Bills: HB2091, HB2140, HB2320, HB2384, HB2398, HB2502, HB2780, HB2918, HB2939, HB2950, HB2999, HB4020, HB4026, HB4029

Keywords: insurance, financial surveillance, regulations, assessments, Arizona Revised Statutes, investment, state treasurer, gold bullion, treasury management, financial regulations, school districts, bonds, financial advisors, elections, municipal advisors, cost of borrowing, lease agreements, school property, tax exemptions, impact aid revenue bonds

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee approved the minutes from March 16, 2026, then heard testimony on a series of bills, with the chair noting that testimony and votes would be handled in batches because members were coming and going. HB 2939 would raise the rural qualified facilities tax credit from $20,000 to $25,000 per job for certain projects with initial investment under $2 billion. Lucid Motors supported the change as a tool to attract manufacturing jobs to rural Arizona, while opponents questioned whether the higher credit would actually create new jobs and pointed to a fiscal note that could reach $48 million. The committee later passed the bill 5-2. HB 2950 would authorize municipalities and counties to form tourism improvement areas funded by lodging business assessments for marketing and tourism promotion. The Arizona Lodging and Tourism Association and Visit Phoenix supported the measure, describing TIAs as voluntary, locally controlled tools already used in other states and useful for rural destinations; senators pressed on whether the assessments were truly voluntary and how the districts would be formed and administered. The bill passed 5-2. HB 2780, a technical cleanup bill related to property tax lien foreclosure and excess proceeds sales, was described as conforming changes to a prior law creating a mechanism for delinquent taxpayers to recover equity; it passed 6-1. HB 2502 would allow certain ASRS members who are elected officials to retire at normal retirement age without resigning their elected office, with the employer paying the alternate contribution rate. ASRS said it was neutral, and the sponsor and a lobbyist argued the bill would create parity with non-elected members who can retire and return to work; the committee passed it 5-2. HB 2140, as amended by a striker, would let the state treasurer invest up to 10% of trust and treasury monies in physical gold or silver bullion held in secure U.S. depositories. The sponsor and Sound Money Defense League supported it as a diversification and inflation hedge, while opponents argued gold is volatile, costly to store, and not a better use of taxpayer funds; the committee adopted the striker and passed the bill 4-2. HB 2398 would require commercial liability insurance for watercraft rented or hired in Arizona, including peer-to-peer boat-sharing programs, while not affecting ordinary personal boat ownership. The sponsor, insurers, and rental operators said the bill responds to uninsured boats being rented through apps and to safety and liability problems; some members said training should also be addressed. The committee adopted an amendment and passed the bill 6-1. Finally, HB 2999 would create state affordable infrastructure districts to finance public infrastructure for housing through bonds, taxes, and assessments, with unanimous landowner consent and disclosure requirements. Home builders and contractors said the districts could lower upfront housing costs and improve financing, but contractors sought stronger payment protections and some senators worried the bill could add red tape and costs without guaranteeing savings to homebuyers. After adopting a large amendment, the committee passed HB 2999, though at least one member voted no and another passed on the vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• A judicially managed lien claim process is exclusive avenue of relief.
• A judicially managed subrogation rights.
• It creates kind of that judicial right?
• Judicial lien on a settlement, though, right?
• Judicial lien on a settlement, though, right?

Bills: SB1166, SB888, SB2387, SB2471

Keywords: insurance, climate change, responsible parties, damages, Hawaii Property Insurance Association, Hurricane Relief Fund, civil action, climate disasters, extreme weather, SB888, Hawaii, consumer protection, smart home security, smart household security device, home security camera, video doorbell, Ring, Nest, connected devices, internet of things

