Transcript Highlights:

• And in many cases, that serves us well, because we need standardized And in many cases, that serves us
• well because we need standardized solutions that architects, engineers, home builders, contractors can
• and certification, brought it to national standards.
• It was about creating standards nationally for not only housing, like how we build buildings, but how
• So those standards will be developed in the next couple of years, and in concert, essentially, they're

Summary: The committee held its first official work session with member and staff introductions, then received an update from the State Building Code Council on the current three-year code cycle and several legislatively directed code changes. Council staff said the council is moving toward CR-102 rulemaking and final adoption in the spring, with legislative mandates nearing completion on minimum dwelling unit size, emergency shelters, single-exit stairs for buildings up to six stories and 24 units, and sixplexes in the residential code. Members asked about how technical advisory groups are selected, and staff explained that the council advertises seats, reviews applications and recommendations, and approves members in public meetings, typically including firefighters, engineers, architects, and other subject-matter experts. A major portion of the meeting focused on the single-stair and sixplex work and on how fire safety, egress, and local service levels are being considered. Council representatives said the single-stair proposal includes emergency escape and rescue openings on all levels and is intended to provide more options for safe egress while reducing building footprint and cost. They emphasized that the recommendations are still entering the public rulemaking process and that cost-benefit considerations were part of the legislative intent. Members also raised questions about whether self-rescue devices or other builder options could be codified, and council staff said such ideas are considered through the advisory process, though not all become required code provisions. The second half of the session covered performance-based codes, prompted by a bill referred to as HB 2381. Todd Byrd explained the difference between prescriptive codes, which specify exact solutions, and performance-based codes, which set outcomes and allow designers and manufacturers more flexibility in how to meet them. He described the bill as a narrow proposal for low-rise residential buildings up to 24 units and under the high-rise threshold, with third-party or state certification and local jurisdiction approval still required. He cited international examples, especially Japan and Sweden, where performance-based approaches supported innovation and prefabrication, and said such systems can lower costs while maintaining safety. Members discussed seismic safety, builder participation, embodied carbon, and energy-code interactions, and council staff said the proposal could help align material, energy, and design optimization without changing the existing energy code. The committee took no vote and adjourned after the informational presentation and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• These standards will help protect wild oyster populations.
• Needs to have clear standards for compliance.
• the standards that must be rigorously applied for the granting of injunctive relief?
• There's no substantive standards whatsoever.
• I mean that in is in and of itself a standard, is that right? Material impact is a standard.

Transcript Highlights:

• The standard for dismissal of an action is not appropriate where you bring in extraneous information,
• So that gets us to what the standard is for summary judgment, and that is whether there is a genuine
• The standard for dismissal of an action is not appropriate where you bring in extraneous information,
• So that gets us to what the standard is for summary judgment, and that is whether there is a genuine
• The standard for dismissal of an action is not appropriate where you bring in extraneous information,

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Kentucky Legislative Ethics Commission met on November 18, 2025, approved the October 14 minutes, and then took up five motions in ethics matters 24LEC3 and 24LEC6. Those motions included a renewed motion to dismiss and motion to quash by Representative Daniel Gberg, a renewed motion to compel/sanctions and continuance request by Mr. Jenkins, and competing motions in limine concerning evidence and redaction of deposition transcripts. Vice Chair Mike Schaw was appointed hearing officer for the motion practice, and the commission agreed to hear the motions one at a time in open session. Representative Chris Lily joined later by Zoom. Counsel for Representative Gberg argued the remaining allegations were minor, that the commission lacked key exculpatory materials such as an alleged LRC report, policies, procedures, and training materials, and that the record did not support the ethics charges. She also argued the case had been broadened by extraneous allegations and that the respondent had been unfairly prejudiced. Enforcement counsel responded that he had produced all materials in his possession, that any LRC materials were not in the commission’s custody, and that the commission’s probable-cause findings were based on sworn testimony and affidavits already in the record. He argued the motions to dismiss and for summary judgment should be denied because genuine issues of material fact remained and the commission had already found probable cause on three ethics violations. Commission members questioned both sides about the alleged LRC report and whether it was part of the commission’s record. The chair stated the commission had not relied on any LRC report and had not withheld anything, while another member emphasized that the proceeding concerned alleged violations of the ethics code, not LRC sexual-harassment policy. A commissioner also noted the unusual structure of the proceeding and questioned whether the complaints, taken as true, stated a basis for dismissal. The transcript ends during continued discussion of the standard for dismissal and summary judgment, with no final ruling on the motions captured in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• , the strict scrutiny standard, and that's the strictest standard judicial standard that we have under
• </c><01:21:36.719><c> established</c> the strict scrutiny standard established the strict scrutiny standard
• </c><01:21:54.480><c> Who</c> standard. What's the process? Who standard. What's the process?
• And I would standard, judicial standard.
• standard of review being used.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And so, therefore, give it to somebody else who will create the standard, you know, will follow the standards
• you know will follow the the standard you know will follow the standards<04:10:27.040><c> so</c><04:
• We have a federal standard, so it’s not an option.
• </c> something we only have a state standard something we only have a state standard for<04:18:58.359
• </c><04:19:01.080><c> so</c> anymore we have a federal standard so anymore we have a federal standard

