Transcript Highlights:

• So we all retain our power of attorney.
• and attorneys because of the attorney to be, um, to represent them at the, um, at the court that they've
• for Veteran Claims, they can pick an attorney there.
• It's 30, it's up to 33%, but not all, not all attorneys charge that.
• He gets free help at the court from an attorney, and the attorney cuts him loose.

Transcript Highlights:

• I am the second attorney to ever come from the Pit River Tribe.
• As the attorney of the child in California, we hold a special position.
• Notice is also given to the attorney for the parents, so we can...
• Notice is also given to the attorney for the parents, so we can.
• But it alerts those attorneys to go check in with the children. are shared, but it alerts those attorneys

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Human Services heard four bills and one consent item. AB 1574 by Assemblymember Chris Rogers would expand tribal access to prevention and diversion services aimed at keeping Native youth out of foster care. Supporters, including tribal representatives and child welfare advocates, said the bill would help address the overrepresentation of Native children in foster care and strengthen culturally relevant, tribally run services. There was no opposition, and the committee passed the bill 6-0 to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. The committee then heard AB 1618, also by Assemblymember Rogers, which would require California to continue a household food insecurity survey if the federal government does not. Supporters from End Child Poverty California, AARP, food banks, and county and local government groups said reliable data is needed to track hunger, target services, and respond to expected federal cuts to food assistance. The bill was approved 5-0 as amended to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. AB 1688 by Assemblymember Carrillo would require notice to additional attorneys when there are allegations of abuse or neglect in a foster placement, including attorneys for parents and other children in the same home. The author and the Children's Law Center said the measure would close a safety gap and improve coordination to protect foster youth. Committee members also spoke in support based on their professional experience, and the bill passed 6-0 as amended to the Assembly Public Safety Committee. The committee also approved the consent calendar, including AB 1602, and adjourned after completing its business.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then the back is just the same for the district attorneys and the public defenders.
• I will say the executive budget does include money for attorney retention and recruitment.
• I'm also trying to recall the conversation that we had with district attorneys and the courts.
• My district is the fifth, $8.6 million, and we heard, um, Attorney—District Attorney Loose mentioned
• Attorneys can go just about anywhere for more money.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> other non-attorneys. other non-attorneys.
• </c> uh survey were was 56 attorneys. uh survey were was 56 attorneys.
• . non-attorneys. non-attorneys.
• </c> I was an attorney. I was an attorney.
• </c> and non-attorneys do as well. and non-attorneys do as well.

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• A lot of times you have a lot of new attorneys coming in.
• appropriate in terms of the attorney general.
• Does the Department of Public Safety need a separate attorney from the AG?
• Does the Department of Public Safety need a separate attorney from the AG?
• General, if the Attorney General is the one who is interpreting...

Summary: The committee first considered Senate Bill 419, as amended to update the effective date to 2026. The bill would allow the State Treasurer and the Department of Wildlife Conservation/Wildlife Conservation Commission to employ or appoint attorneys, joining other entities already authorized to do so. Supporters argued the treasurer’s office handles highly specialized financial matters and large state assets, and that in-house counsel could provide faster, more specialized advice. Members questioned possible conflicts with the Attorney General’s role, the fiscal impact, and why Wildlife was included; the sponsor said Wildlife’s inclusion was tied to similar specialized needs and indicated willingness to remove it if needed. The bill received a due pass recommendation on a 7-2 vote. The committee then heard Senate Bill 835, also amended to update the effective date to 2026. This measure would require qualifying licensing boards and commissions to submit proposed non-rulemaking actions with anti-competitive implications for review, shifting oversight from the Attorney General to the Secretary of State. The sponsor said the bill was intended to address antitrust concerns raised by the North Carolina dental board case and to provide earlier executive-branch review of potentially anti-competitive board actions. Members raised concerns about whether the Secretary of State should be the arbiter of anti-competitive conduct and whether existing court remedies or current executive-order processes were sufficient. The bill passed on an 8-2 due pass vote. Senate Bill 1618 would require courts to conduct pretrial risk assessments early in criminal cases. The sponsor said the assessments would be one tool judges could use in setting bond and determining release conditions, and that the bill was intended to make the practice available statewide rather than only in some counties. Questions focused on who would validate the assessments, whether counties already could do this, whether it would delay release in smaller counties, and whether it would add costs; the sponsor said counties could tailor the process, that it was already being done in some places, and that the fiscal impact would be minimal. The committee voted 6-4 to report the bill due pass. Finally, the chair presented Senate Bill 262, which had been amended and had its title and enacting clause struck as part of ongoing work. The bill was described as an effort to reduce county jail overcrowding by allowing certain inmates awaiting transfer to the Department of Corrections to be handled differently, with further amendments expected. Members discussed concerns about fairness and the use of factors such as community ties in release decisions, and the sponsor said the measure was still being refined and was intended to solve a practical jail-capacity problem. The committee voted 8-1 to pass the bill out.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, I am attorney Donald Crease. I serve pursuant... Attorney Donald Crease.
• </c> require that that person be an attorney. require that that person be an attorney.
• One, attorney are two problems.
• . attorney. attorney.
• Does that satisfy the attorney.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That's where an attorney comes in, but having an attorney on paper is not enough.
• When attorneys don't check in, they can't advocate effectively.
• I'm Ann Quirk, policy attorney with the Children's Law Center.
• And that would be the attorney for the social worker.
• I'm not supporting this to save peremptories for defense attorneys.

