Transcript Highlights:

• Is there public testimony public testimony?
• Is there any further public testimony for the most, you know, for that testimony?
• Any further public testimony seeing no further public testimony?
• Is there public testimony? No public testimony, debate? No debate.
• public testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• In that testimony, whether it's your only testimony, primary testimony, or supplemental testimony, is
• Thank you very much for your testimony.
• I appreciate your testimony.
• So thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you very much for your testimony. I thank you for reading your friend's testimony.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education held a hearing on two late-file bills: H. 4867, concerning school choice, and H. 4927, concerning access to applied behavior analysis (ABA). For H. 4867, testimony focused on a DESE interpretation of M.G.L. c. 76, §12B(k) that would require small elementary-only districts with school choice students to pay secondary tuition when those students continue into high school. Superintendents, school committee members, parents, teachers, and a representative argued this creates large fiscal shortfalls for rural districts such as Hancock, Warwick, Richmond, and Worthington, which do not operate high schools and already rely on tuition agreements for their own resident students. Witnesses said the current interpretation has led some districts to stop accepting school choice students, reducing class sizes and limiting educational opportunities; they urged an exemption or amendment so these districts could continue school choice without assuming high school tuition obligations for nonresident students. Committee members asked about the number of affected districts, how the arrangement worked before 2023, and whether alternative statutory language might solve the issue more broadly. Representative Barrett described the bill as a simple fix to an unenforced provision that had only recently been raised by DESE, and the hearing later included testimony from both district officials and families supporting the bill. The committee closed testimony on H. 4867 and H. 4927 and then adjourned. H. 4927 drew testimony from educators, an ABA provider, and a parent of a child with autism in support of protecting in-school ABA access. Witnesses said the bill would clarify that qualified ABA providers, including BCBAs and RBTs under supervision, may deliver services in schools while allowing districts to maintain neutral safety and operational rules. They argued that inconsistent access to ABA can undermine districts’ obligations under IDEA, including free appropriate public education and placement in the least restrictive environment, and that school-based ABA can reduce removals from class, improve student progress, and support families. A parent testified that her young son needs ABA to function in school and that promised supports had been delayed or not delivered, while another witness said the bill would help ensure accountability and consistent services for students with autism.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thanks for your testimony, Mr. London.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• Thanks for your testimony. Welcome.
• And thanks for your testimony. I said, Bill, introduce yourself, give us your testimony.
• And thank you for your testimony.

Bills: SB38, SB287, SB291, SB292, SB508, SB618, SB901, SB1436, SB1494, SB1626, SB1719, SB1999, SB1333, SB 38

Keywords: evictions, property law, tenant rights, landlord responsibilities, justice court, court rules, SB 287, Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code, sexually oriented business, adult entertainment, strip club, nude entertainment, live nude performance, alcohol prohibition, alcohol consumption, possession of alcohol, criminal offense, Class A misdemeanor, state jail felony, third degree felony

Transcript Highlights:

• And testimony is limited to what? Four minutes for invited testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• With no public testimony, public testimony will close on Senate Bill 2231, and Senator Hinojosa will
• Okay, with no public testimony, public testimony will close.
• If not, public testimony is closed.

Bills: SB530, SB757, SB769, SB1085, SB1241, SB1242, SB1409, SB1878, SB2138, SB2314, SB2231, SB2361, SB2431, SJR59

Keywords: accreditation, postsecondary education, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, baccalaureate degrees, junior colleges, program delivery, faculty recruitment, higher education, performance standards, student loan debt, degree programs, funding, students with disabilities, accessibility, enrollment, report, SB 1085, Sul Ross State University, Rio Grande College, Del Rio

