Transcript Highlights:

• And again, thank you to the chair and this committee for hearing my testimony.
• And again, thank you to the chair and this committee for hearing my testimony. Thank you.
• testimony. Thank you. testimony. Thank you.
• Uh thank you for your testimony. Uh thank you for your testimony.
• <01:21:19.800> Uh Uh thank you for your testimony. Uh Uh thank you for your testimony.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll just note that the testimony will be virtual.
• happy to hear your testimony. happy to hear your testimony.
• I'm reading the translated testimony of Habibbo Elme.
• proceed with your testimony. proceed with your testimony.
• testimony of Habibbo Elme. testimony of Habibbo Elme.

Bills: HF3425, HF3424, HF1385

Keywords: supportive housing, grants, housing assistance, funding, Minnesota Statutes, eviction, rent, nonpayment of rent, landlord-tenant, residential tenant, notice to quit, unlawful detainer, housing, lease violation, late fees, rental assistance, legal aid, tenant rights, Minnesota Statutes 504B.321, pre-eviction notice

Transcript Highlights:

• next part of my testimony next part of my testimony >> since<00:46:26.800> it<00:46
• >> Madam Chair, I did look up some of the testimony we heard.
• not named anybody didn't in my testimony not named anybody didn't in my testimony and<01:24:33.600
• We heard<01:36:19.840> testimony<01:36:20.880> um heard testimony um heard testimony um
• We have no testimony to that.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• none, thank you for your testimony. none, thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you very much for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• Please come to the microphone testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. Great. Thank you for your testimony. Great.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard testimony on House Bill 1042, which would increase the BFA contingent credit limit. State Treasurer Monica Misipelli explained that under RSA 66, state debt capacity is tied to unrestricted revenue and that guaranteed debt counts in the calculation even though it is contingent rather than direct debt. She said the state currently has about 4.2% to 4.3% debt-to-revenue ratio, about $120 million in additional capacity, and that approving the bill’s proposed increase would reduce available capacity for future state borrowing, including capital budgets. She noted the BFA has a long history of using guarantees without a state payout, but said the legislature should consider whether the full additional $250 million is needed and whether unused guarantee authorizations, such as one for the Pease Development Authority, should be reviewed in the future. Committee members asked whether guarantees have the same effect as actual debt for bonding capacity, and the treasurer confirmed that they do for purposes of the formula. Members also asked about the usual level of debt relative to the statutory 10% cap, and she said the state generally stays well below that limit. BFA Executive Director James Key Wallace then testified that the request was driven by rising project costs, inflation, and the need for more runway so the agency does not have to return to the legislature in an emergency. He said the BFA is self-supported, has never had a guarantee paid out by the state, requires collateral and reserves, and believes the appropriate range is closer to $400 million to $450 million; he also said a Senate bill would raise the limit to $400 million. He added that the BFA’s pipeline includes projects from about $15 million to $100 million and that housing availability is an important factor in business location decisions. After closing the work session on House Bill 1042, the committee opened House Bill 241, a bill on health insurance coverage for pain management services for chronic pain. Representative Dave Nagel, the prime sponsor, gave extensive background on his long career in pain medicine and said the bill is intended to improve access to non-opioid therapies and evidence-based pain management. He described the broad population affected by chronic pain and opioid use disorder, and said the proposal has long had bipartisan and stakeholder support. No vote or final action was taken on House Bill 241 in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• I know I have um conclude my testimony.
• with that, I will conclude my testimony with that, I will conclude my testimony and<00:10:19.040
• Um but has submitted their testimony.
• you mentioned in your testimony that if you mentioned in your testimony that if this<01:31:45.199>
• prior to me um who provided testimony. prior to me um who provided testimony.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• All testimony comments are limited to the bill at hand.
• And to provide some testimony toward this, I'd ask Mr.
• Please provide testimony. Moved by Carrillo, seconded by Rogers.
• Is there any other testimony in support of this bill?
• With very abbreviated testimony, are...

