Transcript Highlights:

• And I may have a question for the panel as well.
• You started out well, had a dip, and you made some changes.
• Well, I think it's a lot of the same best practices we've heard.
• Well, the other thing we do that has been mentioned...
• We've lessened the load in the classroom too for a bit as well.

Summary: The subcommittee met to examine Florida’s nursing education pipeline and the state’s persistently low NCLEX passage rates. Chair Tuck opened by noting the projected nurse shortage and Florida’s ranking near the bottom nationally for first-time NCLEX pass rates. The Department of Health explained the Board of Nursing’s approval process for nursing programs, including application requirements, probation standards, and termination for programs that repeatedly fail passage-rate benchmarks. The Florida Center for Nursing then presented statewide data showing Florida has more test takers than most states, but still trails the national average; the gap has narrowed in recent years, though Florida remains below average. Members focused heavily on why the state continues to underperform, with discussion of faculty shortages, clinical placement constraints, accreditation, student preparedness, and the large share of newer private for-profit programs among those placed on probation. Committee members asked about how probation works, what happens when programs improve, and whether the board requires corrective plans. They also questioned the relationship between program type and outcomes, the effect of Operation Nightingale, and how many students fail and retest. The Florida Center for Nursing said first-attempt pass rates are the standard measure and that students who fail are expected to remediate and retest, though costs vary. The center also said Florida’s data shows accredited programs outperform approved or probationary ones, and that the state’s nursing workforce challenges are tied to broader issues such as faculty vacancies, clinical site competition, and student demographics, including many students balancing work, family, and language barriers. A panel of nursing school leaders from public, private nonprofit, and private for-profit institutions then described strategies used to improve outcomes. These included transparent recruitment, early orientation, tutoring, success coaching, stronger faculty development, curriculum mapping to NCLEX standards, higher course benchmarks, mandatory remediation, simulation labs, and commercial NCLEX prep tools such as ATI, Kaplan, and HESI. Several panelists said their programs had improved after probation or had very high passage rates, and they emphasized that student success depends on academic preparation, clinical experience, and support services. Members also asked about tuition, program length, translation into other languages, and faculty recruitment; panelists said costs vary widely, faculty hiring is difficult because hospitals pay more, and some schools are considering medical Spanish and immersion options rather than full curriculum translation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, I would say you know does help.
• Well, thank specifically the library.
• ,</c> guessing probably the reverse as well, guessing probably the reverse as well, right?
• </c><04:34:42.240><c> Well,</c> Yeah. Yeah. They earn their feet. Well, Yeah. Yeah.
• So the... well-earned retirement benefits with 33 well-earned retirement benefits with 33 million<04:

Summary: The committee worked through a series of budget amendments, mostly to House Bill 2 and related House Bill 1 changes, with members discussing whether to reduce or preserve funding for various programs. Early actions included approving an amendment to House Bill 219 that delays implementation of renewable energy-related provisions to 2027, and approving an amendment that removes a $150,000 appropriation tied to a housing-related database while allowing use of housing fund money for the project. The committee also approved an amendment affecting magistrates so they could continue pretrial and other judicial support work, while noting they would not handle bail and that the change reflected separate legislation already signed by the governor. Members then approved a series of administrative savings items in the Department of Administrative Services, including eliminating a long-vacant computer analyst position and reducing overtime and recruiting/subscription-tool budgets. They also approved an amendment cutting marketing and administrative support for the paid family leave program, with members emphasizing that the program itself would continue. A proposed cut to the WorkInvest NH program was discussed at length, with some members arguing it benefits workers and employers and others noting the cost is borne by employers; the committee ultimately set that item aside without taking action. The committee also debated and then approved a modest reduction to a BEA regional planning grant, despite objections that regional planning commissions provide valuable municipal support. The most extended discussion centered on the State Library. Representative Sweeney said he did not want to pursue a full cut of the library and instead favored a more targeted approach, noting that some federal funding for library services such as interlibrary loans and the Libby system may be at risk. Members discussed alternatives, including unfilled positions and other partial reductions, but no final action on the full library cut was taken in the portion provided. The committee also paused on some other items to gather more information before voting.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> &gt;&gt; Well, I'm even more confused. &gt;&gt; Well, I'm even more confused.
• Well, but<04:15:39.680><c> while</c><04:15:40.000><c> well</c><04:15:40.000><c> well</c><04:15:40.399
• Well, I pick my fights.
• Yeah, near near near as<04:22:13.040><c> well.</c> as well. as well.
• Well, I their wheels and and come back. Well, I don't<05:24:08.560><c> know.