Summary: The committee heard SB 1166 SD2, a bill on insurance and climate-related damages that would authorize the Hawaii Property Insurance Association and, in amended versions discussed during testimony, other public and private entities to pursue civil actions to recover losses tied to climate disasters and extreme weather. DCCA’s Insurance Division and the Department of the Attorney General raised legal concerns, saying the bill’s scope may not fit the insurance code section being amended, that it could create subject-matter and title issues, and that some subrogation language may be duplicative of existing rate-filing practice. Lawyers for Justice opposed the measure, arguing it conflicts with existing subrogation law and recent Hawaii Supreme Court rulings that treat the judicial lien process as the exclusive remedy. The American Petroleum Institute also opposed, warning the bill would add liability and litigation risk for companies operating under existing permits and could undermine energy reliability and investment. Supporters said the bill would help shift climate-related insurance costs away from residents and onto fossil fuel companies and other responsible parties. Testimony in support came from the Polluters Pay Hawaii Coalition, Center for Climate Integrity, Hawaii Island Council, Our Hawaii, Sierra Club of Hawaii, and others, who described recent flooding, storm damage, rising premiums, non-renewals, and underinsurance as evidence of a worsening climate-driven insurance crisis. Several supporters urged amendments to give the Attorney General explicit authority to recover insurance-related losses for the Hurricane Relief Fund, HPIA, and private insurers, and to ensure recovered amounts benefit policyholders. Committee members questioned whether HPIA is a private entity, whether the Attorney General could represent it, whether the bill could create double recovery or affect pending climate litigation, and whether insurers would have standing or damages if they are only paying contractual claims. The committee then took up SB 888 SD2, a consumer protection bill that would restrict smart household security device operators from sharing user data with law enforcement without consent or a judicial order, and would bar conditioning device use on such consent. The Office of Consumer Protection testified in support and said an Illinois law could serve as a useful template for exceptions to the warrant requirement. An individual supporter said the measure would protect immigrant communities, judges, and others from surveillance and misuse of private data. No vote was taken during the portion of the meeting provided, and the chair noted additional written testimony submitted in support of SB 1166.

Transcript Highlights:

• Lastly, it establishes court requirements for an expedited judicial review of a malicious delay claim
• The bill provides a process for appealing the individualized determination and judicial review for challenging
• And so this is allowing judicial appeal, and it's prescribing an appeal process to make sure that this

Bills: SB1254, SB1431, SB1478, SB1566, SB1787

Keywords: workers' compensation, industrial commission, safety regulations, employee protection, penalties, compliance, municipal planning, homeowners associations, design regulations, property rights, building permits, single-family homes, liquor, alcohol, spirituous liquor, liquor license, liquor licensing, Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control, restaurant to-go cocktails, mixed cocktails

Summary: The committee heard Senate Bill 1566, which would prohibit municipalities and counties from maliciously delaying licensing, permits, or approvals, authorize the Attorney General to enforce the prohibition, and provide expedited judicial review. The sponsor said the bill is intended to address affordability by preventing intentional government delays in housing and business approvals. County representatives supported the goal but opposed the bill as drafted, arguing the county language differed from the city/town language and could sweep in ordinary processing delays or incomplete applications; the sponsor said a floor amendment would fix the county language. Testimony from supporters described long permit and parcel-number delays and argued the bill would give applicants a remedy against intentional obstruction. The committee recommended the bill do pass by a 7-3 vote, with one present and one absent. The committee then heard Senate Bill 1787, which would require written notice for exactions imposed on development projects, allow individualized determinations, and create an appeal path including judicial review. The sponsor framed it as a takings and affordability measure to stop unrelated or excessive exactions from being imposed on housing projects. Cities and counties opposed the bill, saying existing law already requires nexus and proportionality, already provides an appeal process, and that the bill would create a duplicative Attorney General review and confusion, especially for mixed-use projects. Supporters, including Pacific Legal Foundation, the Home Builders Association, and a homeowner who described a costly infrastructure demand on her property, argued the bill would curb extortionate demands and make the process fairer. The committee passed the bill 7-2 with one present and one absent. Senate Bill 1478, a liquor-regulation cleanup bill, was also heard and received broad support. The measure makes technical changes to liquor statutes, including clarifying interim permits, repealing a federal food-safety preemption provision, and updating definitions such as cider and production terminology. Industry stakeholders said the bill was the product of months of consensus work and mostly technical corrections. It passed unanimously, 10-0. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 1431, which would limit municipal control over home design features and prohibit certain required shared amenities that would necessitate HOA maintenance. The sponsor and supporters argued the bill would reduce housing costs by preventing subjective aesthetic mandates and unnecessary HOA-driven requirements, while opponents from cities and neighborhood groups warned it would undermine local control, crime-prevention design standards, neighborhood character, and quality. Home builders and property-rights advocates said the bill would expand consumer choice and reduce costs, while critics argued it could lead to lower-quality housing and remove local recourse. The bill was not reported out in the portion provided, and testimony continued with no final vote shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• I know my concern is non-judicial foreclosures, just as a concept.
• understand. >> Uh, Chair, yeah, I have serious concerns about this, so I'll be voting no. is um non-judicial
• for foreclosures just is um non-judicial for foreclosures just as<01:49:18.320> a<01:49:18.719

