Transcript Highlights:

• Fair question.
• Nice for questions, sir. Got two quick questions, Mike. Sure.
• That's my first question. My second question, Mr. Chair. Yes, sir.
• Last question. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have one question.
• Representative Daniels, you have a question? Yes, just one question.

Summary: The committee first took up a long-running audit finding involving the City of Daytona Beach’s unexpended building permit fund balance, which has exceeded the statutory cap for several years and was reported at $10.8 million in the latest audit. Mayor Derek Henry and city staff said the city had analyzed the fund, adopted a corrective action plan, waived more than $5.5 million in permit and inspection fees, used some excess funds for a training facility rehabilitation, and is pursuing a $9.4 million City Hall expansion that they say is allowed under a November 2024 Attorney General opinion permitting construction of a building to house the building code enforcement function. Committee members repeatedly questioned whether the city was simply trying to spend down the money, whether the proposed uses were truly lawful, why the balance kept growing despite fee waivers, and where the interest earnings were going. The mayor and deputy city manager said the city’s growth and staffing needs justified the plan, but several members expressed frustration and skepticism. A public commenter also urged accountability and raised concerns about the city’s spending plans and the size of the remaining balance. The committee then received an Auditor General presentation on the Town of Greenville, which found 31 operational audit findings and described pervasive control failures, possible fraud, waste, and abuse. The findings included election paperwork problems that left a council seat vacant, conflicts of interest, late financial disclosure filings, related-party transactions, inadequate meeting notices and minutes, quorum and voting documentation problems, council members’ involvement in day-to-day operations, missing ethics training, budget adoption and monitoring deficiencies, inaccurate accounting records and bank reconciliations, utility billing and rate issues, grant compliance problems tied to an unfinished grocery store project, weak personnel and contracting controls, improper severance and compensation issues, late vendor payments, weak procurement and P-card controls, vehicle-use and property-control weaknesses, poor public records access, and IT access and fraud-policy gaps. Greenville’s mayor and staff said the audit largely reflected the prior administration and that the current council and staff are taking corrective action. They said the town terminated the former manager, adopted seven new policies since the audit began, and is working with the Auditor General to improve procurement, financial controls, inventory management, grant oversight, and ethics compliance. The town attorney said he had alerted federal authorities earlier about concerns, and committee members noted that FDLE has received a criminal referral and is investigating. Several members praised the new leadership’s cooperation but also suggested the town consider consolidation or dissolution if problems persist.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so I guess the question is for the House side of the committee.
• The question is for the House side of the committee: what do you all think about lines one and two there
• They can limit to the agenda topic for the current and one previous meeting, correct?
• The agenda topic for the current and one previous meeting, correct? Yes, Representative Vore.
• Not only do we write about what happened in this meeting and the previous meeting, but by agenda topic

Summary: The conference committee met on Senate Bill 2180, relating to the opportunity to provide public comment at meetings of public entities. Members reviewed the 2002 House version and a proposed 2003 amendment, which largely kept the House language but clarified wording and added a provision allowing public comment to be limited by policy to the current meeting’s agenda topics and at least one preceding meeting’s agenda topics. Several members discussed the balance between allowing public participation and keeping meetings orderly, with comments from both House and Senate members supporting the restriction as a practical compromise based on experience with local boards. Representative Vorey moved adoption of the 2003 amendment, seconded by Senator Wallen. The amendment was approved by majority vote on both the House and Senate sides. The committee then moved to accept SB 2180 as amended, and that motion also passed with majorities on both sides. The bill was declared a due pass by the conference committee and was to be forwarded to the appropriate chambers. The committee also designated carriers for the bill: Senator Castile on the Senate side and Representative Osley on the House side. The meeting then concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• c><02:47:37.600><c> reverse</c> previous question so we can reverse previous question so we can reverse
• </c> on the previous question. on the previous question.
• ordering the previous &gt;&gt; The question is on ordering the previous question.<03:37:33.760><c> Members
• </c><05:58:31.120><c> question</c> Resolution 1423, the previous question Resolution 1423, the previous
• on</c><05:59:15.120><c> the</c> previous question is ordered on the previous question is ordered on the

