, whether PUF money can be used for athletics, and how the land is managed; the witness said the fund is a constitutional endowment, the land is largely leased rather than sold, and distributions are generally used for buildings, labs, and other permanent structures, with some institutions also using a portion for operations. No votes or formal actions were taken. The committee then took up municipal utility districts. Testimony from a law firm, the Texas Municipal League, Fort Bend County Commissioner Vincent Morales, and Johnson Development largely supported MUDs as a financing tool for infrastructure tied to growth. Witnesses said MUDs help fund water, sewer, drainage, roads, parks, and related infrastructure, allowing development to proceed without shifting costs to existing taxpayers and helping keep housing affordable. They emphasized that MUDs are created with disclosure to homebuyers, are subject to the Open Meetings Act and Public Information Act, and are overseen by TCEQ for bond issuance and related financial stress tests. Members questioned whether MUDs are taxing entities, whether they can be created inside city limits or ETJs, how much control cities and counties retain, and whether MUDs are becoming permanent local governments; witnesses acknowledged they levy taxes and debt, can exist within city limits with city consent, and often function as long-term local entities. The committee did not take any formal action during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have a quorum; you're duly constituted to conduct business.
• Amendment 2 was specifically worded about the use of state general funds.
• Um, subsection 5 of this statute has a waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity.
• Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution confers the taxing power to Congress
• Constitution Constitution contains<00:43:11.119> a<00:43:11.760> supremacy<00:43:12.400

Keywords: Call to Order and Roll Call: 0:03 Bills for Consideration: 3:10 Adjournment: 56:19, 958, all

Summary: The Senate Education Committee heard House Bill 1, which would have Kentucky opt into a federal education freedom tax credit program allowing donations to scholarship-granting organizations (SGOs) for K-12 educational expenses. The bill sponsors said it would not use Kentucky general funds, would be administered through the Secretary of State, and would let donors claim up to a $1,700 federal tax credit for contributions to SGOs. They argued the program could support public, private, religious, and homeschool-related educational needs, including tutoring, transportation, technology, special needs services, and other school expenses. Several senators raised concerns about whether the bill would favor larger districts with more school-choice options over rural counties with only one public school, creating a two-tier system. The sponsors responded that public school districts could also create SGOs and that the federal rules limit eligibility to families at or below 300% of area median gross income. They also said the program would not reduce existing state or federal school funding, but would instead redirect federal tax credit dollars that Kentucky donors might otherwise send to other states or back to the federal government. Members asked about the structure and oversight of SGOs, including whether they must be nonprofits, how broad their missions could be, and whether funds could be earmarked for specific purposes. The sponsors said SGOs must be certified, serve at least two schools and 10 students, spend at least 90% of receipts on scholarships, and cannot be directed to a specific student, though they can be targeted to categories such as elementary students or special needs services. They also said homeschool families would need to organize through a co-op or existing approved SGO. No vote was taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• We appreciate the amendments that were taken last month.
• And I know some of the amendments may lend to that, but how do you...
• The motion is do pass as amended to Judiciary. Current vote is 5 to 0.
• The motion is do pass as amended to Judiciary. The current vote is 5 to 1.
• The motion is do pass as amended to Judiciary.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The title amendment is adopted.
• The resolution would place a constitutional amendment on the ballot.
• I think it's important to realize this is going to be a constitutional amendment that people have to
• House Joint Resolution 42 as amended will be reported. Questions on the title amendment?
• Chairman, I move adoption of the amendment. Questions on adoption of the amendment.

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee met with a quorum present and first approved the minutes from the prior meeting. It then reconsidered Committee Substitute for House Bill 5212, noting that an Education Committee amendment had been inadvertently omitted the day before; the vice chairman withdrew the prior motion to report the bill, and the committee returned to the bill with the technical Education Committee amendments pending. The transcript then moved through a long agenda of bills and supplemental appropriations, with the committee generally hearing brief explanations from counsel, occasional member questions, and then voting to adopt amendments and report measures to the full Senate. Among the substantive policy bills, the committee advanced House Bill 4007 on the Industrial Access Road Fund, allowing an additional possible $3 million transfer in a fiscal year, expanding eligible uses, and increasing county/municipal spending limits; House Bill 4765, which raises salaries for state police, teachers, and school service personnel and, via a strike-and-insert amendment, creates a market pay enhancement tied to county and regional income data; House Bill 5162, recodifying tax lien sale procedures and clarifying ownership and government-property tax treatment; House Bill 5382, extending the Neighborhood Investment Tax Credit Program to July 1, 2031; House Bill 5685, authorizing up to $150 million in revenue bonds backed by excess lottery funds for State Culture Center improvements; House Joint Resolution 42, placing a constitutional amendment on the ballot to raise the homestead exemption from $20,000 to $40,000; House Bill 4010, creating an airport hangar grant program and fund; House Bill 4404, increasing from $500 to $5,000 the amount volunteer fire departments may spend on training and fire prevention materials; House Bill 4592, requiring standardized campus safety mapping data for higher education institutions; House Bill 4784, extending and making retroactive a qualified opportunity zone business tax modification; and House Bill 5088, increasing retirement benefits for Division of Natural Resources police officers, with a one-time $4.25 million cash injection. The committee also reported several supplemental appropriations and originating bills, including Senate Bill 842 for the Spay Neuter Assistance Fund, Senate Bill 846 for Culture and History capital repairs, Senate Bill 872 for Natural Resources capital repairs (reduced to $10 million in committee substitute), Senate Bill 876 for Department of Health facilities, Senate Originating Bills 1 through 5 covering Culture and History, road funds, corrections IT and services, tobacco education, and the Adjutant General’s armory board transfer, respectively. Most items were adopted by voice vote; House Bill 4765’s strike-and-insert amendment was adopted after a division vote of 10-6. The committee then adjourned.