Committee: House Commerce and Consumer Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, let's...
• well let's this well under right right well let's this well once<00:18:46.720><c> once</c><00:18:46.919
• Well, not in New Hampshire.
• Well, okay, so it can't be, and so you can't come back and say, oh, well, never mind.
• Uh, well, that's right.

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:

• Well, thank you, Senator. Great. Thank you so much.
• Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
• Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I'll just first of all... Well, thank you very much, Mr.
• But Massachusetts is well poised to make this transition.
• We're gonna have pressures there as well.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy

Summary: The committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy heard testimony on several transportation and clean-fuel bills. Supporters of H. 3535 argued for delaying or pausing enforcement of Massachusetts’ zero-emission vehicle sales mandate, saying the current ACC2 timeline is unrealistic given low ZEV sales, limited charging infrastructure, dealer inventory concerns, and potential economic impacts on dealerships, consumers, and tax revenue. Opponents of that approach, including automakers and clean transportation advocates, said the state should stay on course with electrification and that the mandate is necessary to meet climate goals. The committee also heard support for H. 3570/S. 2326 to update vehicle emission standards for municipal and utility fleets, with municipal utility representatives saying current electric truck technology, charging access, and costs make the rules impractical for critical public services. A major portion of the hearing focused on S. 2246, the Freedom to Move Act, which would require MassDOT and regional planning agencies to set vehicle miles traveled reduction goals and align transportation spending with climate targets. Supporters said the bill would better coordinate transportation planning, encourage transit, biking, and walking, and help Massachusetts meet emissions goals while saving money and improving public health. Some committee members raised concerns that the bill could duplicate existing transportation climate mandates and could disadvantage rural residents who must drive long distances; witnesses responded that the bill is meant to add coordination and flexibility, not impose a one-size-fits-all solution. The committee also heard testimony on H. 3448, which would set deadlines to electrify school buses and public fleets and create programs for private fleet electrification. Advocates said fleet electrification is a practical way to cut emissions, improve air quality, and save money over time, especially for schoolchildren exposed to diesel exhaust. Several witnesses also supported low-carbon fuel standard bills H. 3576 and S. 2251, arguing they would reduce fuel carbon intensity and generate revenue for charging and clean-fuel investments. Others, including a coalition opposed to private jet expansion, objected to the bills’ treatment of sustainable aviation fuel, saying it is not scalable, is expensive, and could create land-use and food-supply tradeoffs. No votes or formal committee actions were taken in the hearing excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you, I'm now leaving the well. Oh, she's up to the well.
• Well, I am. Good afternoon.
• are really well-franchised.
• are really well-freshized.
• thank you “Well, thank you.

Committee: All GIRLS STATE

Transcript Highlights:

• There's carve-outs as well.
• Well, I couldn't answer that question.
• Well, I mean... Well, no, I mean, seriously, who does know that?
• Well, let me ask you this question.
• Well, good morning. Mark Sutherland.

Committee: House Commerce, Consumer Protection, Energy and the Environment

Summary: The Commerce Committee first heard Senate Bill 1020, which would let the Department of Revenue award a Missouri license office contract without rebidding if no qualifying bids are received on the initial solicitation. Senator Sandy Crawford and Director of Revenue Trish Vincent said the change would help keep rural license offices open, reduce repeated bidding delays, and allow the department to work with local entities such as chambers, counties, or cities when smaller offices are hard to staff profitably. Members asked about the process, the challenges in low-volume communities, and whether more online services could eventually reduce the need for offices; no opposition testified, and the hearing concluded without a vote. The committee then took up House Bill 3093, which would extend Missouri’s direct-to-consumer shipping framework from wineries to distillers and breweries. Sponsor Rep. Nick Kimball and many supporters argued the bill would create parity for Missouri craft producers, preserve age-verification and signature requirements, and keep tax collection and other safeguards in place. Supporters included distillers and brewers who said the current system favors wine, limits small Missouri businesses, and makes it harder to reach customers who want products shipped after visiting a taproom or distillery. Several members also raised questions about enforcement, the three-tier system, and whether the bill could be narrowed or paired with other changes. Opponents, including representatives of wholesalers, grocers, convenience stores, and beer wholesalers, argued the bill would weaken the three-tier system, increase competition from out-of-state producers, and create enforcement and tax-collection problems. They said wine shipping has shown compliance and auditing difficulties, cited concerns about underage access and online ordering, and urged the committee to preserve the existing distribution structure or strengthen wine-shipping rules before expanding them. Supporters countered that alcohol shipments are already tightly regulated, that direct shipping is already occurring in other forms, and that the bill would simply add another regulated avenue for Missouri-made beer and spirits. The hearing ended after extensive testimony and questions, with no final committee action reported in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we do carve out Section 230 as well, for the record.
• Well, let me...
• But as an initial step forward, this seems well reasoned.
• Yeah, no, your concerns are well taken.
• well done, so you can kind of pick up on it right away.

