Transcript Highlights:

• , you know, for all the different resource agencies when we're doing our environmental clearance documents
• 58.720> go<00:20:58.960> directly<00:20:59.280> to<00:20:59.360> the documents
• So we just go directly to the documents.
• Moving on to SB 3012, requiring as a condition of entry into the state documentation verifying that any
• threat to our cats pose a documented threat to our native<01:45:47.199> wildlife<01:45:47.679

Bills: SB2709, SB3154

Keywords: biosecurity, Department of Agriculture, quarantine, Akamai Arrival Program, importation regulations, pests control, plant health, animal health, compliance mechanisms, environmental review, transportation projects, NEPA, state sovereignty, federal compliance, streamlining, Hawaii Department of Transportation, 912, senate, all

Summary: The hearing began with SB 2709, which would require the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity to establish rules to enforce the Okami arrival program and strengthen quarantine enforcement for plants, non-domestic animals, and microorganisms. The Department of Land and Natural Resources and the Hawaii Invasive Species Council supported the bill, as did DAB, saying it would improve biosecurity and make some provisions mandatory rather than optional. Alaska/Hawaiian Airlines supported the goal but raised concerns about language changing inspections from “may” to “shall” for aircraft, warning of possible federal preemption and operational conflicts unless the bill is clarified to align with federal aviation safety, security, and operational requirements. Committee members questioned DAB about inspection timing, scope, and compliance; DAB said the measure is intended to increase enforcement, improve form completion rates toward a 90% goal, and expand beyond airlines to other entry modes, while also noting plans to restore detector dog use and improve software/AI tools for processing forms. Decision-making on SB 2709 was deferred to February 17 at 3:02 p.m. in Room CR229. The committees then took up SB 3154, an administration measure authorizing the Department of Transportation to assume certain National Environmental Policy Act responsibilities for highway, rail, public transportation, and multimodal projects, with the aim of streamlining environmental review. DOT supported the bill and explained that it would allow the department to work directly with federal resource agencies such as U.S. Fish and Wildlife and SHPO rather than routing everything through federal highways. After brief discussion, the Committee on Transportation voted to pass SB 3154 with technical amendments, and the AEN committee followed with the same recommendation; the measure was adopted with five votes in favor. A later portion of the transcript shifted to SB 2374 on the blue economy. DBED said it supported the concept but noted that it already sits on many working groups and would need resources if a new working group is created. DBED suggested the committee could instead request research through a letter or memo, and said agencies including ADC, HTDC, and Agriculture had already begun internal discussions. Testimony in support came from IMUA Alliance, Hawaii Food Policy, and others, emphasizing the potential for blue economy ventures to support survivors, align with climate and cultural goals, and create economic opportunity. No final vote on SB 2374 appears in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, there's documentation that's being submitted into our information system.
• There might be additional documentation that we request for them to provide to us, maybe policies and
• So, there's documentation desk audit.
• There might be additional<00:35:23.040> uh<00:35:23.200> documentation<00:35:23.760>
• that<00:35:24.000> we additional uh documentation that we additional uh documentation that