Bills: HB1881, HB2218, HB1956, HB2151, HB1845, HB1844, HB2103, HB2424, HB1650, HB376, HB2599, HB1861

Keywords: land use, ropeway, transportation, state regulation, government exemption, DLNR, Department of Land and Natural Resources, Board of Land and Natural Resources, BLNR, public lands, public trust resources, community co-management, co-management agreement, community-based organization, Native Hawaiian, malama aina, ahupuaa, subsistence, cultural resources, religious practices

Summary: The committee on Water and Land met on February 10, 2026, with Chair Mark Hashem outlining strict testimony rules and noting a time constraint because of later hearings and floor session obligations. The committee then took up several bills, hearing mostly supportive testimony on HB 1881 relating to land use, HB 2218 relating to DLNR/community management, and HB 1956 relating to freshwater waves, while HB 1845 relating to the Land Use Commission drew legal concerns and opposition. HB 2151 relating to building materials had no substantive testimony presented in the excerpt, and the committee moved through it quickly. On HB 1881, testimony focused on protecting North Shore lands from overdevelopment. A supporter described the area as valuable precisely because it remains largely undeveloped, and a member asked whether the bill’s restrictions on “finculars” would affect existing or future private residential installations; the response suggested the bill was aimed at future commercial uses and that grandfathering or personal-use exceptions might be possible, but the exact wording would need legal refinement. HB 2218 received broad support from OHA, DLNR, Kua, Sierra Club, Hui Maka Aana, the Honlay Initiative, and others, who said the measure would expand community-based co-management across DLNR divisions, build on existing park partnerships, and produce real benefits such as better stewardship, safer access, local jobs, and stronger community trust. Members asked about the bill’s five-year review structure, how multiple community groups would be handled, and whether the model could apply to ocean or nearshore areas; DLNR said the board would retain authority, agreements would be non-exclusive and subject to review, and the department was still working through how the approach would function across different divisions and marine settings. For HB 1956, the Attorney General offered technical comments, urging clearer definitions of “residing” and “freshwater way,” clearer timing for citations and arrests, and more explicit procedural safeguards and agency roles. On HB 1845, the Attorney General and Land Use Commission raised concerns that the bill could conflict with constitutional protections for important agricultural lands and could not be reconciled with existing voting requirements; the LUC also said commissioners cannot vote by proxy under sunshine law and warned that the bill could allow too few commissioners to approve major boundary changes. Members questioned how the bill would work in counties without designated important agricultural lands, and the LUC explained that Kauai is the only county to have completed the IAL process, while the broader statutory process remains county-driven and has been the subject of litigation. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the excerpt.