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 332, a bill to add protection and remediation of surface waters as a new authorized purpose for New Hampshire village districts. Prime sponsor Rep. Rosemary Rung said the bill is intended to give local voters in lake communities a voluntary tool to address cyanobacteria blooms and other water-quality problems through village districts, including the ability to raise revenue, adopt ordinances, and pursue treatments or watershed management measures. She emphasized that the proposal is meant to complement, not replace, state law and that any district action would still need to comply with existing permitting and environmental requirements. Supporters, including Andrea Laro of New Hampshire Lakes and Elizabeth Harper of the Lake Sunapee Protective Association, said the bill would help municipalities collaborate on lake protection when state resources are limited. They argued that local districts could bring subject-matter expertise, access grants and technical assistance, and respond more quickly to problems such as septic impacts, runoff, culvert repairs, and in-lake treatments. They also suggested clarifying the bill’s wording around “protection and remediation” to better define the scope of authorized activities. Opponents, including Steve Wolf and Chris Norwood of the New Hampshire Association of Realtors, argued that village districts can already be overly broad and sometimes expand beyond their original purposes. Wolf said existing town and state agencies already handle shoreline protection and warned that village districts can impose ongoing taxes and create governance problems. Norwood urged a study bill instead, citing concerns about the scope of village districts and examples where some districts have taken on planning and zoning powers beyond their original mission. No vote or final action on HB 332 was taken in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• If we are serious about recruiting and retaining high-quality educators, parental leave must be a standard
• Unfortunately, workplace standards... A significant portion of employees during their careers.
• Unfortunately, workplace standards have historically been designed without these realities in mind.
• Whistleblower complaints and congressional documents show alarming changes to ICE training standards.
• We've worked on background checks, training standards, academy standards, decertification, accountability