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The commission met to review and amend the minutes from its previous meeting, correcting the date, several spelling and wording errors, and clarifying references to a scholarship fund and a member’s title. The minutes were then approved as amended, with some members abstaining because they were not present at the prior meeting. The chair then turned to the commission’s work plan under SB 57, emphasizing the need to prioritize the statutory topics and identify which issues require additional research, documentation, and possible spreadsheets. Members discussed a broad range of special education cost drivers and policy questions, including student referral rates, why students are classified as other health impaired, whether referrals increased after COVID school closures, intervention processes before referral, the cost of services required under IEPs and 504 plans, differences between federal law, state law, and DOE rules, reporting of special education costs, out-of-district and residential placements, district sharing of resources, dispute resolution, graduation rates, and adult learning outcomes. Several members raised concerns that school environments, mental health, bullying, and possible overidentification may be contributing to rising special education numbers and costs, while others cautioned that some reported district percentages may be inflated or unclear because of how the data are counted. A major portion of the meeting focused on HB 742, which would eliminate prorated special education aid when state appropriations are insufficient and require the governor to draw a warrant to cover shortfalls. Representative Ames explained that the bill had been recommended for interim study because the commission is already examining special education costing, and he highlighted the gap between FY24 special education costs of about $977.1 million and state aid of $33.9 million for catastrophic aid, $67.4 million for differentiated aid, and $50.8 million in federal IDEA funds, leaving local districts to cover about $825.1 million. He argued the commission should ultimately make clear that both the federal government and the state should contribute more. The Department of Education, through Melissa White, answered questions about data and oversight. She said special education counts come from IEPs entered into the state system using SASIDs, that DOE monitors districts through both desk audits and on-site visits, and that billing is checked against the services listed in each student’s IEP. She also said DOE’s special education work is largely federally funded, with roughly $56.7 million received through IDEA this year and about $49.1 million flowing through to LEAs, while the department retains a small amount for administration and statewide support activities. Members also discussed how adequacy calculations use special education counts from the state system and how those figures are reported.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, there's documentation that's being submitted into our information system.
• There might be additional documentation that we request for them to provide to us, maybe policies and
• So, there's documentation desk audit.
• There might be additional<00:35:23.040> uh<00:35:23.200> documentation<00:35:23.760>
• that<00:35:24.000> we additional uh documentation that we additional uh documentation that

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The commission met to approve the November 21, 2025 minutes, making several clerical corrections before adopting them as amended. The edits included adding the date, correcting a misspelled name, clarifying references to a scholarship fund representative’s title, removing an incorrect “DOE” reference, and fixing a few wording errors. The minutes were approved with one abstention from members who were absent. The bulk of the meeting focused on organizing the commission’s work under SB 57 and identifying which special education cost issues should be prioritized for research and reporting. Members discussed a long list of topics, including student referral rates, why students are classified as other health impaired, increases in referrals since school closures, interventions before referral, costs of non-medically necessary services in IEPs and 504 plans, differences between federal and state requirements, reporting of special education costs, out-of-district and residential placements, dispute resolution, Medicaid and insurance use, graduation rates, and adult learning participation. Several members emphasized the need to combine or narrow topics and to gather better data before the report due July 1, 2026. Representative Ames highlighted HB 742, which would eliminate prorated special education aid payments when state appropriations fall short, and explained that the Education Funding Committee recommended interim study. He argued that local districts are bearing too much of the cost and that the state and federal governments should provide more support. Other members raised concerns about rising special education identification rates, possible overidentification, school climate and mental health factors, bullying, staffing, speech therapy access, and residential placements. One member cautioned that DOE website numbers may be inflated or at least difficult to interpret because of how students are counted. Department of Education staff then explained how special education data and costs are monitored. They said student counts are tied to IEPs and SASIDs in the state system, districts are checked through both desk audits and on-site monitoring, and billed services are compared against IEP requirements. They also described IDEA funding, noting that most DOE special education staffing is federally funded, with a large share of federal money flowing through to local education agencies and the remainder supporting administration, monitoring, and training initiatives. Members discussed whether more staff and more robust oversight would improve accuracy and accountability.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it would have created work for staff to have to write the letter and do all the documentation.
• So again, the the the documentation.
• And they're able to file documents that, you know, they might dispute how it was awarded or anything
• All documents are provided, scoring materials, references, and if there's a valid point that a vendor
• Um, all documents cabinet for review.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the June 10 minutes, and then handled a routine agenda of contracts and agreements. It deferred one Kentucky Educational Television contract to the August 2025 meeting because the vendor was not registered with the Secretary of State, and then approved the remaining routine items on the PSC green list and related contract lists without objection. The most detailed discussion involved two personal service contracts for the Kentucky Employees Health Plan. Officials from the Personnel Cabinet and Department of Employee Insurance explained that the contracts were designed to identify claims errors and overspending, with vendors paid a percentage of validated savings recovered for the plan. Senators asked how the savings were calculated and whether the contracts had changed plan processes; staff said the contracts had produced realized savings, some errors had been corrected going forward, and the vendors report quarterly. The committee approved those contracts. The committee then took up a retroactive Kentucky Higher Education Assistance Authority contract for a customized College Info Road Show bus. Members questioned why the contract was being presented months after execution, why it involved an out-of-state vendor, and whether the purchase was reasonable and timely. KHEAA staff said the delay stemmed from the need to finalize sustainability and safety details after the RFP, and acknowledged internal process and staffing issues. Several members criticized the retroactive approval process and said they could not validate the purchase from the information provided, but the committee ultimately approved the contract after debate. A final KHEAA discussion focused on the purpose and value of the mobile outreach bus. Staff said the bus supports college and financial aid outreach, especially in rural areas, and has been used for 26 years. Some members questioned the return on investment and whether the state should rely more on broadband and remote outreach, while others supported the program as a way to reach students and families. The committee approved the KHEAA contract, with Senator Douglas voting no and explaining concerns about whether such outreach programs are the proper role of government and whether they are the best use of public funds.

