Transcript Highlights:

• have the best access, but this bill creates density in the most constrained part of town, where late-grade

Bills: HB407, HB871, HB882, HB2011, HB3572, HB3578, HB4038, HB4866, HB4897, HB4978, HB5380, HB5555, HB5668, HB5670, HB5674, HB5676, HB5679, HB5688, SB673

Keywords: solar energy, residential construction, building code, municipal regulations, energy compliance, building codes, interconnection, education, funding, teacher support, student resources, school infrastructure, municipal requirements, environmental sustainability, municipalities, construction, agricultural operation, International Code Council, county regulations, construction fees

Transcript Highlights:

• First so we'll move forward with that.
• ,</c> intervals, so within the first 63 days, intervals, so within the first 63 days, um<00:29:56.080
• </c> I guess I don't understand on the first I guess I don't understand on the first program<00:58:02.960
• Didn't catch that the first time.
• </c> obligated to deliver water in the first obligated to deliver water in the first place. place. place

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, and first up, I'll open the public hearing on HB 42. Thank you very much, Mr.
• </c> and only about 40% can do math at grade and only about 40% can do math at grade level<03:47:26.600
• First, this bill solves three problems.
• </c> lottery so that was my first lottery so that was my first inauguration<04:03:10.159><c> with</c>
• </c><04:03:33.359><c> major</c> helped organize the first major helped organize the first major conference

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on HB 402, a bill to repeal a provision in RSA 194-F:2 stating that Education Freedom Account (EFA) funds “shall not constitute taxable income” to the parent or student. The bill sponsor argued the current language is misleading because the state cannot determine federal tax liability, and said the bill would simply remove inaccurate tax advice from state law. He cited IRS guidance and prior federal legislation, including a Ted Cruz proposal, to suggest some EFA uses may be taxable under federal law, while others may not, and said the bill could be amended if needed to avoid confusion. Testimony was sharply divided. Py Campbell opposed the bill, arguing it would unfairly single out EFA students and could amount to a tax on education funds, including for self-employed families, and recommended it be voted inexpedient to legislate. Stephen Matthew French, a tax preparer, also opposed the bill, saying IRS Publication 970 already makes clear that scholarship-type payments used for tuition and related expenses are not taxable, and that the bill addresses a problem that does not exist. He warned that adding tax reporting requirements could create administrative costs for families and the program administrator. Bill Ardinger, a tax attorney, supported the repeal of the statutory language, saying the state should not place potentially incorrect tax advice into law. He explained that under federal tax law, only certain scholarship-like uses are exempt, while many EFA-eligible expenses may not be, especially for families using the program for homeschooling or other nontraditional expenses. He said the current statute could mislead families into thinking all EFA payments are tax-free and could expose the state to future legal problems. The hearing ended after questions from committee members; no vote or final action was taken in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, Senator Cortese. Thank you, thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be brief.
• If I'm wrong, it's an A grade in the state of California.
• It's not the first objection that I've heard in regards to this.
• And I first would want to acknowledge the opposition's statement.
• We reported that to the feds first.

Summary: The committee heard SB 1377, which would change California’s medical exemption process for school immunizations. The author and supporters argued the bill would restore physician discretion, reduce fear of audits and discipline, and help families with medically vulnerable children obtain exemptions. Opponents, including pediatric, medical, and public health groups, said the current system created by SB 276 and SB 277 is working, that valid exemptions are still being issued, and that loosening oversight could undermine immunization rates and public health. Members debated the data behind claims of a chilling effect, the number of exemptions reviewed or revoked, and the bill’s amendments, which narrowed the measure to current exemptions and added a small additional threshold. Because there was no quorum at the time, action on SB 1377 was delayed until a quorum could be present. The committee then heard SB 995, the Masuma Khan Justice Act, which would create a statewide inspection and enforcement framework for large voluntary residential facilities, including private immigration detention centers. The author and supporters described alleged neglect and abuse in detention facilities, including denial of medication, unsafe food and water, and inadequate oversight, and argued the state should ensure humane conditions and accountability. The California Hospital Association expressed concern about duplicative oversight and possible overlap with existing regulation, while the author said the bill was being refined to avoid constitutional problems and duplication. The committee voted to do pass and re-refer SB 995 to Judiciary, with the roll call showing five votes and the bill placed on call. SB 1089 was also heard, proposing expanded access to GLP-1 medications for state and local government employees through CalPERS and encouraging broader affordability efforts through CalRx. The author framed the bill as a response to chronic weight disease, diabetes risk, and high costs, and described his own experience obtaining and paying for GLP-1 treatment. Supporters from the American Diabetes Association and medical groups said GLP-1s are effective tools for preventing and managing type 2 diabetes and could reduce long-term health costs. No opposition was heard, and the committee voted do pass and re-refer the bill to Labor, Public Employment, and Retirement, with the vote placed on call. The committee also began SB 1221 on Murphy conservatorships, with supporters and opponents debating whether district attorneys should have a larger role in these proceedings and whether the bill would improve public safety or disrupt the civil mental health process; the transcript cuts off before final action on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• And who's going first? You want to go first, sir? I don't know since you called me first.
• And who's going first? You want to go first, sir? I don't know since you called me first.
• to the grade required in wells.
• I don't think the safety of our people should come first.
• We do my HR first. Okay. I'd rather do your other one first. Which one do you want to do first? HR?

