Transcript Highlights:

• <00:07:35.280> check it's the state does the background check it's the state does the background
• Since then, those background checks had been limited to a state background check because the FBI would
• Um once this was background check.
• limited to a state background check been limited to a state background check because<00:20:41.520>
• check goes. how the actual background check gets how the actual background check gets conducted.<00:

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 302, which would update New Hampshire’s solid waste facility background-check law so the state can continue to access federal FBI criminal databases for checks on key owners and officers. Senator Howard Pearl and DES Waste Management Director Mike Whimsatt said the bill is the third attempt to correct prior drafting problems that prevented the FBI from accepting the language. They explained that the existing statute has long required background checks for hazardous and solid waste facility applicants because of concerns about organized crime, but the current wording is too ambiguous for federal use. The bill also includes technical corrections, clarifies which company officers must be checked, specifies which DES officials receive the results, and removes the Department of Justice as an unnecessary middleman. Committee members asked about the purpose of the bill, whether family members are covered, who pays the cost, and whether permits have ever been denied; Whimsatt said the applicant still pays, the checks focus on key officers, and at least one permit had been denied in the past due to a felony conviction. The hearing then closed, with one person listed in favor on the blue sheet and no opposition noted online. The committee then opened Senate Bill 229, which would allow retailers to sell uninspected bison, red deer, and elk meat and remove the sunset on the existing program. Senator Pearl said the bill would expand market opportunities for farmers while keeping labeling and traceability requirements in place, including identifying the meat as uninspected and maintaining records of the source farms. Representative Bixby, who had worked on earlier legislation, explained the current framework in detail: the animals are raised on closed farms, must be fenced, cannot be newly imported, and are subject to annual veterinary herd inspections and recordkeeping. He said the prior bison inspection regime was too burdensome for farmers to maintain, and the current law was intended as a workable compromise. Questions from members focused on how many farms participate, how many animals have been sold, and whether the program posed disease risks; the witness said he did not know the exact numbers, and Bixby said the existing import and fencing rules help prevent chronic wasting disease from entering the state. No vote was taken during the hearing, and the bill was left before the committee for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• Background checks are not required.
• This law does not require background checks.
• Why is a criminal background check for tenant organizing necessary?
• So, do you want them to go through another background check to be tenant organizers?
• Have a background check when they're coming in. It's just as simple as that.

Transcript Highlights:

• criminal history background checks as appropriate and shall develop eligibility criteria for interns
• checks as appropriate history background checks as appropriate so<00:05:42.840> that<00:05:43.039
• conduct criminal history background conduct criminal history background checks<00:05:48.919>
• checks as appropriate,' what you're saying is not everybody needs to have this heavy-duty background
• checks as appropriate,' what you're saying is not everybody needs to have this heavy-duty background

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Library and Technology Committee met on March 14, 2025, to hear House Bill 430, House Draft 2, which would create an internship/on-the-job training program administered by the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations, with the state serving as the responsible employer for workers’ compensation coverage and appropriations included. Testimony was uniformly supportive from the State Council on Developmental Disabilities, the University of Hawaii, the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations, and the Department of Education. Supporters emphasized the value of internships as a high-impact educational and career pathway opportunity. The Department of the Attorney General supported the bill’s intent but raised a concern about the criminal history background check language, recommending that the bill be revised so DLIR may conduct checks “as appropriate” rather than requiring a mandatory check for all interns. The AG noted that juvenile records would remain confidential for 16- and 17-year-old interns under existing law and suggested deleting the more specific background-check language or replacing it with the more flexible wording. Several organizations submitted support, including business, health care, tourism, and industry groups. During decision-making, the committee discussed amendments incorporating the Attorney General’s recommendation, adding a 2.5 GPA minimum reference, and clarifying language about private or public sector organizations and placement of interns in state executive branch departments, agencies, or programs. The committee adopted the recommendation to pass the bill with amendments, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• background criminal history back checks background criminal history back checks for<05:44:09.280
• to a background check but if you're to a background check but if you're Contracting<05:58:11.878
• a criminal background check and I'll go a criminal background check and I'll go a<05:58:27.478><
• <06:00:20.000> check through a criminal background check through a criminal background check
• <06:09:21.600> checks background checks background checks done<06:09:24.638> representative

