Transcript Highlights:

• We have seen a dramatic increase not only in the rate of felony cases sentenced, but also in the rate
• Minnesota has experienced a 98% increase in the rate of felony cases sentenced for person crimes; that
• in the rate of felony cases in the rate of felony cases sentenced<00:04:08.519> for<00:04
• Since 1981, the number of felony cases sentenced annually has generally grown from 5,500 cases in 1981
• to over 16,000 cases in 2023.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We don't know in those cases.
• Can everyone hear me okay? Yes.
• Solved cases tend to deter future offending.
• Solved cases tend to deter future offending.
• So when we look at cases occurring over the last three years and total up the number of cases that still

Summary: The House Committee on Community Safety held a December 4, 2025 work session focused first on crime trends and then on policing effectiveness. Adam Gelb of the Council on Criminal Justice reviewed long-term national data showing major declines in reported crime and victimization since the early 1990s, a pandemic-era spike in homicide and some violent crime, and a recent drop back toward pre-pandemic levels. He also highlighted a sharp decline in juvenile arrests and incarceration, a substantial reduction in racial disparities in imprisonment, and noted that much of the disparity reduction appears tied to changes in arrest patterns. James McMahon of the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs then presented Washington’s 2024 crime report, saying total crime fell 8.4% from 2023, with decreases in violent crime, property crime, murders, robberies, aggravated assaults, hate crimes, and vehicle theft, while crimes against society rose. He emphasized that domestic violence makes up about half of crimes against persons, that Washington remains above its 2019 levels in several categories, and that underreporting affects the data. Marshall Clement of the Council of State Governments Justice Center added that Washington remains one of the states still above 2019 violent-crime levels, with homicide and juvenile victimization especially concerning, and noted wide variation in juvenile arrests and violent-crime trends across cities and counties. Jeff Asher of the Real Time Crime Index said his near-real-time data through September 2025 suggests continued national and Washington declines in murder, violent crime, and property crime, with Washington’s murder trend likely continuing downward into 2025. The second half of the work session shifted to policing methods and clearance rates. Richard Hahn of the Niskanen Center argued that disorder and neighborhood conditions affect public safety perceptions, that environmental design and street lighting can reduce crime, and that police agencies need better deployment, investigative capacity, and clearance rates, especially amid staffing shortages. Mark Kropanski of Arnold Ventures summarized research finding that police staffing matters, hotspots and problem-oriented policing reduce crime, and better investigations increase deterrence and trust; he stressed that homicide clearance rates remain only around 60% in Washington and that property-crime clearance is much lower. Marshall Clement returned to focus on Washington’s solve rates, saying only 44% of violent crimes reported to police are solved, with 62% of homicides, 51% of aggravated assaults, 25% of rapes, and 31% of robberies cleared in 2024, and that large numbers of serious crimes remain unsolved over a three-year period. He urged state leaders to set goals, improve data collection, strengthen investigative resources, and support victims and witnesses. No votes or formal actions were taken; the session was informational and included extensive member questions about juvenile crime, domestic violence, underreporting, detective staffing, and how to improve clearance rates.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are holding two public hearings on two different audits.
• We are holding two public hearings on two different audits from the State Auditor's Office today.
• In that case, if not seeing any other questions, we have presenters today...
• So in our case and the other fire districts, it's not really an option, right?
• In our case, our municipalities are looking at it.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee’s Initiative 900 subcommittee held a hybrid public hearing on two State Auditor performance audits. The first audit examined efforts to reduce non-emergency use of emergency systems through CARES programs. Auditors reported that Washington has 52 fire-agency-led CARES programs in 26 counties, but many communities without programs said they need one. Major barriers included unstable funding, difficulty hiring qualified staff, volunteer-based rural departments, and lack of statewide guidance. The audit also found that only about half of programs tracked both required performance measures, and it recommended that the legislature consider private insurance reimbursement options and convene a statewide work group to develop guidance, standards, and possible changes to the role of the Department of Health. Agency representatives and fire officials largely supported the findings and emphasized that short-term grants and one-year contracts make programs hard to sustain. Committee discussion focused heavily on financing, especially Medicaid reimbursement and accountable communities of health (ACHs). Auditors clarified that the 10% figure cited in the report referred to direct Medicaid reimbursement for treat-and-refer services, which some agencies do not pursue because the $115 rate is too low relative to the administrative effort. Several fire officials testified that their programs rely on grants and ACH support, but that funding is often year-to-year and uncertain. They also described the value of CARES programs in reducing emergency room use, jail detentions, and long ambulance wait times, while noting barriers to sharing patient records across systems. Members asked whether the new public safety sales tax authority could help, but fire district representatives said it is not a direct funding option for them. The second audit reviewed performance management in the Department of Commerce’s Office of Economic Development and Competitiveness. Auditors found that the division does not yet have a statewide economic development strategic plan and that performance management is inconsistent across its 16 programs. In a limited review, all six sampled programs had goals, but only half clearly identified performance measures and targets, and only three tracked outcomes and published results. The audit highlighted leading practices from other states, including strategic planning, regular progress reporting, aligning program goals with agency goals, and using performance-based contracts and grant monitoring. Recommendations urged Commerce to seek stakeholder input, assess internal and external conditions, set goals and measures, align programs with the strategy, and strengthen monitoring and evaluation. Commerce officials agreed with the audit and said the division is already working toward a strategic plan, with a new assistant director to be hired and a target of completing the work by mid-next year. Members pressed the department on how the plan would connect to workforce, higher education, housing, and other economic development systems, and asked Commerce to return to JLARC next year with progress updates. The meeting ended with instructions for submitting written public comments and notice of the next JLARC meeting schedule.