Summary: The committee heard a series of bills focused largely on labor, education, workforce, and public employment issues. AB 65 would provide public school employees up to 14 weeks of leave with full benefits for pregnancy and pregnancy-related health issues; supporters said current rules force educators to exhaust sick leave and suffer long-term retirement penalties, while the bill’s author noted it mirrors budget trailer language. AB 1818 would change HEERA procedures for CSU bargaining by shifting certain renegotiation disputes to PERB; Teamsters and other labor groups supported it as a way to stop CSU from unilaterally refusing agreed raises, while CSU moved from opposed to neutral after amendments. AB 1940 would explicitly reference menopause, perimenopause, and postmenopause in workplace protections; supporters said it would clarify rights and improve awareness, while business opposition argued existing reasonable-accommodation law already covers these issues and warned of expanded liability. AB 1534 would add guardrails for new short-term Workforce Pell programs, including tuition caps, limits on income-share agreements, and transparency around partnerships with unaccredited entities; the author later said the bill would be amended to include private institutions. AB 1896 would bar people who participated in immigration enforcement from holding California public jobs during a specified period; supporters framed it as a public-trust measure, while police and public-safety groups opposed categorical exclusion and urged a more individualized vetting approach. AB 2300 would streamline distribution of WIOA workforce funds and reduce delays in local workforce board contracting, with supporters emphasizing faster service delivery and no reduction in accountability. AB 2223 would require CDCR to report standardized data on contracted medical and mental health staffing, vacancies, and costs, following an audit that found heavy reliance on contractors and poor transparency. AB 2483 would create a pathway and certification for formerly incarcerated firefighters to move into firefighting careers after release, with strong support from the author and witnesses who described the work as a real career path and reentry opportunity. AB 2142 would require temporary classified school employees working more than 75% of the school year to receive permanent-employee benefits and protections; school administrators and community college groups opposed it as too rigid for grant-funded and fluctuating positions. AB 2367 would require quarterly reporting from state-run health care facilities on vacancies, overtime, registry/contract staffing, and missed staffing minimums, building on state auditor recommendations; health care workers supported it as a transparency and accountability measure. Several measures were voted out of committee or placed on call. AB 1818, AB 1534, AB 2300, AB 2483, and AB 2223 all received do-pass votes to the Senate Appropriations Committee, though each was placed on call after roll call. AB 65 and AB 1940 also advanced on do-pass motions but were placed on call. AB 2142 received a do-pass vote with opposition and was placed on call. S.J.R. 15, a resolution urging Congress to protect California employers from higher federal unemployment taxes tied to the state’s UI debt, drew divided testimony: business groups supported it, while labor and some members argued California should solve the problem itself and keep the unemployment system solvent; the resolution was also placed on call. The transcript also included committee discussion about working with authors on amendments, especially for AB 1940 and AB 1534, and several members noted support or co-authorship while raising concerns about implementation details and fiscal impacts.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill would also preserve all applicable prevailing wage and labor standards such as public works
• , and apprenticeship standards.
• This bill would also preserve all applicable prevailing wage and labor standards such as public works
• , and apprenticeship standards.
• , office and I have had with stakeholders on this bill to ensure language that secure labor standards

