Transcript Highlights:

• <00:45:03.119> because<00:45:03.480> how<00:45:03.599> could<00:45:03.760>
• that<00:45:05.319> service<00:45:06.240> anyway<00:45:07.000> so<00:45:07.200><
• :45:08.680> risk<00:45:08.880> of<00:45:09.040> closure<00:45:09.880> of
• long history<00:45:16.119> and<00:45:16.200> if<00:45:16.280> you<00:45:16.400><
• :45:19.960> on<00:45:20.079> it<00:45:20.640> but<00:45:20.839> when<00:45

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And that’s Chapter 19, Laws of 1964. Moved by Senator Stec. Moved by Senator Stack. All.
• And that’s by Chapter 443 of the law.
• And after Chapter 6 to the laws in 2003. The law.
• And then, Chapter 6.29, the laws of 2005.
• And that’s on Chapter 534 in the Laws of 1999. Moved by Senator Hartman, Senator Dabo.

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The committee took up a long list of bills and chapter amendments, largely under the Education Law, Insurance Law, General Business Law, Social Services Law, Election Law, Environmental Conservation Law, and related statutes. The transcript reflects repeated motions and seconds, with members generally voting in favor and no recorded opposition on most items. Bills reported included measures sponsored by Senators Prasad, Martinez, Krueger, Serrano, CUNY, Gianaris, Harckham, Fernandez, and others, along with several technical amendments to prior laws and chapter acts. Among the topics referenced were education-related changes, insurance and business regulation, veterans services, housing finance, election law, labor and civil rights matters, mental hygiene and health provisions, retirement and social security, property tax and state finance updates, and amendments to older chapters and laws. The meeting also included reports on bills affecting vehicle and traffic law, military law, environmental conservation, and local or municipal law provisions. The transcript is noisy and repetitive, but the overall pattern is that the committee advanced a broad slate of legislation. No substantive testimony or debate is captured in the transcript beyond the motions, seconds, and the repeated statement that bills were reported, often “in favor” or “all in favor.” The session concluded with the remaining items being reported and “all pieces of business for today being adjourned.”

Transcript Highlights:

• Chapter 142. You'd have to be more specific for me.
• For Chapter 143, we're just taking Chapter 143... 43 and applying it statewide. 26,000 officers in this
• state already operate under the provisions of Chapter 143.
• What we're doing is we're not changing Chapter 143.
• I mean, this is taken from Chapter 143, which is current law.

Bills: HB17, HB16, SB 10, HB27, HB23, SB 15, SB 18, HB 17, HB 16, SB 10, HB 27, HB 23, SB 15, SB 18

Keywords: property tax, school funding, enrollment changes, inflation adjustment, tax rate notice, judicial administration, court reform, juvenile diversion, court security, mental health services, drug offenses, constitutional amendments, property tax exemption, ad valorem tax, Texas Tax Code, nonprofit corporation, charitable organization, educational nonprofit, scientific nonprofit, agriculture support

Transcript Highlights:

• So considering maybe SME chapters or SME provisions in each of the chapters to help address some of their
• the trade facilitation chapter, digital trade, the labor chapter, the SMEs chapter, competitiveness,
• Currently, the USMCA provides for two chapters that relate to cooperation: the competitiveness chapter
• and the SMEs chapter.
• comments by USMCA chapters.

Summary: The joint hearing of the Assembly Select Committee on California-Mexico Bi-National Affairs and the Assembly Economic Development, Growth, and Household Impact Committee focused on the USMCA and how the agreement affects California’s economy, jobs, supply chains, and competitiveness. Opening remarks emphasized California’s heavy trade dependence on Mexico and Canada, the importance of stable trade rules, and concerns that tariffs or uncertainty could harm workers, small businesses, agriculture, logistics, manufacturing, and border communities. Members said the hearing would help inform a future legislative report or resolution on California’s priorities for the agreement’s review. Academic and policy witnesses argued that the USMCA is central to North American economic integration and California’s role in it. Testimony from UC San Diego and CETYS University described California and Mexico as co-producers rather than simple trading partners, highlighting sectors such as medical devices, aerospace, semiconductors, logistics, and advanced manufacturing. Witnesses also warned that the upcoming review could involve not just trade but security and immigration issues, and they urged a stronger, longer-term agreement with more certainty, better border efficiency, and new tools such as specialized technician visas, binational certification standards, innovation zones, and a technology fund. Go-Biz and chamber representatives said USMCA provides predictability, market access, and support for small and medium-sized businesses, while also creating compliance burdens through rules of origin, labor standards, and customs procedures. They pointed to California’s trade missions, export support programs, and state-level cooperation with Mexico and Canada as ways to help firms participate in regional supply chains. Mexican government and business representatives said the agreement is largely functioning well, that Mexico’s public consultation process received nearly 800 submissions and about 2,000 chapter-specific comments, and that many stakeholders favor maintaining or extending USMCA. No formal votes were taken; the committee heard testimony and asked witnesses for follow-up information to inform its report and future recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• to put that in Chapter 12 than in Chapter 13.
• Chapter 12 of our rules deals with sworn complaints. That's right.
• The TEC is undergoing a comprehensive review of its rules to consider, chapter by chapter, whether the
• So let's move to Chapter 28.
• Next, proposal of amendments to Chapter 12.