Bills: HR1181 , HR139 , HB6556 , HB3074

Keywords: Arab American, heritage, cultural recognition, National Arab American Heritage Month, diversity, community contributions, social justice, education, Iran, nuclear, sanctions, JCPOA, global security, U.N. Security Council, weapons proliferation

Transcript Highlights:

• That's a good question.
• Any other questions?
• </c><00:27:09.520><c> Um,</c> question. right here. Um, question. right here.
• Any other questions? Senator Meredith. Not a question as much as a comment.
• Any other questions? Uh Senator to me. Any other questions?

Summary: The committee met after several reschedulings due to flooding, welcomed a new assistant, and confirmed a quorum. It first approved the March 11 minutes, then reported that the day’s agenda included 310 items totaling about $139.4 million, with all vendors registered with the Secretary of State. The committee then approved deferred items involving the Transportation Cabinet/Department of Highways, including one routine PSC green-list item and one PSC amendment item, after hearing from the Transportation Cabinet’s Division of Professional Services and noting prior questions had been answered. The bulk of the meeting focused on Department of Education contracts tied to reading and literacy initiatives. Officials described a competitive grant program for high-quality instructional resources and related professional learning, explaining that resources are selected through evidence-based reviews and a quality curriculum task force, and that districts apply using an instructional resources alignment rubric. Members questioned the program’s reach, whether districts opt in, how many schools applied, and whether the effort is producing measurable reading gains. Department witnesses said about 155 schools applied and were awarded, the program is voluntary, and the University of Louisville’s Reading Research Center is collecting qualitative and quantitative data to evaluate effectiveness. Several members expressed concern that the state has repeatedly funded literacy efforts without improving reading scores, though the committee ultimately approved the education items, with Senator Meredith noting support but frustration about the lack of progress. The committee also approved an MOA amendment item supporting the Principal Partnership Project, which provides tools, resources, and professional learning for administrators and helps meet statutory evaluation-training requirements. Members asked about the use of nonrecurring federal funds and whether the arrangement affects retirement benefits; staff said the contract pays districts based on daily wage and additional workdays, which does increase retirement packages. Representative McCool voted yes but voiced caution about possible supplanting. Finally, the committee took up an Office of the Controller contract for a brokered insurance-related procurement. Representative Balman moved to disapprove the contract, arguing the winning broker was not the low bidder and that the committee lacked answers about how technical scoring outweighed a roughly $600,000 price difference. The motion to disapprove did not prevail, and the contract was approved after further discussion about procurement scoring and the committee’s limited information.

Transcript Highlights:

• I move the previous question.
• I move the previous question. The gentleman from Green has moved the question.
• I move the previous question.
• I move the previous question.
• I move the previous question.

Transcript Highlights:

• I have a question.
• Two questions.
• I had a question about, in the two previous speakers, we heard about a chilling effect on the core functions
• I had a question about, in the two previous speakers, we heard about a chilling effect on the core functions
• Questions? Questions?