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee met on April 22 and took up a special order of bills focused largely on prior authorization and utilization management in health care. The chair framed the discussion as part of a broader legislative effort to reduce delays and barriers to care, especially in behavioral health, chronic disease management, cancer treatment, and rehabilitation services. AB 384 by Assembly Member Connolly would prohibit prior authorization for inpatient mental health or substance use emergency admissions and related physician care; supporters said it would prevent dangerous delays in crisis care, while insurers and health plans warned about fraud, abuse, and ambiguity around residential treatment facilities. The bill was moved on a due pass as amended motion and passed the committee on a party-line style vote, with Republicans largely absent or not voting. The committee then heard AB 510 by Assembly Member Addis, which would require health plans, upon request, to provide a peer reviewer of the same or similar specialty when a treating provider appeals a prior authorization denial or modification. Supporters argued that specialty-matched review would make appeals fairer and more clinically informed; opponents said the requirement was too rigid and that timelines and electronic submission rules needed changes. After discussion about the need for timely, specialty-specific review, the bill was approved on a due pass as amended motion and placed on call. AB 539 by Assembly Member Schiavo would extend prior authorization approvals to one year or the duration of the physician’s prescribed treatment for chronic conditions; supporters cited repeated denials and treatment interruptions, while opponents raised concerns about overbreadth, fraud, and the need for shorter validity periods. The bill was also passed as amended and placed on call. The committee next considered AB 669 by Assembly Member Haney, which would bar concurrent and retrospective review for the first 28 days of medically necessary substance use disorder treatment and limit prior authorization for related outpatient medications. The bill was presented with a powerful personal story from Ryan Matlock’s mother about her son’s death after an insurer cut off treatment early; supporters said the measure would keep patients in care long enough to stabilize, while opponents argued it would reduce oversight and could allow lower-quality or non-evidence-based care. The bill was moved on a due pass as amended motion and placed on call. Finally, AB 512 by Assembly Member Harabedian would shorten prior authorization response times to 24 hours for urgent requests and 48 hours for non-urgent requests; supporters said delays can worsen outcomes, while opponents warned the timelines were unrealistic and could increase administrative burdens and safety issues. The bill was approved as amended and placed on call. AB 574 by Assembly Member Mark Gonzalez was then heard; it would allow up to 12 medically necessary physical therapy sessions for a new episode of care without prior authorization, with supporters emphasizing stroke and neurological recovery and opponents warning of reduced oversight and unnecessary care. The transcript ends during testimony on AB 574, before final action is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you very much for your testimony.
• I appreciate your hearing testimony.
• So that concludes my testimony. I appreciate your time.
• So that concludes my testimony. I appreciate your time. Thank you very much for your testimony.
• testimony. All set. All set. Thank you. testimony. All set. All set. Thank you.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I would have... testimony during the special committee, testimony during the special committee, 12<00
• <00:55:24.680> testimony.
• Um, if uh, Representative D. testimony.
• Um, just formulating in my brain some of the things that we hear in testimony.
• Um, and you know, this this testimony.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee met to continue its review of recommendations for New Hampshire’s family court, with the chair emphasizing a collaborative approach and noting that the group would focus on the origins of the family division, recurring problems identified in earlier reports, and comparisons with other states. Members discussed organizing testimony into three broad topics: the court hearing process and pro se litigant preparation, mediation/arbitration/counseling, and the interaction of domestic violence issues with family court and related criminal proceedings. The chair also noted that the subcommittee would not meet again for two weeks and encouraged members to review materials from Judge Michael Mace and NCSL research on other states’ family court systems. Attorney Heather Culp, senior administrator for the judicial branch’s circuit court, testified about New Hampshire’s ADR programs. She explained that the Office of Mediation and Arbitration, created by statute in 2007, oversees more than 12 statewide ADR programs across the Supreme, Superior, and Circuit Courts, including family division programs such as divorce-parenting mediation, neutral case evaluation, guardianship, termination of parental rights, and voluntary adoption mediation. She said the divorce-parenting mediation program is the largest family division ADR program, with about 3,400 mediation sessions in 2023 out of roughly 6,700 cases, and that most cases involving minor children are referred to mediation soon after the first appearance session. Culp described the family division process as beginning with a first appearance session led by a case manager, who provides information, helps with paperwork, and schedules mediation, usually within 30 to 45 days. She said mediation is strongly encouraged in parenting and divorce cases, but there is no requirement to reach agreement, and parties may settle some issues while leaving others for court. She also explained that mediation is prohibited or limited in certain domestic violence cases: cases with active civil protection orders may proceed only with both parties’ consent and possible safeguards, while cases involving criminal protective orders are not sent to mediation. Mediators in court-referred family cases are contracted with the court and must be certified by the executive branch’s mediator certification board; mediators do not communicate with judges, except through a brief ADR report noting whether the case settled or what the next procedural step is. Members asked about referrals, timing, and the meaning of “neutrals,” and Culp said the court uses in-house contracted neutrals for family division ADR and does not refer divorce-parenting cases to outside providers.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:29:41.600> at ask you to wrap up your testimony at ask you to wrap up your testimony at
• Thank you so much for your testimony and being here today.
• increase you've heard prior testimony increase you've heard prior testimony we're<01:24:53.360><
• Amend the title accordingly as was mentioned earlier during testimony.
• mentioned earlier uh during testimony mentioned earlier uh during testimony section<01:35:36.679