Summary: The Texas Ethics Commission met on March 11, 2025, first in executive session and then in open session. The chair announced that, in light of Texas Attorney General Opinion KP-484, the commission would conform its practices to the opinion and move to repeal tolling rules for sworn-complaint deadlines. The chair also said the commission would dismiss 36 pending sworn-complaint cases in which the 120-day settlement deadline had been exceeded, even though the delay had been tolled under prior TEC rules. The commission then set future meeting dates for June 12 and September 17 and approved prior meeting minutes. The commission adopted a new criminal-referral rule clarifying that, once jurisdiction over a complaint is accepted, commissioners may vote to make a criminal referral. It also adopted revised advisory-opinion rules, with a clarifying amendment from a commenter, and republished proposed changes to the definition of “principal purpose” for political committees after staff recommended a 49 percent political-activity threshold and further public input. The commission published for comment proposed changes to ethics training rules, facial-compliance review procedures, late-filing waiver and reduction rules, and sworn-complaint procedures, including tighter discovery limits, a default-order set-aside process, and removal of tolling language inconsistent with KP-484. It also republished Chapter 28 rules on Speaker-candidate reporting. The commission adopted several advisory opinions. It declined to give an affirmative defense on whether certain school-district communications were political advertising because related litigation had already addressed the issue. It reaffirmed that a House member may use donated district-office space if it is not reimbursable with public funds and was accepted before the contribution moratorium. It also concluded that a judge may use political funds for travel to a Navy-hosted event as a local dignitary, that legislators’ use of a corporate aircraft for a border-region fact-finding trip could be permissible but would likely trigger reporting obligations, that a TCEQ commissioner’s revolving-door restrictions apply only to matters actually placed before the commissioner, and that a part-time legislative staffer may not take outside employment assisting a registered lobbyist. The commission then heard and acted on numerous fine-waiver appeals, granting several full waivers or reductions and approving staff recommendations on others, and terminated a number of inactive campaign treasurer appointments. Finally, the executive director briefed the commission on the 2025 legislative session, noting that staffing requests are tied to Sunset recommendations and that the House had preliminarily recommended about half of the commission’s appropriations requests.

Transcript Highlights:

• the procedures required by KRS chapter the procedures required by KRS chapter 100,<00:11:03.279>
• Uh, so this could very well be limited to the context of chapter 278.
• limited uh to the context of chapter limited uh to the context of chapter 278. 278. 278.
• Chapter 100.
• <00:20:40.240> 100 planning and zoning under chapter 100 planning and zoning under chapter

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So are you referring to chapter 226?
• So um it you referring to chapter 226?
• updates to chapter 26. updates to chapter 26.
• <00:15:13.440> 226 the implementation side of chapter 226 the implementation side of chapter
• about how best to implement chapter 226. about how best to implement chapter 226.

Bills: SB3294

Keywords: wrongful conviction, compensation, Hawaii Revised Statutes, innocence, legal process, burden of proof, case manager, medical coverage, judicial discretion, 912, senate, all