Summary: The committee took up public comment on a package of similar local-option bills related to carbon capture and sequestration, including House Bills 5, 6, 497, 498, 501, and 504. The bills would let parishes, or in some cases specific parishes such as Rapides and Livingston, decide by local vote whether Class VI wells, CO2 sequestration, and related pipeline infrastructure could be permitted. The chair grouped the bills together for testimony, adopted a three-minute public comment rule, and noted that the bills were not yet under consideration for a vote during the public-comment portion. Supporters, including Speaker Pro Tem Mike Johnson, parish officials, local activists, and residents, argued that communities affected by carbon capture projects should have a direct voice through local option elections. They said the bills were about self-determination, local control, and allowing residents to decide whether the risks are worth the benefits. Several speakers said their parishes had passed resolutions opposing carbon capture or asking for local choice, while others emphasized concerns about eminent domain, aquifer protection, lack of public understanding, and the need for more information about project impacts and financial benefits. Some supporters also said a local vote would force industry to engage more directly with communities and could improve transparency. Opponents, including representatives of the Department of Conservation and Energy, the Louisiana Chemistry Association, the Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association, and the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry, warned that the bills would create uncertainty, undermine Louisiana’s primacy over Class VI permitting, and invite litigation under federal preemption and the Supremacy Clause. They said the state already has a strict permitting process with public input and technical review, and that allowing parish-by-parish approval could delay or block billions of dollars in investment, jobs, and export-related projects. The department testified that if the state adopted a local-option referendum system, EPA could determine Louisiana was not implementing the program consistently and could move to remove primacy. No committee vote was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> refer to section the very first refer to section the very first beginning,<00:26:21.080><c> it</
• And you've got a good first step.
• Um, when I finally realized that it wasn't, that was when I first received that first bullet and then
• </c> to Senate file 4276, the first to Senate file 4276, the first engrossment.<00:56:42.680><c> And<
• First of all, the COLA delay.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• two, first come first served, will take these two podiums, and the next two that I call will be right
• I'm going to call up our first four witnesses.
• So first, I want to give my condolences.
• His first trimester was for the United States Capitol.
• First one is about the Constitution.

Keywords: 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And, ironically, there is a first time for every business to have a violation, which would neatly carve
• That's the first thing it does. It sets a standard. I think it's a fair standard.
• So remember in grade school, when you took the math test, you had to show your work, and that's how you
• And the first three were pretty much planned.
• So this is when it was first brought to me, I thought, well, that's a great idea.

Bills: SB5223, SB5928, SB6071, SB5995, SB5966, SB5841, SB6061, SB5944, SB5520, SB6087, SB6076, SB5916, SB6016, SB6137, SB6009, SB5833, SB6161, SB5890, SB5973, SJM8015, SB5816, SB5053, SB5249, SB5536, SB5834, SB5837, SB5872, SB5879, SB5899, SB5925, SB6019, SB6148, SB6190, SB6237, SB6086, SB5574, SB5873, SB5992, SB5924, SB6134, SB6263, SB5395, SB6282, SB5905, SB6302, SB5950, SB6074, SB6096, SB5970, SB5609, SB5827, SB5838, SB5845, SB5862, SB5880, SB5901, SB5922, SB5943, SB5971, SB5975, SB5981, SB5982, SB5984, SB5988, SB5994, SB6034, SB6035, SB6070, SB6097, SB6110, SB6246, SB6248, SB6278, SJM8016, SB5496, SB6054, SB5835, SB5907, SB6031, SB6155, SB6158, SB6227, SB5947, SB6247, SB6085, SB6234, SB6274, SB6194, SB5909, SB5868, SB6026, SB5974, SB6044, SB5906, SB6081, SB6239, SB5923, SB6323, SB6210, SB6045, SB6106, SB5346, SB6089, SB6170, SB5954, SB5968