Summary: The Assembly Judiciary Committee heard three bills. AB 250 by Majority Leader Aguiar-Curry would extend a limited window for survivors of sexual assault to seek civil recourse against perpetrators and entities that allegedly covered up abuse. The author and supporters, including survivor Maya Alexander and Equal Rights Advocates, said many survivors need years before they can come forward and that the bill would improve accountability and public safety. One member raised concerns about the bill’s application to private employers and the exclusion of public employees, but the bill was advanced on a motion to Appropriations and later placed on call until additional votes were added. AB 373 by Assemblymember Rubio would require appointed counsel for non-minor dependents in extended foster care to represent the young adult’s expressed wishes rather than substitute the attorney’s judgment. Supporters from California Youth Connection and the Children’s Law Center said 18- to 21-year-olds in foster care are legal adults and should have their voices fully respected in court. Members discussed how the bill would work in practice and whether it applied only to appointed counsel; the bill was moved to Human Services and later cleared after additional votes were added. AB 387 by Assemblymember Alanis, as amended, would exempt probation officers from criminal jury service. The author and supporters argued probation officers are deeply involved in the criminal justice process, often get dismissed anyway, and should be focused on supervision and court-related duties rather than jury duty. The Judicial Council opposed the bill, warning that categorical exemptions shrink the jury pool and set a bad precedent. After debate over fairness, precedent, and the role of probation officers, the committee voted the bill out on a do pass motion.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> meaningful opportunity for the Attorney meaningful opportunity for the Attorney General's<00:19:
• </c> that pulls in not only the Attorney that pulls in not only the Attorney General's<00:29:52.519><
• sign off the transaction the attorney sign off the transaction the attorney<00:51:20.400><c> would</
• Their attorney reads the contract, correct? What's your relationship with their attorney?
• ><c> the</c> you District Attorneys they they're the you District Attorneys they they're the ones<01:

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 733-FN, a bill concerning third-party litigation financing (TPLF). Representative Cole, the prime sponsor, described TPLF as outside investors funding lawsuits in which they have no personal stake, arguing that the practice is largely unregulated, can involve foreign entities, increases litigation abuse, and contributes to higher insurance and consumer costs. He said the bill is modeled on an NCOIL proposal and would require disclosure of TPLF agreements, with guardrails and reporting requirements on specified pages of the bill. He also noted a couple of drafting fixes, including adding the word “knowingly” and incorporating a missing section later. Members raised questions about the bill’s foreign-entity language, especially the provision allowing a governor or the Department of Safety to designate a country as a threat to critical infrastructure. Representative Cole said he would have lawyers review that issue. Another member asked whether the bill would prohibit a party from obtaining outside funding for a lawsuit; Cole clarified that the bill is intended as a reporting measure, not a ban, and that disclosure would be required. He also said the bill is aimed at American citizens rather than foreign-backed financing, and that some states had considered caps on such arrangements, though this bill does not. Brandon Gratz of the Attorney General’s office testified that the enforcement language appears too limited, because it would allow only civil penalties and not broader Consumer Protection Act remedies such as injunctions or restitution. He suggested the Attorney General may not have meaningful authority under the bill as written and raised possible insurance-law issues. Commissioner D.J. Benton-Court of the Insurance Department said the disclosure could help insurers better assess risk and potentially soften the hard insurance market by improving transparency, competition, underwriting, innovation, and claims management. He also said the bill likely needs further work on jurisdiction and enforcement, and that the committee may need to coordinate with the Attorney General, Insurance Department, and possibly banking regulators. No vote was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• , senior staff attorney Denise Wright.
• I am the second attorney to ever come from the Pit River Tribe.
• But it alerts those attorneys to go check in with the children. ...are shared, but it alerts those attorneys
• Notice is also given to the attorney for the parents, so we can.
• But it alerts those attorneys to go check in with the children. are shared, but it alerts those attorneys

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> uh phone number that these attorneys uh phone number that these attorneys were<00:09:46.959><c>
• So thank you. attorneys never use their client's attorneys never use their client's address<00:17:17.120
• </c> attorneys need to be identified. attorneys need to be identified.
• </c><00:20:04.400><c> for</c> email, and again stating attorneys for email, and again stating attorneys
• You see the attorneys who were named.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Might be susceptible to being influenced by the attorney legislator, even though, or even if, the attorney
• Attorney legislators have to keep their outside work as attorneys separate from their duties as a legislator
• Questions have also arisen about whether another attorney employed by the law firm in which the attorney
• Or attorney lawyer's behalf.
• Aren't these attorneys? Yes.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The Legislative Ethics Board met to reorganize its agenda, elect officers, approve prior minutes, review employment disclosure forms, consider rule changes, and discuss a draft annual report. Larry Hoff was nominated and elected chair/president, and Lori was nominated and elected vice chair. The board then approved the December 8 minutes and approved two employment disclosures involving Senate and House security employees whose spouses also work in legislative security roles. Jennifer presented proposed rule updates, described as mostly technical, clarifying procedures for continuances, answers to reasonable-cause determinations, hearings before either the board or an ALJ, and discovery in adjudicative proceedings. The board moved to approve the rule amendments, and the motion passed. The draft annual report was also discussed, with members suggesting edits to bios and noting the report’s reference to 478 ethics inquiries. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on a draft advisory opinion about whether attorney-legislators may represent clients in matters against state agencies. Members debated whether the opinion should emphasize the constitutional reality of a part-time legislature and the need to distinguish legislative duties from private legal work, or whether it would create unnecessary special treatment for attorneys. Several members raised concerns about conflicts of interest and using legislative status to gain advantage, while others argued the existing ethics rules already cover those situations. In the end, the board decided not to issue the proposed advisory opinion. Jennifer also mentioned Advisory Opinion 2019-5 regarding citizen members of the board and their restrictions, including limits on lobbying. No public testimony was offered, and the board adjourned to executive session.

Transcript Highlights:

• Might be susceptible to being influenced by the attorney legislator, even though, or even if, the attorney
• Attorney legislators have to keep their outside work as attorneys separate from their duties as a legislator
• Questions have also arisen about whether another attorney employed by the law firm in which the attorney
• Aren't these attorneys? Yes.
• Aren't these attorneys? Yes.