Summary: The subcommittee hearing focused on whether the Office of the State Auditor may constitutionally audit the Massachusetts Legislature under Chapter 250 of the Acts of 2024 and what such an audit could include under generally accepted government auditing standards. Chair Cindy Friedman opened by explaining the background: voters approved Ballot Question 1 in November 2024, the law took effect in January 2025, and the Auditor then initiated audits of both chambers. The chair said the subcommittee was seeking expert testimony because the proposed audit scope, constitutionality, and possible bias concerns remained unresolved. Public testimony was invited, but no members of the public pre-registered; written testimony remained open for a short period after the hearing. The hearing then proceeded with invited experts on constitutional law/state government and auditing-related issues. Professor Lawrence Friedman testified that the ballot initiative’s approval by the Attorney General and by voters did not resolve constitutional questions, and he argued Chapter 250 violates the Massachusetts Constitution. He said the Legislature has constitutional authority to set its own rules and manage its proceedings, and that an executive-branch audit would intrude on legislative deliberation, speech and debate protections, and separation of powers. He also warned that even audits of supposedly administrative matters could become a vehicle for repeated document demands and litigation that would indirectly burden legislative functioning. In questioning, senators pressed him on the line between administrative and deliberative functions, the role of the Attorney General versus the courts, the possibility of retroactive audit scope, and whether prior legislative consent to audits mattered; he said prior consent would not bind future legislatures and that constitutionality is ultimately for the courts. Professor Ray La Raja also opposed the audit, framing it as a threat to institutional independence and representative democracy. He argued that allowing an executive-branch official to audit the Legislature without consent would upset separation of powers, chill internal debate, and create a precedent for broader executive intrusion. He said voters often support “transparency” reforms without fully appreciating institutional consequences, and that legislatures should defend their autonomy, especially amid what he described as broader executive overreach nationally. Senators asked about chilling effects, the practical distinction between administrative and core legislative functions, and whether the courts or the Legislature should resolve the issue; he said the courts would ultimately adjudicate disputes, but the Legislature should not waive its constitutional authority lightly. Jean Kempthorne took the opposite view, arguing the audit is permissible and should proceed. She said the state auditor is a constitutional officer accountable directly to the people, that the audit power can be expanded by statute, and that separation of powers does not require watertight compartments. She contended the audit would not displace core legislative powers because the auditor can only evaluate operations, report findings, and make recommendations. She also argued the Legislature itself already conducts audits of other branches, so it is inconsistent to claim an audit of the Legislature is unconstitutional. In response to senators’ questions, she said there are guardrails against truly intrusive requests, but that the administrative-versus-legislative distinction is not a workable bright line; she suggested disputes should be handled case by case, with objections, negotiation, or litigation if specific requests go too far. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any questions?
• questions questions per<00:38:52.960><c> uh</c><00:38:53.119><c> this</c><00:38:53.280><c> question<
• </c><00:43:43.440><c> for</c><00:43:44.119><c> uh</c> questions um I have a question for uh questions
• Tom Gach, for Tax Foundation of Hawaii, same comment as in the previous bill. Any questions?
• Further questions? I have a question for Dean, HHFDC.

Committee: House Housing

Summary: The House Committee on Housing held a public hearing and moved quickly through a long agenda, beginning with HB 606 on the Department of Hawaiian Homelands. DHHL and several community testifiers strongly supported the bill, describing it as a way to fulfill long-standing promises to Native Hawaiians, reduce the DHHL waitlist, keep families in Hawaii, and support housing production and the broader economy. Testifiers emphasized the cultural and economic importance of stable housing and noted the large number of people still waiting for DHHL homes. The committee then heard HB 1086, also relating to DHHL, which would allow the department to use a $75 million appropriation from the dwelling unit revolving fund as collateral for loans. DHHL, HHFDC, and other supporters said the measure would help DHHL obtain better loan terms and preserve trust funds for other uses. Members asked detailed questions about how the collateral would work, whether other agencies use similar structures, and what would happen if the collateral were drawn upon; staff explained that the funds would be encumbered for the loan and that a similar model had been used for a HUD-backed project. The committee also heard HB 739, which would create the COM homes program to fund counties to buy voluntary deed restrictions from eligible homeowners or buyers. Supporters said the program could help keep local workers in Hawaii by using existing housing stock and cited examples from places like Aspen and Vail. The Attorney General’s office recommended amendments to remove duration requirements to avoid right-to-travel concerns, and the Tax Foundation suggested clarifying the conveyance tax exemption so it also covers the instrument imposing the restriction. Members asked whether tax dollars would be used to buy homes, who would be eligible, and how enforcement would work; supporters said the program is voluntary and income-blind, with restrictions tied to living and working in the state. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Sar has some questions.
• Senator Sar has some questions.
• If there are no questions... >> I have one. >> Oh, I have a question, Senator Smith.
• If there are<00:08:43.200><c> no</c><00:08:43.440><c> questions</c> are no questions are no questions
• </c> vote this out using the previous role. vote this out using the previous role.