Keywords: criminal offense, fingerprinting, law enforcement, state regulations, public safety, wildfire risk, disclosure, safety, environmental policy, risk assessment, overpayment recovery, modernization, health care, legislation, zero emission, cargo handling, port district, environmental impact, grant allocation, healthcare

Transcript Highlights:

• THIS COMES PRIMARILY FROM A LOT OF THE FEEDBACK I RECEIVED IN THE FIRST COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE.
• WHILE ALSO TAKING IN THE FEEDBACK FROM THE FIRST COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE WHICH I KNOW THAT THE PRESIDENT
• AND AGAIN SENATORS THIS AMENDMENT IS REALLY BASED ON THE FEEDBACK I HEARD FROM THE FIRST COMMITTEE OF
• TAX HOLIDAY SHOULD BE FOR NECESSITIES, NOT FIRST SCORING POLITICAL POINTS WITH YOUR CONSTITUENTS.
• CERTAINLY THE PRESIDENT FROM HIS FIRST DAY I CAN REMEMBER IS ALWAYS SPOKEN TO TURN TO HELP THE FARMER

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, one of the first actions that was taken this session was the LBB board, in conjunction with
• The first one that I mentioned was the initial bill that was laid out on page 24.
• And that is contingent on legislation to address local rail grade crossings, $400 million to the Water
• First of all, thank you for all that y'all do.
• The first is Rider 144. Right now? Absolutely, Mr. Chairman.

Bills: SB1, HB500, SB 1

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, state budget, mental health funding, education funding, infrastructure improvements, public safety, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We started this session, it's our first bill, with many more to come.
• Instead, we're injecting the largest first ever. investment as we heard from our chairman in the nation
• In the first, very first section, support and maintenance of a system of public free education.
• properly funded, and that's the only reason that we're having this conversation here tonight in the first
• And my teacher bill of rights that many of you that are opposing this bill today voted against was graded

Bills: SB2, SJR36, SB2, SB2, SR29, SB2

Keywords: Maverick County, recognition, economic development, Texas Senate, community celebration, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• First of all, the troops—are they doing well? The troops are doing well.
• You can guess my first complaint is property taxes. Yep, right.
• Our first request is for $2 million, $1.9 million.
• Or do they have to start at a lower grade and then work up?
• That’s the first bump we got, and our employment numbers actually improved for the first time.

Bills: SB 1

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

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee heard a presentation from the Legislative Budget Board on the Texas Department of Public Safety’s Article 5 budget. LBB recommended $3.7 billion in all funds for 2026-27, a 5.2 percent decrease from the base, while FTEs would rise by 856.7. Major items included funding for driver license services, DPS facilities, troopers and recruit schools, crime labs, vehicle and aircraft operations, border security, and rider changes. The committee also reviewed DPS exceptional items not included in the recommendation, including additional staffing, technology, and facility requests. Members focused heavily on driver license operations, criticizing long wait times, call abandonment, and repeated staffing increases without clear process improvements. LBB said the agency’s call-answer rate was about 9 percent in fiscal 2024, with average hold times around 34 minutes, later reduced to roughly 22-25 minutes. Senators questioned whether more FTEs alone would solve the problem and urged a broader efficiency study and better use of technology. DPS officials said they were pursuing process changes, including appointment-system upgrades, online pre-population of forms, and remote issuance options, while noting that Real ID requirements and population growth continue to drive demand. DPS leadership then outlined the agency’s priorities: completion of the Williamson County training academy, recruitment and retention of troopers, capital needs for vehicles and aircraft, and expanded responsibilities at the Capitol complex and the Alamo. Officials said the new trooper funding would help address staffing shortages, public safety, and border operations, and that overtime and deployment patterns had been adjusted to reduce burnout and improve flexibility. They also discussed Operation Lone Star, saying DPS spending is largely overtime, travel, and fuel, and that the agency continues to coordinate with federal partners while awaiting clarity on possible federal reimbursement for border security costs. Senators also raised concerns about oilfield theft, cartel activity, high-speed pursuits, bilingual pay, and the Texas Ranger Hall of Fame and Museum, and DPS said it would follow up on some of those issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the first item is Senate File 12, Wyoming National Guard Reenlistment Bonus Program.
• And so it would apply to those people that have gotten their first term out of the first six years.
• Many of the towns have valleys in them or grade to them. A town like Pal's is pretty well flat.
• Many of the towns have valleys in them or grade to them. A town like Pal's is pretty well flat.
• This would Wyoming would be the first state to do this.