Transcript Highlights:

• by case.
• I know you have a big hearing today, and you're going to hear from many, many Cape Codders and Islanders
• Sorry, I didn't hear the time.
• Can you hear me? We can. Hello? Can you hear me? We can. Okay. My name is Kathleen Uberti, Sear.
• Hearing no one, that concludes our list of speakers and our agenda for this hearing.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government held a long public hearing focused mainly on two sets of issues: proposals to amend or repeal the MBTA Communities Act, and bills to allow local rent stabilization. Committee chairs opened by explaining the hearing would be tightly managed because of the very large number of speakers, with testimony limited to two minutes per person and written testimony still accepted by email. Members and witnesses were called in a mix of in-person and virtual order throughout the hearing. On the MBTA Communities Act, several legislators and local officials argued the law is too rigid and should be revised to account for local conditions. Speakers from small, rural, or infrastructure-limited communities such as Hanson, Halifax, Marshfield, Winthrop, Dracut, Carver, Rehoboth, and others said the law’s one-size-fits-all approach does not fit towns with limited water, sewer, transit access, or buildable land. Some filed bills would repeal the law, exempt certain communities, or create appeals processes based on infrastructure, environmental, or historical constraints. Supporters of the law’s changes emphasized local control and the need to avoid forcing development where communities believe it is impractical or inconsistent with town character. A large portion of the hearing was devoted to rent stabilization legislation, especially S. 1447 and related House bills. Supporters included legislators, city councilors, tenant advocates, labor leaders, housing nonprofits, public health organizations, and residents who described sharp rent increases, displacement, homelessness risk, and the strain on working families, seniors, students, and people with disabilities. They argued local-option rent stabilization would let municipalities cap excessive increases and prevent no-fault evictions while preserving flexibility for local conditions. Opponents, including small landlords and property owners, said rent control would discourage investment, worsen housing quality, burden responsible owners, and drive small landlords out of the market. Some witnesses also supported a Cape Cod/Island transfer fee bill and a suburban infrastructure fund, arguing those would provide local revenue for housing or roads. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you so much. hearing is now closed. Representative hearing is now closed.
• Hearing none.
• c> uh Hearing no further disc uh Hearing no further disc uh hearing<00:56:09.520> no<00:56
• Hearing... Oh, sorry.
• Hearing... Oh, sorry.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't want you to hear the cries that we've had to hear.
• c> to<00:10:06.640> hear.
• So in the Heller case, the U.S.
• So in the Heller case, the U.S.
• cases. Rifle homicides are rare. cases. Rifle homicides are rare.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 3433 and House File 3402 together, both aimed at restricting assault-style weapons and high-capacity magazines. The bill authors described the measures as bans on the sale and possession of enumerated military-style semi-automatic weapons and magazines over 10 rounds, while allowing current owners to keep firearms through a BCA certification process. They framed the bills as a response to the Annunciation School shooting and broader gun violence, emphasizing public support and the need to act to protect children and communities. Testimony in support came from Annunciation families and a Hennepin Healthcare emergency physician. Survivors and family members described the shooting’s aftermath in personal detail, including the death of children, severe injuries, long-term trauma, and ongoing medical treatment. They argued that the type of weapon mattered because it increased the speed and severity of the attack, and that limiting access to these weapons could slow future mass shootings and save lives. The physician said the injuries he treated showed how high-velocity rifles cause far greater tissue damage and urged swift action to limit access. Opposition testimony came from the Minnesota Gun Owners Law Center and the NRA. They argued the bills would not have prevented the Annunciation shooting, contended that the 1994 federal assault weapons ban did not reduce crime, and said the legislation would likely face constitutional challenges because the firearms and magazines are in common use and protected by the Second Amendment. They also raised concerns about the bill’s grandfathering, registration, renewal, inspection, storage, and ammunition restrictions, and suggested lawmakers should instead focus on mental health intervention and other upstream causes of violence. The hearing ended with the committee moving into member discussion; no vote or final action was taken in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair hears none. The bill is left pending.
• Um, if a case by case authorization exceeds those de minimis levels, and they have to do more rigorous
• If the case ever got that far.
• That's not what these cases are about.
• And in those cases, the cities often um.

