Transcript Highlights:

• Next, we >> Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. Uh, and last, Mr.
• >> Thank you for your testimony. >> Thank you for your testimony.
• Uh, please give your your testimony.
• present your testimony when you're ready. ready. ready.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• your testimony when you're ready. ready. ready.
• So, um, thank you for your testimony.
• <01:18:25.520> when record and commence your testimony when record and commence your testimony
• Johnson, for your testimony. Thank you. Uh, up next, uh, Mr.
• Uh, up next, uh, testimony. Thank you.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:45:37.119> on again, in the absence of testimony on again, in the absence of testimony
• And I also heard testimony saying that people felt that if we removed this free speech zone, that it
• <00:53:52.160> saying And I also I I heard testimony saying And I also I I heard testimony
• ,<01:44:53.520> but with the introductory testimony, but with the introductory testimony,
• Something that was said during testimony Something that was said during testimony really<01:54:34.080

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, when I was listening to the testimony on the bill, I got it.
• Um as we heard<00:40:51.200> testimony,<00:40:52.348> [clears throat] heard testimony,
• from the testimony from the testimony they<00:46:30.800> said<00:46:31.280> and<00
• >> Okay, that that's great testimony. We're >> Okay, that that's great testimony.
• you<01:19:00.640> talked testimony was testimony, have you talked testimony was testimony,

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, we don't have a date, but there would be an informational hearing to allow public testimony, allow
• public anformational hearing to allow uh public anformational hearing to allow uh public testimony
• 17.759> people<00:04:17.919> to<00:04:18.079> talk<00:04:18.239> about testimony
• , allow people to talk about testimony, allow people to talk about the<00:04:18.560> bill<00:04

Bills: HF2433

Keywords: education funding, children with disabilities, transition aid, special education, school district consolidation, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you. >> Thank you for your testimony.
• Please introduce yourself and proceed with your testimony. >> Okay.
• Uh, this is a difficult testimony for me to give.
• /c><00:45:00.640> tonight,<00:45:01.040> but testimonies that I heard tonight, but testimonies
• <00:47:41.119> And >> Thank you for your testimony.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The presentation focused on Think Small’s recommendations for Minnesota child care licensing modernization, including a proposed three-tier system for early care and education: unregulated “trusted caregivers,” state-licensed health and safety programs, and “recognized” early care and education programs that would pursue board-approved quality pathways. Dr. Nicole Smarillo said the recommendations came from an extensive engagement process with providers and field experts, and emphasized that the goal is not deregulation but a right-sized system with clearer funding aligned to state expectations, a reduced and more health-and-safety-focused licensing framework, and a profession-led quality system with multiple pathways rather than a single rating model. A major recommendation was creating a Minnesota Board of Early Care and Education with real decision-making power, made up of providers, families, and experts. The board would set quality expectations, approve multiple recognition pathways, address professional qualifications, advise on funding and supports, and monitor policy impacts on child outcomes, supply, and workforce stability. Presenters said the current Parent Aware system would be replaced in this future model, and that programs would have a roadmap from health-and-safety licensing to a time-limited candidate status and then to recognized program status. Several providers testified in support of the framework. Shauna Maranovich said the process welcomed field voices and produced recommendations grounded in proximity expertise. Cindy Cunningham, a licensed family child care provider, said the proposal reflected provider feedback, supported a Minnesota-specific model, and would separate health and safety licensing from quality improvement while reducing fear-based enforcement. Maria Harms, a child care center operator, said current licensing is overly burdensome and that the board and multiple pathways would better reflect day-to-day practice and reduce silos across program types. Candace Yates of Child Care Aware of Minnesota supported aligning supports with quality pathways and said the system needs a shared floor for quality and more continuous, less fragmented support. No votes or formal committee actions were taken in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, next we have testimony All right.
• Next we have testimony from Natalie Bronner.
• appreciate your testimony here today. appreciate your testimony here today.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.