Bills: SB170 , SB177 , SB207 , SB208 , SB215 , HB27 , SB219 , SB247 , SB232 , SB81 , SB170 , SB177 , SB207 , SB208 , SB215 , HB27 , SB219 , SB247 , SB232 , SB81

Committee: Senate Banking and Insurance

Keywords: health insurance, health savings account, high deductible plans, federal regulations, cost-sharing, insurance law, breast cancer, health coverage, deductible, copayment, insurance, captive insurance, captive insurer, captive insurers, insurance regulation, Alabama Department of Insurance, insurance commissioner, premium tax, capital requirements, surplus requirements

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:16:30.200><c> program</c> a transition from a previous program a transition from a previous program
• Now, the question is: shall the bill be read a third time? Are you ready for that question?
• </c> Are you ready for the question? Are you ready for the question?
• Are you ready for the question? Are you ready for the question?
• Are you ready for the question? Are you ready for the question?

Transcript Highlights:

• That is the better question.
• And then a question. >> And thought, oh, yes, I'm saying I do have a question.
• So some of these questions was in there for questions in by all means ask, I don't necessarily know,
• But these questions are fair.
• I do have a few questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> questions or comments? Senator France. questions or comments? Senator France.
• Any questions? Seeing no taxes. Any questions?
• Are there any questions about the motion? Seeing no questions, all in favor, please say I.
• Are there any questions about the motion? Seeing no questions, all in favor, please say I.
• Are there any questions about the motion? Seeing no questions, all in favor, please say I.

Committee: Senate Rules and Administration

Transcript Highlights:

• That's a great question.
• I do have a question.
• One last question.
• Let me ask a question.
• Just a quick question, different question than from the previous ones.

Summary: The committee first approved the March 9 and 10 minutes, then heard a presentation from the Arkansas Excellence in Teaching Fellowship Program featuring three third-grade teachers from Poyen, Drew Central, and Cabot, along with Department of Education Secretary Jacob Oliva. The teachers described the fellowship as a year-long collaboration among 23 merit-pay recipients from across the state, focused on sharing classroom strategies, data use, and professional support. Members asked about teacher experience, how the fellowship information is shared locally, the role of merit pay, and how teachers are addressing third-grade reading and retention concerns under the ATLAS assessment system. The teachers emphasized early intervention, relationships with students, small-group instruction, progress monitoring, and communication with families; they also described community supports such as churches, food backpacks, and local donations. Several members raised broader questions about poverty, trauma, social services, DHS involvement, and whether similar professional learning should be expanded to more teachers. Secretary Oliva said the fellowship is a small subset of a larger merit-pay program, that participation was voluntary, and that the state is working to improve literacy supports, clarity, and alignment across grades. He also said ATLAS results are now available to schools and families much faster than in the past, often within 24 to 72 hours, and that the state is using the data to identify at-risk students earlier and support intervention before retention decisions are made. The committee then moved to the adequacy/resource allocation presentation from the Bureau of Legislative Research. Staff explained that the report is part of the statutory adequacy review and focuses on state funding sources beyond foundation aid, including categorical and supplemental funds. They noted that districts and charters spent more than $7 billion in the 2025 school year, with roughly 49% from foundation funding and 51% from other sources over the last three years. The presentation outlined the four categorical funds—Alternative Learning Environment, English Learners, Enhanced Student Achievement, and Professional Development—describing their restricted uses, student-based funding formulas, and the ability of districts to transfer some money among categoricals while keeping it within allowable purposes. Staff said categorical funds account for about 4% of total spending, or less than $300 million, and reviewed superintendent feedback on whether those funds met district needs, with responses varying by category and district.

Transcript Highlights:

• One last question.
• Let me ask a question.
• Just one more quick question.
• That addressed my question.
• Just a quick question, different question than from the previous ones.