Summary: The committees first took up SB 3294, a controversial measure concerning post-release assistance for people pursuing reversals of prior court decisions where innocence is in question. Members discussed keeping the bill moving on the “human side” while a House companion addressed the legal issues. The adopted amendments removed advanced compensation language and instead required DCR, with DHS, to help petitioners prepare applications for financial and medical assistance, notify DHS upon release, assign a case manager to assist with a cell phone for one year, housing, employment, mental health counseling, and expedited benefits, and provide a state ID upon release. The measure also included technical amendments and a defective date, and it passed unanimously. The joint committees then heard SB 2237 on fire prevention, which would require state agencies to create and update hazard maps and direct DNR to adopt rules and clear brush. DLNR testified that a single lead agency should develop the maps with input from other agencies, that a five-year timeline would be more reasonable, and that assigning DNR all fuels management on state lands would create an unfunded mandate. Members discussed using the newly created fire marshal’s office as the lead, and the committees ultimately deferred the bill in favor of a broader wildfire mitigation measure already moving in another committee. The final agenda included SB 2596 on government leases, SB 30002 on the Hawaii State Planning Act and green infrastructure, and SB 3067 on records and filing requirements. SB 2596 was advanced unamended to Ways and Means. On SB 30002, OPSD explained that a 2025-2027 comprehensive review of chapter 226 is underway, with a report and draft legislation due in 2027, and members debated whether to move piecemeal changes now or wait for the broader review; the bill nevertheless passed unamended. SB 3067, which updates outdated filing formats and drawing scales, also passed unamended with DAGS supporting the measure in writing.

Transcript Highlights:

• , which amends, among other things, the definition of employer or public employer in Section 1 of Chapter
• in 1978, and it sought to represent all employees of the Massachusetts Defenders Committee under Chapter
• 150A, not Chapter 150E.
• As I previously mentioned, Chapter 211D assigns the CPCS committee a number of specific responsibilities
• I'm referring to the statutory framework in Chapter 211D, which lays out very specific responsibilities

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 2522 / H. 5909, which would amend state labor law to treat the Committee for Public Counsel Services (CPCS) as a public employer and allow its employees to seek collective bargaining rights. The chair explained the Article 48 initiative process, noted that no opponents or members of the public had signed up to testify, and said written testimony would be accepted through March 20. The hearing focused on whether CPCS staff should be brought within the public-sector bargaining framework and how that would interact with the agency’s statutory duties. Expert testimony began with an NCSL analyst, who gave a national overview of public employee bargaining rights and examples of public defender unions in other states and localities, including Colorado, New York City, Indianapolis, Cook County, Maryland, and Illinois. Department of Labor Relations officials then reviewed prior failed organizing efforts at CPCS and its predecessor, explaining that earlier petitions were dismissed because the agency was not considered a public employer under existing law. They said passage of the initiative would not automatically unionize employees, but would allow a union to petition for an election or written majority authorization, with normal unit-appropriateness and supervisory/confidential employee issues still to be resolved. CPCS Chief Counsel Anthony Benedetti testified that the agency supports providing information to the legislature but is not taking a position for or against unionization. He described CPCS’s statutory responsibilities, size, and current efforts to expand staffing after recent indigent-defense crises, and said any new bargaining framework would need to operate alongside the agency’s obligations to provide counsel. Proponents from SEIU Local 888 and allied labor groups argued that CPCS employees have long been denied the same collective bargaining rights as other public workers, and that a union would provide just-cause protections, a voice on staffing and working conditions, and better support for recruitment and retention. CPCS attorneys and staff testified in favor of the measure, citing heavy caseloads, rapid expansion, inadequate supervision and office support, and the need for representation in disciplinary and workplace disputes. Committee members asked about bargaining-unit composition, the role of the DLR, the effect of unionization on attorneys’ ethical duties, and the use and cost of paid signature gathering. The hearing ended with no votes taken and no opposition testimony presented.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 2411, an act amending Title 13, Chapter 36, Arizona Revised Statutes, Section 13-3603, relating
• House Bill 2830, an act amending Title 15, Chapter 1, Article 1, Section 15-7-02, relating to school
• Section 9-500.54 and amending Title 11, Chapter 2, Article 4 of the Arizona Revised Statutes by adding
• House Bill 2195, an act amending Section 36-406, Arizona Revised Statutes, amending Title 36, Chapter
• House Bill 2830, an act amending Title 15, Chapter 7, Arizona Revised Statutes, by adding Section 15-

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• :45:30.720> um<00:45:30.800> in<00:45:31.040> violation<00:45:31.440> of<
• Uh<00:45:33.599> in<00:45:34.200> Steuartville,<00:45:35.200> close<00:45:35.440
• ,<00:45:36.720> um<00:45:36.880> I've<00:45:37.200> got<00:45:37.359> a<00
• <00:45:44.160> reported<00:45:44.480> an<00:45:44.800> increase<00:45:45.040>
• in the base<00:45:45.599> rent<00:45:45.920> for<00:45:46.160> new<00:45:46.319