Bills: HB 1520, HB 1525, HB 1530, HB 1535, HB 2068, HB 2091, HB 2347, HB 2372, HB 2805, HB 2815, HB 2867, HB 3154, HB 3482, HB 3483, HB 3663, HB 3781, HB 3901, HB 3915, HB 4135, HB 4153, HB 4158, HB 4329, HB 4331

Keywords: Angelina and Neches River Authority, river authority, Sunset Advisory Commission, Texas Sunset Act, Special District Local Laws Code, local government, natural resources, board of directors, director training, board governance, public testimony, open meetings, public information, conflict of interest, ethics, complaint system, general manager, board president, staggered terms, removal of director

Transcript Highlights:

• the Wendy's workers were non-case the Wendy's workers were non-case carrying,<00:31:54.120> so
• people get to hear these discussions at times,<00:35:52.360> right?
• So in this case, the decision was be.
• uh when I hear that uh when I hear that it's<00:42:53.280> a<00:42:53.360> across-the-board
• I think what she was saying, this is one of those uncommon cases.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:00:19 DCBS 00:01:58, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You heard just one of the cases.
• Chair hears none and the substitute is adopted.
• I hear you, you're gonna have to finish up.
• I hear your frustration.
• And in that case.

Bills: HB 111, HB1545, HB2145, HB2467, HB2520, HB4136, HB4181, HB4214, HB4218, HB4219, HB4359, HB4437, HB4822, HB111

Keywords: Texas Public Information Act, open records, public records, government transparency, confidentiality, attorney-client privilege, governmental body, Chapter 552, public information law, nonprofit association, quasi-governmental entity, economic development, trade secrets, proprietary information, commercial financial information, Alamo restoration, local workforce board, TDCJ contract facility, civil commitment facility, water supply corporation

Transcript Highlights:

• hearings I understand uh at there's hearings I understand uh at there's nothing<00:57:56.680> for<
• now many towns did have public hearings now many towns did have public hearings so<01:25:14.080>
• normal case.
• In the majority of cases, he thinks that would be the case.
• Barry: In some cases, yes. In some cases, they are the owner-operator. In some cases, they're not.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you hear me? Yeah. We hear you. Great. Yeah. We hear you. Great.
• Can you hear me okay? Yeah, I'm here as well, Mr. Chairman, if you can hear me. Okay.
• Can you hear me? Welcome. Can you hear me? Thank you.
• Can you hear me okay? Hello? Can you hear me okay? Can you hear me, Nancy? Hello, can you hear me?
• No, so that'll conclude today's hearing. So keep an eye open for future hearing dates.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The commission met for its second hearing to study the future of credit card payments and sales transactions and their impacts on small businesses. Members heard extensive testimony from credit unions, retailers, restaurants, and payment-industry representatives on interchange fees, processing fees, fraud, chargebacks, rewards programs, and the ability of businesses to pass fees on to customers. Several witnesses argued that swipe fees have risen sharply, are especially burdensome for restaurants and other small businesses, and are charged on taxes and tips that are merely pass-through amounts. They urged state action to prohibit fees on tax and tip portions, improve transparency, and allow surcharging or convenience fees, while opponents warned that state regulation could reduce fraud protections, increase compliance costs, and threaten consumer rewards programs. Business owners and trade groups described thin margins, rising costs, and the difficulty of understanding merchant statements or negotiating with processors. Restaurant witnesses said card-not-present and online transactions create the greatest fraud and chargeback risk, with money often removed immediately from merchants’ accounts and disputes rarely resolved in their favor. Retail witnesses gave examples of rising effective rates, higher fees on rewards cards, and the burden of processing fees on low-value transactions. A representative from the Massachusetts Restaurant Association and others said restaurants are effectively paying fees on meals tax and gratuities, which they argued should not be subject to interchange charges. On the other side, the Cooperative Credit Union Association said interchange revenue helps credit unions fund fraud prevention, rapid card replacement, and member protections, and warned that state limits on interchange could weaken those safeguards and lead to higher consumer costs or reduced services. Airlines for America testified that airline credit card rewards are popular, support travel and jobs in Massachusetts, and could be harmed by interchange reform. The National Restaurant Association and a payments-policy attorney countered that interchange fees are set by card networks rather than competitive markets, that banks remain highly profitable even with rewards, and that states can act after recent court decisions. No votes were taken; the hearing consisted of testimony and questions from commissioners.