Summary: The committee approved the March 9 and 10 minutes and then heard a presentation from the Arkansas Department of Education on the Arkansas Excellence in Teaching Fellowship, featuring three third-grade teachers from Cabot, Poyen, and Drew Central who are also teacher merit pay recipients. The teachers described the fellowship as a year-long Zoom-based collaboration with about 23 educators statewide, focused on sharing classroom strategies, data use, and professional support. Members asked about the teachers’ experience, how they share what they learn with their districts, the range of grades represented in the fellowship, and the relationship between the fellowship and merit pay. The teachers emphasized building relationships with students, using data to drive instruction, early intervention, and collaboration across grade levels, while the secretary said the program is intended to identify and elevate high-performing teachers and spread their practices. A major portion of the discussion focused on third-grade reading, retention, and the new ATLAS testing system. Teachers and the secretary said students are screened and progress monitored throughout the year, families are notified early if students are at risk, and schools are using interventions, tutoring, and individualized reading plans. They said ATLAS results are now available much faster than in the past, often within 24 hours or a few days, allowing teachers and parents to respond quickly. Members asked about the impact of poverty, trauma, foster care, DHS involvement, IEPs, and critical shortage areas; teachers said relationship-building, small-group instruction, and coordination with counselors and special education staff are key. The secretary said the fellowship is a small subset of a broader merit pay program, that participation was voluntary, and that the state is trying to build a coherent system with literacy coaches, high-impact tutoring, and clearer standards rather than teaching to the test. Members also discussed broader policy issues, including the need for more positive public messaging about public education, teacher input in decision-making, and support for early childhood education. Several legislators asked whether the state should expand funding for early learning and whether more literacy or academic coaches are needed in districts that improve and then lose eligibility for state support. The secretary said the state has committed literacy coaches to D and F schools and is still working through how to sustain support as schools improve. He also said the administration would look at data and return on investment before supporting additional funding, and he encouraged legislators to help recruit eligible teachers into future fellowship cohorts. After the teacher panel concluded, the committee moved on to the adequacy resource allocation study, where Bureau of Legislative Research staff began a presentation on state and local education funding sources, categorical funds, and district spending patterns.

Transcript Highlights:

• Will the bill carrier yield to a question? Representative Anderson, will you yield to a question?
• Speaker, I may ask another question? Representative Anderson will yield to another question.
• Would the bill carrier answer a question? Representative Anderson, will you yield to a question?
• Are you asking another question? I am asking another question.
• And to answer that question, no.

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a quorum present, then received a gubernatorial message listing numerous bills signed by the governor. The chamber also handled conference committee business, including appointing conferees for House Bills 1003 and 1169 after refusing to concur with Senate amendments, and adopting a conference committee report on House Bill 1053, which repealed a Century Code section related to the length of the state highway system. A major portion of the meeting focused on Senate Bill 2137, which would allow supplemental feed for hunting and include an expiration date. The House divided the proposed amendments into two parts. Division A, dealing with baiting limits and setbacks near livestock facilities, drew extensive debate over private property rights, enforceability, livestock protection, and hunting access, and failed 14-76. Division B, requiring chronic wasting disease surveillance and a report to Legislative Management, also drew debate over whether the reporting requirement was necessary or too late to be useful; it failed 44-46. With both divisions defeated, the House then passed the underlying bill 56-34. The House also laid over Senate Bills 2340, 2326, and 2289. Later, it defeated Senate Bill 2325, which would have created a process for non-federal easements on wetland areas, by a vote of 4-84. It passed Senate Bill 2210, directing a legislative management study on watershed-based water management, 85-3; Senate Bill 2387, establishing rights for sexual violence survivors, 89-0; and Senate Bill 269, allowing state agencies to satisfy legal notice requirements by posting on their websites if newspaper publication is missed, 72-17. The House then excused absent members and adjourned until Monday, April 14, 2025.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> for that um to my colleague's question for that um to my colleague's question and<00:14:05.639><
• </c> report but you can look at previous report but you can look at previous reports<00:37:57.599><c>
• You have a question? Thank you.
• You have a question? Thank you.
• Any other questions at this point?