Summary: The Senate Committee on Education K-16 met with a large agenda and repeatedly recessed for floor activity and other committee conflicts. The committee heard and left pending several higher education bills, including SB 2361 to transfer University of Houston-Victoria from the University of Houston System to the Texas A&M System and rename it Texas A&M University Victoria; testimony from university officials, local leaders, and industry representatives strongly supported the move as a way to better align degree programs with regional workforce needs in engineering, agriculture, and STEM. SB 530, which would align Texas accreditation statutes with federal rules allowing institutions to choose among nationally recognized accreditors, also received supportive testimony and was left pending. SB 1085, allowing Sul Ross satellite campuses to offer lower-division coursework toward bachelor’s degrees, was laid out and left pending as well. The committee also took up a series of education policy bills. SB 1241 would expand the standardized tests Texas public universities may accept for admission beyond the SAT and ACT, with supporters from the Classic Learning Test, homeschool advocates, and student-choice groups arguing it would increase access and competition; it was left pending. SB 769 would require a TEA/Higher Education Coordinating Board report on barriers faced by students with disabilities in higher education, and testimony from The Arc of Texas and others emphasized the need for better data and accessibility; the bill was left pending. SB 2231 would designate the second week of October as Free College Application Week, and SB 1878 would modernize terminology and support workforce-oriented programs at the Josie School; both were laid out and left pending. The committee reported several bills favorably after adopting committee substitutes. SB 605, concerning charter school expansion applications while under conservatorship or a management team, passed on a 9-0 vote. SB 1871, SB 1873, and SB 1874, all related to school discipline and teacher immunity/placement review provisions, were adopted and reported favorably, with members noting the need for further discussion on some language. SB 762, dealing with flag displays in public schools, passed on a 7-1 vote. SB 1962, relating to public school accountability and challenges to school system operations, passed 7-1 after a corrected vote. SB 1750, replacing a $60 million statewide charter facilities cap with an attendance-growth-based allotment, passed 7-1 with one member voting present not voting. SB 2252, supporting kindergarten readiness and early literacy/numeracy, SB 2253, concerning educator preparation and certification, SB 2365, on student use of wireless devices during instructional time, and SB 1924, restoring local peace officer citation authority for school offenses and adding reporting and parent-notification requirements, were also reported favorably. The committee additionally heard SB 37 on higher education governance and compliance oversight, which passed 7-1 after a substitute that refined curriculum review, governing board authority, faculty senate rules, and a new compliance office within the Higher Education Coordinating Board.

Transcript Highlights:

• before we begin testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. Any questions or comments? Thank you. Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you so much for listening to my testimony. Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you so much for listening to my testimony. Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing opened with remarks from House Chair Mindy Domb and Senate Vice Chair Robyn Kennedy, who outlined procedures for the hybrid public hearing, noted the committee would hear testimony on 15 bills related to treatment settings, and recognized members present. The first major bill discussed was H. 4200, authorizing a pilot program for psychedelic-assisted treatment in licensed facilities. Representative Jim O’Day and witnesses from Control Z supported the bill, describing it as a tightly controlled, medically supervised pilot with DPH oversight, limited sites, and screening requirements. Committee members asked about the number of sites and whether Column Health still existed; witnesses said the bill contemplated three separate pilot programs and that Column Health no longer existed after being purchased by another company. The committee also heard testimony on S. 1405 to make the drug stewardship program permanent by removing its 2026 sunset date. Senator John Keenan and others said the program helps collect and safely dispose of unused medications, reduces diversion, and should remain in place because manufacturers should bear disposal costs. A member from Boston added support based on local concerns about people searching through bags for drugs, and Keenan explained the original sunset reflected pilot status and industry pushback. A large portion of the hearing focused on S. 1394 and H. 2193, which would strengthen implementation of the 2023 Roadmap for Behavioral Health Reform. The Children’s Mental Health Campaign, Parent/Professional Advocacy League, Massachusetts Association for Mental Health, and Elliott Community Human Services testified that the roadmap’s helpline, community behavioral health centers, and crisis services are important but unevenly implemented. They urged a single point of accountability within EOHHS, regular strategic planning, a public data dashboard, and financial analysis of the behavioral health system and the access and crisis intervention trust fund. Witnesses said commercial insurance often does not fully reimburse community behavioral health center services, making sustainability difficult, and asked for better coordination across agencies and crisis response systems. Committee members asked whether the roadmap includes substance use disorder; witnesses said it is intended to cover behavioral health broadly, including mental health and substance use. The committee also heard testimony on bills to ban aversives and on suicide prevention signage. Lisa Jean Graff testified in support of S. 1394 by urging a statewide ban on aversive practices, including electric shock, withholding food or bathroom access, and other painful interventions, arguing disabled people deserve the same protections from harm as others. Fonda Bryant and Carol McLean supported a bill requiring suicide prevention signs on tall parking garages, describing personal experiences and saying the signs could create a brief pause and connect people to 988 or other help. McLean said her son died by suicide from a parking garage and that signage might have made a difference. The committee also heard strong testimony in support of creating intensive stabilization and treatment units within DMH facilities (S. 1398/H. 2204), with the Massachusetts Nurses Association and a DMH nurse arguing that highly assaultive patients need specialized, more secure units to protect staff and other patients and to improve care. Additional testimony supported creating a dedicated board for licensed mental health counselors (H. 4696/S. 1382), with Rep. John Badger, the Mass Mental Health Counselors Association, and others saying LMHCs are a large and growing workforce that needs its own licensing board, clearer standards, and faster implementation of existing licensure reforms. The committee also heard extensive testimony on H. 2223 regarding benzodiazepines and non-benzodiazepine hypnotics. Survivors and advocates described severe withdrawal, lack of informed consent, cognitive harms, and long-term disability, while a physician supported the bill as a way to improve disclosure of risks. Finally, the committee heard multiple witnesses in favor of H. 2231/S. 1383 to establish peer-run respite centers statewide. Advocates and people with lived experience said peer respites provide non-coercive, home-like alternatives to hospitalization, can reduce trauma and repeated admissions, and may be especially important for marginalized communities; they also cited cost savings and existing positive outcomes from current respite programs. No votes or final committee actions were taken during the hearing portion reflected in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Appreciate the time um for my testimony. testimony. testimony.
• Stone's testimony testimony testimony hit<00:56:38.960> the<00:56:39.080> mark.
• I believe you have our testimony. Yes, we do have your testimony.
• testimonies and in in my testimony testimonies and in in my testimony today. today. today. 2,589
• You'll see in your testimony<01:23:13.880> like<01:23:14.240> a testimony like a testimony