Bills: SB209, SB248, HB122, SB99, SB209, SB248, HB122, SB99

Keywords: sales tax exemption, Consumer Price Index, local government, clothing, school supplies, emergency preparedness, Alabama Administrative Procedure Act, APA, administrative law, judicial review, agency deference, Chevron deference, de novo review, contested case, state agency, regulatory power, individual liberty, statutory interpretation, rule interpretation, license revocation

Transcript Highlights:

• We are opposed to some middle ground solutions the Texas Judicial Council has proposed.
• And so in 2020, the Texas Judicial Council had a recommendation to the legislature to adopt some kind

Bills: HB1193, HB2495, HB2733, HB3104, HB3395, HB4325, SB3009

Keywords: HB 1193, informal marriage, common-law marriage, declaration of informal marriage, confidentiality, privacy, county clerk, vital statistics unit, Family Code, Health and Safety Code, marriage records, public records, personally identifying information, PII, legal representative, Texas marriage law, child enrollment, parent rights, managing conservator, education

Bills: HB1193, HB2495, HB2733, HB3104, HB3395, HB4325, SB3009

Keywords: HB 1193, informal marriage, common-law marriage, declaration of informal marriage, confidentiality, privacy, county clerk, vital statistics unit, Family Code, Health and Safety Code, marriage records, public records, personally identifying information, PII, legal representative, Texas marriage law, child enrollment, parent rights, managing conservator, education

Bills: HB 1193, HB 2495, HB 2733, HB 3104, HB 3395, HB 4325, SB 3009

Keywords: HB 1193, informal marriage, common-law marriage, declaration of informal marriage, confidentiality, privacy, county clerk, vital statistics unit, Family Code, Health and Safety Code, marriage records, public records, personally identifying information, PII, legal representative, Texas marriage law, child enrollment, parent rights, managing conservator, education

Bills: SB2232, SCR1, SCR6, SCR15, SCR27, SCR32

Keywords: Unplug Texas Day, digital detox, family activities, outdoor recreation, community engagement, crossing guard, school crossing guard, crosswalk safety, school safety, student pedestrian safety, traffic safety, elementary school, campus safety, pedestrian awareness, bicycle safety, traffic regulations, commemorative resolution, appreciation day, Texas Legislature, honorary designation

Bills: HB 1194, HB 1221, HB1738, HB1913, HB2177, HB2178, HB2180, HB2229, HB2282, HB2448, HB2492, HB2777, HB2984, HB3357, HB3553, HB3602

Keywords: emergency protection order, protective order, magistrate, criminal procedure, victim safety, family violence, domestic violence, stalking, assault, magistrate's order, temporary protection, court order duration, defendant restrictions, Article 17.292, Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, emergency restraining order, victim protection, firearm restriction, pretrial intervention, reimbursement fee

Bills: HB713, HB827, HB932, HB499, HB510, HB163, HB296, HB879, HB913, HB163, HB296

Keywords: healthcare, maternal health, reporting requirements, Texas Maternal Mortality and Morbidity Review Committee, health provider immunity, workplace violence, nurses, grant program, healthcare facilities, safety measures, safety, nursing, grants, healthcare safety, verbal abuse, physical abuse, nurse empowerment, occupational therapy, licensure, interstate practice

Bills: HB32, HB15, HB171, HB421, HB581, HB644, HB745, HB349, HB917, HB204, HB923, HB15, HB171, HB204

Keywords: eviction, landlord rights, tenant rights, justice court, property law, court procedures, chemical dependency, court-ordered treatment, mental health, health care, treatment facility, juvenile justice, criminal justice reform, deep fake, digital impersonation, age verification, private cause of action, explicit content, consumer protection, HB 581

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, that was answering my question because we're seeing a recurring problem here on judicial compensation
• I'm just here to answer any questions you may have about the complicated topic of prosecutor and judicial
• You are eliminating core fundamental American rights—the civil judicial process.
• It is one of the oldest judicial proceedings that exists.
• increasing Texans' access to justice and enhancing our ability to meaningfully participate in the judicial

Bills: HB32, HB15, HB171, HB421, HB581, HB644, HB745, HB349, HB917, HB204, HB923, HB15, HB171, HB204

Keywords: eviction, landlord rights, tenant rights, justice court, property law, court procedures, chemical dependency, court-ordered treatment, mental health, health care, treatment facility, juvenile justice, criminal justice reform, deep fake, digital impersonation, age verification, private cause of action, explicit content, consumer protection, HB 581

Transcript Highlights:

• court judges, commissioners, court expenses, and payment of those expenses from the consolidated judicial
• House Bill 324 by Representative Villio, relative to judicial salaries, provide relative to state increases