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And whereas FFA sponsors chapters in rural and urban areas throughout the state.
• Who's the Mesa Vista FFA Chapter President.
• Also joining me is Aaron Lucero, the Mesa Vista FFA Chapter Vice President.
• I too was an honorary chapter member. Whatever that is.
• Her dad was the FFA advisor at the Artesia chapter.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think if you look at the entirety of Chapter 121A, you will see what the heart of that chapter is.
• This is in keeping with that chapter.
• If you can show me on the bill draft the section that is either Chapter 13 or Chapter 363A, which is
• draft the section that is either chapter draft the section that is either chapter 13<00:27:02.159
• Again, there's no Chapter 10 reference or Chapter 13 reference in the bill.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Um I for labeled chapter 13 at the top.
• There were four tribal nation properties that received an exemption in chapter 13.
• received an exemption in chapter 13. received an exemption in chapter 13.
• That was repealed in chapter 13. And so that account was closed, that program was closed.
• Um in addition um in chapter 13 only.

Bills: HF9

Keywords: energy policy, renewable energy standard, carbon-free standard, solar standard, hydroelectric, hydropower, electric utility, Public Utilities Commission, PUC, renewable portfolio standard, carbon capture and sequestration, CCS, greenhouse gas emissions, climate policy, nuclear power plant, certificate of need, fossil fuel plant demolition, utility compliance delay, beneficial electrification, sales tax exemption

Transcript Highlights:

• Good morning and welcome to today's Joint Committee on Housing hearing regarding zoning and Chapter 40B
• For those that I don't know, Chapter 40R was a program that was established back in 2004.
• Chapter 40R, incentivizing more affordable and accessible housing in the Commonwealth.
• Chapter 40R has long been Supply in a way that is sustainable and equitable.
• This is not a Chapter 40B requirement for any of the homeowners that were prior to 2010.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Housing held a hybrid hearing on zoning, Chapter 40B, and related housing bills. Much of the testimony focused on the “Yes in My Backyard” bill (H. 1572/S. 962), which would expand by-right development of missing middle housing, reduce barriers such as minimum lot sizes and parking mandates, and support duplexes, triplexes, and other small-scale housing. Supporters included housing advocates, developers, local officials, and municipal leaders from places like Cambridge, Salem, and Braintree, who argued that state action is needed because local zoning often blocks needed housing and that the bill would help create more affordable, neighborhood-compatible homes. Several witnesses also backed a companion “Yes in God’s Backyard” bill (H. 2347), which would allow faith-based institutions to build housing on their property by right, with testimony emphasizing the potential for new units, added municipal tax revenue, and partnerships between religious organizations and housing developers. The committee also heard testimony on Senate Bill 1021 to modernize Chapter 40R incentives. Senator Pavel Payano and others said the program’s payments have not kept pace with inflation since 2004 and should be increased to better encourage smart-growth zoning near transit and town centers. Another major topic was H. 2298 on site plan review, which would codify and standardize the process in state law. Rep. Kristin Kassner and witnesses from MAPC and NAIOP said current site plan review practices vary widely across the state, creating confusion, delays, and litigation, while a uniform framework would give municipalities clearer tools to review by-right projects without undermining local oversight. The hearing also included testimony on Chapter 40B reform, including S. 1005 and H. 1537. One witness supported further review of 40B and stronger regional planning, while another backed a proposal to allow certain pre-2010 40B condominium owners to sell at market value under a framework that would recapture some of the subsidy benefits. Committee members asked several questions about local zoning changes, housing goals by county, and how the proposed bills would affect communities. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chairs indicated that written testimony would be welcomed for technical details and additional comments.