Committee: Senate Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, thank you, Chair, and hello, everyone. Well, thank you, Chair. And hello, everyone.
• I think that was referenced as well.
• I also feel very... ...at the national level as well.
• Well, I appreciate you being here.
• So, a very effective and also well-supported program.

Summary: The joint informational hearing examined how agricultural programs have used cap-and-invest funding and what role agriculture should play in future climate investments. The chairs opened by noting that agriculture had been largely left out of the cap-and-invest reauthorization, despite prior support through the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, and framed the hearing around climate-smart agriculture, food security, rural vitality, and the need for measurable co-benefits such as water savings, soil health, and air quality improvements. The first panel included CDFA Deputy Secretary Virginia Jamison and LAO analyst Helen Kirsten. Jamison described CDFA’s climate-smart portfolio, including the Healthy Soils Program, SWEEP, the Alternative Manure Management Program, and dairy methane reduction efforts, saying roughly $727 million has supported these programs and produced estimated reductions of 31 million metric tons of CO2e, 1.6 million acre-feet of water savings, and about 4,000 projects. She emphasized technical assistance, oversubscription of the programs, and the need for continued investment and better measurement/verification. Kirsten outlined the cap-and-invest structure, the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, and the state’s emissions inventory, noting agriculture is about 8% of California’s GHG emissions and that funding for tier-three programs may remain constrained. She also said prior LAO work found the programs have significant reduction potential but that some estimated benefits may be overstated, recommending further evaluation. The second panel featured UC researchers Alexandra Hill and Ermi Kibreab, who presented on the economic importance of California’s working landscapes and on dairy methane reduction pathways. Hill said working landscapes are a major part of the state and national economy, with agriculture driving most of the sector’s sales and jobs. Kibreab explained that dairy is central to methane reduction because it accounts for a large share of agricultural methane emissions, and described herd efficiency, digesters, alternative manure management, and emerging feed additives as complementary strategies. He said digesters and other incentive-supported measures are helping California move toward its methane goals, while noting feed additives such as 3-NOP and seaweed-based approaches could offer additional reductions in the future. The third panel brought contrasting views from environmental advocates, farmers, and industry representatives. Phoebe Seaton argued that further state funding for dairy digesters is not environmentally or economically justified, citing concerns about methane, nitrous oxide, groundwater impacts, odors, and high cost per ton reduced. Brian Shobe of CalCAN supported continued funding for programs like AMP, SWEEP, and Healthy Soils, saying they provide multiple co-benefits and that farmers need stable, incentive-based support to comply with climate and water regulations. Cannon Michael of Bowles Farming Company described his farm’s investments in organic and regenerative practices, composting, drip irrigation, solar, habitat management, and workforce programs, and said consistent funding helps farms plan and remain viable. Tricia Gerringer of the Agricultural Council of California urged funding for FPIP, the Farmer Program, methane reduction programs, and sustainable ag waste management, arguing they deliver immediate, measurable reductions and co-benefits. Members and witnesses debated the relative merits of digesters versus alternative manure management, the role of regenerative agriculture, and whether agriculture should be treated as a distinct policy category. No votes were taken; the hearing concluded with public comment supporting agricultural climate funding and a request to include agriculture in broader cap-and-invest discussions.

Transcript Highlights:

• However, in that law as well, there's, again, a balance for However, in that law as well, there's, again
• Court precedent is out in place as well on this question.
• Well, Representative, I'm leading this ballot initiative now.
• Well, it's tough for reporters to deal with her as well, and she has faced very little in the way of
• Well, I think your testimony was very clear.