Transcript Highlights:

• And in previous testimonies, the Hawaii Natural Energy Institute documented that that has 200 times more
• <02:02:02.159> with<02:02:02.400> federal my testimony and documented with federal
• my testimony and documented with federal economic<02:02:03.760> data,<02:02:04.159> is<
• reports with the PUC, which classifies the amount that they're currently importing, but in other documents
• they've indicated they don't documents they've indicated they don't import<02:18:37.760> any<

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The joint hearing covered three measures. SB 1602 would appropriate funds to DLNR for monitoring wells for the Koho aquifer system; DLNR and HHFDC supported it, and written testimony from several organizations and individuals was also in support. Members asked whether monitoring wells are a statewide function rather than a county function, and staff confirmed they are done statewide. The second bill was an administration measure clarifying that criminal water pollution enforcement remains with the Department of Health rather than DLNR. The Attorney General’s office said it was a cleanup clarification and that DOH has stronger enforcement powers and better testing capability; DOH and DLNR supported it, and there was no opposition noted. The final and most heavily debated measure was SB 1074 on environmental impact statements. The bill would let previously authorized or permitted commercial activities continue for up to one year while an agency determines whether environmental review applies after a challenge, and would allow permit renewals during that review. DLNR said it stood on written comments and suggested aligning the bill with similar House language. Supporters, including several ocean tourism and Maui business representatives, argued the bill would provide certainty and keep families and small operators working while environmental review is completed, especially in the wake of the Lahaina fires and ongoing business losses. Some supporters said the measure should be narrowed with a sunset or limited to recently renewed permits. Opponents, including the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development, Earthjustice, the Sierra Club, and other environmental advocates, argued the bill was overly broad and could weaken HEPA/NEPA-style environmental review, especially for fisheries and other commercial activities. They said the bill could be used as a “Trojan horse” to avoid review and that DLNR could resolve the underlying disputes more quickly through settlement or existing exemption processes. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• there as well as a frequently documents there as well as a frequently asked<00:09:40.200> questions
• <00:09:40.680> document<00:09:41.079> so<00:09:41.279> as<00:09:41.399> we
• asked questions document so as we asked questions document so as we continue<00:09:41.920> to
• as<00:10:01.040> well<00:10:01.320> so<00:10:01.680> uh asked questions document
• as well so uh asked questions document as well so uh would<00:10:01.959> encourage<00:10:02.279

