Transcript Highlights:

• I hear you, and I get your point.
• The Austin case, just to clarify a little bit, that case regarded educational benefits.
• bit that case regarded um educational bit that case regarded um educational benefits<01:03:36.520
• Okay, we'll open up the public hearing on House Bill 427 and hear from the prime sponsor. support<01:
• <01:37:19.480> this let me what you have you'll hear this let me what you have you'll hear

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard testimony on House Bill 167, which would add ski, snowboard, and boat wax containing PFAS to the state’s consumer-product restrictions. The sponsor argued the product is already banned in many places, has PFAS-free alternatives, and is used in ways that can directly contaminate water rather than landfills. She cited high PFAS levels in several New Hampshire lakes and said the bill was a simple extension of prior PFAS legislation. A witness also described a personal experience where a liquid ski wax disappeared from the market and later returned, likely because of PFAS concerns. The chair then closed the hearing on HB 167 without a vote. The committee then opened a hearing on House Bill 312, dealing with college athletes’ name, image, and likeness (NIL) rights. Representative Moffett said the bill was modeled on New Jersey law and intended to let student-athletes earn compensation from NIL without losing institutional scholarships, while also requiring licensed representation and setting limits on certain endorsements. He described the measure as proactive because NIL rules are evolving and could create conflicts among schools and future lawsuits. Members questioned whether the bill should apply to two-year institutions, whether it should exclude firearms and weapons, and whether the scholarship protections would cover need-based or academic aid as well as athletic scholarships. Moffett said the scholarship language was intended to protect scholarships generally, but not need-based aid specifically, and he acknowledged discomfort with some of the endorsement restrictions. Public testimony on HB 312 was mixed. One supporter, a former Division III athlete and coach, backed the bill but urged removal of a section allowing institutions or athletic bodies to use an athlete’s NIL without compensation, arguing most New Hampshire athletes do not receive NIL money and should not have to work extra jobs to cover basic expenses. The chair also raised concerns about the bill’s contractual and identity-rights implications, referencing prior committee work on a J.D. Salinger-related identity case and noting the committee had previously declined to get involved in similar contractual disputes. No vote was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• > of<00:14:03.440> the hearing notice, copies of the hearing notice, copies of the resolutions
• We hear from those offering testimony.
• This hearing is conference room 225.
• :20.000> failures, unlikely case of technical failures, unlikely case of technical failures, this
• we hear from those offering testimony. testimony. testimony.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committees heard and acted on several resolutions related to housing, emergency preparedness, public safety, corrections, transportation, and wildfire mitigation. Measures discussed included HCR 67 on developing a comprehensive strategy for updated building codes; HCR 164 on maintaining publicly accessible hurricane shelter lists; HCR 180 on coordinated homelessness response; HCR 37 on emergency outreach to kupuna; HCR 121 on expanding Kolekole Pass as an emergency exit route; HCR 43 on studying highway patrol and speed cameras; HR 69 on vegetation management and wildfire risk; HCR 133 on supporting a floating dry dock at Pearl Harbor; HCR 153 on reducing the use of private out-of-state prisons; and HTR 23 on the new Oahu Community Correctional Center design and inmate release procedures. Testimony was largely supportive across the agenda. Supporters included state agencies, advocacy groups, and individuals, with some measures drawing comments or suggested amendments. For HCR 69, the Division of Consumer Advocacy, PUC, Hawaiian Electric, Charter Communications, and Life of the Land all supported the measure, though some requested amendments or raised due process concerns. For HCR 121, the Department of Transportation said improvements were planned later in the year to allow emergency access through Kolekole Pass, and public testimony emphasized wildfire, tsunami, and evacuation concerns. For HCR 43, DOT supported the study, and testimony noted possible benefits for enforcement and court efficiency. HCR 37 received strong support from ARP Hawaii, social work students, caregivers, and other community groups focused on kupuna safety. The committees took action on all items. HCR 67, HCR 164, HCR 180, HCR 37, HCR 121, HCR 43, HCR 133, HCR 153, and HTR 23 were all recommended for passage, with some measures passed as is and others with amendments. HCR 69 was amended to add the Department of Land and Natural Resources and the Department of Education, and to incorporate suggested amendments from Charter Communications and Hawaiian Telecom. HCR 121 was passed with technical amendments. Votes were recorded in favor on each measure, with some members excused and one no vote noted on HCR 43. The meetings concluded with adjournment after the final votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• What I'm hearing, Mr. Dolvrock... What I'm hearing, Mr.
• First, can you hear me? Okay.
• I don't know about case managers.
• Last year, we had five hearings.”
• Last year, we had five hearings.”