Bills: H5004

Committee: Joint Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-14, H 5-004, “an act to improve access to public records.” Chairs Cindy Friedman and Alice Peisch outlined the Article 48 process and explained that the committee was hearing expert testimony, then proponents, then opponents, before any public testimony. The first expert, Will Clark of the National Conference of State Legislatures, gave a general overview of public records laws across the states, emphasizing that all states have some form of open-records law but that exemptions, timelines, fees, and coverage of legislatures vary widely. He discussed legislative exemptions, legislative privilege, and court cases showing that outcomes often turn on the exact language of state constitutions, statutes, and chamber rules. Rebecca Murray, General Counsel for the Secretary of the Commonwealth, testified about Massachusetts public records administration, saying requests and appeals have risen sharply since the 2017 law update, with state agency requests increasing from 22,572 in 2017 to 47,776 in 2025 and appeals reaching a record 4,051 cases in 2025. She said the initiative would extend the law to the General Court and the Governor’s office and add exemptions for those branches, while warning that the volume and complexity of requests could require more resources. The proponents, led by Jesse Littlewood of the Coalition for Healthy Democracy, Scotia Hila of Act on Mass, and Auditor Diana DiZoglio, argued that Massachusetts is an outlier for exempting the legislature and governor from public records law and that the proposal would create needed accountability without exposing personal constituent communications or internal deliberations. They said the measure would make records such as committee votes, final bill drafts, amendments, expenditures, attendance records, minutes, and public testimony available, while preserving exemptions for constituent services, draft legislation, internal staff communications, and policy development discussions. DiZoglio emphasized that the initiative is aimed at basic administrative and financial records, citing her own difficulty obtaining receipts, contracts, and procurement documents, and said the public should be able to see how taxpayer dollars are spent. Committee members questioned the witnesses extensively about the scope of exemptions, constituent privacy, legislative privilege, and whether the measure could reach communications with nonprofits or lobbying-type interactions; proponents responded that privacy and constituent-service exemptions were intended to remain in place, though some members pressed for clearer statutory language. The hearing also included a contentious exchange over whether the initiative could affect legislative communications and whether the Senate had already taken a position against the measure. Some members raised concerns about separation of powers, legislative privilege, and the possibility of exposing constituent communications or internal deliberations, while proponents argued that the initiative was narrowly tailored and that any legal disputes could be resolved in court. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing. The committee concluded the testimony portion after hearing from the proponents and their questions, with the matter left pending for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I'm speaking with my colleagues as well.
• Wouldn't they be required to have a ban as well? Mr.
• My children started driving at a very early age as well.
• Thank you. ...be aware as well.
• Districts as well?

Bills: SB23 , SB73 , SB210 , SB234 , SB243 , SB244 , SM16

Committee: Senate House Education

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 23, which would require school districts and charter schools to adopt and implement policies prohibiting student use of wireless communication devices during the school day, with exceptions for medical needs, assistive technology, emergencies, and educator-approved instructional use. The sponsors and PED/Broadband officials said the bill builds on last year’s law, responds to classroom distraction and cyberbullying concerns, and pairs the mandate with access to the Education Technology Infrastructure Fund for implementation support. Supporters included NEA-NM, AFT-NM, Teach Plus, New Mexico Kids Can, higher education, ECED, and others, who said the bill would improve focus, classroom culture, and student readiness. Some members questioned the three-year phase-in, local control over consequences, effects on recess/lunch and after-school programs, charter and virtual school enforcement, and whether statewide mandates were necessary; the committee ultimately advanced the bill on a 6-3 vote, with Senators Pope and Soules voting no. The committee then heard Senate Bill 73, which would add a requirement that driver education include instruction on vulnerable road users such as pedestrians, bicyclists, and others outside vehicles. The sponsor and supporters from APS, NEA-NM, AFT-NM, PED, Albuquerque city officials, cycling and pedestrian advocates, and individuals affected by traffic violence said New Mexico’s high pedestrian and bicyclist fatality rates make the training necessary and that better education could improve safety and awareness. Some testimony connected the bill to broader public health, climate, and Vision Zero efforts, while several speakers shared personal stories of crashes and losses. Committee members asked about the three-hour requirement, whether it would apply to existing drivers, how it would be implemented by DOT and MVD, and whether the bill should also address training for vulnerable road users themselves; concerns were also raised about rural road conditions and the limited behind-the-wheel training currently required. The committee passed SB 73 on a 6-3 vote, with Senator Thornton voting no. Finally, the committee began hearing Senate Bill 234, an appropriation of $1.2 million to Albuquerque Public Schools for transportation of students in foster care. The sponsor and an expert witness, a former CYFD caseworker, described serious transportation failures after contracts were terminated, saying caseworkers were forced to drive children themselves and that missed or late rides disrupted schooling and overburdened staff. APS, New Mexico Child First Network, and CYFD all supported the bill, saying it would clarify responsibility, relieve caseworkers, and ensure continuity of transportation for foster youth. Committee questions focused on why the appropriation was limited to APS rather than other districts with transportation shortfalls, whether $1.2 million would be enough, who would provide the rides, and what safety/background-check standards would apply if contractors were used. The bill was still under discussion when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, we are moving pretty well. We're going to be done early. Okay, we are moving pretty well.
• Okay, did we hear Senator Musselman as well? Yep, and Stephanie as well, and Senator Pitcher.
• Well, that's weird. Don't do that to Stephanie. All right.
• Well, there's not going to be any money attached to it.
• That's going very well down in Gunnison.