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The company then records a document in the county recorder's office, clouding the title.
• The company then records a document in the county recorder's office, clouding the title.
• I've provided a couple documents that should be helpful for you in understanding what SB 164 aims here
• The register of deeds is not going to decide what's a legal and not legal document, as he said.
• <01:43:29.719> as what's a legal and not legal document as what's a legal and not legal document

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We didn't have any documented cases of criminal drops, but it doesn't mean that the pilot didn't catch
• We didn't have any documented cases of criminal drops, but it doesn't mean that the pilot didn't catch
• If you're taking care of a family member, you have to accumulate a whole bunch of medical documentation
• <02:34:40.319> hand chairman so I I get this document hand chairman so I I get this document
• No, no, no—this document, that's all I was just curious, you know.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• previous having a bad moment and as the previous having a bad moment and as the previous document
• that was uh provided to document that was uh provided to you<01:59:46.280> you<01:59:46.400><
• There would be a concern that the note is not accurately reflecting whatever should have been documented
• <04:39:34.119> may<04:39:34.400> include<04:39:35.279> uh pages of of documents
• may include uh pages of of documents may include uh digital<04:39:36.199> files<04:39:37.199>

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They're especially the ones that are older and have no documentation of ownership.
• <01:06:20.640> of older and have no documentation of older and have no documentation of ownership
• We're really just trying to solve the documentation problem, and I'll turn it over to John Wally.
• This document was put onto the online portal.
• This document was put New Hampshire.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, I didn't documentation or evidence of specific documentation or evidence of specific incidences<01
• <02:26:14.560> I'm documented the entire collection.
• I'm documented the entire collection.
• At my school, we have a computer system that every incident is documented, the steps that were taken,
• policies or the way that we um document policies or the way that we um document our<03:54:32.560

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 102, which would make informational materials about type 1 diabetes available on the Department of Education website. Senator Ward said the bill is intended to help parents, teachers, and school staff recognize early symptoms such as thirst, frequent urination, fatigue, and weight loss so children can be referred for care before they develop diabetic ketoacidosis. He noted that a newer blood test can identify some children at risk earlier than in the past. Members asked how people would be directed to the website, and Ward said the information would be posted online and also distributed in handouts, with school personnel helping spread awareness. He emphasized the bill is informational only and not a diagnostic or treatment tool. Several supporters testified in favor, including representatives from the Dartmouth Diabetes Link and students with type 1 diabetes who described delayed diagnoses, emergency hospitalizations, and the difficulty of having symptoms misunderstood as stress, athletics, or normal teenage changes. They said the bill could help parents, teachers, and peers recognize warning signs earlier and reduce the risk of life-threatening ketoacidosis. One witness noted that New Hampshire ranks high in childhood type 1 diabetes, and another said even a single person seeing the information could make a difference. A retired diabetes educator and state representative also testified in support. The hearing on SB 102 was then closed. The committee then opened the hearing on Senate Bill 211, which would require school sports teams to be designated as male, female, or co-ed, bar biological males from female-designated teams and locker rooms, and create a cause of action for violations. Senator Avard said the bill responds to constituent concerns and is meant to protect fairness, safety, and privacy for biological females. In questioning, he said girls could still play on boys’ teams, but boys could not play on girls’ teams, and he said he would be open to changes. Opponents, including an attorney from LGBTQ Legal Advocates and Defenders, argued the bill is substantially the same as a law passed the previous year that was already challenged in federal court and found likely unconstitutional under equal protection and Title IX; they urged the committee to mark it inexpedient to legislate. The transcript cuts off before any committee vote or further action on SB 211.

