Transcript Highlights:

• "Appreciate you're accommodating me. Thank you." "Okay. Thank you.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I can accommodate you.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• bodies to consider certain factors such as public safety, transportation, availability of hotel accommodations

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So when you get into the budget, those savings are accommodated.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• physically disabled first responders with amputations to continue service if certified without accommodations

Summary: The committee met and first reported favorably CS for SB 1782, which creates a new offense for dangerous excessive speeding, with support noted from the Orange County Sheriff’s Office and the Florida PBA. It also reported favorably CS for SB 306, which addresses Medicaid managed care provider network access by requiring after-hours and holiday appointment availability and a minimum level of primary care participation. CS for SB 716, imposing mandatory minimum sentences for certain sexual offenses committed by registered sex offenders or predators, and CS for SB 1084, expanding protections against non-consensual dissemination of intimate images and digitally forged intimate images, were also approved. The committee then approved CS for CS for SB 1604, a corrections package that would require prepayment of court costs for certain inmate lawsuits, shorten the limitations period for confinement-condition claims, allow consecutive sentencing in some cases, and revise mental health treatment procedures in correctional settings. Members discussed constitutional concerns and access-to-courts issues, but the bill was reported favorably. CS for CS for SB 1804, which creates a capital offense for trafficking a child 12 or younger or a mentally incapacitated person for sexual exploitation, drew extensive debate and opposition from the Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, and Floridaans for Alternatives to the Death Penalty; despite objections about constitutionality and ethics, it was reported favorably. The committee also approved CS for SB 1838, expanding protections for court officials against tampering, harassment, and retaliation, and CS for CS for SB 890, the Emily Adkins Family Protection Act, which creates a statewide VTE registry and requires blood clot screening and training in hospitals and care facilities. Members and public witnesses spoke in strong support of the blood clot bill, including family members and survivors. Finally, the committee reported favorably CS for SB 1252, directing FDLE to study a statewide pawn data database, CS for SB 468, increasing penalties for fleeing or eluding law enforcement and allowing vehicle impoundment, CS for SB 490, expanding off-duty concealed carry eligibility for correctional officers and correctional probation officers, and CS for SB 572, the Pam Rock Act on dangerous dogs, which was amended to refine enclosure, confiscation, euthanasia, and insurance requirements.

Transcript Highlights:

• overreached, if there are industries that are significantly impacted and we can alter our policies to accommodate

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• These building codes effectively prevent the use of natural gas and require expensive equipment to accommodate
• These building codes effectively prevent the use of natural gas and require expensive equipment to accommodate

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Wednesday, February 25, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• have a site on the Heights which we were considering expanding, doubling our space in order to accommodate
• have a site on the Heights which we were considering expanding, doubling our space in order to accommodate

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: House Finance Division 3 met in work session and opened with procedural remarks from the chair about the committee’s schedule, deadlines, and recommendation options, noting the meeting was advisory and no votes were expected. The first bill discussed, House Bill 1569, concerned repealing the directive to sell the Anna Philbrook Center for Children property in Concord. Testimony from DHHS and New Hampshire Hospital focused on whether the property could be subdivided, the relationship to Senate Bill 572, the status of the city of Concord’s first right of refusal, and the practical effects of a sale. Witnesses said the $5 million sale estimate was a budget assumption, that moving staff and equipment would create some relocation costs, and that the center had required significant recent maintenance and renovation spending. Members also discussed the number of transitional housing beds at the site, the temporary nature of those beds, and whether the property should remain available given hospital workforce and service needs. The committee then turned to House Bill 661, which had been recommitted for further review after new information emerged. The chair summarized federal developments, including a December 2025 ACF letter and a related executive order, as well as a federal HHS press release about states diverting foster youths’ Social Security survivor benefits. Representative Walner explained that amendment 3055H had been drafted to move the bill forward in smaller steps, with a fiscal note requested on the amendment because the original bill was viewed as too large and expensive. Members discussed whether the committee had received copies of the amendment and whether federal guidance or funding had changed the policy landscape. The discussion also included broader questions about foster youth benefits and whether federal action would support state implementation. One member cited ACF language stating that only 11 states had enacted policies to stop interception of survivor benefits and that technical assistance would be available to the remaining states. The meeting remained in work-session mode throughout, with no votes taken and no final recommendations made during the portion provided. The chair indicated the committee could return to the bills later in the month.