Committee: Joint Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Interim Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, thank you, kind of. Thank you, kind of.
• Well, one thing, it's got to be repurposed.
• I was also born there as well.
• So thank you, Senator, for that as well.
• So thank you, Senator, for that as well.

Summary: The committee first took up a long-running audit finding involving the City of Daytona Beach’s unexpended building permit fund balance, which has exceeded the statutory cap for several years and was reported at $10.8 million in the latest audit. Mayor Derek Henry and city staff said the city had analyzed the fund, adopted a corrective action plan, waived more than $5.5 million in permit and inspection fees, used some excess funds for a training facility rehabilitation, and is pursuing a $9.4 million City Hall expansion that they say is allowed under a November 2024 Attorney General opinion permitting construction of a building to house the building code enforcement function. Committee members repeatedly questioned whether the city was simply trying to spend down the money, whether the proposed uses were truly lawful, why the balance kept growing despite fee waivers, and where the interest earnings were going. The mayor and deputy city manager said the city’s growth and staffing needs justified the plan, but several members expressed frustration and skepticism. A public commenter also urged accountability and raised concerns about the city’s spending plans and the size of the remaining balance. The committee then received an Auditor General presentation on the Town of Greenville, which found 31 operational audit findings and described pervasive control failures, possible fraud, waste, and abuse. The findings included election paperwork problems that left a council seat vacant, conflicts of interest, late financial disclosure filings, related-party transactions, inadequate meeting notices and minutes, quorum and voting documentation problems, council members’ involvement in day-to-day operations, missing ethics training, budget adoption and monitoring deficiencies, inaccurate accounting records and bank reconciliations, utility billing and rate issues, grant compliance problems tied to an unfinished grocery store project, weak personnel and contracting controls, improper severance and compensation issues, late vendor payments, weak procurement and P-card controls, vehicle-use and property-control weaknesses, poor public records access, and IT access and fraud-policy gaps. Greenville’s mayor and staff said the audit largely reflected the prior administration and that the current council and staff are taking corrective action. They said the town terminated the former manager, adopted seven new policies since the audit began, and is working with the Auditor General to improve procurement, financial controls, inventory management, grant oversight, and ethics compliance. The town attorney said he had alerted federal authorities earlier about concerns, and committee members noted that FDLE has received a criminal referral and is investigating. Several members praised the new leadership’s cooperation but also suggested the town consider consolidation or dissolution if problems persist.

Transcript Highlights:

• And slide 31 shows the job numbers as well there.
• Some of those wells are deep—around 200 feet—but I think we have five or six wells.
• We also have Tilapia Wells, our smallest port.
• Is it a well? Is it a river?
• So, okay, she, well, we don't know yet, but she's open.

Committee: House New Mexico Finance Authority Oversight Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• Sure, Nicolette Serra speak here as well.
• See, each of the answers are all well.
• Well, this is in reference to the admission.
• We think they'll do well in this. Thank you.
• Well, I appreciate the opportunity to lay this out.

Committee: House Higher Education

Transcript Highlights:

• Obviously, the fire chief has something to say as well.
• Very well, very well, very well.
• Well, I would...
• Well, he did have the light on. I'll get you next.
• And it came out almost the same as well.