Summary: The meeting focused on Missouri’s substance use prevention and treatment system, with repeated emphasis on recovery support services, peer support, recovery housing, transportation, and harm reduction. Dan Haniken of Into Action described his own recovery from addiction and incarceration and argued that treatment alone is not enough; he urged greater investment in recovery housing, peer support, employment, and community-based supports that help people stay sober and avoid relapse. Members asked about funding sources, program capacity, referrals, treatment court, transportation, and how Into Action supports people on medication-assisted treatment (MAT). Haniken said the organization is funded through a mix of federal, state, county, city, foundation, and private donations, and that housing and transportation remain major barriers, especially because support is often funded for too short a period compared with the longer time people need to stabilize. Matt Cushman of the Raytown Fire Protection District gave a strong endorsement of harm reduction, including naloxone distribution, syringe service programs, and broader decriminalization of harm reduction tools. He argued that stigma is a major barrier to care and that Missouri should expand access to clean needles, test strips, and other services, while also improving access to MAT in jails and communities. Committee members questioned the evidence base, the role of faith-based providers, and whether safe consumption sites should be pursued; Cushman said syringe exchange decriminalization should be the immediate priority, while safe consumption sites are a longer-term issue. He also described community paramedicine and mobile integrated health as valuable but funding-dependent, and said naloxone distribution is improving but still uneven, especially in rural and minority communities. Representatives from Central Ozarks Medical Center and Four Rivers Community Health Center highlighted the importance of peer support specialists, community health workers, care coordinators, and wraparound services in rural health centers. COMC’s Morgan McClure and Monet Lehman described a jail reentry program in Pulaski County, with Lehman sharing her trauma and recovery story and explaining how she helps incarcerated people prepare for release with housing, employment, benefits, transportation, and treatment connections. Four Rivers’ Devon Polarys and Cassandra Trout said their CEO would change Missouri policy to allow FQHCs to receive reimbursement for peer support and community health worker services similar to CCBHCs, arguing that these roles are essential for addressing barriers like transportation, housing, food insecurity, and insurance. Members discussed confusion over reimbursement rules, the differences between FQHCs and CCBHCs, and the need for better funding and clearer policy for peer and community health worker services. No votes were taken; the discussion ended with a suggestion to bring in a subject matter expert on community health workers for a future session.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:04:43.120> this for hearing this for hearing this Bill<00:04:46.080> thank<00:04
• routine vision and and hearing routine vision and and hearing screenings<00:16:38.600> that's
• <00:24:39.360> from um they claim to want to hear from um they claim to want to hear from
• from me and they don't want to to hear from me and they don't want to hear<00:26:17.799> from
• hear something or counselor hears hear something or counselor hears something<01:13:15.199> there

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And you said it got a hearing this. I cannot. Okay. And you said it got a hearing this session?
• I can barely hear the lady.
• We hear bills all the time, and we hear from your side of the aisle, we want to protect kids.
• I was in the hearings.
• I was in the hearings.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The other case in the analysis is The Crew, which was online... ...offered full refunds in that case.
• This helps resolve the majority of cases, which are very small cases.
• , in those cases.
• Today that is no longer the case.
• Today that is no longer the case.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But we get cases like this, unfortunately, every single day.
• And thank you so much for hearing this bill. Thank you.
• , but rather a case of medical fragility.
• We have been hearing these horror stories for years in Florida.
• of rights cases, As important as it is, and I've had termination of rights cases, to rush to a decision