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills, with most measures drawing either support or comments rather than opposition. HB 2395, relating to taking marine deposits for research, education, management, or propagation, received support from the University of Hawaii and DLNR. HB 2585, relating to agricultural tourism, drew broad support for its intent to keep agritourism secondary to farming, but agencies and farm groups raised concerns about enforcement, county authority, and the rebuttable presumption language. Testifiers included OPSD, the Agribusiness Development Corporation, Hawaii Farm Bureau, a small farm operator, and others, with some urging clearer definitions, simpler registration, and protections for bona fide farms and hosted farm stays. HB 1728, on rainwater catchment systems, was supported in principle by DLNR, which cited drought conditions and said it deferred to counties and the Department of Health on safety and regulation. HB 1881, which would prohibit passenger ropeways on mountain lands, drew strong support from community testifiers who said it would help prevent development disguised as agritourism and protect forests and country lands. HB 1990, establishing penalties and possible foreclosure for unresolved zoning violations, received comments from the Attorney General recommending removal of AG references and more county-centered enforcement, while the Hawaii Association of Realtors warned the 30-day timeline could create problems for absent or unaware homeowners. The committee also heard HB 1712, which would expand and make permanent certain seats on the State Building Code Council. The Plumbers and Fitters union supported the bill, but BIA Hawaii requested amendments to add “licensed contractor” language, and architects and other professionals opposed the measure, arguing that increasing the council from 12 to 15 voting members would make it less efficient and harder to reach quorum. Finally, HB 2151, relating to hempcrete, was supported by a Kauai workforce development advocate and the Hawaii Farm Bureau, who said hempcrete could support agriculture, manufacturing, and affordable housing while reducing carbon and reliance on imported materials. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• DLNR: We stand on our testimony in support. Chair: That is all the testimony on Zoom.
• OHA cites this in their testimony.
• OHA cites this in their testimony.
• Good testimony. Um, next. Any...
• So I stand on my testimony.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Water and Land met on March 13, 2025, and first announced that SB 1456 would be deferred to the end of the agenda and ultimately worked on later, with the chair indicating the bill would be deferred and revisited in a future measure. The committee then heard SB 841 on marine life conservation districts. DLNR supported the bill, saying it would fund carrying capacity studies to inform rules and policies. Testimony noted a pilot study already underway at the Puka Marine Life Conservation District and another nearing completion at the old Kona Airport MLCD. Members discussed costs, with DLNR estimating about $300,000 per year for one user-experience study, potentially more for ecological analysis, and also discussed possible funding from the Mālama Kai special fund. DLNR said it had no objection to consulting current operators and other users, and explained the program would be a new, ongoing adaptive-management tool. The committee next heard SB 411 on capital improvement projects at small boat harbors. DLNR supported the intent, saying the bill would help expedite use of special funds for CIP work, while the Department of Budget and Finance opposed it, arguing the draft could conflict with constitutional limits on appropriations. Public testimony from an industry representative supported the bill and urged more collaboration with commercial operators, while committee discussion focused on whether DLNR could already use special funds for repairs, how much engineering and bidding work is required before projects go out to bid, and whether the current process creates bottlenecks when bids exceed initial estimates. DLNR said it can do some repairs and maintenance within existing authority and funding ceilings, but that the bill as drafted could be too broad. The committee also heard SB 5 on historic preservation, where DLNR supported the measure and NAOP Hawaii opposed it, saying the bill’s broader definition could expand the scope beyond the stated goal of narrowing reviews and reducing backlog. The committee then took up SB 1462 on the state historic preservation income tax credit. The Department of Taxation said the revenue estimate assumes the cap would be reached each year the credit is available, and DLNR supported the bill. SHPD said the prior credit had sunset, outreach had previously been done in targeted communities such as Chinatown, and owners of eligible historic properties are notified during review. Finally, the committee heard SB 268 on island burial councils. DLNR supported the bill, and OHA strongly supported it, saying the councils have struggled with quorum and expertise and that the measure would restore the original intent of having lineal descendants and cultural practitioners as decision makers, while still allowing landowners and developers to testify and participate. OHA also said it would help provide technical support and urged continued involvement from SHPD and the Attorney General’s office.