Bills: SB39 , SB2129 , SB2141 , SB2246 , SB2323 , SB2439 , SB2722 , SB 39

Committee: Senate Transportation

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee reconvened on SB 2722, as substituted by Senator Bettencourt, which would redirect a portion of Harris County Toll Road Authority surplus revenues to the City of Houston and impose audit and tax-rate penalty provisions. Houston Police Chief Noe Diaz and Fire Chief Thomas Munoz testified in support, arguing that Houston bears a large share of toll-road public safety burdens, citing thousands of police and fire responses on toll-road property and the need for compensation for emergency services. Bill King, testifying neutrally, said the toll authority generates large excess revenues and urged stronger oversight and clearer controls on how the money is spent. Opponents, including Harris County officials, business and neighborhood representatives, and toll-road critics, argued the bill would divert transportation dollars, create a precedent for taking toll revenues for general municipal use, and could worsen project delivery and incentives; several also questioned the accuracy and interpretation of the revenue figures and the lack of comparable audit requirements for the city. The committee took extensive testimony but left SB 2722 pending without a vote. The committee then heard SB 2129, which would increase fines for motorists who disregard railroad crossing gates or flaggers, and SB 2323, which would redact railroad crew members’ personal information from public accident reports. Both bills were presented as safety measures, with railroad labor testimony in support, and both were left pending after brief public testimony. The committee also heard SB 2141, a Zaffirini bill concerning specialty license plates for judges, with the substitute aimed at reducing security risks by changing how judges are identified on plates; it too was left pending. Finally, the committee heard SB 2439, another Zaffirini bill, described as a TDLR cleanup measure related to ATV and off-highway vehicle safety certification. The bill would abolish the current training and certification program, which supporters said was burdensome and underused given the small number of approved instructors statewide. With no significant opposition on the record, the committee closed testimony and left SB 2439 pending as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, All right. Any objection? What? Well, All right. Any objection? What? Well, hold on.
• Well, my people want to know what was Well, my people want to know what was Well, my people want to know
• Well, thank gentleman across the way. Well, thank gentleman across the way. Well, thank you.
• So that's Well, maybe coverage as well. So that's Well, maybe coverage as well.
• Well, no. I trying to pass it this year. Well, no. I trying to pass it this year. Well, no.