Transcript Highlights:

• So at this point I will turn to our budget document, which you have before you, just a few highlights
• So at this point I will turn to our budget document, which you have before you, just a few highlights
• So at this point I will turn to our budget document, which you have before you, just a few highlights
• So at this point I will turn to our budget document, which you have before you, just a few highlights
• So at this point I will turn to our budget document, which you have before you, just a few highlights

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first reviewed House Bill 1, focusing on the legislative branch budget, especially the Senate and House lines. Members discussed that the Senate’s fiscal year 2025 adjusted authorized amount was higher than 2024 actual spending, largely due to personnel, benefits, and travel, and one member proposed a $500,000 annual cut. Staff explained that any reduction would need to be allocated across specific line items such as personnel, benefits, and travel, and noted that the Senate budget is entirely General Funds. After discussion of how the adjusted authorized figures were calculated and why the branch no longer staffs some joint committees as it once did, the committee moved on without taking a vote on that section. The committee then heard a detailed presentation from the New Hampshire Retirement System. NHRS officials described their statutory administrative budget, which is funded through the retirement trust rather than the General Fund, and said the FY 2026-2027 increase is driven by IT modernization, cybersecurity, a new strategic plan, and additional staff positions. They also reviewed the system’s funding progress, clean audit opinions, investment performance, and changes to asset allocation, while noting that several recent pension-related laws required major database changes. Members questioned the large increase in salaries and benefits, the need for new employees versus contractors, the purpose of training costs, and the source of the Group Two benefit funding. NHRS said the governor’s budget includes General Funds for Group Two benefit changes, with $5 million in FY 2026 and $27.9 million in FY 2027, and that the figures reflect the governor’s recommendation and related HB 2 provisions. Committee members also asked about employer and employee contribution rates for Group Two police and fire members, which NHRS said were not included in the budget document but were about 31.2% for police and 30.35% for fire, with employee shares around 11.55% and 11.8%. The committee did not make a decision on the NHRS budget during this exchange and indicated it would review the details further before returning to it later. The committee then heard from the Community Development Finance Authority on the State Treasury Department budget line for the required state match to administer the federal Community Development Block Grant program. CDFA explained that its $280,000 annual request for FY 2026 and FY 2027, totaling $560,000, supports administration, technical assistance, contracting, and monitoring of roughly $19 million in annual federal CDBG funds. Members asked about the leverage of the state match, oversight of projects, staffing, and grant prioritization. CDFA said it has 18 employees, uses public hearings and a scoring system to prioritize awards, and conducts both desk and on-site monitoring, with annual audits to ensure compliance. No vote was taken on the CDFA item in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• /c><00:09:52.839> in<00:09:53.040> fact<00:09:53.600> two<00:09:53.959> documented
• <00:09:54.560> cases cancer and in fact two documented cases cancer and in fact two documented
• <02:04:41.559> at uh data points that are documented at uh data points that are documented
• would that not be the finished document would that not be a<02:28:55.399> better<02:28:56.000
• They are happy to work with the Department of Health and Human Services to draft up a document such as

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Health, Human Services and Elderly Affairs heard testimony on House Bill 606, as amended, a bill aimed at preventing physicians from denying medically necessary sterilizing or fertility-affecting treatment based on a patient’s age, number of children, marital status, or a doctor’s speculation about future reproductive intentions. Representative Ellen Reed, the sponsor, described the bill as a response to her own long experience with PCOS, heavy bleeding, and repeated refusals by doctors to perform a hysterectomy despite her clear wishes. She said the amendment narrows the bill to medically necessary care, adds definitions for “medical condition” and “appropriate reproductive care,” and removes earlier provisions about voluntary sterilization referrals. She also said the bill does not target religious objections, and that doctors could still refuse for medical, payment, or existing religious reasons not addressed by the bill. Committee members asked about religious freedom, informed consent versus waivers, and the scope of the new definitions. Reed responded that religion was not added to the list of prohibited reasons for denial, and that the amendment is intended to protect doctors when patients sign informed consent or waivers. She explained that “appropriate reproductive care” includes procedures such as hysterectomy, oophorectomy, orchiectomy, salpingectomy, and endometrial ablation, and that the bill now focuses on medically necessary treatment rather than elective sterilization. She said the change was intended to make the proposal narrower and more tailored after earlier concerns. Several witnesses supported the bill with personal accounts of being denied hysterectomies or other procedures despite serious symptoms. Representative Lauren Selig described a decade-long effort to obtain a hysterectomy after years of cycle problems and migraines, saying doctors dismissed her concerns and treated her symptoms as normal. Jade Flad also testified in support, saying she had long been told to simply endure her cycle problems and noted that her husband was offered a vasectomy without similar barriers. The sponsor said online support was strong and that there was little or no written opposition testimony. No vote or final committee action was taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So if there was a way to consolidate and to make it more of a concise one document instead of having
• So if there was a way to consolidate and to make it more of a concise one document instead of having
• project managers are very well, they're very familiar with the scope of the project, what's in the documents
• project managers are very well, they're very familiar with the scope of the project, what's in the documents
• The master plan is a study document that we are mandated by law to repeat every six years.