Committee: House Higher Education Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• Any questions regarding it?
• Just a question on follow-up.
• I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Members, any questions for the panel? Good question.
• I'll be happy to answer questions. Members, any questions for the sponsor?
• With that, I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Members, any questions?

Bills: HB 11 , HB14 , HB132 , HB1584 , HB1606 , HB5061 , HB 1041 , HB2286 , HB132

Committee: Senate Business & Commerce

Summary: The committee first took up pending business and quickly reported several measures favorably, including HB 12, SB 1361, SB 1705, SB 1749, SB 1897, SB 2344, SB 2566, HB 3809, and HB 4215, with most sent to the Local and Uncontested Calendar. HB 12’s substitute clarified a limited midterm review of regulatory agencies tied to Sunset Commission recommendations. SB 2696’s substitute changed med spa regulation from a license to a certificate, with training instead of an exam, plus background checks, continuing education, and two-year renewals. HB 3809 dealt with battery energy storage decommissioning and recycling, and HB 4215 was reported without a substitute. SB 1978, concerning interconnection of electric facilities in ERCOT and federal jurisdiction concerns, was reported out on a 5-3 vote after debate, but then the chair later announced the bill was withdrawn and left pending subject to the call of the chair. HB 1899 was also reported favorably, with one nay. A major portion of the meeting focused on HB 14, the advanced nuclear energy bill. Senator Schwertner described it as creating a Texas Advanced Nuclear Energy Office, a nuclear permitting coordinator, a development fund, a completion grant program, and a workforce development program. Testimony was sharply divided. Supporters, including representatives from Fermi America, Dow/X-energy, CPS Energy, Paragon Energy Solutions, Bridge to Nuclear, Aalo Atomics, and the Texas Association of Business, argued that Texas should lead in advanced nuclear, citing future baseload demand, data centers, industrial power needs, supply-chain development, and long-term energy diversification. Opponents, including Public Citizen, Texas Nuclear Watchdogs, Sierra Club, and individual citizens, argued the bill would subsidize unproven, expensive technology, create grants rather than loans, and expose taxpayers to major risk while doing little to meet near-term energy needs. Several members questioned whether the state should fund projects that may not produce grid power for years, and whether the bill’s grant structure and new office were justified. The committee also heard HB 5061, which Senator Schwertner said would prohibit unethical surveillance and misuse of confidential information by state contractors, create a confidential reporting system through the State Auditor’s Office, authorize Texas Rangers investigations, protect whistleblowers, and impose penalties including contract termination, fines, and contracting bans. No public testimony was offered, and the bill was left pending. HB 132, sponsored by Senator Hughes, would extend confidentiality protections for sensitive information to hostile acts by foreign adversaries; it was also left pending after no testimony. HB 1584 was then laid out, with Senator Schwertner explaining it would require utilities to maintain and update priority restoration lists for critical facilities after Hurricane Beryl exposed communication failures, but the transcript cuts off before any action on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• My question is for staff.
• I just had a couple questions here.
• All right, members, any questions? All right.
• And if there's no questions, I'll give you a second.
• And if there's no questions, I'll give you a second.

Committee: All LEGISLATIVE JOINT AUDITING-EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