Summary: The Legislative Ethics Board met to reorganize its agenda, elect officers, approve prior minutes, review employment disclosure forms, consider rule amendments, and discuss a draft annual report. Larry Hoff was nominated and approved as chair, and Lori was nominated and approved as vice chair. The board then approved the December 8 minutes and found no ethics issues with two employment disclosure forms involving Senate and House security employees who are married to each other. Jennifer presented proposed rule changes, described as mostly technical updates, including clarifying that either party may request a continuance for good cause, replacing references to a “complaint” with a “reasonable cause determination,” allowing the board to use an ALJ to hear matters and prepare an initial order, and clarifying discovery authority. The board moved, seconded, and unanimously approved the rule amendments. Members also reviewed a draft annual report and discussed updating biographies and other details. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on a draft advisory opinion about attorney-legislators representing clients in matters against state agencies. Jennifer explained that the draft concluded such representation is not automatically an ethics violation, but cautioned about special privileges, appearances of impropriety, and the need to keep legislative and private legal roles separate. Members debated whether the opinion should be broadened to emphasize that all legislators, regardless of outside employment, must avoid using their office for private advantage. Several members argued the issue is highly fact-specific and that a broad opinion could create unnecessary complexity or special treatment for lawyers. By the end of the discussion, the board appeared to decide not to issue the proposed opinion. The chair also noted a prior advisory opinion on citizen members of the board and reminded members of restrictions on lobbying and related activities. No public testimony was offered, and the board moved toward executive session.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Attorney General's Office anticipates no fiscal impact.
• General's Office, or is this new to the Attorney General's Office?
• In fact, the Attorney General is not a law enforcement officer, nor is the Attorney General's Office
• I'd be curious about the Attorney General's reaction to that question.
• That is not what the Attorney General's Office does.

Summary: The committee opened by noting it would hear three bills and adjourn before 5 p.m. House Bill 2323, the Blue Envelope Program bill, was briefed as a Department of Licensing program to help neurodivergent drivers communicate with law enforcement during traffic stops by providing a blue envelope with instructions and documents such as registration and insurance. Representative Carolyn Eslick described the bill as a voluntary, free tool modeled on programs in other states, and several supporters testified that it could reduce stress, improve communication, and prevent misunderstandings during stops. A committee member asked whether the program could be broadened to other people with disabilities, and Eslick said anyone could request a blue envelope. No vote was taken. House Bill 2096 would allow the Department of Licensing to issue confidential driver’s licenses and identicards to investigators in the Attorney General’s Office for undercover civil and criminal investigations. Staff said the bill would have no fiscal impact and that current practice already requires credentials to be returned when assignments end. Representative Julia Reed said the measure would protect investigators working on consumer protection, civil rights, and environmental enforcement, while the Attorney General’s Office testified that investigators sometimes need to use real IDs in covert work and could be exposed or doxed. The sheriffs and police chiefs association raised concerns that the AGO investigators are civilian staff, not commissioned officers, and questioned whether existing law enforcement agencies should handle such work instead. A tobacco-control advocate supported the bill as a tool to strengthen enforcement against illegal tobacco sales and youth access. No action was taken. House Bill 2134 would require certain regional transportation planning organizations to include greenhouse gas and vehicle miles traveled reduction goals in regional transportation plans for specified counties. Staff said the Department of Transportation had no fiscal impact, while local governments reported an indeterminate impact. Representative Davina Duerr said the bill would align regional plans with existing local climate planning requirements and state emissions targets. Supporters from Futurewise, Transportation Choices Coalition, and Spokane Reimagined said the bill would improve consistency in planning, support transit and active transportation, and help address transportation-related climate pollution. An industry representative opposed the bill, warning it could bias funding away from road preservation at a time of underinvestment and weather-related stress on the system. The public hearing on HB 2134 then closed, and the meeting ended with a reminder about caucus timing.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> meaningful opportunity for the Attorney meaningful opportunity for the Attorney General's<00:19:
• </c> that pulls in not only the Attorney that pulls in not only the Attorney General's<00:29:52.519><
• sign off the transaction the attorney sign off the transaction the attorney<00:51:20.400><c> would</
• Their attorney reads the contract, correct? What's your relationship with their attorney?
• </c><00:53:50.079><c> it's</c> relationship with their attorney it's relationship with their attorney