Bills: HB0078, SF0012, SF0013, SF0052, SF0069, SF0070

Keywords: forest health, grant program, state forester, wildfire prevention, environmental conservation, habitat improvement, military, national guard, reenlistment, extension bonus, funding, Wyoming, Wyoming National Guard, recruitment, referral bonus, military service, eligibility expansion, incentive program, wildlife management, environmental restoration

Transcript Highlights:

• First, this is for cooperatives time.
• </c> nuclear, but when solar technology first nuclear, but when solar technology first came<01:28:43.120
• And this is only the first step, so I'd ask for a green vote.
• ,</c> and summer camps through the 12th grade, and summer camps through the 12th grade, creating<03:49
• But the first 10 reunion.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, and first up, I'll open the public hearing on HB 42. HB 42. Thank you very much, Mr.
• level and only about 40% can do math at grade level.
• </c> and only about 40% can do math at grade and only about 40% can do math at grade level<03:47:26.600
• First, this bill solves three problems.
• </c><04:03:33.359><c> major</c> helped organize the first major helped organize the first major conference

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee opened a public hearing on HB 402, a bill dealing with whether Education Freedom Account (EFA) payments should be described in state law as not constituting taxable income. The bill sponsor argued that the current statute is misleading because New Hampshire should not imply a federal tax result, and said the bill would remove that language and could also be amended to clarify that families should consult tax advisors. He emphasized that the measure was not intended to impose a state tax on EFAs, but to avoid giving inaccurate advice about possible federal tax liability. Testimony was divided. A retired representative and a tax preparer both opposed the bill, saying EFA payments are already treated consistently with IRS rules and that the bill would create confusion, administrative burden, and possible tax consequences for low- and moderate-income families. They argued the bill is a solution in search of a problem and warned that requiring 1099s could add costs for the scholarship organization and recipients. A tax attorney supported the bill’s repeal of the state language, saying New Hampshire should not put tax advice into statute and that the current wording is inaccurate because federal law, not state law, controls taxability. He cited IRS Section 117 and Publication 970, explaining that only some scholarship-like payments are tax-free and that many EFA-eligible expenses may not qualify for federal exemption. Members asked questions about what would be misleading, whether the bill was trying to tax EFAs, and the cost of issuing 1099s. The sponsor and witnesses repeatedly said the bill was not a state tax on voucher payments, but a clarification about federal tax treatment. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• They resigned before they even showed up for their first meeting.
• I mentioned the very first part about, you like this testimony, don't you?
• I mentioned the very first uh language.
• Um the very first time it was don't you?
• c> um</c> So, first and foremost, um So, first and foremost, um this<04:38:00.639><c> bill</c><04:38:

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• When budgets are tightened and classes are cut, part-time faculty are the first to be let go.
• That was the first one.
• So more time to prepare, even turning in grades, there's all sorts of examples of that where the duties
• And the first is House Bill 5931. Ms.
• Executive session now and I we've got two bills we're going to consider and the first is House Bill 5931

Bills: SB6258, SB5963

Keywords: Washington Medical Commission, medical license, license relinquishment, voluntary surrender, nondisciplinary pathway, physician regulation, health professional licensing, disciplinary database, National Practitioner Data Bank, license renewal, license reinstatement, medical board, professional discipline, credential surrender, healthcare regulation, SB 5963, passport to careers, Washington College Grant, financial aid, higher education

Transcript Highlights:

• Let's go with Stephen Watson first. Che call Steve Steven Watson, thank you for being here.
• Under your bill they're gonna be, it's gonna be mandatory they do it first when I do a plant that's correct
• I mean, a lot of times we'll have a mud graded.
• So when, when do you start your first traffic study, and then when do you really actually start pouring
• Traffic impact studies are one of the first steps in project development, and it's often completed before