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first addressed House Bill 415, which would remove the requirement that schools provide menstrual products. Members supporting an ITL said the mandate was unfunded, had been in place since 2019, and was already working without complaints from districts. Other members opposed the bill, arguing menstrual products are essential and that the requirement helps students, especially those with fewer resources. The committee voted ITL on HB 415 by a roll call of 17 yeas, 0 nays. The committee then took up House Bill 388, concerning public reports on special education. Supporters of ITL said they agreed with the goal of transparency but were concerned about student privacy, especially in small districts, and thought the bill’s information requests went too far. They noted that related issues could potentially be addressed in another bill, HB 557. The committee voted ITL on HB 388, 17-0. House Bill 730, which would require schools and some colleges to provide information on adoption, was also moved ITL. The sponsor said adoption is personally important to him but that the bill was not the right vehicle and involved entities such as colleges and the Attorney General unnecessarily; he said related ideas might be folded into other bills later. The committee agreed and voted ITL, 17-0. The committee then discussed House Bill 671, a preschool/early literacy proposal involving a statewide nonprofit digital program, likely Waterford. Members raised questions about who would be covered, data privacy, prior use of federal ESSER funds, whether the program had measurable results, and whether the bill’s nonprofit requirement was too restrictive. Department of Education witness Melissa White said the state had spent $400,000 in FY22 and $600,000 in FY23 on a Waterford contract using ARP ESSER funds, but she did not have participant counts and said the department could not measure literacy gains for that population. She also said the bill’s funding level would likely require an RFP and that, if enacted as written, the program would probably still be Waterford-based. The discussion continued without a final vote in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• background check for whoever we're background check for whoever we're bringing<00:54:20.760>
• who have paid for the background check and would be charged again to do a background check.
• who have paid for the background check and would be charged again to do a background check.
• who have paid for the background check and would be charged again to do a background check.
• who have paid for the background check and would be charged again to do a background check.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard Senate File 558, a bill to create a formal process for removing unauthorized occupants from real property, often described as a “squatters bill.” The author presented an A2 amendment, which was adopted, and explained that the bill would give sheriffs a structured complaint and verification process, allow fees, provide immunity when the process is followed, and impose civil remedies for wrongful removal and criminal penalties for false complaints. The bill also includes a provision on holdover situations, clarifying that certain unauthorized guests of tenants are unlawful occupants rather than tenants, and a use-of-excess-force provision was mentioned. Supporters said the measure is intended to give property owners and law enforcement a clearer, faster, and more consistent way to handle situations where people occupy property without a lawful basis, especially in rural or seasonal properties and in some landlord-tenant disputes. Senator Uty read a letter from Hubbard County Sheriff Corey Oas describing recurring problems with rental issues, couch hopping, and subletting without landlord knowledge, and a testifier from Pine Island described several local examples of prolonged and costly occupancy disputes, including a restaurant tenant who stopped paying rent and a rural property trespass incident. Committee members in support emphasized the need to balance tenant rights with property rights and to avoid leaving sheriffs to make ad hoc decisions. Michael D. from Homeline opposed the bill, arguing that existing trespass and harassment restraining order laws already address unlawful occupants and that the proposal creates due process concerns by allowing removal without a court hearing. He also warned that the bill’s definition of unlawful occupant could jeopardize oral leases, which are allowed under Minnesota law. In response, supporters said the bill is meant to distinguish true landlord-tenant relationships from trespass situations and to provide a workable process consistent with Minnesota law. At the end of the discussion, the chair announced that Senate File 558 would be laid over for possible inclusion. He also said Senate File 222 would be laid over, Senate File 559 would be moved with a recommendation to pass to the Judiciary Committee, and the fourth bill on the agenda was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:02:54.400> check dealer will require a background check dealer will require a background
• background check clears the waiting background check clears the waiting period<00:04:21.919>
• :12:50.240> background background check or not a background background check or not a background
• <00:30:39.880> check without a universal background check without a universal background check
• <00:58:47.720> check get it through a background check get it through a background check somewhere

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Once they're hired, their employers are required to run background checks, and the aide is required to
• Another was the Department of Health's redundant verification of FBI background checks.
• Employers are still required to run FBI background checks at hire.
• To be clear, home care aides would still receive an FBI background check at the time of hire.
• They're double-checking that the person passed the background check in order to issue the certification