Keywords: 965, house, all

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee held an informational hearing on the state capital outlay process, with Roger Husser and Matt Baker of the Division of Administration’s Office of Facilities Planning and Control (FPNC) presenting a detailed review of House Bill 2 and proposed improvements. They said FPNC administers about 54% of the bill, while other agencies administer the rest, and emphasized that the capital outlay program has improved significantly over the last few years, with project expenditures more than doubling due to better cash-flow management, staffing changes, and more efficient project administration. They also explained how the bill is structured by priorities, how the priority-one cash line of credit is capped and adjusted for construction inflation, and how the bill has grown into a much larger, longer-range plan than a true five-year program, especially on the non-state side. A major theme was that the bill contains too many dormant, legacy, and low-priority projects, which creates false expectations and ties up funding. Committee members pressed the presenters on culture change, third-party project management, staffing shortages, and the use of technology and statutory interpretation to speed projects without sacrificing compliance. Husser and Baker said they had reduced internal bureaucracy, used staff augmentation because of hiring difficulties, delegated smaller projects to agencies when appropriate, and improved cash-flow analysis so projects can move forward with less money up front. They also discussed overappropriations, dormant projects, and the need to reappropriate unused funds to projects that can actually spend them. The presenters offered several recommendations and considerations: limit the number and size of new projects, reduce scope creep, require more regular endorsement of long-running projects, consider caps on priority-five funding, impose time limits and reporting requirements on non-state grant projects, and possibly require non-state entities to escrow or otherwise demonstrate their match earlier. They also suggested bundling related projects together, expanding that approach beyond the current pilot, and improving transparency by showing full project funding history and the first year each project appeared in the bill. No votes were taken, and the meeting remained informational, with members generally supportive of the efficiency reforms while also raising concerns about false hope, dormant projects, and the need for clearer expectations and accountability.

Transcript Highlights:

• If you have documentation on encumbrances and those types of things, if this applies to any agency, please
• the patient is ill and seeking care, if that patient does not follow through and provide that documentation
• Listen to this: 84% of Americans—I've got all these documented—84% of Americans are... ...84% of Americans
• Listen to this, 84% of the Americans, I've got all these documented. 84% of Americans are I've got all
• these documented. 84% of Americans are expected to receive a tax cut. 84% of Americans are expected