Bills: HR188, HR189, HR190, HR191, HR179, HR180, HR181, HR182, HR183, HR185, HR186, HR187, HCR75, HCR76, HCR77, HCR78, HCR79, SCR24, SCR36, SCR39, SB64, SB107, SB152, SB185, SB217, SB232, SB278, SB290, SB294, SB320, SB321, SB419, SB424, SB436, SB440, SB468, SB470, SB476, SB482, SB489, HCR32, SCR11, HB12, HB42, HB205, HB222, HB267, HB324, HB325, HB350, HB478, HB610, HB617, HB679, HB745, HB749, HB797, HB807, HB821, HB896, HB979, HB992, HB1000, HB1024, HB1050, HB1166, HB1172, HB1173, HB1193, HB1207, HB1218, HB1223, SB256, SB180, HR1, HR17, HCR5, HCR4, HCR47, HB59, HB74, HB159, HB330, HB364, HB414, HB458, HB525, HB568, HB786, HB1008, HB1033, HB1034, HB1041, HB1062, HB1070, HB1079, HB1112, HB1118, HB1139, HB1151, HB1176, HB1182, HB1196, HB1214, HB1241, HB87, HB115, HB162, HB368, HB433, HB441, HB447, HB466, HB481, HB741, HB1242, HB362, HB893, HB990, HB1007, HB1153, HB1243, SB162, SB349, SB350, SB382, SB383, SB127, SB244, HB615, HB864, HB1103, HB1175, HB31, HB225, HB608, HB664, HB897, HB977, HB1003, HB1160, HB1180, HB911, HB306, HB366, HB1161, HB1230, HB181, HB901, HR20, HR74, HB284, HB393, HB459, HB577, HB582, HB605, HB614, HB682, HB733, HB772, HB773, HB996, HB1035, HB1058, HB1082, HB1113, HB1189, HB1234, HB1240

Keywords: hunting dogs, field trials, working dogs, dog training, greyhound protection, Farm Bill, federal overreach, sportsmen, sportswomen, wildlife management, conservation, rural communities, Louisiana hunting, hunting tradition, animal welfare, dog breeders, dog owners, outdoor recreation, Kathy Taylor, musical achievements

Bills: SB2064, SB2312, SB2811, SB2662, SB2744, SB2809, SB2862, SB2343, SB2336, SB2075, SB2308, SB2601, SB2397, SB2219, SB2849, SB2449, SB2781

Keywords: state architect, construction projects, design approvals, building codes, state agency oversight, government contracts, transparency, record retention, public oversight, Hawaii Revised Statutes, building permits, task force, state-owned lands, construction, regulatory process, government accountability, external consultants, procurement reform, cost efficiency, in-house expertise

Summary: The committee met for decision-making on measures heard earlier in the week and took up a series of government operations, procurement, public records, public meetings, and related bills. Several measures were deferred one week to February 12, 2026, including bills on state construction projects, government accountability, gubernatorial appointments, the legislature, public procurement, and a bill on Hawaiian lei sales, largely so the committee could compare similar measures, address concerns, or integrate related reports. The committee also deferred SB 2449 on public meetings for the year, citing concerns that the proposed business-day definition was overly prescriptive and unnecessary. The committee passed several bills with amendments. These included measures clarifying UIPA applicability to records created or maintained by agencies, with amendments changing “government function” to “agency function” and committee report language noting Attorney General concerns and exempting ERS for now; SB 2811 on state building projects with technical amendments and a delayed effective date; SB 2809 on budget-related reports; SB 2336 on trees, with a Senate draft and removal of “political subdivision”; SB 2308 on small purchase vendor compliance, setting the threshold at $5,000 and adding a delayed effective date; SB 2601 on procurement, reorganizing misdemeanor language and leaving funding/FTE issues to Ways and Means; SB 2219 on a capital visitor center working group; and SB 2849 on public meetings, with technical amendments and a delayed effective date. Bills on neighborhood board concerns and public notice were also adopted, with SB 2929 drawing testimony both for and against. Testimony was generally supportive on procurement and small business measures, especially SB 2928 establishing permanent small business procurement coordinator positions, which drew strong support from the State Procurement Office, DBEDT, the Chamber of Commerce, DOT, the Ethics Commission, and others. On public notice, the County of Maui supported allowing website posting, while another witness raised concerns about accessibility, centralized notice locations, and impacts on kūpuna and people with disabilities. On search and rescue, the committee heard support for creating a statewide coordination structure, along with discussion of where such an office should reside; the Attorney General raised constitutional and placement concerns, while witnesses suggested law enforcement, DLNR, or DoD as possible homes. The committee also heard support for a bill protecting home addresses of covered public servants and candidates, though the Public First Law Center urged broader coverage and a better fit with existing law.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, this one would require any person appointed by the governor to serve in the executive branch in a
• <00:20:18.240> in<00:20:18.400> the<00:20:18.480> executive<00:20:18.880> branch
• <00:20:19.120> in<00:20:19.280> a serve in the executive branch in a serve in the executive
• branch in a position<00:20:19.679> that<00:20:19.760> is<00:20:19.919> not<00:20