Transcript Highlights:

• c> topic<00:45:09.640> I<00:45:09.800> I<00:45:09.880> swore<00:45:10.440>
• > up<00:45:15.640> to<00:45:15.760> my<00:45:15.880> neck<00:45:16.160>
• /c><00:45:26.560> this,<00:45:26.800> but<00:45:27.000> I<00:45:27.080> think
• 29.760> that<00:45:29.880> we<00:45:30.040> don't<00:45:30.320> do<00:45:
• The<00:45:51.680> concern<00:45:52.160> was<00:45:52.359> always<00:45:52.800>

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The Legislative Commission on Pensions and Retirement met on April 14, 2026, adopted the April 7 minutes, and then took up Senate File 4464, which the chair said would be laid over after hearing testimony. The bill would restore continued health insurance coverage for police officers and firefighters in the PERA Police and Fire Fund who suffer documented physical duty-related injuries, addressing the current 5-year cap and the loss of coverage at normal retirement eligibility. Senator Hal Hoffman and Senator Hoffman’s testimony emphasized that the bill is a narrow fix for injured public safety workers and not a broader restructuring of retirement benefits. Supporters, including Mike Ladue of Law Enforcement Labor Services, several injured officers, Sheriff Ryan Kruger, and Amber Waldner, described the personal and family impacts of severe line-of-duty injuries and argued that coverage should continue to age 65 so families are not left with uncertainty if injuries worsen or force medical retirement. They said the bill would honor the promise made to public safety workers and provide stability for long-term care needs. One witness, Officer Albert, said the 2025 changes significantly reduced the protection he believed he and his family would have if his injury forced retirement. Anne Finn of the League of Minnesota Cities opposed the bill as drafted, warning that restoring coverage to age 65 for all physical injuries would be fiscally unsustainable without additional state funding. She said the 2025 pension changes were part of a negotiated package, noted that duty disability retirements are common, and argued the employer cost could reach about $500,000 per employee and create significant property tax pressure, especially for smaller communities. She urged the committee to work on a broader solution and said revisiting only one part of the 2025 law would create imbalance.

Transcript Highlights:

• is a presentation by Representative Esposito of House Bill 301 relating to proposed amendments to Chapter
• Members, the bill takes a different approach to amending Chapter 120. ...to Chapter 120.
• Members, the bill takes a different approach to amending Chapter 120 from Senate Bill 108 that was previously
• In August 2024, Chapter 65C-46 was finalized and laid out the content for these signs for safe homes.
• In October 2023, the department published its notice of rule development for Chapter 65E-9, which is

Summary: The Joint Administrative Procedures Committee heard a presentation from Representative Esposito on a proposal to strengthen oversight of agency rulemaking under Chapter 120. The bill would require cost-benefit analysis at the front end and after implementation, create an eight-year sunset and review process for rules, and require express legislative authority for agency rulemaking. Members questioned the lack of concrete examples of burdensome rules, the effect on already slow rulemaking, the choice of an eight-year sunset, and the bill’s origin; Esposito said she was working with stakeholders and cited her chamber-of-commerce background and research with the Cicero Institute. No vote was taken on the bill itself. Staff then reported on legislatively mandated rulemaking from 2023 and 2024, noting that most required rules had been adopted, proposed, noticed, or scheduled, with a few agencies still outstanding. The Department of Financial Services explained a delayed notice of rule development for the MySafe Florida Home condominium pilot program as an oversight that has since been corrected, and the Department of Education said it did not proceed with rulemaking for the Fostering Prosperity grants because the program received no funding in the 2025 budget. The Department of Health described delayed rulemaking for the sickle cell disease and trait registry, saying the registry and opt-out forms were being implemented and that notices of rule development had now been filed. Members pressed the department on why rules took so long and discussed the need for statutory deadlines. The Department of Children and Families reported on two 2023 human-trafficking-related rules: signage requirements for residential treatment facilities and children’s safe homes, and a new certification process for adult safe homes. DCF said the signage rule is now moving forward and the adult safe home certification rule has been submitted for final review after workshops and stakeholder feedback. Senators questioned the lengthy timeline and the lack of oversight during the interim, while the chair emphasized the need for time-certain deadlines in legislation and for JAPAC oversight hearings. The committee also considered staff-proposed amendments to Chapter 120 addressing emergency rules pending legislative ratification and the process for initiating ratification, including a one-year limit and notice to JAPAC. After discussion, the committee voted to forward the proposed amendments to the Senate President and House Speaker. Finally, members discussed a proposed amendment to the administrative law judge appointment and retention process under Section 120.65. DOAH’s interim director opposed the change, saying ALJs and workers’ compensation judges have different functions and warning against shifting appointment power to cabinet officers whose agencies appear before DOAH. Members raised concerns about timeliness, consistency, and accountability in DOAH decisions. The committee voted to forward this proposal as well, with Senator Smith voting no on that motion.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:45:11.440> So<00:45:11.599> how<00:45:11.760> do<00:45:11.920> you
• <00:45:16.160> Um,<00:45:16.480> madam<00:45:16.880> chair,<00:45:17.119>
• > you<00:45:18.960> know,<00:45:19.599> as<00:45:19.839> a<00:45:20.000>
• > has,<00:45:24.160> I<00:45:24.319> mean,<00:45:24.800> having<00:45:25.040
• Um, you<00:45:30.319> know,<00:45:30.480> I<00:45:30.720> guess<00:45:30.880>