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee held a public hearing on the State Auditor’s Office performance audit of Washington’s Restoring Quality Home Care Initiative (I-1163). Auditors said the initiative’s background checks and 75-hour training requirement are widely viewed as safety measures, but the state lacks pre-2011 data to directly measure safety outcomes. They also found Washington’s long-term care workforce is still short, though the state ranks better than many others in workers per disabled person, and that some groups and regions have larger gaps between authorized and actually used Medicaid care hours, suggesting access problems for certain clients. The audit focused heavily on the certification process for home care aides. Auditors reported that many applicants never finish certification, that the process often exceeds the 200-day legal deadline, and that delays can cause lost income, job loss, and in some cases repeated employer changes that allow aides to keep working without becoming certified. They recommended that the Department of Health accept applications only after training and testing are completed, move testing into training programs more broadly, and eliminate redundant DOH verification of FBI background checks. Committee members asked about testing contract incentives, language access, and the role of immigration in workforce shortages; auditors said they found no financial performance standards in the Prometric contract, did not specifically study immigration status, and did not focus on language barriers in this audit. Department of Health and Department of Social and Health Services officials largely agreed with the audit’s findings and recommendations. They said they have already made improvements, including expanded in-program testing, more staffing, and rule changes, and that testing has been integrated into more than 110 training programs. DSHS noted testing is offered in 13 languages. Both agencies said they support further streamlining and expect continued collaboration, including possible budget or legislative requests. No public testimony was offered, and the committee adjourned without taking any vote or formal action on the audit.

Transcript Highlights:

• Background checks for these types of workers are widely accepted as an important safety regulation.
• Once they're hired, their employers are required to run background checks, and the aide is required to
• Another was the Department of Health's redundant verification of FBI background checks.
• To be clear, home care aides would still receive an FBI background check at the time of hire.
• They're double-checking that the person passed the background check in order to issue the certification

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee heard a State Auditor’s Office performance audit on the Restoring Quality Home Care Initiative (I-1163), which created home care aide certification requirements, FBI background checks, and an abuse/neglect registry. Auditors said some requirements likely improve safety, especially background checks and training, but the state lacked pre-2011 data to measure outcomes directly. They also found Washington has a long-term care workforce shortage, though its workforce supply ranks better than many states, and that more stringent entry requirements do not appear to reduce workforce participation compared with other states. The audit’s main concern was that the certification process is slow and burdensome. Auditors reported that most applicants never finish certification, that only about one-third of fiscal year 2025 applicants were certified within the 200-day legal deadline, and that the average time to certification was 463 days. They identified delays between training and testing, limited testing access in some areas, and redundant Department of Health verification of FBI background checks as key causes. The audit recommended streamlining the process by accepting applications later in the process, expanding testing within training programs, and eliminating the redundant background-check verification. Department of Health and Department of Social and Health Services staff largely agreed with the audit’s findings and recommendations. They said they have already made improvements, including moving exams into more than 110 training programs, increasing credentialing staff, and reducing barriers through rule changes. DSHS noted testing is offered in 13 languages. Committee members asked about testing contract incentives, language access, and whether the agencies would seek statutory or budget changes to implement the recommendations. No public testimony was offered, and the meeting adjourned without any vote or formal action by the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• checks. little more than just background checks.
• <02:57:56.240> check get my background check get my background check >> and<02:57:56.960
• But but who do I pay for my background<02:58:08.080> check? background check?
• background check?
• background checks themselves. background checks themselves.

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• here<00:48:39.760> so background checks even existing here so background checks even existing
• <01:05:41.400> check through that and this background check through that and this background
• <01:05:56.760> the background checks will be handled the background checks will be handled
• /c><01:06:36.880> that's background checks for this and that's background checks for this and
• background check you're just modifying background check you're just modifying the<01:07:00.599><