Transcript Highlights:

• members please not we also testimony members please not we also have<00:07:45.319> testimony<
• I have submitted written testimony, and we are in support and stand on our testimony.
• That’s my testimony.
• That’s my testimony. So I stand on my written testimony about the heiau.
• That’s my testimony.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 707, which would create a state income tax deduction for contributions to Hawaii 529 college savings accounts and conform state law to federal changes allowing 529 funds to be used for K-12 expenses. The Department of Taxation said it could administer the bill as written. The Hawaii State Council on Developmental Disabilities supported the measure but asked that ABLE accounts be included and that the program title be changed; the Department of Taxation indicated the title issue could be a problem because the bill’s expanded purpose may not fit the current program name. No vote was taken. The committee then heard House Bill 617, which would fund a Bachelor of Science in Nursing program at the University of Hawaiʻi Community Colleges. UH Community Colleges supported the bill, and Maui nursing staff testified that faculty recruitment is challenging but manageable, clinical placements are available, and the campus already has a statewide RN-to-BSN pathway; they said the new program would create two tracks, including a four-year BSN option. Members also heard support from several organizations, including the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, nursing groups, and health care associations. No action was taken. Next were several UH-related measures. HB 718 would fund faculty and staff positions at the John A. Burns School of Medicine; the dean and other supporters testified in favor. HB 1279 would create a medical education liaison position tied to Project ECHO; the Attorney General raised constitutional concerns about statewide concern and grant standards, while an individual witness supported the concept but suggested the bill should focus on liaison/support functions rather than program administration. HB 1169 would consolidate conference center revolving funds, and HB 1168 would authorize up to $800 million in UH revenue bonds; UH’s CFO said both were procedural/housekeeping measures and supported them. On HB 1168, members questioned debt service, possible uses, and whether deferred maintenance would be included; the CFO estimated annual debt service could be about $33 million to $41 million at current rates, said likely uses could include student housing and research facilities, and said deferred maintenance was not the current strategy. The CFO also explained that revenue bonds require both legislative authorization and a Board of Regents resolution approving the project and amount. Finally, the committee heard HB 548, which would authorize revenue bonds and appropriations to acquire the St. Francis School campus for UH Mānoa. UH supported the bill but noted the property is privately owned and not known to be for sale. A supporter described the site as a unique 11-acre parcel contiguous to the main campus and urged the committee to seize the opportunity for future generations. No vote or final action was taken on the bills in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for your testimony.
• <00:15:08.440> and testimony we also have um testimony and testimony we also have um testimony
• thank you thank you for your testimony thank you thank you for your testimony thank<00:15:41.800
• the committee um I submitted a testimony the committee um I submitted a testimony yesterday<00:15
• the AG's testimony the AG's testimony um<00:26:29.240> to<00:26:29.559> insert<00:26:29.880