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on HB 733-FN, a bill on third-party litigation financing (TPLF). Representative Cole, the prime sponsor, described TPLF as outside investors financing lawsuits in which they have no personal stake, arguing that the practice is largely unregulated, can involve foreign entities, and contributes to litigation abuse, higher insurance costs, and what he called a “tort tax.” He said the bill is modeled on an NCOIL proposal and would require disclosure of TPLF agreements, with specific references to foreign-entity restrictions, consumer-protection guardrails, and reporting requirements. He also noted a few technical fixes to the draft, including adding the word “knowingly” and restoring a section that had been omitted. Committee members questioned how the bill’s foreign-entity language would work, including whether a governor or the Department of Safety would designate countries of concern, and whether the bill would bar foreign parties from using litigation funding. Cole and others clarified that the bill was intended as a reporting measure, not a ban on litigation funding itself, and that the goal was to disclose who is funding lawsuits and to what extent. Representative Sal asked whether the bill would prevent a litigant from getting outside financing; Cole answered no, emphasizing disclosure rather than prohibition. Brandon Grat of the Attorney General’s Consumer Protection and Antitrust Bureau testified that the bill’s enforcement provisions were too limited. He said the draft appears to give the Attorney General only a civil-penalty remedy, likely too small to deter violations, and not the broader Consumer Protection Act tools such as injunctions, restitution, or investigation authority. He also raised concerns about whether the Attorney General or Insurance Department would have proper jurisdiction, given that the product may be financial or insurance-related. Insurance Commissioner DJ Benton Court said the department sees possible benefits from transparency because disclosure of litigation funding could help insurers assess risk, improve underwriting, and potentially ease hard-market pressures, especially for nonprofits and child care providers. He also said the bill’s language likely needs further work to clarify agency authority and suggested involving the Attorney General, Insurance Department, and banking regulators. Opposition testimony came from the New Hampshire Trial Lawyers Association. Marissa Chase and Samantha Hering argued the bill is one-sided because it requires disclosure only on the plaintiff side and not from defendants or insurers. They said New Hampshire already has court rules and discovery procedures that cover relevant disclosures, making the bill unnecessary, and questioned whether the existence of a funding contract is even relevant in litigation. The hearing ended with the committee continuing to discuss possible revisions and enforcement options, but no vote or final action was taken in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Deputy Attorney General Miranda Steed said the Attorney General has comments on the resolution as drafted
• </c> STR128 SD1 requesting the attorney STR128 SD1 requesting the attorney general<00:19:20.720><c> to
• I am Deputy Attorney General members.
• ><c> uh</c><00:19:43.679><c> the</c><00:19:43.919><c> Attorney</c> Miranda Steed and uh the Attorney
• Now the attorney general renewals.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs met on April 15, 2025, and heard several Senate resolutions. For S.R. 128, S.D. 1, which asks the Attorney General to provide a list of state lands leased to the United States or federal agencies, Deputy Attorney General Miranda Steed said the Attorney General had concerns with the resolution as drafted because it also seeks legal opinions on the legality of current and potential lease renewals. She noted the issue is important, especially with military leases expiring in 2029, but said the request was too broad and suggested legislators bring specific questions to the Attorney General after session instead of through a resolution. Committee members discussed the request, including concerns about language referencing the current administration, but ultimately recommended passage as is, with one member noting support with reservations. The motion to pass S.R. 128, S.D. 1 unamended was adopted. The committee then considered S.R. 204, requesting the Department of Law Enforcement to provide information on the disposal, detonation, and destruction of explosives, fireworks, and similar hazardous materials. There was no in-person testimony and no one on Zoom to testify, though one written testimony with comments had been received. The committee recommended passage of S.R. 204 as is, and the recommendation was adopted without opposition. Finally, the committee took up S.R. 184, requesting county police departments to increase enforcement against out-of-state vehicles operating on public roads without proper county registration. Again, there was no live testimony, only one written submission with comments. The vice chair recommended passage as is, noting a similar House resolution had not been scheduled on the other side. The committee adopted the recommendation and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill deals with the Attorney General's office, which would seem to fit within state government.
• So I'm curious why the bill is moving to the floor without knowing from the Attorney General's office
• Representative Nash: I have discussed this bill with the Attorney General.
• General's office would get. without knowing from the Attorney without knowing from the Attorney General's
• </c> practice requests that the Attorney practice requests that the Attorney General's<00:03:27.920><

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• A lot of times you have a lot of new attorneys coming in.
• Does the Department of Public Safety need a separate attorney from the AG?
• General, if the Attorney General is the one who is interpreting...
• So these are attorneys that are going through...
• Worked with several of the district attorneys to get their input as well.