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee heard House Bill 2712, which would remove the exam requirement for licensure as a Licensed Social Work Associate (LSWA). Members expressed concern that the exam requirement was only added in 2021 and has not been in place long enough to evaluate, but they also questioned whether licensure should be granted without a meaningful measure of competency. Testimony was split: supporters argued the exam is a barrier for applicants without formal social work education, while opponents said licensure should still require some standard of competency, especially because the title carries public expectations and insurance reimbursement implications. Karina Bonia, speaking for NASW New Hampshire, said there is very limited data because only one person in New Hampshire currently holds an LSWA. She explained that LSWA applicants may have degrees outside social work, unlike licensed social workers, and that the current exam is the same national social work exam used for higher levels of licensure. She argued that this creates a significant barrier for LSWA applicants and noted that LSWA holders are already required to complete 30 hours of training and substantial supervised hours. Members asked for data on pass/fail rates and whether a different exam or practical skills test would be more appropriate. Committee members and OPLC representatives discussed whether the current statute and board rules already provide enough authority for the board to set other criteria, and whether the exam requirement is tied to the social work compact. OPLC indicated that the current rule requires passage of a national proctored exam approved by the board, but that no national exam exists specifically for this level, and that the board may need legislative authority to develop different criteria. The discussion ended with interest in obtaining the existing rule language and possibly revisiting the issue through amendment or future legislation rather than immediately removing the exam requirement.

Transcript Highlights:

• And it just I find a background check.
• was never required to have a background was never required to have a background check.<00:08:21.520
• Who's going to pay the cost of having this background check done?
• that what's built into the background that what's built into the background check?
• <00:13:25.440> were this background check done if they were this background check done if

Keywords: Call to Order and Roll Call: 0:02 Bills for Consideration: 26RS HB 383: 1:03 26RS HB 469: 6:32 26RS HB 586: 14:46 26RS HB 621: 19:58 Adjournment: 28:32, 958, all

Summary: The House Standing Committee on Primary and Secondary Education met and first considered House Bill 383, which concerns military-connected students with IEPs and 504 plans. The sponsor explained that the bill, as amended by a committee substitute and then a committee amendment, is intended to emphasize Kentucky’s priority for military children and to have their existing or new plans adopted within 30 days of arrival to the greatest extent possible, while documenting cases where that is not possible. Members spoke in support, including references to military families who would benefit. The committee adopted the substitute and amendment and then passed HB 383 favorably to the House floor with the committee substitute attached. The committee next heard House Bill 469, which would require school board candidates to undergo a background check and can test before appearing on the ballot. The sponsor said the bill was prompted by concerns about school board access to children and school buildings, and that the cost would be paid by the candidate. Members asked about the criteria for disqualification and the open records exemption; the sponsor said the background check would use existing pass-fail criteria and the records exemption would protect candidates from embarrassment if they failed. The committee passed HB 469 favorably with the committee substitute attached. House Bill 586 was then considered, clarifying that sunscreen is not a medication in schools. The sponsor and a student advocate testified that some districts treat sunscreen as an over-the-counter medication, limiting student use without a provider order, and argued the bill would help prevent sunburn and skin cancer by allowing students to use sunscreen more freely. Members praised the advocacy and asked about the medication issue; the sponsor said the concern came from dermatology stakeholders. The committee passed HB 586 favorably to the House floor. Finally, the committee took up House Bill 621, which would move special education caseload and class-size limits from regulation into statute. The sponsor said the bill responds to proposed Department of Education changes that worried special education teachers, would slightly increase class-size maximums when a paraprofessional is present, and would not affect waiver procedures, preschool caseloads, or speech-language pathologist caseloads. Members asked about the rationale and supporting data for the limits; the sponsor said there are no federal guidelines and the bill was meant to preserve current regulatory numbers. The committee passed HB 621 favorably to the House floor, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll conduct background checks on those who are signing up.
• But I don't know if we need to have background checks.
• Nobody should be run through a background check.
• Volunteer piece and the background checks. How quickly are those background checks?
• I want my background check.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Does the background check cover both?
• I would get to see everyone's background check.
• I would get to see everyone's background check.
• So background checks will go to the state, to DIAA.
• Do you want to review the background check? If I get your background check. All right, moving on.