Transcript Highlights:

• She said this is an easily addressable issue to accommodate the needs of a state with a different perspective
• She said the issue is just something she feels is easily addressable to accommodate the needs of a state

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The discussion focused on a cannabis legalization/regulation bill and whether it should be retained for further study or moved forward. Members debated the fiscal impact, with one side emphasizing that the bill would cost about $7.1 million in the first two years before generating revenue, while supporters argued the House should make a statement in favor of legalization despite likely opposition from the Senate and governor. There was also disagreement over strategy: some said retaining the bill until closer to the next election would give the issue more visibility, while others said delaying would only avoid sending a bill the Senate was unlikely to take up anyway. A major point of contention was whether cannabis should be regulated by a new cannabis commission or placed under the Liquor Commission. Supporters of the Liquor Commission argued it already has enforcement infrastructure, especially for age restrictions, and could handle cannabis more efficiently without creating a new bureaucracy. Opponents said cannabis is a different industry that would require specialized expertise, and they objected to expanding the Liquor Commission, which they described as unpopular and costly. The committee also discussed past versions of the bill, including concerns about limited licenses and the perception that the earlier approach favored large businesses. Members reviewed specific provisions such as licensing fees, THC limits, and cultivation categories. One member noted a $10,000 fee for retail cannabis stores and cannabis product manufacturers authorized to perform extractions, while a smaller tier-one cultivator fee was described as a lower-cost option for small growers. There was also discussion of whether the bill would allow sales through general retail outlets or only dedicated cannabis stores, and whether plants and seeds were covered. No final vote or action was clearly recorded in the excerpt, but the main procedural question was whether to retain the bill for more work or advance it as written.

Transcript Highlights:

• During conversations with the agency, we addressed the need for better financial planning to accommodate
• During conversations with the agency, we also discussed the need for better financial planning to accommodate

Bills: SB 1

Keywords: campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The ground has to accommodate the now eight families.