Keywords: Reuploaded tor restore the roll call and minutes approval 0:00:01 Call to Order and Roll Call 0:00:20 Approval of Minutes 0:00:50 Information Items 0:01:39 Project Rpt from Eastern KY University 0:06:54 Lease Rpt from University of KY 0:11:33 Project Rpt from Finance and Admin Cabinet 0:18:50 Lease Rpt from Finance and Admin Cabinet 0:29:33 OFM – KY Infrastructure Authority 0:38:27 OFM – Debt Issues 0:46:27 Louisville Arena Authority 1:24:30 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The committee first approved the November minutes and received information items on University of Kentucky medical and research equipment purchases, five school districts reporting upcoming bond issues with no additional tax levies needed, and a School Facilities Construction Commission list of prior debt issues for fiscal year 2026. It then considered an appropriation increase for a University of Kentucky project at the Central Kentucky Regional Airport in Richmond. University officials said the project is 100% federally funded and will construct a terminal building tied to EKU’s airport operations and planned flight school. Members asked about the relationship to aviation expansion and whether the flight school would be publicly operated; the witnesses said EKU would operate it, public appropriations had already been applied, and student revenue would help offset costs. The committee approved the item by roll call vote. Next, the committee approved a University of Kentucky lease purchase for property at 415 West Sun Street in Morehead, Rowan County, for $6.4 million. UK said the property, which includes an 85,000-square-foot facility on 9.6 acres, is directly across from UK St. Clair and was offered by the Rowan County Board of Education after it moved to a new location. Members questioned why the payment schedule was structured as quarterly installments and why the price was below two appraisals; UK said the board requested the arrangement and did not want the full amount upfront, and there was no interest on the purchase price. The committee also approved this item. The deputy state budget director then reported three appropriation increases in the Tourism, Arts and Heritage Cabinet: a Ballard Wildlife Management Area pump station project, Lake Barkley State Resort Park emergency repairs, and Lake Barkley lodge wing exterior repairs. After questions, staff explained the Lake Barkley increases were mainly to cover construction contingencies because bids came in close to available funding. The committee approved the action items, then heard four no-action pool projects: HVAC upgrades at the FFA leadership training center in Hardinsburg, Kentucky School for the Blind’s McDaniel Scoggin building, KSD’s Brett Brady Hall, and a Kentucky State University Shanty Hall renovation for the School of Engineering Technology. Finally, the committee heard two real property items: a new CHFS lease in Wayne County and a Transportation Cabinet lease modification in Christian County. The Wayne County lease drew the most discussion, with members questioning the high per-square-foot cost and whether another county location could be used; CHFS said it maintains offices in every county seat, this lease would replace an existing 1977 office, and the new construction was negotiated down from a higher initial bid. The Christian County item was described as a replacement site for driver licensing space, with renovation costs partly absorbed by the lessor and the remainder amortized over the lease term.

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll do the testimony first and then go to member questions for each candidate individually.
• Looking forward to your testimony. Please introduce yourself and proceed.
• Chair, and thanks for your testimony, Audrey. Yeah, and thanks for stopping at my office.
• But, you know, we had testimony just the other meeting that 36% of Minnesotans can't or are struggling
• is that they do I think the testimony is that they do I wondered<01:03:28.920> whether<01:03:

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And Superintendent Olsson, we can see you if you're ready to begin your testimony.
• Please state your name for the record and begin your testimony when you're ready. Okay.
• Please state your name for the record and begin your testimony.
• and please begin your testimony. and please begin your testimony.
• Um, so very much appreciate the testimony we've heard today and the member comments.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee heard House File 3492, which would create a $25 million grant program for school safety and security improvements, funded by a reduction in a prior appropriation for the Northern Lights Express rail project. The bill would allow grants of up to $500,000 through the Department of Education for school districts, charter schools, cooperative units, tribal contract schools, and nonpublic schools. Staff explained that the bill uses the language of clause 7 of the safe schools revenue statute, focusing on facility security enhancements such as laminated glass, public announcement systems, emergency communication devices, and related equipment and modifications. Testifiers and members generally supported the goal of improving school safety, but there was disagreement about the bill’s scope. Supporters, including a superintendent and a nonpublic school principal, said the bill would help pay for one-time hardening costs like secure entrances, door locks, redesigned offices, and other physical security upgrades, and argued that all schools and students should be eligible. Several members raised concerns that the bill is too narrow and too competitive, could disadvantage districts without grant writers, and should also allow broader uses such as counselors, social workers, SROs, or mental health supports. Others said the bill should prioritize physical security and that one-time dollars are best used for one-time facility improvements. No vote was taken. The chair indicated the bill would be laid over, and the discussion ended with the author saying the proposal is not a fix-all but a starting point for school safety investments.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you very much for being here and for that great testimony. I really appreciate that.
• Thank you so much for your service and for your testimony. The first to be certified.
• Appreciate your testimony. You did great. Thank you.
• Thank you very much for your testimony. I appreciate it.
• For your testimony and your feedback and your kind words.