Summary: The Senate Education Committee met with enough members present to conduct business and approved the June 17 minutes. It first heard HB 459 with House Amendment 1, which would prohibit the sale of energy drinks on public middle and high school campuses during school hours or school events. The sponsor and Department of Education explained that the bill targets beverages containing caffeine and marketed as energy drinks, not ordinary soft drinks or coffee/tea products. Public testimony from the Medical Society supported the bill on health grounds, while the beverage industry said its companies already voluntarily limit school offerings and that the bill does not reflect current practice. No vote was taken in the transcript. The committee then heard HB 461, a follow-up to prior legislation on New Castle County property reassessment and school tax rates. Senator Cruz said the bill would let New Castle County school districts adjust and reset tax rates to reflect reassessment changes without increasing projected operating revenue, and that it includes a sunset. DSEA supported the measure, saying fair property values are important to public education funding. The committee also heard HB 452, which would require additional background checks and training for DIAA sports officials and strengthen DIAA enforcement procedures. Members questioned how checks would be handled, who would see the results, and who would provide training; the DIAA compliance coordinator said the checks would be maintained through the state process and that associations would verify eligibility. The bill’s sponsor and DIAA said the goal was to align officials with existing child-safety standards. Next, the committee considered HS1 for HB 425, which raises the salary supplement from 6% to 12% for nationally certified school counselors, nurses, and school social workers, and allows DOE to identify additional qualifying positions by regulation. Supporters, including school social workers, nurses, and DSEA, argued the change would improve retention and recognize advanced credentials. Senator Hansen raised concerns that school psychologists were not included; sponsors said a broader study and possible future legislation or budget language would address other nationally certified school-based professionals. The committee then heard HS1 for HB 358 on student elopement notifications, inspired by Ace’s Law, but administrators and the chair raised concerns that the bill may be too prescriptive and difficult to implement in practice, especially when schools may not immediately know a student has left campus. Finally, the committee discussed HB 379 on the comprehensive school discipline improvement program; DOE said the substitute was intended to consolidate prevention and intervention supports and avoid competition for funding, while DASA asked that the bill be paused or tabled. The meeting ended before action on the remaining bill, and HB 443 was deferred to a future executive meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Would you be willing to temporarily return this to the calendar so I can make a phone call and double-check

Bills: SCR12, HB221, HB509, HCR58, SB78, SB25, SB80, SB132, SB155, SB157, SB202, SB228, SB250, SB414, SB433, SB479, SB513, SCR9, SCR58, SB65, SB215, SB249, SB269, SB282, SB296, SB323, SB363, SB369, SB474, SB490, SB492, SB500, SB514, HCR32, HB17, HB41, HB73, HB223, HB244, HB759, HB906, HB966, HB1006, HB1009, HB1086, HB1107, HB1112, HB1215, HB1242, SB217, SB283, SB469, HB36, HB42, HB74, HB119, HB159, HB259, HB302, HB414, HB459, HB776, HB848, HB956, HB1017, HB1028, HB1095, SB208, SB312, SB382, SB389, HB210, HB258, HB359, HB368, HB468, HB552, HB732, HB784, HB870, HB953, HB1117, HB1236

Keywords: logging, recognition, John Keith, environment, safety, Mississippi River bridge, Trump Expressway, transportation, federal funding, Louisiana highways, injection wells, public hearing, geologic sequestration, environmental impact, public comment, Ascension Parish, state capitol, economic development, community partnership, celebration day

Transcript Highlights:

• Would you be willing to temporarily return this to the calendar so I can make a phone call and double-check

Bills: SCR12, HB221, HB509, HCR58, SB78, SB25, SB80, SB132, SB155, SB157, SB202, SB228, SB250, SB414, SB433, SB479, SB513, SCR9, SCR58, SB65, SB215, SB249, SB269, SB282, SB296, SB323, SB363, SB369, SB474, SB490, SB492, SB500, SB514, HCR32, HB17, HB41, HB73, HB223, HB244, HB759, HB906, HB966, HB1006, HB1009, HB1086, HB1107, HB1112, HB1215, HB1242, SB217, SB283, SB469, HB36, HB42, HB74, HB119, HB159, HB259, HB302, HB414, HB459, HB776, HB848, HB956, HB1017, HB1028, HB1095, SB208, SB312, SB382, SB389, HB210, HB258, HB359, HB368, HB468, HB552, HB732, HB784, HB870, HB953, HB1117, HB1236

Keywords: logging, recognition, John Keith, environment, safety, Mississippi River bridge, Trump Expressway, transportation, federal funding, Louisiana highways, injection wells, public hearing, geologic sequestration, environmental impact, public comment, Ascension Parish, state capitol, economic development, community partnership, celebration day