Summary: The Human Services Subcommittee considered three bills and reported all of them favorably. HB 1013, relating to crisis care coordination, would create a pilot program in Polk and Volusia counties to connect people who have had Baker Act-related crises with follow-up counseling, assessments, and outpatient services through partnerships between law enforcement and community providers. The sponsor said the program has reduced repeat Baker Act commitments in Polk County, and the committee adopted a strike-all amendment moving the pilot to a different statute, formalizing partnerships, and requiring an independent DCF evaluation due in January 2029. The bill drew support from mental health and justice advocates and passed unanimously. The committee then heard PCS for HB 511, which addresses child protective investigations involving specific medical diagnoses. Sponsors and several parents, attorneys, and advocates described cases in which children were removed after injuries were initially treated as abuse but later linked to conditions such as Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, metabolic bone disease, or other medical fragility. They argued the bill would require notice of the right to a second medical opinion, better consideration of preexisting conditions and medical records, and more coordination before reports are sent to law enforcement, while still preserving protections for abused children. Members expressed sympathy for the families and emphasized the need for fairness and accurate medical review; the bill passed 17-0. Finally, HB 1439, based on recommendations from the 2025 Commission on Mental Health and Substance Use Disorder, was presented as a broader mental health and substance use disorder measure focused on crisis response, access to care, and workforce development. An amendment aligned the bill more closely with commission recommendations, including assessment tools, trauma-informed practices, school-based behavioral health access, telehealth, discharge planning, and long-acting injectable treatment access. The commission chair testified that the bill reflected a vetted set of recommendations from subject matter experts and commissioners, and the committee adopted the amendment and then reported the bill favorably by unanimous vote. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Looking forward to hearing from you. Thank you, Chair Wahab.
• With that, we're going to begin today's hearing.
• One of the issues so far, what I hear is that, first of all, One of the issues so far, what I hear is
• So I think that's one action item that I hear from you.
• That's the fact-finding that I want to hear.

Summary: The joint Sunset Review Oversight Hearing focused on the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education (BPPE) and its reauthorization, operations, enforcement, fiscal condition, and student protections. Committee leaders and DCA officials praised the Bureau’s recent improvements in data systems, licensing, inspections, and enforcement, while noting the Bureau’s role has become more important as federal higher education oversight weakens. Bureau Chief Deborah Cochran said the agency has met its inspection mandate for the first time since the law was enacted, increased citations and disciplinary actions, reduced pending complaints, and used data tools to identify risk and monitor institutions more effectively. A major portion of the hearing centered on student harm, especially school closures, transcript access, predatory recruiting, and the Student Tuition Recovery Fund (STRF). Members asked how the Bureau protects students when schools close, whether bad actors can reopen under new entities, and whether enforcement tools are strong enough. Cochran said the Bureau can cite, fine, place schools on probation, revoke licenses, and order refunds, but it is seeking new authority to deny approval to operators who previously closed schools improperly or failed to refund students. She also said the Bureau is tracking ownership data and is concerned about institutions targeting immigrant and visa students. On STRF, Cochran explained that the fund is currently healthy, assessments are at zero because the balance is above the statutory target, and the Bureau paid about 1,100 claims totaling roughly $17 million over the last four years. Several members questioned the fairness of the assessment structure and discussed alternatives such as surety bonds, but the Bureau said STRF is working well and no change is needed at this time. Fee increases and the Bureau’s structural deficit were another major topic. Cochran said the Bureau reduced costs by eliminating positions, streamlining inspections, improving data analysis, and shifting some student-relief costs to STRF, but that legislative action is still needed to address the deficit. She said the proposed fees were based on workload analyses and that application fees generally match service costs, while annual fees are designed to cover most of the Bureau’s revenue needs. Some members and stakeholders criticized the proposed increases as too high, especially for out-of-state registration and campus fees, while others argued the Bureau needs sufficient resources to regulate effectively. Public commenters from private schools, Northeastern University, San Joaquin Valley College/Carrington College, and TICAS generally supported the Bureau’s mission and reauthorization, but urged changes such as risk-based oversight, better transcript protections, stronger limits on repeated provisional approvals, and more targeted fee and STRF reforms. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended with no formal action beyond discussion and receipt of testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• The big thing I hear is that we want to hear from you if there's a flag for more resources, if you have
• Hearing all of the non-recurring today.
• One last question with UNM, Project ECHO, I I've been hearing that a lot often through these hearings
• We really needed to hear that.
• Additionally, legal aid is no longer taking cases and has not taken housing cases since last summer.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, so can you hear us? Um, can we hear them? >> I can hear you. This is Jimmy Bird.
• Uh, so can you hear questions on that. Uh, so can you hear us?
• Um, can we hear them? us? Um, can we hear them?
• <00:27:04.320> they<00:27:04.640> call cases excelic in other cases they call cases
• to be able to hear as well. to be able to hear as well.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Discussion of the KentuckyWired Network 00:00:55 Discussion of the Water Resource Information System 00:35.40 Discussion of Geographic Information Systems 00:52:30 Discussion of Committee Report to LRC 01:15:05, 958, all