Summary: The joint appropriations committee met on April 28 to review the FY 2027 budget package, including the general appropriations feed bills (HB 4138 and SB 1831) and related budget reconciliation measures. Staff described the budget as including about $17.96 billion in general fund appropriations, a one-time transfer of state monies to increase revenues, a 5% lump-sum reduction to most agencies’ discretionary general fund budgets, and several one-time restorations or continuations for items such as school facilities, child care, child safety, corrections stipends, and public safety operating costs. Members spent much of the meeting debating how the across-the-board cuts would be implemented, which programs might be affected, and how fund sweeps from prior-year appropriations and special funds would work, including questions about universities, public safety, rural hospitals, transportation grants, the Corporation Commission, and health insurance costs for state employees and troopers. A major point of discussion was the impact on universities and higher education. Arizona Board of Regents representatives said the proposed reductions and fund sweeps would affect already obligated dollars, research, staffing, and student aid programs, and could force difficult decisions about programs such as the Promise Program, Teachers Academy, and other pass-through funds. Committee members also raised concerns about whether the cuts could lead to tuition increases or reductions in services, while majority members emphasized that agencies and the executive branch should decide how to absorb the reductions. Another major topic was health care and the state employee health plan: staff explained that the budget includes a $228 million general fund infusion to stabilize the plan, while a separate reconciliation bill would raise employee premiums over three years. Members also discussed whether the budget’s changes to AHCCCS/Access and hospital eligibility rules could increase costs for hospitals and reduce coverage. Public testimony largely opposed the budget. Speakers from Opportunity Arizona, the Arizona Board of Regents, and local governments argued that the proposal would shift costs onto working families, reduce support for education, housing, SNAP, health care, and rural infrastructure, and protect tax benefits for data centers and higher-income taxpayers. A mayor from Globe asked for state help after severe flooding damaged roads, water lines, and homes, while a motorcycle safety advocate asked the committee to review a DPS motorcycle safety fund appropriation. Committee members and staff repeatedly clarified that some items discussed were one-time appropriations not continued into FY 2027, that some fund sweeps were from unspent or unencumbered balances, and that the committee planned to take a mass roll-call vote on the budget bills at the end of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• If you have documentation on encumbrances and those types of things, if this applies to any agency, please
• the patient is ill and seeking care, if that patient does not follow through and provide that documentation
• I've got all these documented. happened to have a gray hair or two. I appreciate that very much.
• Listen to this, 84% of the Americans, I've got all these documented. 84% of Americans are I've got all
• these documented.

Bills: HB4138, HB4139, HB4140, HB4141, HB4142, HB4143, HB4144, HB4145, HB4146, HB4147, HB4148, HB4149, HB4150, HB4151, HB4152, HB4153, SB1831, SB1832, SB1833, SB1834, SB1835, SB1836, SB1837, SB1838, SB1839, SB1840, SB1841, SB1842, SB1843, SB1844, SB1845, SB1846

Keywords: appropriations, education funding, health care, general fund, state budget, local funding, gaming, pari-mutuel, horse racing, regulatory assessment, first-time starters, budget implementation, federal funds, government services, budget stabilization, financial reporting, capital outlay, infrastructure, veterans services, highway construction

Transcript Highlights:

• In 2023, I remember coming to my desk and I sat down and I saw a document there and it said, Climate
• But what I would encourage you all to do is do what I did: look at that document.
• Look at that document. Because quite frankly, when I saw it, I went, none of us got input on this.
• It will also include the settlement document itself, unless the agreement...
• It will also include the settlement document itself, unless the agreement is confidential under the existing

Bills: HB165, HB175, HB198, HB272, HB457, HB488, HB566, HB603, HB763, HB902, HB909, HB971, HB981, HB1066, HB1125, HB1154, HB1231

Keywords: HB165, lottery proceeds, Lottery Proceeds Fund, Veterans Service Grant Fund, constitutional amendment, veterans, military veterans, veterans' benefits, veterans services, family support, state lottery, education funding, Minimum Foundation Program, problem gambling, compulsive gaming, state treasurer, ballot proposition, constitutional referendum, lottery revenue, Louisiana resident veterans

Transcript Highlights:

• In 2023, I remember coming to my desk and I sat down and I saw a document there and it said, climate
• But what I would encourage you all to do is do what I did: look at that document.
• Look at that document. Because quite frankly, when I saw it, I went, none of us got input on this.
• Look at that document. Because quite frankly, when I saw it, I went, none of us got input on this.
• It will also include the settlement document itself, unless the agreement... ...is confidential under