Summary: The Senate met with 29 members present, heard a prayer and national anthem presentation, and approved the journal without objection. The chamber then received multiple messages from the House on conference committee reports and concurrence actions, and took up a long calendar of Senate resolutions and House/Senate bills returned from the House with amendments. Several resolutions were adopted without objection, including commendations and requests for reports or studies, while others were left over or returned to the calendar. The Senate concurred in or adopted amendments on a series of bills covering registrar compensation (SB 25), broadband administration and reimbursement (SB 80), school safety master key boxes (SB 132), dental coverage for cancer treatment (SB 155), paid parental leave for educators (SB 157), election supervisor compensation days (SB 202), water utility service line replacement funding (SB 228), weight management services through the Office of Group Benefits (SB 250), medical debt protection (SB 414), Medicaid coverage of weight-loss medication (SB 443), and design-build authority for vertiport facilities (SB 513). It also adopted a House concurrent resolution urging backup motors for the St. Claude Avenue Bridge (HCR 32). One bill, SB 479 on removal of certain judges, had its amendments rejected and was sent to conference. The chamber then considered conference committee reports on several measures. Reports were adopted on SB 312 (labor organization dues and fees), SB 208 (veterans services and VA-related restrictions), SB 382 (workers’ compensation advisory council and reimbursement schedule timing), SB 389 (agent and athlete registration and fee review), and multiple House bills including HB 359 (party primary qualifying rules), HB 368 (New Orleans historic preservation lien procedures), HB 468 (wholesale residential real estate definitions), HB 552 (DWI-related responsive verdict language), HB 732 (motor vehicle fines/fees and hybrids), HB 870 and HB 1236 (pharmacy benefit manager and insurance provisions), and HB 1117 (prescription period issues). HB 210 on retroactivity was also adopted after debate. Several conference reports were temporarily passed over or returned to the calendar, including HB 953, and the Senate adjourned to reconvene the next morning for final work.

Transcript Highlights:

• check and are subject to biennial name-based background checks; a background check of out-of-state records
• Clarify that the exemption from fingerprint-based background checks for individuals who have submitted
• check and are subject to biennial name-based background checks; a background check of out-of-state records
• Clarify that the exemption from fingerprint-based background checks for individuals who have submitted
• to section 321-4.5 from fingerprint-based background checks on page eight.

Bills: HB2592

Keywords: Mauna Kea, MKSOA, Mauna Kea Stewardship and Oversight Authority, University of Hawaii, UH, Board of Land and Natural Resources, BLNR, Department of Land and Natural Resources, DLNR, Hawaii Revised Statutes chapter 195H, land management, transition period, management plan, administrative rules, rulemaking, lease extension, sublease, public lands, Native Hawaiian rights, cultural stewardship

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met on several decision-making agendas and first considered HB 1696, which would lower the minimum age for commercial driving in-state from 19 to 18 and adjust qualifying criteria. The committee agreed to accept amendments, including changes suggested by the Operating Engineers Union, and voted unanimously to pass the bill with amendments. HB 2333, which would authorize airport special districts and increase penalties for certain aeronautics violations, was deferred after concerns were raised about treatment of people outside airport security perimeters. On the next agenda, the committee passed HB 1710 with technical amendments only. That bill would allow the State Historic Preservation Division to conduct phase reviews of certain private-property projects and revise concurrence deadlines. HB 1737, clarifying allowable agricultural district uses related to farm dwellings and farm employee housing, also passed with technical amendments only. HB 1823, dealing with coastal zone management and excluding certain state- or county-funded infrastructure projects in Lahaina from the definition of development, passed with amendments from the Attorney General’s office. The committee then took up HB 1897, an alternative dispute resolution measure for condominium-related disputes, including facilitated mediation, evaluative mediation, and binding arbitration. Despite noting broad opposition and a reservation from Senator Buenaventura, the committee adopted the measure and moved it forward as is. Finally, HB 2576, which streamlines background check requirements for health care facilities and workers, passed with amendments reflecting input from OHA, HAH, and DOH. The meeting concluded with notice of a later joint agenda and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Speaker, generally, as far as funding goes, because we've discussed background checks.
• Speaker and gentle lady, who does those background checks you're talking about?
• You're telling that USCIS does a very extensive background check and checks out every country they ever
• for somebody's background check out of the country.
• All I'm hearing is a background check, Mr. Speaker, gentlemen.