Bills: HF1143, HF1548, HF1340, HF2549, HF2559, HF1673, HF2740, HF2507, HF2461, HF2381, HF2695

Keywords: education funding, unemployment aid, special education, Minnesota statutes, appropriations, housing, redevelopment, local government, trust funds, community development, HF1340, housing infrastructure bonds, Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, MHFA, affordable housing, supportive housing, permanent housing, adaptive reuse, area median income, AMI

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll keep testimony around 2 minutes.
• Go ahead with your testimony. State your name for the record.
• Thank you for your testimony, Mr. Mayor. Any questions or discussion from members?
• Thank you for your testimony, Mr. Mayor. Any questions or discussion from members?
• Thank you very much for your testimony. Any questions from members or discussion?

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Please state your name for the record, your title, and begin your testimony.
• He asked everyone to keep testimony to two minutes.
• Abderholden's testimony.
• All right, public testimony is closed. Oh, sorry, go ahead.
• <01:25:51.840> is amended all right public testimony is amended all right public testimony

Bills: HF2196, HF2586, HF2187, HF2037

Keywords: mental health, emotional disturbance, terminology update, statutory cleanup, conforming amendments, children's mental health, serious mental illness, severe emotional disturbance, case management, residential treatment, outpatient services, crisis services, health plan coverage, antipsychotic drugs, medical assistance, Medicaid, foster care, juvenile court, school discipline, county board

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for your testimony. Members, is there any discussion?
• Thank you to our testifiers, and that concludes public testimony.
• Thank you to our testifiers, and that concludes public testimony.
• Thank you to our testifiers, and that concludes public testimony.
• Thank you to our testifiers, and that concludes public testimony.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• you, Representative, for your testimony you, Representative, for your testimony and<01:58:41.400
• Are you familiar with your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• Thanks. your testimony. >> All right. Thanks. your testimony. Okay. Okay. Okay.
• , Um I've been listening to the testimony, Um I've been listening to the testimony, and<04:22:25.920

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:26:23.120> from I um I think we've got testimony from I um I think we've got testimony
• Seeing none, thank you for your testimony.
• for taking time to hear my testimony. for taking time to hear my testimony.
• Um the department taking our testimony.
• Appreciate your testimony. thank you. Appreciate your testimony.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The testimony continues that public schools must provide services regardless of budgets.
• He says Thatcher was thorough and his written testimony was compelling. testimony from Andrew Thatcher
• In testimony, we received 12 examples, printed out.
• We also have testimony from—well, we also have testimony which said that if we had the bill just had
• um from well we also have have testimony um from well we also have testimony<04:58:57.000> which<

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for listening to my testimony.
• Thank you for listening to my testimony.
• Thank you for listening to my testimony.
• Thank you for listening to my testimony.
• Thank you so much for your testimony. testimony. testimony. >> Thank<00:21:10.640> you.