Bills: S0124, S0206, S0420

Keywords: Florida Virtual School, FLVS, virtual school, online education, distance learning, K-12 education, public school choice, charter-like franchise, student enrollment priorities, home education, homeschool, military families, active duty military, rural schools, inner-city schools, accelerated graduation, education technology, supplemental funding, direct-support organization, foundation

Summary: The committee first heard SB 124, which updates Florida Virtual School’s statute to remove outdated language and clarify its service, funding, governance, reporting, and district coordination provisions without changing day-to-day operations. Florida Virtual School testified in support, members praised the bill, and it passed unanimously on a roll call vote. The committee then took up CS for SB 206 on students with autism spectrum disorder. Senator Harrell explained that the bill would require autism and neurodevelopmental training in educator preparation programs, require ESE-certified teachers to complete an autism microcredential, create an Autism Educator Loan Forgiveness Program, provide salary supplements for teachers with the autism endorsement, and require district professional development to include autism-specific training with local CARD centers. A large number of speakers—teachers, parents, students, and advocacy groups—supported the bill while urging that implementation be fully funded, high quality, and not become an unfunded mandate. Several members spoke in favor, emphasizing the growing number of students with autism and the need to recruit and retain special education teachers. The bill was reported favorably by committee vote. Finally, the committee considered SB 420 on patriotic displays in classrooms. Chair Burgess explained the bill as a way to place portraits of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln in schools to encourage civic and patriotic reflection, and he offered an amendment narrowing the requirement from every classroom to one prominent display in each school and adding language making it subject to state appropriation. The amendment was adopted. Testimony on the bill was mixed: some speakers supported the idea as a spark for civic discussion, while many others opposed it as symbolic, unnecessary, or better addressed through curriculum and teacher training rather than mandated displays. In debate, some senators argued the portraits could prompt broader historical conversations, while others raised concerns about representation, classroom autonomy, and funding. The transcript ends during debate on the amended bill, before a final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• You may proceed with your testimony. Thank you. Good morning, everyone.
• Thank you very much for your testimony. Senator Nemes did you have a question?
• c><00:19:28.159> your loop thank you very much for your loop thank you very much for your testimony
• testimony testimony Senator<00:19:30.520> nemus<00:19:30.919> did<00:19:31.039> you
• okay oh Ma'am if you could testimony okay oh Ma'am if you could please<00:30:38.919> identify

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00:00 Roll Call: 00:00:24 SB 7: 00:00:51 SB 130: 00:06:00 SB 244: 00:11:17 SB 236: 00:13:31, 958, all