Transcript Highlights:

• When that is the case, there is a provision in this law for there to be, within 14 days, a hearing at
• When that is the case, there is a provision in this law for there to be, within 14 days, a hearing at
• When that is the case, there is a provision in this law for there to be, within 14 days, a hearing at
• When that is the case, there is a provision in this law for there to be, within 14 days, a hearing at
• When that is the case, there is a provision in this law for there to be, within 14 days, a hearing at

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And uh I'm going to make just a brief announcement that by attending this hearing, you would hear you
• 55.040> cases.
• referred these cases. referred these cases.
• before the end of today's hearing. before the end of today's hearing.
• case we need it. case we need it.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• If it is a case of um...
• <00:32:13.919> work exactly this would be our case work exactly this would be our case work
• <00:32:16.720> to after filing or when we open a case to after filing or when we open a case
• It may have created more cases.
• that and uh we look forward to hearing that and uh we look forward to hearing from<01:10:40.600>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee met on House Bill 553, which concerns the definitions of child abuse and neglect in RSA 169-C, including psychological maltreatment and the rebuttable presumption of harm. The chair and members emphasized that the bill is intended to clarify definitions rather than create punishments, and they discussed concerns that had arisen after the bill’s earlier drafting. Representative Eimon stated his view that the bill is constitutional, citing case law, and members noted that amendment 114 would restore language refined by the prior study committee and address trauma-informed wording, especially around substance use disorder and newborns. A major portion of the discussion focused on whether the bill could be read to treat ordinary parental discipline or disagreements with a child—such as grounding, taking away car keys or a phone, or refusing gender-affirming care—as abuse or neglect. DCF Deputy Director Jen Ross explained that screeners look at the nature of the allegation and whether the parent’s conduct is likely to cause serious psychological or emotional harm; she said routine discipline or prudent parenting would not be screened in, while persistent ridiculing, terrorizing, bullying, isolating, threats, or similar conduct could qualify. She also said that denial of gender-affirming care, by itself, would not be treated as neglect, but the agency would consider the full context and any resulting harm or need for mental health care. DCF General Counsel Susan Larby added that the legislature’s earlier definition of psychological maltreatment and related policy already focus on pervasive emotionally abusive behavior, and that the bill is meant to make the statute more understandable and transparent, not to change the core neglect standard. She and other speakers said the goal is to identify serious harm and provide services, not to remove children for ordinary parental decisions. Lisa Massio of the Office of the Child Advocate said the bill and related placement language are intended to preserve family unity and fill gaps where courts have interpreted neglect too narrowly or inconsistently. Members also discussed a proposed concise analysis from Representative Maral and asked about CPSW qualifications and training; DCF said staff generally have backgrounds in human services, social work, psychology, or education and receive a 12-week Core Academy on policy, law, investigations, and family engagement. No vote was taken in the portion provided, and members indicated they wanted to continue refining the amendment before sending anything to the Office of Legislative Services.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is of great importance to hear his nomination.
• If that's not the case, I just know that. happened.
• No, you just hear about it on the radio, I mean.
• Typically, all the parties to the case in the first phase of a rate case are just trying to get that
• Hearing none, public testimony is now closed.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• When you hear the...
• Hearing none, the substitute is adopted.
• Hearing none, the substitute is adopted.
• Hearing none, the substitute is adopted.
• jurisdiction. for these types of cases.