Bills: SB2064, SB2312, SB2811, SB2662, SB2744, SB2809, SB2862, SB2343, SB2336, SB2075, SB2308, SB2601, SB2397, SB2219, SB2849, SB2449, SB2781

Keywords: state architect, construction projects, design approvals, building codes, state agency oversight, government contracts, transparency, record retention, public oversight, Hawaii Revised Statutes, building permits, task force, state-owned lands, construction, regulatory process, government accountability, external consultants, procurement reform, cost efficiency, in-house expertise

Summary: The committee heard several government operations measures, beginning with SB 2064 on state construction projects, which would create an office of the state architect within DAGS to oversee design review and approvals for state construction. DAGS said it stood on its written testimony, DECAB supported the bill, DOT supported it, and HGA opposed it. No audience testimony or member questions were taken, and the chair moved on. The committee then took up SB 2312 on government contracts, which would make records held by private contractors performing government functions subject to UIPA. The State Procurement Office, Attorney General, OIP, ERS, DHS, and HGA offered comments or opposition, while the League of Women Voters, Public First Law Center, All Hawaii News, Grassroots, and several individuals supported the bill. Public First Law Center argued the bill closes a loophole and does not expand or reduce existing exemptions, while OIP and others raised concerns about privacy, confidential information, and the need for clearer procedures. Members discussed possible clarifying amendments, including changing “government function” to “agency,” and the bill was left for further consideration. Other measures discussed included SB 2662 on government accountability, which would require justification and caps for external consultants; ERS and DOT opposed it, while the American Council of Engineering Companies of Hawaii and Airlines Committee of Hawaii argued consultants are often more efficient and necessary for major projects. The committee also heard SB 2744 on due process, for which no testimony was received; SB 2809 on budget-related reports, with comments from B&F and the Tax Foundation; SB 2862 on gubernatorial appointments, opposed by the Governor’s Office and the Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission and supported by one individual; a bill on continuous legislative sessions, with comments from B&F, LRB, and Hope for Hawaii; SB 2336 on tree management standards, supported by an individual and the Outdoor Circle; and SB 2075 on public procurement local preferences, which drew broad support with comments from SPO and the Attorney General and discussion of simplifying the preference structure. No votes were taken in the excerpt, and the chair repeatedly moved measures along after testimony and questions.

Bills: HB207, HB235, HB324, HB449, HB463, HB502, HB 1121, HB1445, HB1465, HB1778, HB1977, HB2000, HB2066, HB2596, HB207, HB235

Keywords: child protection, sexual offenses, obscenity laws, visual material, anatomically correct dolls, mannequins, robots, criminal offenses, sexually explicit material, minors, artificial intelligence, sexually explicit, doll, mannequin, robot, law enforcement, healthcare, insurance, affordable care, access

Bills: HB207, HB235, HB324, HB449, HB463, HB502, HB 1121, HB1445, HB1465, HB1778, HB1977, HB2000, HB2066, HB2596, HB207, HB235