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Culture and the Arts met on March 14, 2025, and heard two measures. On SB 441 SD1, relating to the Hawaiʻi Symphony Orchestra, the committee received strong support from the orchestra, the Democratic Party of Hawaiʻi, IATSE Local 665, and an in-person testifier, with testimony emphasizing statewide access to music, education and community programming, cultural value, economic impact, and job stability for musicians and staff. The Attorney General’s office offered comments and suggested language related to the State Endowment Fund. Committee members asked about how the funding would be used, the orchestra’s reach, and its history; the orchestra said it preferred direct operating support and described its audience and employment footprint, neighbor-island outreach, and plans to expand season length and education programs. The committee then heard SB 1581 SD1, relating to the Hawaiʻi Japan Pacific Peace Monument. No testifier from the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts was present, and no one testified on Zoom. With no discussion from witnesses, the measure was briefly taken up and later advanced. In decision-making, the committee adopted amendments to SB 441 SD1, including a preamble describing legislative intent and the orchestra’s history, references to the State of Hawaiʻi endowment fund and statewide public benefits, and language ensuring the funds support statewide purposes and neighbor-island access to music and educational opportunities. The committee also added a deferral date of July 1, 3000 and technical amendments, then voted to pass the measure with amendments. SB 1581 SD1 was also passed forward with amendments, including a July 1, 3000 deferral date and technical changes, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• . testimony. testimony.
• . testimony.
• its written testimony and support. its written testimony and support.
• testimony. Do you want to say anything? testimony. Do you want to say anything?
• testimony. Thank you very much. testimony. Thank you very much.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 2592, which would clarify the powers of the Mauna Stewardship and Oversight Authority regarding land use on Mauna Akea and related property transfers. The Department of Land and Natural Resources supported the rural property transfer but objected to language transferring conservation district use permits, saying CDUPs normally run with the land rather than being assigned to specific telescopes or observatories. The University of Hawaiʻi and the observatories generally supported the bill but urged clearer language, especially on the transfer of real property assets, related obligations and liabilities, and the inclusion of milestones for the transition. Office of Hawaiian Affairs supported the bill’s overall intent but warned that some language could be overbroad and might improperly waive future beneficiary claims. Several testifiers opposed the measure, arguing it ignored DHHL lands and beneficiary rights, while others supported it as a way to clarify the authority’s role. Members questioned DLNR about the practical effects of transferring CDUP responsibility, and the committee emphasized that the bill was narrowly focused on specific land. The committee then took up House Bill 2593, which would authorize the Mauna Stewardship and Oversight Authority to extend existing leases and subleases for up to 10 years. The authority explained that the bill does not itself extend any lease, but instead gives the authority discretion to initiate a transparent public process if extensions are needed. The University of Hawaiʻi supported the concept but said the timing of any extension matters and noted possible legal requirements under state law. The observatories also supported the bill, describing it as a flexible tool during a broader transition process and noting that the authority has held many public planning workshops. Opponents, including Native Hawaiian and community testifiers, argued that the conservation lands should receive the highest protection, that the community had not consented, and that the observatories have had decades to plan ahead. One testifier urged the bill be deferred or killed for lack of clarity. In response to questions, the committee clarified that the bill only authorizes a process and does not itself extend leases, and that any extension would require public participation. The final measure discussed in the excerpt was House Bill 2047, relating to the AHAPU advisory committee. The discussion focused on the committee’s administrative relationship to the Department of Land and Natural Resources and whether DLNR should oversee basic legal compliance issues such as Sunshine Law and legislative reporting. DLNR explained that the committee is administratively attached to the department, which provides support on human resources, procurement, and legal questions, but that the committee itself generally handles its own operations. The department said it would route compliance questions to its attorneys and implement their advice. The hearing then moved on to House Bill 2231, which would transfer appointment authority for island burial council members from the governor and Senate to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs board of trustees. OHA said it generally supported the change for geographic moku representatives, since it already nominates candidates for those seats, but expressed concern about taking on appointment authority for the large landowner seats because that role is less directly tied to its statutory duties.