Transcript Highlights:

• background checks. background checks.
• the criminal background check passed. the criminal background check passed.
• <00:27:01.919> checks getting criminal background checks getting criminal background checks
• ><00:27:29.279> for background checks in the law for background checks in the law for decades?
• If uh doing a criminal background<00:39:09.359> check, background check, background check, uh<

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard Senate Bill 254, which Senator David Roford described as a technical correction to controlled substance inventory law for pharmacies. He said the bill would remove outdated language requiring inventories to be done in an odd-numbered year, while keeping the existing requirement that pharmacies conduct a full controlled substance inventory every two years in line with federal law. Members asked several clarifying questions about whether the requirement is pharmacy-by-pharmacy, whether new pharmacies would be affected, and whether the change would alter scope or compliance; the sponsor and a representative of the New Hampshire Pharmacist Association said it would not, and that it mainly provides clarity for pharmacies and inspectors. The public hearing on SB 254 was then closed, and the committee also heard support from a representative of the pharmacist community, who said the association supports the bill. The committee then discussed a non-germane amendment to SB 254 dealing with FBI background checks for educational surrogate parents under the Department of Education. Representative Leyon explained that the amendment was requested by the Department of Education after the FBI rejected prior statutory language, and that the goal was to allow people serving as educational surrogate parents to complete FBI fingerprint-based background checks so they can perform their duties. Department of Education and Department of Safety staff testified that the amendment mirrors language that has worked in other education-related background check statutes, including provisions with specific disqualifying offenses tied to child safety, and that the FBI requires precise statutory language and direct transmission of records through the Department of Safety. Members questioned why the FBI’s approval was needed, whether individuals could simply provide their own records, and whether changing federal leadership could require future changes; witnesses said the state needs both state and national records, that records must come directly from the FBI through the Department of Safety, and that the language is intended to satisfy current federal requirements. During the discussion, some members expressed skepticism about the need for the amendment and about placing it on a bill about controlled substance inventories, but no vote was taken during the portion of the transcript provided. The committee also briefly discussed a separate bill on physician assistants/physician associates, with members noting that the proposed name change would not alter scope of practice and that some outside groups had raised concerns about transparency, but that discussion was interrupted and not concluded in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• here<00:48:39.760> so background checks even existing here so background checks even existing
• <01:05:41.400> check through that and this background check through that and this background
• <01:05:56.760> the background checks will be handled the background checks will be handled
• /c><01:06:36.880> that's background checks for this and that's background checks for this and
• background check you're just modifying background check you're just modifying the<01:07:00.599><

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee hearing focused on House Bill 271, which would remove the exam requirement for licensure as a Licensed Social Work Associate (LSWA). The chair and several members expressed reservations about repealing a requirement that was only created in 2021, arguing that licensure should include some measurable demonstration of competency and that it is too early to judge whether the current standard is working. Members also raised concerns about the social work compact and the lack of uniformity across states, saying that changing the requirement now could undermine the standards New Hampshire agreed to at the outset. Testimony in support of the bill argued that the LSWA exam is a barrier for applicants because the level is intended for people without formal social work education, and the exam is the same national exam used for licensed social workers. The witness said there is only one LSWA in New Hampshire, so there is little pass/fail data, but noted that the Association of Social Worker Boards reported 78% of its membership favored retaining the exam. Supporters also emphasized that LSWA holders complete 30 hours of training and extensive supervised hours, and that they are not intended to work independently. Opponents or skeptics questioned whether the exam is the right measure for this role and asked for data showing actual failures or barriers. The discussion turned to possible alternatives, including a different exam, a practical skills assessment, or broader rulemaking authority for the board to set LSWA criteria. One suggestion was to amend the law to give the board authority to develop appropriate standards in rulemaking, rather than naming a specific exam in statute. Members also discussed whether the board could create a more suitable assessment and noted that the current law requires a national proctored examination approved by the board, but there is no national exam specifically for LSWA. No final vote or action was taken in the excerpt, and the subcommittee indicated it would gather more information, including the existing rule language, before moving the bill forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• This includes adults where there are three in-state background checks, two national background checks
• This includes adults where there are three in-state background checks, two national background checks
• This includes adults where there are three in-state background checks, two national background checks
• This includes adults where there are three in-state background checks, two national background checks
• <01:09:53.080> checks plan for that um for background checks plan for that um for background

Keywords: 1183, house