Summary: The hearing opened with several procedural announcements and then took up AB 2148, which would prohibit artificial intelligence from replacing education workers. The author and supporters from the California Federation of Teachers and California School Employees Association argued the bill was a modest first step to protect human educators, students’ social-emotional development, and teacher agency in classroom technology decisions. Public support came from labor and education groups, while some school administrator and county office representatives said they were moving to neutral or awaiting the printed amendments. The committee discussed teacher shortages and the role of AI as a supplement rather than a replacement, then passed AB 2148 as amended to Higher Education on a 5-0 vote. The committee then heard AB 2202, which would create a Closing the Achievement Gap Commission to advise the State Board of Education. The author and sponsors said the commission would improve coordination between state and local education leaders and help the state better support local efforts to close achievement gaps. Support came from CSBA, CFT, charter schools, and many district leaders. Members raised questions about early childhood representation on the commission, and the author said he would discuss that with the sponsor. The bill passed as amended to Appropriations on a 5-0 vote. The consent calendar, including AB 1569, AB 2071, AB 2206, AB 2298, AB 2467, AB 2580, AB 2652, and AB 2726, was also approved. AB 2555 was then heard as a special order bill to reform English learner reclassification. The author said the current system is outdated, inconsistent, and too subjective, and proposed a more automatic, transparent process with stronger parent involvement and post-reclassification monitoring. Testimony in support emphasized personal experiences of delayed reclassification and the need to recognize biliteracy; there was no opposition. The bill passed as amended to Appropriations on a 6-0 vote. The committee also approved AB 1860, which would extend design-build authority to county offices of education while preserving prevailing wage, apprenticeship, and skilled workforce requirements; opposition from county superintendent and facilities groups was removed after amendments, and the bill passed 6-0 to Appropriations. Later, the committee passed AB 2514, which would create a State of Achievement Gap Dashboard to track state-level progress in closing achievement gaps, and AB 2149, which would require the Legislative Analyst’s Office to publicly assess the state’s progress and recommend actions. Both bills were presented as part of a broader package to improve state accountability for student outcomes, and both passed as amended to Appropriations on 7-0 votes. Finally, AB 2490 was heard, proposing to allow longer-term substitute assignments with added training, mentorship, and parent notification to address teacher shortages and classroom instability. Supporters said it would reduce “subchurn” and help maintain continuity, especially in special education; opponents, including CTA, Public Advocates, and CTC staff, argued the bill was unnecessary given existing rulemaking and could create legal and training concerns. The transcript cuts off during committee discussion of AB 2490, so no final vote is shown for that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• The federal standards allow for the exclusion of up to two bona fide discount points that allows the
• And this will align Kentucky with the majority of states that rely on the federal standards.
• ><c> for</c><00:02:23.599><c> the</c> The federal standards allow for the The federal standards allow
• . standards. standards.
• So, um, that points and fee standards.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00 Call to Order and Roll Call 00:01 Discussion SB 157 00:23 Vote SB 157 05:22 Discussion SB 189 05:57 Vote SB 189 26:49, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:10:09.839><c> Um</c><00:10:10.080><c> this</c> standards division operating.
• Um this standards division operating.
• </c> appropriations in the labor standards appropriations in the labor standards division.<00:10:45.279
• </c><00:24:24.400><c> These</c> these standards are violated. These these standards are violated.
• </c> nursing home workforce standards board. nursing home workforce standards board.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• for for intent or the legal standards for for intent or the legal standard<04:06:21.640><c> for</c><
• </c><05:47:02.680><c> that</c> and the Constitutional standards that and the Constitutional standards
• because Community standards standards because Community standards evolve<05:50:43.040><c> and</c><05
• Certainly the constitutional standards change, right, and the standards, you know, change.
• Certainly the constitutional standards change, right, and the standards, you know, change.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 763, an early bill concerning AED access at athletic events and venues. Representative Morris offered amendment 0743H to clarify the bill by removing charter schools from the language and tying AED placement to American Heart Association guidance, emphasizing that AEDs should be readily accessible within a reasonable walking distance rather than mandated on every field. The amendment and then the bill as amended both passed 17-0, and the bill was reported out as Ought to Pass with Amendment. The committee then considered House Bill 781, requiring school districts to adopt cell phone-free education policies, and a related bill, House Bill 131. HB 781 was amended to include charter public school boards, cover other personal electronic communication devices, require at minimum restrictions on student personal cell phones during class instruction, allow superintendent-approved exceptions for medical or language needs, protect students with medical needs or disabilities under Section 504, and set an effective date of July 1, 2025. Some members argued the amendment was too prescriptive and limited local control, while supporters said it still left districts flexibility outside classroom instruction. The amendment passed 16-1, and the bill then passed Ought to Pass as Amended 16-1. HB 131, described as a mirror bill, was then retained by a 17-0 vote. House Bill 398, a title bill requiring Holocaust and genocide studies to include impacts on people with disabilities, was moved to ITL after Representative Selig reported the genocide commission believed the topic was already being covered. That motion passed 17-0. The committee also agreed to hold several bills for later consideration, including HB 754, HB 1221, HB 360, and HB 699, citing the need for more review or missing copies. Finally, the committee took up House Bill 361, prohibiting mandatory mask policies in schools. Supporters argued the bill would preserve individual choice while preventing statewide or districtwide mandates in future public health emergencies, and cited a Department of Health and Human Services letter saying masks remain effective but decisions should be based on individual choice and risk assessment. Opponents emphasized local control and the need for districts to respond to different public health conditions. The transcript cuts off before the final vote on HB 361 was completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Minnesotans have high standards, and we want to meet those standards and we expect to.
• Minnesotans have high standards, and we want to meet those standards and we expect to.
• Minnesotans have high standards, and we want to meet those standards and we expect to.
• Minnesotans have high standards, and we want to meet those standards and we expect to.
• </c> those standards and and we expect to. those standards and and we expect to.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• mechanism and how easy it would be to have a standard mechanism.
• would I Wrote it down, standardized evidence-based way to identify them.
• Protocol to simply implement instead of that question as standard evidence-based practice.
• So, it's both trying to look at cost, but it also tries to standardize for.
• I already talked about the behavioral health standards. I get too excited.