Summary: The committee met to review education audit reports and heard responses from several school districts with findings. Camden Fairview School District was cited for using operating funds for an end-of-year employee awards banquet and for unauthorized credit card charges that caused a small loss; district officials said the current administration had strengthened controls, stopped the banquet practice, and improved monthly credit card reconciliation. Members questioned whether the prior officials were still employed, whether the credit card issue was an outside hack, and how teacher appreciation could continue without using district funds. Forest City School District was cited for spending about $33,000 on an off-campus staff celebration and entertainment event; district representatives said the money came from long-standing Pepsi-related donation funds, that the event was intended to recognize staff and growth, and that they would change practices and receive training going forward. Members discussed whether those funds were private donations or operational funds, and staff said the district’s accounting treatment made them subject to the constitutional restriction at issue. The committee also reviewed several other findings. Conway School District was referred for an ongoing investigative report involving misuse of district funds and resources by former maintenance employees. Magnolia School District had undeposited activity funds totaling more than $21,000, tied to a resigned high school secretary and sponsor receipts not deposited. Westside School District had about $30,000 in credit card charges lacking documentation or business purpose, including charges by the superintendent, personal purchases, and items shipped to personal addresses; the matter was referred to the prosecuting attorney. Boonville School District was cited for paying a board member’s son more than the statutory limit for seasonal groundskeeping without the required exemption, and DESE later denied the exemption request. After discussing those cases, the committee filed the remaining eight findings en masse and then filed the 89 reports with no findings. Members noted that most school districts audited had clean reports and encouraged districts to continue good practices while learning from the findings discussed.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> just happy to answer any questions. just happy to answer any questions.
• Seeing none, members, questions. No question. Yes, please go ahead, Chair.
• Seeing none members questions. online? Seeing none members questions. No<00:17:38.799><c> question.
• Any other questions?
• Okay, seeing none, members, questions? I have one question for DOE.

Summary: The Committee on Education heard three resolutions. STR 53 SD1 sought to have the Legislative Reference Bureau work with the Hawaii State Public Library System to identify rural and underserved communities needing better telecommunications access so residents can participate in the legislative process. Testimony from the Hawaii State Council on Developmental Disabilities supported the measure, emphasizing that many advocates cannot always travel to the Capitol and need better access. STR 117 SD1 urged the Department of Education to work with the Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School Advisory Committee and the County of Hawaii to inventory bus stops on Hawaii Island used by students and develop safety improvements; DOE described an upcoming live route audit, noted the large number of routes and stops on the Big Island, and said some stops are on private roads. The Department of Transportation, Hawaii County Council, the mayor’s office, and others supported the measure, and members discussed whether the effort could eventually expand statewide. STR 134 asked the Department of Education to provide a detailed report on the true cost of producing school meals to improve transparency and avoid unnecessary price increases. DOE said it already tracks food, labor, benefits, supplies, equipment, and other costs to calculate per-meal costs, but does not currently include transportation costs in the same way; it stated its breakfast cost was $5.80 and lunch cost was $8.66. Support testimony came from the Hawaii Public Health Institute, Hawaii Appleseed, the Hawaii Children’s Action Network, the Hawaii Hunger Action Network, and others, who said clearer cost information is especially important amid funding uncertainty. In decision making, the committee amended and passed STR 53 SD1, reverting it to the original draft by replacing the Legislative Reference Bureau with the Controller and adding coordination with the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development and the Hawaii Broadband and Digital Equity Office, while removing references tied to the LRB and the public access room outreach clause. The committee also amended and passed STR 117 SD1, shifting the lead role to the Safe Routes to School Advisory Committee and adding a request for the County of Hawaii to consider funding the effort. STR 134 was passed unamended. Representative Souza was excused for the votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, questions? Are there any questions? Yeah, I have a question. Who's that?
• I think we're back at questions. We are, and I see a couple of questions there.
• Is that the question?
• Thanks, Rick Wally, for that question. It's a great question.
• Any other questions?

Committee: Joint Joint Oregon-Washington Legislative Action Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• Speaker, with that, I yield back the balance of my time and I move the previous question.
• The Speaker pro tempore: The question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution.
• The previous question is ordered. The question is on adoption of the resolution.
• Pursuant to House Resolution 873, the previous question is ordered.
• PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 873, THE PREVIOUS QUESTION IS ORDERED.

Bills: HR874 , HB5371 , HR873

Keywords: Richard B. Cheney, Congress, House of Representatives, respect, resolution, continuing resolution, appropriations, fiscal year 2026, omnibus, government funding, federal budget, USDA, Department of Agriculture, FDA, Food and Drug Administration, Veterans Affairs, VA health care, military construction, legislative branch, Congress funding