Bills: SB6, SB30, SB13, SB2878, SB2501, SB66, SB268, SB331, SB618, SB414, SB1394, SB2425, SB898, SB993, SB442, SB735, SB784, SB2538, SB1919, SB1013, SB2215, SB2322, SB626, SB570, SB747, SB2183, SB673, SB1015, SB1447, SB1370, SB1784, SB1897, SB2873, SB2891, SB2933, SB2540, SB2681, SB2695, SB1965, SB2203, SB872, SB875, SB1030, SB1277, SB1730, SB1681, SB1152, SB2969, SB2747, SB2705, SB2541, SB1708, SB2080, SB2721, SB1986, SB2392, SB2539, SB2857, SB2799, SB2785, SB2782, SB1531, SB1927, SB1263, SB1098, SB835, SB3070, SB22, SJR27, SB25, SB7, SB552, SB1612, SJR87, SJR1, SB6, SB30, SB13, SB2878, SB57, SB127, SB293, SB441, SB3059, SB512, SB241, SB1718, SB140, SB2055, SB2075, SB2018, SB1534, SB1567, SB785, SB1233, SB1580, SB1663, SB413, SB447, SB519, SB467, SB1579, SB1191, SB1021, SB1838, SB2807, SB2835, SB546, SB2121, SB2167, SB2035, SB2024, SB1032, SB1049, SB1266, SB1400, SB1302, SB401, SB1596, SB1281, SB1242, SB1343, SB310, SB1346, SB2753, SB2703, SB2221, SB1719, SB2177, SB800, SB790, SB748, SB571, SB1957, SB1923, SB1896, SB1760, SB1335, SB2368, SB2477, SB2587, SB2972, SB2986, SB2965, SB1563, SB1467, SB1164, SB1137, SB614, SB705, SB961, SB918, SB955, SB869, SB850, SB863, SB1610, SB1055, SB2206, SB457, SB2337, SB1362, SB926, SB1494, SB251, SB456, SB500, SB1307, SB2615, SB2995, SB2321, SB973, SB974, SB865, SB506, SB781, SB1522, SB1558, SB510, SB667, SB763, SB2073, SB1858, SB1660, SB505, SB2900, SB1433, SB1540, SB1964, SB1300, SB1644, SB2217, SB2373, SB2431, SB1758, SB2480, SB3039, SB3047, SB3073, SB2920, SB2781, SB826, SB766, SB2460, SB527, SB1946, SB2885, SB1243, SB2610, SB2595, SB857, SB2501, SB66, SB268, SB331, SB618, SB414, SB1394, SB2425, SB898, SB993, SB442, SB735, SB784, SB2538, SB1919, SB1013, SB2215, SB2322, SB626, SB570, SB747, SB2183, SB673, SB1015, SB1447, SB1370, SB1784, SB1897, SB2873, SB2891, SB2933, SB2540, SB2681, SB2695, SB1965, SB2203, SB872, SB875, SB1030, SB1277, SB1730, SB1681, SB1152, SB2969, SB2747, SB2705, SB2541, SB1708, SB2080, SB2721, SB1986, SB2392, SB2539, SB2857, SB2799, SB2785, SB2782, SB1531, SB1927, SB1263, SB1098, SCR9, HB5560, HB762, HB 107, HB 114, HB138, HB4386, HB2495, HB581, HB3348, HB5323, HB1584, HB4341, HB6, HB171, HB143, HB449, HB3486, HB4263, HB5246, HB2, HB2011, SB17, SB21

Keywords: electric power, interconnection, utilities, ERCOT, large load customers, water supply, sewer service, demand management, school libraries, library advisory councils, parental rights, library materials, educational content, challenging materials, judicial branch, court security, expunction, pretrial intervention, youth diversion, record retention

Bills: SCR22, SB53, SB204, SB266, SB268, SB291, SB292, SB296, SB304, SB305, SB413, SB447, SB455, SB462, SB493, SB504, SB519, SB522, SB532, SB541, SB667, SB670, SB673, SB681, SB687, SB711, SB746, SB765, SB783, SB827, SB850, SB860, SB888, SB897, SB901, SB927, SB955, SB963, SB984, SB989, SB993, SB996, SB1023, SB1033, SB1058, SB1062, SB1101, SB1119, SB1172, SB1173, SB1215, SB1220, SB1227, SB1228, SB1229, SB1238, SB1239, SB1245, SB1248, SB1254, SB1259, SB1273, SB1277, SB1302, SB1332, SB1341, SB1346, SB1350, SB1352, SB1353, SB1355, SB1358, SB1370, SB1371, SB1378, SB1403, SB1404, SB1415, SB1437, SB1448, SB1450, SB1464, SB1493, SB1494, SB1537, SB1566, SB1569, SB1589, SB1598, SB1644, SB1709, SB1719, SB1729, SB1733, SB1744, SB1772, SB1810, SB1841, SB1895, SB1930, SB2039, SB2289, SB2312, SCR1, SCR6, SCR27, SCR32, SB2232

Keywords: SCR 22, Senate Concurrent Resolution 22, official state gun, state symbol, cannon, artillery, Texas Revolution, Battle of Gonzales, Come and Take It, Alamo, San Jacinto, Twin Sisters, Sam Houston, Angelina Eberly, Texas history, historic weapon, commemorative resolution, state emblem, Texas heritage, Gonzales Memorial Museum