Transcript Highlights:

• any reporting requirements not federally mandated, finance related, or tied to the Professional Standards
• Then we had the standards movement that came out in the '80s and '90s.
• That's where all our standards came from. Then, over 2000, we had No Child Left Behind.
• This standard exists for a reason.
• By removing this standard and replacing it with a blanket prohibition, this bill would eliminate the

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 1339 from Sen. Dave Lent, who described it as an education accountability and modernization measure that shifts schools away from compliance-driven reporting toward locally set, measurable student-outcome goals. He said the bill would reduce unnecessary reporting, provide a three-year support and intervention cycle for struggling schools, and recognize excellence while preserving local control. Victoria Young testified in opposition, arguing the bill echoed No Child Left Behind-style accountability and could unfairly single out schools, while Quinn Perry of the Idaho School Boards Association supported the bill but raised a limited concern about intervention language that could affect local authority over calendars or budgets. The committee then took up House Bill 516, a cleanup bill related to last year’s prohibition on classroom instruction about sexual orientation and gender identity. Rep. Dale Hawkins and Doug Taylor said the bill simply removes leftover “age appropriate/developmentally appropriate” language from the prior law, arguing that the K-12 prohibition is already absolute and the extra phrase creates confusion and legal uncertainty. Opponents, including Mary Brown, Jean Henscheide, Scaruleen, Nissa Nagle, and Jeffrey Watkins, argued the change would eliminate age-appropriate instruction, parental choice, and classroom discussion of relevant history, literature, and current events, and could chill instruction affecting LGBTQ students and broader education. Supporters, including Grace Howitt of the Idaho Family Policy Center, said districts had not consistently implemented the prior law and that the bill would better protect parents and prevent what they described as inappropriate gender instruction. Committee members pressed witnesses on whether the bill conflicted with existing Idaho Code, especially the older family-life and sex-education statute that leaves policy decisions to local school boards, and whether removing the phrase could create unintended effects on teaching topics like puberty, Supreme Court cases, or literature. After debate, Sen. Nichols moved to send HB 516 to the floor with a do-pass recommendation, but Sen. Burtenshaw offered an alternate motion to hold the bill at the call of the chair. The committee adopted the motion to hold HB 516 at the call of the chair, so no floor recommendation was issued.

Transcript Highlights:

• any reporting requirements not federally mandated, finance related, or tied to the Professional Standards
• Then we had the standards movement that came out in the '80s and '90s.
• That's where all our standards came from. Then over 2000, we had No Child Left Behind.
• This standard exists for a reason.
• By removing this standard and replacing it with a blanket prohibition, this bill would eliminate the

Keywords: 989, all

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 1339, sponsored by Senator Dave Lent, which would replace the existing continuous improvement plan with a more locally driven, results-focused accountability system for public schools. Lent said the bill is intended to reduce reporting burdens, emphasize measurable student outcomes, reward excellence, and provide escalating support for schools that struggle over a three-year review cycle. Support came from the Idaho School Boards Association, which said the bill aligns accountability with local priorities, though it raised a small concern about possible limits on local authority over calendars and budgets. One witness opposed the bill, arguing it repeats the flawed logic of No Child Left Behind and overemphasizes outcomes while ignoring inputs and broader school improvement processes. The committee voted to send SB 1339 to the floor with a due pass recommendation. The committee then took up House Bill 516, a cleanup bill related to last year’s law restricting classroom instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity. The sponsor and bill drafters said the measure simply removes an “age appropriate or developmentally appropriate” phrase that was left in by mistake when the law was expanded from K-3 to K-12, and that the change is meant to clarify that the prohibition is absolute. Several opponents argued the removal would eliminate useful age-appropriate instruction, create confusion for teachers, and potentially affect classroom discussion of literature, history, and current events involving LGBTQ people. Supporters, including Idaho Family Policy Center, said the bill is needed because districts have not consistently adopted policies and that schools should not provide such instruction. After extended discussion about possible conflicts with existing code and the scope of the prohibition, the committee initially considered a due pass motion but then adopted a substitute motion to hold HB 516 at the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• It also refers to the standards laid out by medical assistance, so we have a standard that we go by,
• a more tighter standard.
• </c> provided it also refers to the standards provided it also refers to the standards laid<00:15:04.199
• that we go by um a more have a standard that we go by um a more tighter<00:15:09.959><c> standard</c
• </c><00:57:50.680><c> occupational</c> bill updates the standard occupational bill updates the standard