Summary: The Senate Judiciary Committee met with a quorum and considered four bills. Senate Bill 7, sponsored by Sen. Bledsoe, would create a Right of Publicity Act to prohibit unauthorized commercial use of a person’s unclothed likeness, including for living and deceased individuals, while carving out exemptions for artistic and news-related uses. Bledsoe said the bill is intended to address privacy, dignity, and AI-generated image misuse, and noted she may offer a floor amendment to address concerns from broadband and internet providers. Sen. Thomas supported the bill but questioned the 10-year duration, and Bledsoe said that timeframe was somewhat arbitrary. The committee voted 8-0 to pass SB 7 with favorable expression to the floor. Senate Bill 130, presented by Sen. Maiden, addressed gift card scams and theft of redemption information. A committee substitute was adopted, and Maiden described the bill as a response to organized retail crime, citing major gift card scams in Louisville and Lexington and explaining how tampered cards are returned to shelves and later drained after purchase. He said the substitute would create clear criminal penalties, make gift card tampering a felony, and add gift card fraud to the credit card fraud statute. Members shared personal experiences with compromised gift cards, and the committee approved SB 130 8-0 with favorable expression. Senate Bill 244, a reorganization cleanup bill presented by Sen. Howell and Attorney General’s office counsel Will Schroer, would complete name and structural changes following the transfer of Administrative Hearings and Child Support from the Cabinet for Health and Family Services to the Attorney General’s office and align the bill with prior data privacy legislation. The committee voted 9-0 to send SB 244 to the floor with favorable expression. Senate Bill 236, sponsored by Sen. Smith, drew extended discussion about a veteran’s case involving an old misdemeanor/DUI matter and a later warrant or failure-to-appear issue. The witness described being arrested years later despite having rebuilt her life, and senators debated whether the bill’s proposed time limit could create loopholes or affect court procedures; members emphasized that the underlying charge would remain and that the bill was aimed at unserved failure-to-appear warrants. The committee ultimately voted to advance SB 236 with favorable expression, with several members explaining their support while noting concerns about possible future language changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you very much for your testimony in your bill today.
• I saw Isabel in every brave woman who gave testimony that day.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• Much of my testimony will be reiterative of Mr. Jensen, so I'll be brief.
• Today my testimony...

Summary: The committee met without a quorum and operated as a subcommittee while hearing several bills, with members repeatedly noting that votes would be taken later once a quorum was established. Early in the meeting, the committee heard SB 1446 on parole en banc review and SB 1278 on elderly parole eligibility for certain sex offenses. SB 1446’s author said the bill would give commissioners more discretion in en banc review, make votes public, and allow referral for sexually violent predator evaluation in certain cases; supporters included the California District Attorneys Association, while opponents from Uncommon Law, the Ella Baker Center, and public defender groups argued it would add confusion, create constitutional and litigation concerns, and duplicate existing safeguards. SB 1278 would exclude certain rape, child sexual abuse, and habitual/serial sex offense convictions from elderly parole eligibility; district attorneys and police chiefs supported it as a victim-safety measure, while civil rights and defense organizations opposed it as unnecessary, costly, and inconsistent with evidence on aging and recidivism. Both bills were discussed but not voted on due to the lack of quorum. The committee then heard SB 1354, which would bar out-of-state military or law enforcement personnel from entering California to perform such functions without the Governor’s permission. The author and supporters framed it as protecting state sovereignty and limiting unauthorized armed incursions; the committee accepted an amendment removing a criminal penalty and leaving enforcement to the Attorney General. No opposition testimony was offered, and members expressed support, but no vote was taken because quorum was still lacking. The committee also heard SB 926, a bill to fund implementation of Proposition 36. Supporters, including sheriffs, district attorneys, probation officials, and the League of California Cities, said local agencies need funding for treatment, supervision, and administration; opponents argued the proposal was fiscally reckless, lacked accountability, and overemphasized incarceration. Amendments removed a specific appropriation and shifted funding decisions to the budget process, but the bill was also held pending quorum. Later, the committee heard SB 874, which would require background checks for unlicensed providers of Medi-Cal behavioral health treatment services, create a stakeholder workgroup, and direct DHCS to issue guidance and report on program integrity. Support came from local health plans and behavior analysis providers, who said the bill would improve safety and consistency; there was no opposition testimony. The committee then heard SB 1210, which would extend CalGang oversight and due process protections to local gang databases as well as shared ones. Supporters described privacy abuses, racial disparities, and personal harm from inaccurate gang labels; law enforcement opposition argued the bill would impose CalGang standards on informal investigative files and would significantly change the gang definition. The author said the bill closes a loophole and preserves prior reforms, but no vote was taken. The committee also began hearing SB 1019 on creating a California Cargo Thief Task Force, with strong support from BNSF, trucking, shipping, port, and supply-chain representatives who described organized, multi-jurisdictional cargo theft and rail sabotage; no opposition was heard, and members indicated support, but action was deferred pending quorum. The meeting then moved to SB 1217 on a non-consensual intimate image clearinghouse, with the chair and author describing privacy-related amendments and the bill’s focus on helping survivors remove exploitative images; the transcript cuts off as that presentation began.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:04:14.640> Again, proceed with their testimony. Again, proceed with their testimony.
• Andre, for your testimony. Is there anyone else who has pre-registered for testimony?
• Is there that um concludes testimony.
• Is there anyone in the testimony.
• Sometimes testimony in a previous bill.