Bills: HB2226, HB2269, HB2343, HB2760, HB3621, HB4079, HB4204, HB4518, HB4531, HB4555, HB4850, HB4876, HB4903, HB4996, HB5122

Keywords: construction trust funds, Property Code, Chapter 162, construction payments, mechanics lien, contractors, subcontractors, laborers, material suppliers, materialmen, real property improvement, assignment of payment rights, unpaid trust funds, trust fund beneficiaries, construction industry, payment protection, Texas construction law, property owners association, landscaping, grass maintenance

Transcript Highlights:

• We don't want to use statistical metrics like case clearance rates as blunt instruments.
• In the very rare case. where they arise.
• Hear me say this, in Texas, under this Supreme Court, Living Constitution is dead. Thank you.
• The very best litigation is the case that's never brought, the case that doesn't. have to be brought,
• and another judge at the hearing next week who may not know what happened at the first hearing.

Bills: SB26, SB28, SJR36, SB26, SB616, SB565, SB384, SB28

Keywords: teacher compensation, education funding, public school educators, teacher retention, teacher designation, lottery, gambling, internet gaming, mobile application, criminal offenses, aquifer, water management, Edwards Aquifer, sustainability, regulatory framework, SB 565, Texas Water Code, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, compliance agreement

Transcript Highlights:

• It's time that we hear those voices.
• That court case is currently pending. That court case is currently pending.
• So we currently have these in the court cases.
• That's how it's been the case.
• That's how it's been the case.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Every kid should be able to hear. Thank you.
• In this case, the facility is a van.
• In this case, the facility is a van.
• Okay, so we don't hear from the public. Thank you. Okay. So we don't hear from the public. Okay.
• This would not have been the case in 2018.

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee heard a long agenda of health bills focused on access to preventive care, behavioral health, hospital services, and patient safety. Early items included AB 554, which would expand and protect access to HIV prevention drugs like PrEP, including injectable forms and coverage protections; supporters said it would shore up access amid federal threats, while insurers opposed it as a costly benefit mandate. AB 577 would limit insurer and PBM practices that steer medications away from physician offices and require more transparency and patient consent; doctors and patient advocates supported it, while health plans and insurers warned it could raise drug costs and disrupt specialty pharmacy networks. AB 546 would require coverage for portable HEPA purifiers for vulnerable enrollees during declared emergencies, especially wildfire smoke events, with support from air quality and public health groups and opposition from insurers concerned about benefit expansion and cost. The committee also heard AB 224, which would codify California’s updated essential health benefits benchmark plan after a public review process, adding infertility treatment, hearing aids, and durable medical equipment if approved by CMS for the 2027 plan year. DMHC said the state had completed the review and needed legislation to meet federal timing, and the measure drew broad support. AB 1032 would require plans and insurers to reimburse up to 12 additional behavioral health visits for enrollees in wildfire-affected counties for a limited period after an emergency; supporters argued it would fill gaps in trauma care after disasters, while insurers said existing parity and continuity-of-care rules already address the issue and that the bill could create inequities. AB 849 would require trained chaperones for sensitive ultrasound exams and training on how to observe and intervene; it was backed by a survivor and patient advocates, with hospitals and health districts raising staffing concerns. Later, AB 1196 would direct the Department of Public Health to update outdated rules requiring three surgeons for certain heart surgeries using cardiopulmonary bypass; supporters said the rule no longer reflects modern practice and strains staffing, while cardiology representatives had no formal opposition but wanted to review amendments. AB 1113 would codify a right to wear a mask for health reasons in public spaces, with support from disability and public health groups. AB 1386 sought to add perinatal care to the list of basic hospital services, prompting testimony about maternity ward closures, workforce shortages, and rural access; the author said the bill would be amended further and that the committee would need to revisit timelines and implementation details. The committee also heard AB 1429, which would address Kaiser’s repeated mental health parity violations and improve access to behavioral health care, though the transcript cuts off before any action on that bill is shown. Several bills were moved with motions and seconds, but many were held for quorum; AB 1196, AB 1113, and AB 1386 were among the measures advanced to a roll call or held on call, and the committee repeatedly noted that final votes would occur when quorum was available.

Transcript Highlights:

• After that, ongoing failure to comply may result in removal from the hearing room. hearing room.
• , been, um, sharing this in each hearing, been, um, sharing this in each hearing, but<00:02:31.920
• of cases. of cases.
• love to hear it. love to hear it.
• court administrative hearings hearing court administrative hearings the<01:13:59.120> theory<

Keywords: 1187, senate, all