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• to satisfy the most stringent standard, um, legal standard.
• to satisfy the most stringent standard, um, legal standard.
• He added that the correct fundamental-rights standard is also the standard used in child abuse and neglect
• He added that the correct standard is also the correct standard in child abuse and neglect cases, and
• He said the correct standard is also the standard in child abuse and neglect cases, where the state has

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• by the governor during his State of the State address, but it would reduce the renewable energy standard
• 7.5% and would add nuclear generation to that as well as an applicable energy source to meet the standard
• The renewable standard has been no less than 15%, and now this would take it no less than 7.5%.
• We did have original heartburn based on the filing that cuts the standard in half, but working on the
• R-E-S, R-A-M, renewable energy standard rate adjustment mechanism.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The district is requesting to convert the award from a pre-K award to a standards-based award to allow
• The potential motion is council approval to amend the current 2023-2024 standard. and a local match of
• The potential motion is council approval to amend the current 2022-2023 standards-based award language
• Okay, so I move for council approval. to amend the current 2022-2023 standards-based award language to
• The question I have is the need to update adequacy standards to account for the— and Dennis Dowd with

Transcript Highlights:

• Under the civil standard is by the preponderance of the evidence.
• So we're not changing that standard of evidence at all.
• That's the standard for a jury, not for the DA or the responding...
• Okay, and then if he wants a conviction, what's the standard?
• Does your, and you've said that it has no minimum training standards.

Bills: HR165, HR166, HR167, HR168, HR169, HR170, HR171, HR172, HR173, HR174, HR175, HR176, HR177, HR178, HCR65, HCR66, HCR67, HCR68, HCR69, HCR70, HCR71, HCR72, HCR73, HCR74, HR159, HR160, HR161, HR162, HR163, HR164, HCR60, HCR61, HCR62, HCR63, HCR64, SCR23, SCR32, SB105, SB125, SB304, SB430, SB438, SB442, SB522, HB87, HB115, HB162, HB368, HB433, HB441, HB447, HB466, HB481, HB573, HB741, HB1242, HR1, HR17, HCR5, HCR4, HCR47, HB27, HB71, HB214, HB225, HB241, HB244, HB306, HB345, HB366, HB446, HB511, HB514, HB655, HB730, HB743, HB1027, HB1037, HB1043, HB1082, HB1091, HB1096, HB1103, HB1167, HB1174, HB1175, HB1230, HB1237, HB1238, HB55, HB385, HB394, HB396, HB406, HB608, HB622, HB676, HB772, HB897, HB1030, HB1035, HB1038, HB1045, HB1049, HB1056, HB1058, HB1059, HB1092, HB1100, HB1117, HB1160, HB1161, HB1162, HB1177, HB1180, HB1189, HB1216, HB1239, HB1240, HB59, HB74, HB159, HB330, HB364, HB414, HB458, HB525, HB568, HB786, HB1008, HB1033, HB1034, HB1041, HB1062, HB1070, HB1079, HB1112, HB1118, HB1139, HB1151, HB1176, HB1182, HB1196, HB1214, HB1241, SB162, SB349, SB350, SB382, SB383, SB127, SB244, HB51, HB58, HB140, HB750, HB911, HB982, HB1010, HB151, HB180, HB192, HB193, HB310, HB635, HB690, HB961, HB1003, HB1146, HB864, HB977, HB181, HB31, HB664, HB615, HB901, HR20, HR74, HB9, HB284, HB393, HB459, HB577, HB582, HB605, HB614, HB682, HB733, HB773, HB996, HB1113, HB1234, HB1236

Keywords: condolences, community service, education, local government, Port Allen, HR166, House Resolution 166, condolences resolution, memorial resolution, Billy D'Aquilla, William Henry D'Aquilla, St. Francisville, Louisiana House of Representatives, tribute, obituary, mayor, alderman, mayor pro tempore, public service, sympathy