Keywords: 914, all

Summary: The committee heard and advanced several bills. Senate Bill 419, as amended to update the effective date to 2026, would allow the state treasurer and the Department of Wildlife Conservation/Wildlife Conservation Commission to employ or appoint attorneys. Supporters said the treasurer’s office handles highly specialized financial matters and needs in-house expertise and faster legal advice; questions focused on possible conflicts with the Attorney General, fiscal impact, and why Wildlife was included. After discussion, the bill was reported due pass by a 7-2 vote. Senate Bill 835, also amended to a 2026 effective date, would require qualifying licensing boards and commissions to submit proposed non-rulemaking actions with anti-competitive implications for review by the Secretary of State. The author said the bill responds to antitrust concerns raised by the North Carolina dental board case and is intended to provide state supervision before boards take potentially anti-competitive action. Members questioned whether existing court remedies and Attorney General oversight were sufficient, and whether a single official should have that authority. The bill passed due pass 8-2. Senate Bill 1618 would require courts to conduct pretrial risk assessments early in criminal cases, with the assessments used as one factor in bail decisions but not as the sole basis for granting or denying bail. The author said the bill is modeled on federal practice and is meant to help judges make fact-based decisions and reduce jail overcrowding, especially in Oklahoma County. Members asked about who validates the assessments, county implementation, and costs; the author said counties could choose their own approach and that the fiscal impact would not be significant. The bill was reported due pass 6-4. The committee also considered Senate Bill 262, which was heavily amended and had both the title and enacting clause struck while members continued working on it. The bill concerns moving certain inmates convicted of nonviolent financial crimes out of county jails and into appropriate intake/transport processes, with the author emphasizing the goal of reducing jail overcrowding and inviting further collaboration on the language. Members raised concerns about fairness and possible unequal application based on community ties, and the bill was reported due pass 8-1 despite being acknowledged as a work in progress.

Transcript Highlights:

• As we lose attorneys, right now, people are concerns that we lose attorneys.
• We don't have enough contract attorneys in that area.
• Right now, we have two level five attorneys in Elmore County.
• So a level five attorney handles capital cases.
• We banked those for our attorneys.