Bills: HB 135 , HCR 64 , SCR 3 , SCR 30 , SB 500 , SB 739 , SB 816 , SB 898 , SB 1283 , SB 1351 , SB 1423 , SB 1531 , SB 1540 , SB 1666 , SB 1721 , SB 1886 , SB 1931 , SB 2001 , SB 2075 , SB 2154 , SB 2173 , SB 2217 , SB 2284 , SB 2375 , SB 2383 , SB 2386 , SB 2398 , SB 2448 , SB 2476 , SB 2540 , SB 2580 , SB 2589 , SB 2693 , SB 2707 , SB 2776 , SB 2786 , SB 2801 , SB 2864 , SB 2927 , SJR 84 , SCR 30 , SB 243 , SB 324 , SB 393 , SB 457 , SB 511 , SB 529 , SB 547 , SB 636 , SB 646 , SB 659 , SB 715 , SB 731 , SB 735 , SB 800 , SB 801 , SB 904 , SB 1065 , SB 1141 , SB 1181 , SB 1224 , SB 1241 , SB 1242 , SB 1250 , SB 1266 , SB 1285 , SB 1359 , SB 1434 , SB 1442 , SB 1467 , SB 1502 , SB 1524 , SB 1528 , SB 1551 , SB 1585 , SB 1640 , SB 1754 , SB 1757 , SB 1777 , SB 1844 , SB 1863 , SB 1972 , SB 2007 , SB 2035 , SB 2046 , SB 2055 , SB 2069 , SB 2082 , SB 2119 , SB 2139 , SB 2154 , SB 2200 , SB 2201 , SB 2269 , SB 2310 , SB 2330 , SB 2357 , SB 2366 , SB 2401 , SB 2422 , SB 2514 , SB 2530 , SB 2533 , SB 2543 , SB 2544 , SB 2550 , SB 2568 , SB 2589 , SB 2660 , SB 2693 , SB 2695 , SB 2707 , SB 2717 , SB 2721 , SB 2742 , SB 2753 , SB 2807 , SB 2846 , SB 2891 , SB 2925 , SB 2938 , SJR 3 , SJR 18 , SB 5 , SB 326 , SB 767 , SB 769 , SB 783 , SB 914 , SB 963 , SB 1035 , SB 1197 , SB 1271 , SB 1415 , SB 1437 , SB 1619 , SB 1637 , SB 1786 , SB 1806 , SB 494 , SB 530 , SB 2312 , SB 1 , SB 260 , HB 135 , HB 1109 , HB 1392 , HB 22 , HCR 64 , SJR 36 , SJR 50 , SJR 63 , SJR 84 , SJR 59 , SCR 12 , SCR 39 , SCR 48 , SCR 19 , SCR 30 , SCR 3 , SB 2023 , SB 62 , SB 666 , SB 847 , SB 284 , SB 854 , SB 1073 , SB 810 , SB 1505 , SB 583 , SB 1502 , SB 507 , SB 1434 , SB 1376 , SB 1585 , SB 1772 , SB 2016 , SB 1163 , SB 1122 , SB 731 , SB 397 , SB 508 , SB 1436 , SB 287 , SB 261 , SB 1882 , SB 393 , SB 1791 , SB 209 , SB 2429 , SB 1999 , SB 511 , SB 2309 , SB 510 , SB 1085 , SB 1975 , SB 2717 , SB 1262 , SB 1524 , SB 636 , SB 2056 , SB 884 , SB 517 , SB 1200 , SB 1845 , SB 1863 , SB 2681 , SB 2200 , SB 2199 , SB 1757 , SB 2458 , SB 2201 , SB 801 , SB 2533 , SB 3014 , SB 3013 , SB 758 , SB 1721 , SB 1013 , SB 2797 , SB 2383 , SB 2119 , SB 2448 , SB 1777 , SB 1283 , SB 2076 , SB 2786 , SB 2876 , SB 2284 , SB 1540 , SB 2929 , SB 2540 , SB 2595 , SB 2217 , SB 715 , SB 500 , SB 1640 , SB 2001 , SB 2514 , SB 2753 , SB 2398 , SB 1241 , SB 2927 , SB 2173 , SB 2538 , SB 898 , SB 1449 , SB 2529 , SB 2846 , SB 2476 , SB 986 , SB 1181 , SB 2075 , SB 2154 , SB 2864 , SB 1359 , SB 2386 , SB 2550 , SB 1351 , SB 1423 , SB 1931 , SB 2245 , SB 2589 , SB 2707 , SB 410 , SB 2776 , SB 2580 , SB 1886 , SB 1234 , SB 739 , SB 456 , SB 1666 , SB 2801 , SB 2055 , SB 1012 , SB 2926 , SB 2138 , SB 1242 , SB 2615 , SB 2310 , SB 1224 , SB 2972 , SB 2841 , SB 3016 , SB 2139 , SB 1856 , SB 2035 , SB 1528 , SB 1141 , SB 2401 , SB 2530 , SB 2375 , SB 547 , SB 1266 , SB 1373 , SB 1467 , SB 2069 , SB 2269 , SB 2480 , SB 672 , SB 904 , SB 2695 , SB 2891 , SB 2422 , SB 2543 , SB 1854 , SB 317 , SB 2539 , SB 2532 , SB 2925 , SB 1250 , SB 2082 , SB 2203 , SB 457 , SB 2357 , SB 2721 , SB 243 , SB 1285 , SB 2568 , SB 1959 , SB 1442 , SB 1454 , SB 2520 , SB 2541 , SB 1708 , SB 1237 , SB 1844 , SB 1586 , SB 1551 , SB 3039 , SB 2819 , SB 66 , SB 629 , SB 1015 , SB 2342 , SB 2903 , SB 2933 , SB 1965 , SB 2477 , SB 3029 , SB 2605 , SB 2419 , SB 1957 , SB 375 , SB 250 , SB 777 , SB 628 , SB 2523 , SB 2367 , SB 2703 , SB 2608 , SB 2778 , SB 3044 , SB 2965 , SB 2521 , SB 865 , HB 2525 , HB 3093 , SB 1032 , SB 2165 , SB 2501 , SB 2675 , SB 2452 , SB 2835 , SJR 84 , SB 457 , SB 547 , SB 904 , SB 1467 , SB 1757 , SB 1777 , SB 2055 , SB 2069 , SB 2139 , SB 2401 , SB 2530 , SB 2543 , SB 2695 , SR 349 , SR 367 , SR 468 , SB 3064 , SB 3065 , HJR 7 , HB 119 , HB 130 , HB 163 , HB 166 , HB 201 , HB 272 , HB 331 , HB 380 , HB 654 , HB 694 , HB 718 , HB 865 , HB 1266 , HB 1397 , HB 1500 , HB 1552 , HB 1576 , HB 1583 , HB 1584 , HB 1760 , HB 1894 , HB 1965 , HB 2018 , HB 2029 , HB 2286 , HB 2340 , HB 2427 , HB 2455 , HB 2467 , HB 2508 , HB 2523 , HB 2730 , HB 2756 , HB 2791 , HB 2970 , HB 3016 , HB 3096 , HB 3248 , HB 3255 , HB 3336 , HB 3623 , HB 3698 , HB 3699 , HB 3803 , HB 3804 , HB 3805 , HB 3806 , HB 4129 , HB 4187 , HB 4236 , HB 4238 , HB 4643 , HB 4738 , HB 4739 , HB 5333 , SCR 3 , SCR 30 , SB 500 , SB 739 , SB 898 , SB 1283 , SB 1351 , SB 1423 , SB 1540 , SB 1666 , SB 1721 , SB 1886 , SB 1931 , SB 2001 , SB 2075 , SB 2154 , SB 2173 , SB 2217 , SB 2375 , SB 2383 , SB 2386 , SB 2398 , SB 2448 , SB 2476 , SB 2540 , SB 2580 , SB 2589 , SB 2707 , SB 2776 , SB 2786 , SB 2801 , SB 2864 , SB 2927 , HB 135 , HCR 64 , SB 2284 , SB 3064 , SB 3065 , HJR 7 , HB 119 , HB 130 , HB 163 , HB 166 , HB 201 , HB 272 , HB 331 , HB 380 , HB 654 , HB 694 , HB 718 , HB 865 , HB 1266 , HB 1397 , HB 1500 , HB 1552 , HB 1576 , HB 1583 , HB 1584 , HB 1760 , HB 1894 , HB 1965 , HB 2018 , HB 2029 , HB 2286 , HB 2340 , HB 2427 , HB 2455 , HB 2467 , HB 2508 , HB 2523 , HB 2730 , HB 2756 , HB 2791 , HB 2970 , HB 3016 , HB 3096 , HB 3248 , HB 3255 , HB 3336 , HB 3623 , HB 3698 , HB 3699 , HB 3803 , HB 3804 , HB 3805 , HB 3806 , HB 4129 , HB 4187 , HB 4236 , HB 4238 , HB 4643 , HB 4738 , HB 4739 , HB 5333