Summary: The House convened with a quorum, opened with prayer and the pledge, adopted the journal, and granted several members leave. The chamber also recognized visiting groups and honored individuals and organizations, including Livingston Parish Day at the Capitol, the Denham Springs High School robotics team, Principal Justin Wax, and the Louisiana Primary Care Association. Multiple House and Senate resolutions were introduced, adopted, or referred, including commendations, memorials, and study requests on topics such as TOPS, workforce outcomes, health issues, and transportation. In regular order, the House considered and passed several measures. HB 27, a constitutional amendment on applying state monies to retirement system unfunded liabilities, passed 87-0. HB 71, extending civil liability protection to licensed armed private security officers when use of force is deemed justified, drew extensive debate over training standards, criminal versus civil liability, and the role of prosecutors and law enforcement before passing 70-28. HB 214, a constitutional amendment on ad valorem tax exemptions for certain property, passed 82-10. HB 241, a technical correction to bank records disclosure law, passed 91-0. HB 244, clarifying constitutional convention ballot language and delegate/vote requirements, passed 77-16. The House also passed HB 345 to add port rail infrastructure to the Class 2 and Class 3 Rail Infrastructure Improvement Program, HB 446 to change when local bond and tax elections may be held, HB 511 to create a grant program for pursuit intervention safety technology after the death of Sgt. Grant Candies, HB 514 to expand the ad valorem tax exemption for seniors age 65 and older, and HB 65 to allow DOTD more contracting options for ferry operation and maintenance. HB 730, which would bar use of ADS-B aircraft tracking data to levy fees or taxes, prompted lengthy discussion about aviation safety, privacy, airport revenue, and alleged misuse of tracking data before the bill was presented for final action near the end of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to invite Katie Carney, are you here to testify on S. 2681, an act establishing safety standards
• All right, we're going to go back to S. 2681, safety standards for BMX. Is Katie Kearney here?
• of safety and accountability because right now the standard is not consistent.
• When I heard this was the second... ...standards.
• The helmet standards that we're told to go by are not for motocross, and that's a good point.

Summary: The hearing covered several public safety bills and related testimony. On S. 2681, “Colby’s Law,” which would establish safety standards for BMX/motocross tracks, the committee heard emotional testimony from the family of a teen killed at a track and from advocates who said minimum standards are needed for barriers, medical staff, emergency planning, insurance, and oversight. A track owner and rider also testified that safety is important but argued the bill was incomplete and should better distinguish between BMX and motocross and include more specific equipment and weather-related rules. On S. 2680, a bill to expand emergency planning around aging nuclear plants and high-level nuclear waste sites, supporters from Cape Cod, medical groups, and anti-nuclear organizations urged a 50-mile emergency planning radius and stronger state preparedness, citing risks from long-term waste storage and inadequate federal oversight. The committee also heard testimony on a Barnstable home rule petition to allow certain emergency response vehicles to use red lights, with the town supporting the change to improve response times on the water. A substantial portion of the hearing focused on H. 5158, the Protect Act, which would limit state and local cooperation with federal civil immigration enforcement. County sheriffs testified about how ICE notifications and detainers work in practice, distinguishing between criminal warrants and civil immigration requests to notify, and describing their discretion when people are released on bail or at the end of a sentence. Sheriffs said they generally notify ICE when requested, especially in cases involving serious charges, but emphasized the need to balance public safety, victim notification, and due process. Committee members pressed them on the impact of ICE pickups at courthouses and jails, and several lawmakers and witnesses argued that pretrial detainees taken by ICE can disrupt prosecutions and deny victims their day in court. Supporters of the Protect Act included labor, education, health care, and immigrant advocacy groups. They said immigrants and mixed-status families are living in fear of routine interactions with police, schools, courts, and hospitals, and urged the committee to ban 287(g) agreements, prohibit law enforcement from asking about immigration status or providing operational assistance to ICE, and add stronger protections for sensitive locations such as schools and health care facilities. Medical witnesses described patients and families avoiding care because of ICE presence, and educators said students are missing school out of fear. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing; the committee heard testimony and indicated it would continue receiving written testimony before taking action later.