Summary: The House Appropriations Committee met on April 27 and first took up House Bill 175 and its companion House Bill 165, both dealing with lottery proceeds for veterans. HB 175 was amended to create a Veterans Service Grant Board within the Department of Veterans Affairs and direct $500,000 annually from Louisiana Lottery net proceeds into a Veterans Service Grant Fund, with unused money returned to the lottery proceeds fund that supports the MFP. Supporters, including the bill sponsor, The Boot Louisiana, LDVA Secretary Charlton McGinley, and Bastion Veterans Organization, argued the grants would help veteran services, workforce placement, mental health, housing, entrepreneurship, and retention of veterans in Louisiana. Members raised concerns about drawing from lottery proceeds that traditionally support education, but the committee adopted amendments and reported HB 175 favorably as amended. HB 165, the constitutional amendment companion, was also amended for technical and ballot-language changes and then reported favorably as amended for voter consideration. The committee then considered House Bill 457, which would authorize the Louisiana Department of Health and the State Fire Marshal to set minimum housing standards for homeless shelters, group homes, and halfway homes. The sponsor said the bill responded to a state auditor recommendation and to unsafe conditions in some facilities; he also explained an amendment changing the Fire Marshal’s duties from mandatory to permissive to reduce fiscal impact and allow agencies flexibility. Some members questioned whether local standards already existed and how enforcement and funding would work, while others supported the need for statewide minimum standards for human housing. The committee adopted the amendment and reported HB 457 favorably as amended. House Bill 488, by Representative Brough, sought to create a Belle Chasse Bridge Merit-Based Special Fund using recurring severance tax revenues from Plaquemines Parish to help buy out the Belle Chasse toll bridge and end what the sponsor described as excessive tolls and fees. He and several local witnesses, including business owners, a YMCA representative, and a parish council member, testified that the tolling arrangement had harmed access, businesses, and quality of life. The committee adopted a technical amendment clarifying the revenue source and then reported HB 488 favorably as amended. House Bill 566, which would prohibit state funds from supporting net-zero greenhouse gas initiatives tied to the 2022 Louisiana Climate Action Plan, drew significant debate over whether it would interfere with agency funding and economic development efforts; the sponsor argued the plan lacked legislative approval and should be repudiated, while members urged caution and suggested hearing from affected agencies. The sponsor agreed to consider deferring the bill, and the committee did not advance it at that time. House Bill 603, a constitutional amendment authorizing investment of state funds in digital assets and precious metals, was discussed as a way to hedge inflation and preserve value; members asked about limits and safeguards, and the bill was reported favorably. The committee then began hearing House Bill 763, a transparency measure creating a public database for settlement agreements involving state agencies.

Transcript Highlights:

• Despite my timely submission of all required documents in 2023 and following my testimony to the House
• During my last visit, the dealership documented that no software update is available and there is no
• creates a centralized licensure and disciplinary registry so that professional misconduct can be documented
• First, you want to emphasize the comprehensive plan is supposed to be a document that sets out general
• We don't know if it's appropriate to call out specific uses in this document like this bill does, especially

Bills: HB2072, HB2251, HB2279, HB2308, HB2323, HB2342, HB2400, HB2408, HB2456, HB2660, HB2697, HB2868, HB2873, HB2877, HB2910, HB2946, HB2955, HB2991, HB4001, HB4010

Keywords: Cesar Chavez, public holiday, state law, holiday repeal, Arizona Revised Statutes, midwifery, medication administration, healthcare, patient safety, advisory committee, licensed midwives, river trips, liability, outfitter, Grand Canyon, negligence, risk management, contractual waiver, dental practice, business registration

Transcript Highlights:

• The two of them have been instrumental in preparing this document.
• 00:32:47.120> in<00:32:47.360> preparing<00:32:47.760> this<00:32:48.000> document
• instrumental in preparing this document. instrumental in preparing this document.
• That's one of their main goals is to review and approve the RFP documentation.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all