Bills: SJR 18, SCR 5, SCR 13, SCR 25, SB 3, SB 6, SB 10, SB 11, SB 12, SB 13, SB 15, SB 17, SB 18, SB 35, SB 388, SB 412, SB 441, SB 495, SB 666, SB 687, SB 706, SB 740, SB 815, SB 842, SB 917, SB 925, SB 995, SB 1006, SB 1281, SB 1300, SB 1379, SB 1451, SB 1902, SJR 36, SJR 18, SJR 12, SCR 13, SCR 25, SCR 5, SCR 22, SB 565, SB 372, SB 495, SB 842, SB 765, SB 62, SB 19, SB 18, SB 666, SB 707, SB 888, SB 687, SB 706, SB 847, SB 290, SB 11, SB 10, SB 13, SB 412, SB 441, SB 1248, SB 740, SB 14, SB 1006, SB 504, SB 917, SB 925, SB 388, SB 1902, SB 1121, SB 995, SB 857, SB 305, SB 296, SB 284, SB 35, SB 6, SB 815, SB 3, SB 1281, SB 1379, SB 1300, SB 1497, SB 1499, SB 1498, SB 1451, SB 1061, SB 15, SB 65, SB 241, SB 304, SB 402, SB 499, SB 621, SB 974, SB 1023, SB 1024, SB 1025, SB 1106, SB 686, SB 112, SB 371, SB 204, SB 400, SB 609, SB 1447, SB 670, SB 502, SB 427, SB 850, SB 854, SB 413, SB 1555, SB 1362, SB 1346, SB 1033, SB 1220, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 987, SB 1539, SB 893, SB 447, SB 875, SB 406, SB 509, SB 985, SB 965, SB 17, SB 1119, SB 1505, SB 12, SB 24, SB 57, SB 1194, SB 1253, SB 1215, SB 1532, SB 1268, SCR 12, SCR 24, SB 1302, SB 856, SB 650, SB 583, SB 673, SB 840, SJR 18, SB 11, SB 441, SB 10, SB 18, SB 412, SB 495, SR 238, SR 264, SR 266, SR 267, SR 268, SR 270, SR 271, SR 272, SR 278, SB 1169, SB 1169

Keywords: capital gains, taxation, constitutional amendment, state revenue, individual investment, SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame, football coach, school facility naming

Bills: SJR18, SCR5, SCR13, SCR25, SB3, SB6, SB10, SB11, SB12, SB13, SB15, SB17, SB18, SB35, SB388, SB412, SB441, SB495, SB666, SB687, SB706, SB740, SB815, SB842, SB917, SB925, SB995, SB1006, SB1281, SB1300, SB1379, SB1451, SB1902, SJR36, SJR18, SJR12, SCR13, SCR25, SCR5, SCR22, SB565, SB372, SB495, SB842, SB765, SB62, SB19, SB18, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB706, SB847, SB290, SB11, SB10, SB13, SB412, SB441, SB1248, SB740, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB917, SB925, SB388, SB1902, SB1121, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB35, SB6, SB815, SB3, SB1281, SB1379, SB1300, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB1451, SB1061, SB15, SB65, SB241, SB304, SB402, SB499, SB621, SB974, SB1023, SB1024, SB1025, SB1106, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB400, SB609, SB1447, SB670, SB502, SB427, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1555, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB893, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB509, SB985, SB965, SB17, SB1119, SB1505, SB12, SB24, SB57, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1268, SCR12, SCR24, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB840

Keywords: capital gains, taxation, constitutional amendment, state revenue, individual investment, SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame, football coach, school facility naming

Transcript Highlights:

• So you purchase a policy if your surrogate does not have insurance that accommodates that.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So it'll be crucial that going forward we lock in both the revenue streams that are able to accommodate

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, that’s how we’re, you know, streamlining permitting to the extent that we do to accommodate those