Transcript Highlights:

• They resigned before they even showed up for their first meeting.
• They resigned before they even showed up for their first meeting.
• So it's so if for their first meeting.
• I mentioned the very first part about—you like this testimony, don't you?
• c> um</c> So, first and foremost, um So, first and foremost, um this<04:38:00.639><c> bill</c><04:38:

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee convened for a day of public hearings on nine bills, with plans to later execute several early bills and possibly additional measures under House Rule 44. Chair Diane Pauer outlined time limits for sponsors and testimony, announced a lunch break around noon, and noted substitute members would be arriving later. The first hearing was on House Bill 1107, which would allow municipal budget committees to have one to three alternate members. Representative Valon, the prime sponsor, said the bill was intended to help towns like Epping deal with quorum problems during the compressed budget season and noted that alternates are common on other local boards. The New Hampshire Municipal Association testified in support, saying the bill would increase flexibility and help fill seats. Committee members raised concerns about whether alternates should be elected, how they would be selected, whether they would be sufficiently informed to vote, and whether the bill’s one-year term language and rescission provisions were clear. The sponsor and NHMA said the process would be consistent with other local boards, that alternates would typically be appointed after elections, and that they would follow up on possible statutory clarification. The hearing closed with six remote supporters, one paper supporter, and no opposition reported. The committee then heard House Bill 1118, sponsored by Representative Colby, which would raise the daily amount municipal employees may hold before remitting funds to the treasurer from the current $1,500 limit to $3,500. Colby said the existing thresholds are outdated, have not been updated in about 20 years, and create burdens for smaller towns that must make frequent bank deposits, sometimes far from town offices. She said the bill would improve efficiency and allow staff to focus more on serving residents, while still allowing municipalities to keep lower limits if they choose. Members asked about how the remittance process works in practice, what amounts municipalities typically collect, and whether the change reflected a broader trend of updating cash-handling thresholds. The sponsor explained that the bill only changes the dollar thresholds in the relevant statutes and does not require municipalities to adopt the higher limit. The transcript cuts off before any final action on HB 1118 is reported.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, the first one, the 209 bill first, please. session. So I have two amendments here session.
• </c> uh the first one that 209 209 bill first uh the first one that 209 209 bill first please. please
• </c> pay, the first 15 grand. pay, the first 15 grand.
• So there'd be $50,000 up to the for the<03:22:23.840><c> first</c> the first the first $65,000<03:22:
• So that that first formula. Yeah.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up SB 209, which would require schools seeking building aid for construction or reconstruction projects to use an owner’s project manager. The chair explained an amendment that would remove the bill’s requirement that the manager be engaged before application and instead revert to current law, while updating the project threshold from the older $1 million figure to a more current amount and clarifying that the manager’s role is to protect the project owner’s interests. Members asked about the cost of hiring a project manager over several years before a project is funded, the 1.5% fee in rule, and whether the rules already define the manager’s duties. The chair said the amendment addressed those concerns by leaving the timing to current law and relying on existing administrative rules for qualifications and responsibilities. The committee then voted 18-0 to adopt the amendment and 18-0 to recommend SB 209 OTPA, placing it on the consent calendar. The committee then moved to SB 99, which concerns allowing students enrolled in career and technical education programs at receiving comprehensive high schools to take additional academic courses there. The chair said the bill was intended to make it easier for students to access CTE without being blocked by scheduling conflicts in their sending schools, and to clarify how agreements between sending and receiving districts would work. He described concerns about the bill’s cost formula, transportation, part-time versus full-time status, and whether the proposal could unintentionally create open-enrollment or athletic-transfer issues. He said the amendment would mirror existing treatment for homeschool and charter school students, use a familiar funding model, and limit participation to students already enrolled in one or more CTE classes at the receiving school. The chair also emphasized that comprehensive high schools already have a statutory definition and that the bill would help more students participate in CTE, which he said currently reaches only a relatively small share of students statewide. He noted that transportation would be covered only when a CTE bus is available, otherwise students would be responsible for arranging travel as under current practice. After brief discussion, the committee voted 18-0 to adopt the amendment and 18-0 to recommend SB 99 OTPA, also placing it on the consent calendar.