Keywords: child protection, sexual offenses, obscenity laws, visual material, anatomically correct dolls, mannequins, robots, criminal offenses, sexually explicit material, minors, artificial intelligence, sexually explicit, doll, mannequin, robot, law enforcement, healthcare, insurance, affordable care, access

Transcript Highlights:

• body for the judicial branch.
• <00:01:44.479> branch system Minnesota judicial branch system Minnesota judicial branch comprises
• c> ongoing the judicial branch the smaller ongoing the judicial branch the smaller ongoing funding
• the judicial branch or does the the judicial branch or does the executive<00:29:42.440> branch
• <00:31:26.760> branch<00:31:27.240> but judicial branch but judicial branch but providers

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee heard a presentation from State Court Administrator Jeff Shorba on the Minnesota judicial branch’s 2026-27 budget request. He outlined the courts’ structure and workload, noting 322 judges, about 2,800 staff, roughly 1 million district court cases annually, and a current budget of about $479 million. Shorba emphasized the courts’ constitutional role, the fact that court fines and fees are deposited into the general fund rather than retained by the branch, and recent legislative investments that helped reduce pandemic-era backlogs, improve technology, sustain treatment courts, and raise interpreter and examiner pay. The budget request focused on several areas: a 6% judicial salary increase to address recruitment and retention problems, including a 15% rise in turnover and a 27% drop in applicants since 2020; funding for health care and office lease cost increases; digital accessibility compliance work required by new federal ADA rules; a modernized justice partner access system for court records; higher pay for forensic psychological examiners, whose workload has risen sharply; increased juror compensation from $20 to $100 per day and mileage adjustments; and ongoing funding for interpreters, jury services, and cybersecurity. Shorba said the total request would be a 12% increase over the FY 2026-27 base budget. Members asked follow-up questions about funding for newly launched treatment courts and how those courts are financed after federal grants expire. Shorba said he would provide more detail later and noted the branch generally starts treatment courts with federal funding before seeking state support. Representative Ric also asked about labor negotiations, and Shorba explained that the judicial branch negotiates its own contracts rather than using the executive branch, with three unions involved and many unrepresented employees. No votes or formal actions were taken during the discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, um I'm judicial branch so much.
• So um I do think that judicial branch.
• in the judicial branch. So thank you. in the judicial branch. So thank you.
• And so if we are to be advocates for the judicial branch, the judicial branch has to come and tell us
• And so if we are to be advocates for the judicial branch, the judicial branch has to come and tell us

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee took up House File 3874 and laid it over for possible inclusion in a finance bill. The Minnesota Judicial Branch, represented by State Court Administrator Jeff Shorba and Chief Judge Michael Fritz, presented a supplemental funding request focused on two main areas: judicial safety and security, and the employer share of Minnesota Paid Leave costs. Shorba said the branch was grateful for prior budget support but noted it did not receive salary increases for staff or judges and did not get funding for juror per diem. He explained that the branch is seeking funding for personal data protection, home security, two additional judicial security positions, security for the chief justice at public events, and a revived courthouse security grant program. Much of the testimony centered on rising threats against judges and court staff. Shorba and Fritz described increases in incidents, threats, and disturbances, and Fritz gave several examples of threatening behavior involving judges’ homes, personal information, and online doxxing. They argued that the branch needs better threat assessment, coordination with local law enforcement, and security measures at homes, courthouses, and online. Members expressed support for the concerns and asked questions about how threats are currently handled and whether state patrol officers assigned to security duties would need additional training. The second major topic was the judicial branch’s request for funding to cover its employer contribution to Minnesota Paid Leave, which took effect in January 2026. Shorba said the branch followed MMB’s calculations and expected the cost to be addressed through broader state government funding, but the branch did not receive an operational adjustment. He said the branch is now having to hold positions open to absorb the cost. Members questioned why the request was not included in the earlier budget process, and Shorba responded that the branch believed the issue would be handled centrally and later learned it had not been funded for the judiciary. No vote on the funding requests was taken in the discussion shown.