Keywords: 989, all

Summary: The Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee met with a quorum and first heard a budget presentation for the Department of Parks and Recreation. Legislative analyst Janet Jessup reviewed the agency’s structure, dedicated funds, prior ARPA and general fund infrastructure appropriations, and the department’s FY 2027 requests. Those requests included additional park personnel and trail maintenance staff, one-time project funding, and a supplemental $9.8 million transfer to move grant funds from a consolidated program into the current park operations program. Director Susan Buxton said the agency has no general fund request, emphasized the economic impact of outdoor recreation, and highlighted completed and ongoing capital projects at parks statewide, including Ponderosa, Heyburn, Priest Lake, Eagle Island, Cascade, Harriman, Ashtonia Trail, and Bruneau Dunes. Committee members asked about resident access to campsites, out-of-state pricing, vacancy filling, the new Twin Peaks property in Lemhi County, OHV education, and trail maintenance. Buxton said the agency is filling positions quickly, that higher nonresident fees have increased availability for Idahoans, and that the Twin Peaks acquisition is expected to become revenue-positive within two years. The committee then heard the Office of the State Public Defender budget. Analyst Janica Bicharat summarized the office’s staffing, fund balance, and FY 2027 requests, which included six additional trial attorney positions, secure hosted data storage, and one-time laptop and data migration costs. Director Eric Frederickson described the agency’s transition to a statewide public defense system, noting that it inherited more than 1,300 cases on day one, has since reduced vacancies to about 7%, and is building pipelines for attorneys and social workers. He warned that the pending Tucker v. State of Idaho case could lead to renewed litigation if the system is not adequately funded. In response to questions, Frederickson said the office can absorb the current year’s rescissions through vacancy savings, but future cuts could force reductions in training and contract attorneys, increasing caseloads and risking attorney retention. He also said CPA case costs are running above appropriation, county lease/MOU issues remain unresolved in some counties, and public defenders are generally paid less than county prosecutors and attorney general attorneys. The committee adjourned after announcing the next day’s budget hearings for the Industrial Commission, Public Utilities Commission, and Secretary of State.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, we're losing attorneys there.
• So, we're losing attorneys there.
• So, we're losing attorneys there.
• So, we're losing attorneys there.
• So, we're losing attorneys there.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Fiscal Committee met on Friday, November 21st and first approved the October 17th minutes, with one member abstaining because she was not present. The committee then adopted the remainder of the consent calendar after removing two items for separate consideration. On tab four, members discussed item 25282 with the Commissioner of Administrative Services and Public Works staff; the project had been delayed after testing revealed design errors and flaws, and the committee was told the work would restart with test piles the following week and was projected for completion in fall 2027. The item was approved. On tab five, item 25279 concerned a Health and Human Services facility project and a federally required element added late in the process. Commissioners explained that the project had originally been funded at $21 million, later required additional financing, and that the legislature had recently lifted a restriction so non-ARPA funds could be used. They also said the sale of the existing Manchester property would not be needed to complete the build, that a broker RFP was about to be issued, and that any sale would require further approvals. The committee approved the item. The committee then approved item 25280 after a brief exchange about rainy day fund estimates and prior budget assumptions, and approved item 25278 without discussion. Item 25272 drew questions about the consumer advocate’s RFP for outside utility-rate-case assistance; the office said it eliminated proposals focused only on return on equity work after the Eversource decision, selected a Michigan firm for spreadsheet and operating-cost analysis, and noted there were no in-state firms doing this specialized work. The committee approved the item, with one member recorded in opposition. On tab nine, item 25261 concerned a new judicial council budget obligation tied to legislation and public defense staffing needs. The presenter said the request reflected a late-added obligation from the judicial branch, that more requests may still be needed, and that public defense staffing was strained by vacancies and competition from Massachusetts. The committee approved the item. Under informational items, members received an update on 529 plan distributions and on interest and dividends tax refunds, with Revenue Administration saying roughly $21 million more in refunds remained and that the repeal-related refunds were nearly finished. The committee also noted an environmental services item for which questions would be submitted separately. The next meeting was set for December 19th at 11:00 a.m., and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• I would have to defer again to the attorney general for that.
• I'd have to again defer to the attorney. Yeah.
• </c> And so I'm not sure why the attorney And so I'm not sure why the attorney general<00:06:34.960><
• And I'm not the attorney. Yeah.
• When the when the attorney that. Okay.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee first took up a series of House bills in decision-making. HB 309 was recommended to pass with amendments deferring the effective date to 2050 and was adopted unanimously by members present, with one member excused. HB 344 was recommended to pass with amendments changing the EV charger-ready parking stall requirement from a fixed 25% to a standard allowing the Department of Accounting and General Services to determine the number needed in a new facility; that recommendation was adopted. HB 423, HB 833, HB 987, and HB 988 were each recommended to pass unamended and were adopted without objection. HB 596 was recommended to pass with amendments deferring the effective date to 2050 and adding the Department of Defense’s concerns and testimony to the committee report. HB 750 was passed unamended because of the filing deadline, with concerns to be noted in the committee report for conference committee review. HB 1161 was also passed unamended, with the committee report to reflect requested Department of Transportation amendments. HB 1483 was recommended to pass unamended, with the chair voting no with reservation on that measure. The meeting then shifted to a separate agenda item involving the governor’s office and a proposed settlement related to Lahaina. Members questioned why the legislature had not been kept informed during negotiations and expressed concern that the committee was being asked to approve the settlement without meaningful ability to amend it. The governor’s representative said the administration would defer legal questions to the attorney general, but stated that amendments could jeopardize the legal agreement and potentially have significant impacts on the state. Members also raised concerns about transparency, the public nature of the process, and uncertainty over how Hawaiian Electric would cover its share of the judgment. In response, the governor’s office said it would follow up with the attorney general and governor and provide answers directly. The chair then moved to reconsider the prior action and recommended passing the settlement measure with the attorney general’s suggested amendments removing language from page 7, lines 3 to 17, while preserving prior committee-report concerns. That reconsidered recommendation was adopted by the committee.