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• By law, 2022 Chapter 117, Chapter 12, and last 2024 Chapter 70, section, when we link to Department of
• Senate Bill 1167, an act amending Title 9, Chapter 4, Article 8, and Title 11, Chapter 2, Article 4,
• , Chapter 4, Article 1, and Section 48-1121-7104, relating to public safety employees.
• House Bill 2010, enactment section 24, chapter 10, article 5, relating to advertising.
• House Bill 2100, and act in Title 11, Chapter 6. Order 4. of us.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 1711, act, Mining Title 50, Chapter 1, Oracle 5000 advice, statute abiding section 1,60,
• Senate Bill 1054, an act amending Title 9, Chapter 4, and Title 11, Chapter 2, Article 4, Arizona Revised
• Senate Bill 1544, an act amending Title 19, Chapter 9, Section 13-9-22, relating to probation.
• Senate Bill 1585, an act amending Title 13, Chapter 38, relating to sex offender monitoring.
• Senate Bill 1827, amending Title 41, Chapter 1, Article 1, Section 41-1727, relating to aviation.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The staff amendment amends various sections to comply with the drafting requirements of KRS Chapter 13A
• The staff suggested amendment amends various sections to comply with KRS Chapter 13A.
• The staff suggested amendment amends various sections to comply with KRS Chapter 13A.
• The staff suggested amendment amends various sections to comply with KRS Chapter 13A.
• <00:04:44.400> 13A comply with cares chapter 13A comply with cares chapter 13A Additionally

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Administrative Regulation Review Subcommittee met on February 10 with a quorum present, approved the minutes, and then reviewed a long agenda of agency regulations, most of which were accompanied by staff-suggested amendments for drafting conformity under KRS Chapter 13A. The Department of Financial Institutions’ 808 KAR 9:10, the Secretary of State’s 030 KAR 2:11, the Office of the Attorney General’s 04 KAR 5:10, the Board of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology’s emergency 201 KAR 17:120, the Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources’ 301 KAR 2:41, the Department for Environmental Protection’s 401 KAR 47:110 and 48:320, the State Police regulations 502 KAR 1:012 and 1:121, the Department for Public Health’s 902 KAR 4:15, the Department for Medicaid Services’ 907 KAR 1:15, and the Department for Community Based Services’ 921 KAR 1:400 were all discussed and, where applicable, staff amendments were approved without objection. The Workplace Standards emergency regulation 803 KAR 2:320E was also presented without amendment, and the Department of Insurance’s 806 KAR 9:360 was taken up but ultimately deferred at the agency’s request. Several regulations drew brief substantive discussion. The Fish and Wildlife rule on foxhound training enclosures was explained as expanding both commercial and non-commercial provisions for training with dogs involving red fox and coyotes, with enclosure standards intended to protect wildlife inside and outside the facilities. The environmental protection rules were tied to House Bill 478 and addressed permit-by-rule timelines, reporting, and operating standards for certain construction and demolition debris landfills, including sites up to two acres; members asked whether these facilities were private or municipal, and staff said they were a mix, often tied to private demolition contractors or single projects. The State Police fee increase for hazardous materials endorsements was described as reflecting a federal TSA fee change, and the witness estimated the new fee at about $23. The most extended debate concerned the Board of Education’s 704 KAR 3:535 on full-time virtual and remote learning programs. The agency amendment would cap enrollment in such programs at 10% above a district’s prior-year in-person enrollment, while also clarifying accountability, staffing, and monitoring requirements. Education officials said the cap was intended to address concerns about district capacity and student performance, and they cited Cloverport as an example of a district with high virtual participation and participation-rate issues. Members expressed concern that the amendment was too open-ended for regulation and suggested the issue might be better addressed in statute; no motion was made to adopt the agency amendment, so the regulation was left to proceed to the committee of jurisdiction. The Department of Insurance also discussed implementation of Senate Bill 188, saying it had received more than 3,000 complaints since the law took effect and was still working through enforcement and complaint processing before asking to defer its PBM licensing regulation.