Summary: The Information Technology Oversight Committee met with a quorum, approved the prior meeting minutes, and then heard a presentation from Leadcore representatives Jimmy Bird, Mike Murray, and Rebecca Moss on the Kentucky Wired network. Leadcore described its role as the design-builder and service provider under the KCNA contract, saying the network was built with roughly 13,200 feet of fiber, mostly aerial, and that the use of non-armored cable was a Kentucky-side decision made to reduce cost. They also said aerial construction and non-armored cable increase maintenance challenges, including storm damage and squirrel-related damage, and reported FY25 service activity of 104 break-fix events, 30 maintenance replacements, 64 storm-damage events, and nearly 13,000 feet of fiber replaced to date. Committee members questioned whether the original project anticipated this level of replacement and whether any forecast existed for maintenance under non-armored cable. Leadcore said it did not do a formal forecast and could not say whether the replacement rate was above or below norms, though it acknowledged the decision not to use armored cable came from the Kentucky side of the contract. Members also asked about whether replacements caused network degradation; Leadcore said it tries to replace cable at existing splice points to avoid degradation and, where needed, uses armored cable for replacement sections going forward. The committee then explored Leadcore’s relationship with Excel and KCNA. Leadcore said it has a service-level agreement for KCNA-related fibers but not for dark fibers used by Excel, and that Kentucky Wired fibers get priority on service requests. It said outages are reported through a 1-800 number and that it was not aware of any access problems to the huts. On the tech refresh, Leadcore said its understanding is that maintaining the network is its responsibility, but the technology refresh is not; it said only a very limited amount of refresh has occurred and that this did not match the original contract intent. Leadcore also said it had not been asked to defer maintenance. The chair closed by saying the testimony would inform a committee report and that he intended to recommend clawing back or withholding some previously authorized Kentucky Wired and refresh funding until an audit is complete, with the committee to vote on a report later.

Transcript Highlights:

• But I do hear what you're saying.
• This wasn't just one or two cases.
• So why is that the case?
• So they have a business case to do so.
• So they have a business case to do so.