Bills: HF3388, HF400

Keywords: HF3388, Minnesota premium security plan, reinsurance, health insurance, group health carriers, MCHA, MNsure, individual market, premium stabilization, carrier assessment, health insurance assessment, premium security plan account, state innovation waiver, high-risk pool, reinsurance payments, healthcare premiums, insurance carriers, deferral of assessment, financially impaired condition, HF400

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from the prior day and then heard House File 400, a bill described as a defrayal measure for health insurance mandates. Representative Perryman said the bill would not block future mandates, but would require the state to pay the added costs of any new mandated benefits so those costs would not be shifted to premium payers. She and supporters framed the bill as a way to protect affordability for Minnesota employers, workers, and families, especially in the fully insured market. Testimony in support came from the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce and the Minnesota Council of Health Plans. They argued that Minnesota has a high number of mandated benefits, that each new mandate adds cost to premiums, and that businesses—especially small and midsize employers—are already struggling with rising health insurance costs. The health plans representative said the bill would use the existing Commerce defrayal process to reimburse plans for eligible mandate-related claims, allowing those costs to be removed from premium rates. Several members echoed support, saying the bill would improve transparency by showing the fiscal impact of proposed mandates and help prevent people from being priced out of coverage. Members also explored how mandates apply in the market and how premiums are set. Deputy Commissioner Julia Dryer explained that, unless otherwise specified, mandates generally apply to the individual, small group, and fully insured large group markets, while self-insured ERISA plans and other markets are generally outside that scope. Representative Elkins noted that the affected market is relatively small and said small businesses are increasingly moving to self-insured plans because of cost. He and others raised concerns about affordability, while Representative Smith argued that mandates often ensure needed care and that the bill shifts costs to taxpayers rather than insurers. Representative Bacham added a personal example from tribal self-insurance, saying preventive physicals had saved lives and asking whether other factors besides mandates are driving insurer costs. No amendments were offered, and the bill was laid over for possible future consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• In the interest up for public testimony.
• <00:07:54.479> to of time, I'll limit public testimony to of time, I'll limit public testimony
• further public testimony in the room? further public testimony in the room?
• we'll close public testimony committee. we'll close public testimony committee.
• We'll now take testimony in support of the<01:08:51.120> bill.

Bills: HB0159

Keywords: student rights, free expression, K-12 education, speech protection, religious views, political speech, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony, Mr. Thank you for your testimony, Mr. Stewart.
• I guess we'll uh close public testimony I guess we'll uh close public testimony and and and work
• Thank you both for your testimony today. Appreciate it. Further comments, testimony? Mr.
• Further<01:47:12.000> testimony? Further testimony? Further testimony?

Bills: SF0050, SF0084, HB0133, HB0116, HB0011, HB0044

Keywords: groundwater, water resource management, state engineer, aquifer study, corrective controls, monitoring wells, public reporting, water conservation, Colorado River, drought, irrigation, water rights, voluntary program, interstate agreements, conservation districts, supervisors, elections, agriculture, local governance, beneficial use

Transcript Highlights:

• She said they are in agreement with some of the testimony provided today.
• Thank you for your testimony. We really appreciate it. Thank you.” “Laura Barker from Hero Pups.”
• Thank you for your testimony. Do we have any questions from the committee?
• Thank you for your testimony. Do we have any questions from the committee?
• There wasn't a ton of testimony.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Let's proceed with some testimony, Mr. Thompson.
• If you would please state your full name for the record and commence your testimony when you're ready
• with some testimony Mr Thompson if<00:02:41.120> you<00:02:41.200> would<00:02:41.360>
• when you're ready thank you Mr testimony when you're ready thank you Mr chair<00:02:45.800> fellow
• Kohls, would you like to identify yourself yet again one more time and then begin your testimony?