Transcript Highlights:

• when I said I I really didn't know well when I said I I really didn't know well when I said I didn't
• so I some Giants in this State as well so I some Giants in this State as well so I just want you all
• we have a uh on Fourth Avenue that well we have a uh on Fourth Avenue that well we have a lot of lot
• we did then but yeah we we we did well we did then but yeah we we we did well we did well and uh and
• and well and well it's alive and it's alive and it's alive and well and it it's just and it's and it

Bills: SB 2

Transcript Highlights:

• and those who are not doing so well?
• </c><00:57:22.960><c> um</c> on some of those numbers as well um on some of those numbers as well um
• Chairman. well in Minnesota we do of course have well in Minnesota we do of course have you<01:04:23.319
• Well, Mr.
• Well, she said it was Matt, so I assumed it was you.

Committee: Senate Jobs and Economic Development

Transcript Highlights:

• c> as</c><00:59:33.280><c> well</c> 22nd as well 22nd as well so<00:59:35.559><c> yes</c><00:59:35.880
• </c> budget out as well budget out as well uh<01:01:53.240><c> and</c><01:01:53.359><c> it</c><01:01:
• </c> so we really just start off with well so we really just start off with well what<03:26:46.239><c
• Well, what's reasonable?
• </c><03:30:55.080><c> you</c> so well in Hampshire says well you so well in Hampshire says well you cannot

Summary: The meeting was an introductory Ways and Means Committee orientation led by Chair John Janigian. Members went around the room introducing themselves, with several returning legislators and several freshmen describing their backgrounds in business, education, public service, finance, transportation, journalism, military service, and nonprofit work. Janigian explained his own legislative history and professional background, and other members, including Bill Bolton, Fred Doucette, Mary Ford, Jim Tierney, Scott Brier, Thomas Oppel, Mary Murphy, Representative Spar, Susan Elberger, Dennis Malloy, Jordan Ulery, and Julius Soti, briefly described their prior experience and reasons for serving on the committee. The chair then outlined the committee’s role. He said Ways and Means is responsible for revenue estimates that Finance will use to determine how much the state can spend over the next biennium, and that the committee would spend the next five to six weeks developing its best revenue estimate, due around February 15. He also explained that the committee hears from state agencies and departments about how taxes are created, collected, and performing against expectations, and that it reviews bills affecting state revenue, including tax increases, tax decreases, tax removals, and fee-related measures. Janigian noted that the committee had five bills at the time of the meeting and expected more to be referred. He explained that most would be first-committee bills, though some second-committee bills could come over if they involved taxes or fees after passing policy committees. He used marijuana-related legislation as an example of a bill that might first go to another committee and later reach Ways and Means if it had fiscal implications. No votes were taken; the meeting was informational, and members were told how to participate in hearings and follow-up questions during regular committee work.