Summary: The committee heard several bills, with most of the discussion focused on public safety, consumer protection, and youth harms. AB 1557 by Assemblymember Papin would clarify e-bike motor power limits and set lower speed-related standards for Class 1 and 2 e-bikes. Supporters, including the California Police Chiefs Association, cities, the California Medical Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics, argued the bill would reduce severe injuries and deaths among young riders. Opponents from People for Bikes warned it could conflict with federal law, create legal uncertainty, and disrupt the bicycle market. The author and committee members acknowledged industry concerns and urged continued work on the bill. AB 1770 by Assemblymember Garcia would place large health care service plan arbitration under California Department of Justice oversight and require compliance with the California Arbitration Act. Supporters described cases where patients were forced into private arbitration with little transparency or accountability, arguing the bill would make the process fairer and more neutral. Kaiser Permanente and the Civil Justice Association of California said they were still reviewing amendments and had not settled on a final position. Committee members expressed sympathy for the personal stories shared and encouraged continued negotiations. The committee also heard AB 2075, which would require fire suppression equipment to be kept closer at hand during brush work, and AB 1864, which would require screening of gene synthesis orders to prevent misuse for bioterrorism. AB 2075 was presented as a response to a Ventura County wildfire, with support from the Ventura County District Attorney’s office and no opposition heard. AB 1864 was backed by the author, Stanford biosecurity expert Dr. Milana Trout, and Encode AI, while Biocom opposed unless amended and California Life Sciences remained neutral. Members discussed implementation details and the role of the Department of Public Health. A major portion of the hearing was devoted to AB 1709, which would set a minimum age of 16 for social media accounts on platforms with harmful features and create an e-safety advisory commission. Supporters, including youth advocates, parents, medical groups, and Common Sense Media, said addictive design features are harming children’s mental health and safety. Opponents, including EFF, the ACLU, TechNet, and other civil liberties and industry groups, argued the bill is overbroad, raises First Amendment and privacy concerns, and could limit access to important online communities. Despite those objections, the bill was moved forward after committee discussion, with members emphasizing the need to protect children while continuing to work on carveouts and implementation details.

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll have questions for the whole panel after we hear from each one of you. Thank you.
• Seeing and hearing no public testimony, public testimony is closed.
• I tell you, so y'all are going to hear some stories about Paul now.
• So all these cases where you had clear voter fraud going on were never, never seen.
• So this would be a great tool to actually get some of these election fraud cases heard.

Bills: SB1065, SB2117, SB2217, SB2363, SB2533, SB2742, SB2743, SB2881, SB2964, SB3013, SB3014

Keywords: SB 1065, handgun carry, license holder, concealed carry, open carry, government contracts, governmental entity, property lease, state agencies, local government, higher education, university, Texas Government Code, Penal Code 30.06, Penal Code 30.07, Penal Code 46.03, Second Amendment, gun rights, firearms, civil penalty

Summary: The Senate State Affairs Committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 1065, which would require government property contracts to prohibit contractors from barring licensed handgun holders from carrying firearms on leased or owned public property, with civil penalties and attorney general enforcement for violations. Senator Hall and invited witnesses from the Texas State Rifle Association, NRA, and Texas Gun Rights argued the bill would close a loophole exposed by the State Fair of Texas gun ban and protect law-abiding Texans’ self-defense rights. Opponents, including Moms Demand Action/Everytown, said the bill would undermine event organizers’ ability to set site-specific safety rules and could increase liability and insurance costs. Public testimony was then closed and the bill was left pending. The committee next took up Senate Bill 2742, which would create civil penalties for independent school districts and officials who use public resources for electioneering, waive immunity defenses, and expand attorney general enforcement. Senator Hagan-Bood said current law bans the conduct but lacks meaningful penalties, making injunctions the only remedy. No public testimony was heard, and the bill was left pending. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 2743, also by Senator Hagan-Bood, which would allow a court to disqualify local prosecutors who refuse to prosecute election offenses and appoint the attorney general to handle the case, with a committee substitute adjusting the removal process through an adjacent-county judge. Opponents from the Texas Civil Rights Project argued the bill would undermine prosecutorial discretion and was vague and open to abuse, while a Harris County election official described past instances where alleged voter fraud cases were not pursued. After testimony, public comment was closed and SB 2743 was left pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• Many of us have read about a case in 2022 Chairman Hughes: when Dr.
• The case against Dr.
• We'll hold questions until we hear from the panel, ma'am. Thank you so much.
• Thank you, senators for hearing me.
• Thank you again for hearing me. Chair: Thank you for your testimony.