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, Chair Nney, please begin your testimony. Thank you, Vice Chair Woody.
• :57.079> your motion um chair nne please begin your motion um chair nne please begin your testimony
• <00:01:59.479> thank<00:01:59.640> you testimony thank you testimony thank you Vice<00:
• <00:07:48.360> um the record and begin your testimony um the record and begin your testimony
• You've heard some of these statistics in previous testimony, but per the BCA over the past four years

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee met with a quorum present, approved the January 21, 2025 minutes by voice vote, and then took up House File 7, which was recommended to pass and be re-referred to the Ways and Means Committee. The chair also reminded attendees about decorum rules in the committee room. House File 7 was described by the author as a public safety package combining 12 provisions from prior Republican-authored bills, aimed at supporting law enforcement, reducing violent crime, and increasing accountability in the criminal justice system. The bill’s main provisions discussed included tougher penalties for aggravated fleeing, making it a crime to be in a stolen vehicle, allowing tracking devices on stolen vehicles even when occupied, increasing penalties for blocking highways and critical infrastructure, and increasing penalties for assaulting peace officers. The author also highlighted provisions on sex trafficking, predatory offender registration, and greater public disclosure of bail payments, case dismissals, sentencing reductions, and sentencing guideline changes. Testifying in support were Ramsey County Sheriff Bob Fletcher, MPPOA President Shane Mey, and Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association Executive Director Jeff Potts, all of whom argued the bill would help officers address auto theft, fleeing suspects, and assaults on law enforcement. They cited increases in assaults on officers and high numbers of stolen vehicles and fleeing cases, and said the bill would improve safety and transparency. Witnesses generally supported the bill’s approach but suggested some refinements, including adding language for additional aggravating factors in officer assault cases and considering similar treatment for corrections officers. Sheriff Fletcher also urged reconsideration of the recently enacted raise-the-age changes, arguing they could limit law enforcement’s ability to respond to younger offenders involved in stolen vehicles. No opposition testimony or final vote on House File 7 was recorded in the excerpt beyond the motion to pass and re-refer it.

Transcript Highlights:

• say in my testimony. say in my testimony. >> Thank<00:42:10.560> you.
• And that's my testimony. We oppose HB 1774.
• And that's my testimony. We our schools. And that's my testimony.
• And it some don't cover my written testimony.
• You were testimony.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We would ask those to limit testimony to three minutes.
• I am a resident of Newton, and I thank you for hearing my testimony in support of S. 517 and H. 876 on
• The league concurs with their testimony, and we would like to draw your attention to two provisions of
• Thank you all for your testimony. I have a couple of questions.
• Thank you for your testimony. Just a couple questions. I guess a few questions.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Committee on Election Laws held a hearing on election security bills, focusing first on S. 517 and H. 876, which would strengthen Massachusetts’ post-election audit process. Testimony from the Brennan Center, Common Cause Massachusetts, Verified Voting, and the League of Women Voters supported expanding audits to include all ballot types, increasing audit frequency from every four years to every two years, requiring statewide audit reports to be posted within 30 days and kept online for six years, and allowing municipalities to conduct audits under state standards. Witnesses also praised the bill’s creation of a work group to study risk-limiting audits and other improvements, emphasizing public confidence, transparency, and the ability of audits to detect errors or deter fraud. Committee members asked detailed questions about how Massachusetts compares with other states, how risk-limiting audits differ from current tabulation audits, how audits are selected and expanded if discrepancies appear, and what the costs and mechanics of different audit methods would be. Witnesses explained that current audits are typically random, hand-count-based checks of selected contests and batches of ballots, that risk-limiting audits use statistical sampling and can escalate to a full recount if needed, and that Massachusetts’ local-control structure makes a collaborative work group useful. They also noted that audits generally confirm results but can uncover errors that do not change outcomes, and occasionally more serious problems. The committee then heard testimony on H. 832, which would authorize the Secretary of the Commonwealth to take emergency actions affecting elections during declared emergencies. Supporters said the bill would create a clear statutory process for rescheduling or adjusting elections during severe weather or other crises, including allowing emergency absentee ballot accommodations for civilian responders, and would reduce the need for court intervention. No votes were taken on the bills during the hearing, and the meeting ended with adjournment after no additional testimony was offered.