Bills: HF4210, HF4212, HF4549, HF4464, HF4546, HF4447

Keywords: senior nutrition, older adults, aging services, home-delivered meals, congregate dining, meal delivery, grocery delivery, food insecurity, nutrition support, area agencies on aging, Minnesota Board on Aging, human services, special revenue fund, nonprofit grants, SNAP outreach, medically tailored meals, rural nutrition, food access, transportation services, elderly

Transcript Highlights:

• accommodate all who wish to testify, there will be a time limit of 2 minutes per witness during the public testimony
• All right, um, we're going to take testimony. We don't have any registered testimony.
• Alright, we'll proceed to a public testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• all who wish to testify, there will be a time limit of two minutes per witness during the public testimony
• We're going to take testimony. We don't have any registered testimony.
• We'll proceed to public testimony. Is there anyone else who wishes to testify?

Bills: HB 1026, SCR37

Keywords: transportation, Farm-to-Market Road, highway designation, Texas Transportation Commission, state highway system, SCR 37, Senate Concurrent Resolution, Panama Canal, Texas ports, port infrastructure, maritime trade, shipping lanes, supply chain resilience, global commerce, exports, LNG, liquefied natural gas, crude oil, refined petroleum, agriculture

Transcript Highlights:

• As always, we will limit public testimony to two minutes per witness.
• If there are no further questions, we'll proceed to testimony. The chair calls Robin Painovich.
• Thank you for your testimony. Thank you. The chair calls Ray Piansic. That's pretty good.
• Thank you for your testimony. So you registered.

Bills: HB 1057, HB1876

Keywords: teacher salary, retirement benefits, career education, work experience credit, Texas Education Code, technical training, workforce development, grants, education funding, 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Speaker, last year, the rural caucus reached out to you and tried to get some testimony in committee
• <00:05:18.640> in um and tried to get some testimony in um and tried to get some testimony
• Again, it was great testimony.
• Again, it was great testimony.
• testimony to public comments. testimony to public comments.

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House first passed H.953, an act approving an amendment to the charter of the town of Panton, on third reading by voice vote. It then took up S.325 on regional planning and Act 250 tier jurisdiction, where a Lowell member offered an amendment to redefine conserved land for purposes of the conserved land inventory and Vermont’s conservation goals. The Speaker ruled that amendment not germane, and the House sustained that ruling. A separate Williamstown amendment to expand interim housing exemptions was then debated; supporters said it would help housing growth in already developed areas, including rural towns, while opponents from the Environment Committee and Ways and Means said it remained unfavorable and could affect towns that rely on Act 250 review. The House rejected that amendment by voice vote. A Barre City member then offered a wetlands amendment to limit Class 2 wetland buffers in targeted housing areas, arguing it would support housing in designated growth areas while still protecting most wetlands; after discussion, the member withdrew the amendment. The House then passed S.325 in concurrence with proposal of amendment by voice vote. The House next postponed action on S.208, relating to standards for law enforcement identification, for two legislative days. It then considered S.209, prohibiting civil arrest in sensitive locations. The Judiciary Committee explained that the bill expands existing civil-arrest protections beyond court proceedings to include schools, government buildings, DMV offices, libraries, polling places, social service sites, places of worship, camps, and health care facilities, while preserving exceptions for judicial warrants, court orders, contempt, and court security. The committee also described changes to remedies and definitions, including exclusions for temporary custody during a mental health crisis. Testimony cited included representatives from medical, immigrant justice, legal, library, municipal, faith, education, and civil rights groups; the bill was reported favorably by Judiciary on a 6-5 vote. A Bennington member offered an amendment to S.209 that would remove the governor’s statutory exemption to authorize 287(g) agreements, arguing such agreements can undermine due process, public safety, and trust in law enforcement. The Judiciary Committee had already found the amendment not germane, and the member withdrew it. Debate then continued on the committee-recommended bill, with a Sheldon member speaking from a law-enforcement perspective to argue Vermont already does not conduct civil immigration arrests and warning the bill could create confusion and liability for officers. The transcript ends during that discussion, before final action on S.209 is shown.