Bills: SB 240, SB 1183, SB 1184, SB 1577, SB 2043, SB 2051, SCR 42, SJR 68

Keywords: biological sex, gender identity, public facilities, civil penalties, local government, EBT, electronic benefits transfer, food stamps, SNAP, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, TANF, temporary assistance for needy families, welfare benefits, benefit card fraud, fraud hotline, card replacement, photo ID, recipient photograph, HHSC, Health and Human Services Commission

Transcript Highlights:

• This is the case for flavored vapes.
• This is the case for flavored vapes.
• This is the case for flavored vapes.
• And in this case, again, there is an alternative product.
• hear certain appeals.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Do we have someone to open the hearing?
• Those two, the most recent cases, were too COVID related, where the hearings bureau accepted, you know
• <00:41:50.560> that the settlements and in the cases that the settlements and in the cases
• Let's hear<00:54:06.960> it. hear it. hear it.
• ways now it seems to me I mean the case ways now it seems to me I mean the case that<00:56:18.000

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But isn't it the case that, um, you made that case in the Rand case, and the court disagreed and you
• case.
• case.
• case.
• case.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• hearing comments and themes. hearing comments and themes.
• the hearing in.
• Um many of the hearings the hearing in.
• to hear New hearing, I was appalled to hear New Hampshire<04:15:32.080> DOT<04:15:32.800>
• should make an exception this case. should make an exception this case.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We would have to shut down the case, go to Circuit Court to have the matter heard, then have the case
• We would have to shut down the case, go to Circuit Court to have the matter heard, then have the case
• So that varies from case to case.
• <00:28:30.600> and then we have to reopen the case and then we have to reopen the case and
• down, go to Circuit Court, do all that filings, have a hearing, have the case remanded back, and then

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you hear me, Mr. Heres? Yes, I can hear you. Can you hear me?
• Can you hear He's got to unmute himself. Can you hear me,<00:41:58.800> Mr.
• case uh the case here in this proposal. case uh the case here in this proposal.
• Can you hear me, Mr. Thomas? Yes, I can. Can you hear me? We can hear you.
• Can you hear me? We can hear Yes, I can. Can you hear me?

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the case.
• And this particular case had case.
• Construction defect case.
• And on the first case I billed $44,16? and on the second case I billed 37,217.
• Can you hear me? >> I'm here. Can you hear me? >> Yep. >> Yep. >> Yep.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The task force met on October 22, 2025, with a quorum present and several members participating remotely. Members approved the minutes from the previous meeting. Michelle Urick of the Legislative Coordinating Commission then gave an administrative update on proxy voting and the task force’s operating procedures. She said the enabling statute only authorizes the officially appointed member to act and vote, so proxy voting is not allowed, and votes must be cast in person at the meeting where the item is considered. She also said members may submit written positions, but not vote before or after a meeting. In response to concerns about attendance for future votes, the chair said the January meetings would be rescheduled if possible using a Doodle poll so more members could be present in person. The group also agreed to treat the revised document as operating procedures rather than a formal charter, with no separate adoption action needed at that time. The task force then moved into testimony on homeowners and commercial property insurance. Paul Edgar of Minnesota Realtors said rising insurance costs are adding to housing affordability pressures, citing an increase in the monthly principal, interest, taxes, and insurance payment on a median-priced Minnesota home from $1,622 in 2021 to $2,642 in September 2025. He said higher insurance costs and limited coverage can affect buyers’ financing, especially for condominiums and townhomes, and urged continued work on liability and insurance-related laws that may discourage condo development. He also referenced prior bipartisan reforms to Minnesota’s condominium construction defects law and said his organization supports further improvements to encourage more condo production. Keenan Ravery of the Minnesota Mortgage Association focused on how insurance requirements affect mortgage lending. He explained that lenders require insurance both at origination and throughout the life of the loan, with standards aimed at protecting collateral rather than providing full homeowners coverage. He said replacement-cost coverage has long been the norm, but recent issues with roofs, deductibles, HO-6 policies, and force-placed insurance have become pain points for consumers and lenders. He said his association is working with national trade groups on reforms that could allow more flexibility in coverage types and deductibles, and he expressed hope that Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Housing Finance Agency may announce policy changes in the coming months or by early 2026. No votes or substantive policy actions were taken beyond approving the minutes and agreeing to pursue scheduling adjustments for January.