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House returned to Senate Bill 325 on regional planning and Act 250 tier jurisdiction and first took up Representative Charlton’s amendment to extend the interim housing exemptions in tier one areas from 2028 to 2030. Charlton argued the change would better align the exemptions with the state’s 2030 housing targets and give rural communities and smaller developers more realistic time to plan and build. Committee members opposing the amendment said the exemptions would no longer be needed once 1A and 1B areas are established, and Ways and Means reported an unfavorable straw poll. After debate, the House rejected the amendment by roll call, 66-76. During debate, members discussed whether the extension would help or hinder housing production, with supporters emphasizing rural Vermont, achievable timelines, and the need for certainty for developers, while opponents stressed that the temporary exemptions were meant to bridge the transition to the new tier system. The House also heard questions about whether any communities had actually adopted 1A or 1B status yet, and it was noted that future land use maps were not yet complete. The chamber then moved to a second amendment from Representative Dobervich, which would extend certain interim Act 250 exemptions for designated village centers and nearby areas through January 1, 2031, including projects of 50 units or fewer or mixed-income/mixed-use projects meeting specified infrastructure criteria, with municipal bodies able to opt out. Dobervich said the proposal would expand access to the interim exemptions for rural communities that lack permanent zoning or subdivision bylaws but otherwise meet the criteria, helping more towns build housing in already developed areas. Opponents argued the amendment could allow too much development in small towns without local review and questioned how many municipalities would actually qualify. The debate continued with members discussing the relationship between Act 181, the temporary exemptions, and the ongoing work to create future land use maps and tier designations.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are certainly exploring any sort of options we have to provide Spanish language accommodations to

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• A small addition of about 50 square feet will accommodate a walkway between the existing and new filter

Bills: HF4680, HF4047, HF4590, HF3757, HF3569, HF4507, HF4426, HF4927, HF4788, HF4757, HF4747, HF3561, HF4014, HF4013, HF4689, HF4766, HF4589

Keywords: wastewater treatment, improvements, capital investment, Greenfield, bonds, water treatment, infrastructure, municipal funding, state bonds, public utilities, HF4590, Tamarack, municipal infrastructure, bonding bill, general obligation bonds, Public Facilities Authority, sewer system, collection system, street reconstruction, local infrastructure

Transcript Highlights:

• If you need seating accommodations, please alert the sergeant staff wearing gold ties.

Bills: HF4077, HF3809, HF3639, HF4478, HF3363, HF3874

Keywords: municipal nondisclosure agreement, NDA, public records, transparency, local government, county, city, town, school district, housing and redevelopment authority, economic development authority, port authority, economic development, land development, public financing, tax increment financing, TIF, abatement, municipal bonds, debt obligations

Summary: The Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee approved the minutes from March 25 and March 26, then took up House File 4077, a bipartisan bill authored by Representatives Greenman and Roach. The bill would prohibit municipalities from entering into non-disclosure agreements with private entities that restrict disclosure about land development, economic development, or publicly funded projects, while preserving existing Chapter 13 data practices rules and trade secret protections. The authors argued the bill is needed to prevent secret agreements and backroom decision-making that undermine public transparency, and they moved that the bill be re-referred to the general register. Several local officials and residents testified in support, including a St. Louis County commissioner, the mayor of Lonsdale, and residents from Farmington and Hermantown. Supporters said NDAs had been used in connection with data center and other development projects to keep elected officials and the public in the dark, eroding trust and limiting community input. They described the bill as a common-sense transparency measure and said existing law already protects legitimate trade secrets. Opposition came from the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce and the Minnesota Business Partnership, which argued that NDAs are often necessary in early-stage economic development discussions to protect sensitive business information and remain competitive with other states. They warned the bill could discourage investment, jobs, and tax growth, and said it would impose a one-size-fits-all state mandate that limits local discretion. Committee members then debated whether the bill was too broad and whether it should be narrowed to data centers; supporters responded that the issue extends beyond data centers to other forms of economic development. A roll call vote was requested on the motion to re-refer the bill to the general register, but the final vote result was not stated in the transcript excerpt.