Transcript Highlights:

• Even if you want to give us a video of your testimony as your written testimony, we'll take a look at
• We consider written testimony to have just as much of an impact as we would your testimony before us
• Thank you very much for your testimony. Interesting testimony. Thank you. Senator?
• Thank you for your testimony. Thank you for your testimony, but I do have a question.
• Those are all closed for testimony. H-563, S-378, H-540 are all closed for testimony.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education held a lengthy hearing on a large slate of bills focused primarily on charter school policy and vocational technical education. Committee members opened with ground rules for testimony, including a two-minute limit, written testimony acceptance, and a live-streamed format. The committee then heard testimony on bills to expand collective bargaining rights in Horace Mann and Innovation Schools, reform charter school funding and reimbursement, allow enrollment preferences for high-need students in charter lotteries, and require BESE to consider district impacts when approving new or expanded charters. Several witnesses, including union leaders, parents, educators, and legislators, argued that charter growth has strained district budgets and that funding formulas should be reworked to better protect public schools; charter advocates and alumni countered that charter schools serve high-need students well and should not be penalized for their success. A major portion of the hearing focused on vocational technical education bills, including proposals to expand access and capacity, create a large grant program, and increase MSBA reimbursement rates for vocational school construction. Supporters described long waitlists, strong labor-market demand, and the higher cost of building and maintaining vocational schools, while municipal officials emphasized the tax burden on local communities. The committee also heard testimony on charter school reimbursement bills that would extend the state’s reimbursement schedule, with witnesses from districts such as Boston, Worcester, Fall River, and New Bedford describing large net losses to charter tuition and arguing for longer reimbursement periods and structural reform. The committee took no final votes during the hearing. In one instance, the chair said a bill would be held open until a missing senator could testify. Members asked several detailed questions about charter admissions lotteries, special education placements, funding formulas, and the practical effects of proposed charter caps and reimbursement changes. The hearing remained informational, with witnesses and committee members presenting sharply different views on whether the bills would improve equity and opportunity or harm existing public school systems.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are also accepting written testimony.
• If you're interested in submitting written testimony, or if you'd like to add to your testimony from
• I come before you today to testify, and I'll submit written testimony because my testimony is a little
• Thank you very much for your testimony. Thank you. Thank you very much for your testimony.
• Again, we're accepting written testimony.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Cannabis held a hearing on a package of cannabis bills focused on equity funding, delivery expansion, advertising restrictions, medical use, first responders, and ownership limits. Testimony strongly supported S. 87/H. 184 to direct a larger share of cannabis revenue into the Cannabis Social Equity Trust Fund and related equity programs, with speakers arguing the current funding is insufficient and that automatic transfers would better support businesses and communities harmed by the war on drugs. Several witnesses also backed H. 145/S. 89 to allow licensed cannabis delivery into municipalities that ban retail sales and to hotels, saying current rules unfairly limit social equity delivery operators and consumer access. There was also support for H. 176 on medical cannabis eligibility and S. 76 on cannabis use by first responders, while H. 177/H. 178 on new taxes drew opposition from several business owners who said the industry is already heavily burdened and overtaxed. A major point of debate was S. 94/H. 157, which would prohibit billboard advertising for non-prescription marijuana. Public health advocates, parents, and neuroscientists argued that cannabis billboards normalize use, are seen by youth, and are difficult to regulate effectively under the current 85% adult-audience standard. They urged a public health approach similar to tobacco restrictions. In contrast, several industry witnesses opposed further advertising limits, saying cannabis businesses already face strict marketing rules, billboards are privately owned, and additional restrictions would hurt small operators and raise First Amendment concerns. Some witnesses also criticized the proposed increase in ownership caps and consolidation provisions in the broader cannabis bill, warning they would favor large multistate companies over small and social equity businesses. Committee members asked questions about billboard ownership, enforcement of the current advertising rules, and the legal basis for restricting sign content. Witnesses and members also discussed the Cannabis Control Commission’s role, the difficulty of enforcing audience-composition standards, and whether delivery should be treated more like alcohol. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chair noted that written testimony would continue to be accepted.

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, well, let's open public testimony.
• Seeing none, the chair thanked them for their testimony. Seeing none, thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. Thank you for your testimony. Any questions?
• So thank you for your testimony.
• With no public testimony, public testimony will close on Senate Bill 2231, and Senator Hinojosa will

Summary: The committee heard and discussed several higher education and public school bills. Senator Burwell presented SB 1242 to remove an outdated Coordinating Board approval requirement for Texas State Technical College land and facility acquisitions, and SJR 59 to create a constitutionally dedicated endowment for TSTC capital needs; both drew strong support from industry and workforce groups and were left pending. SB 757, by Senator Middleton, would create a debt-to-earnings accountability system for public college programs, with supporters saying it would protect students from low-value degrees and opponents warning it could unfairly penalize programs with long-term value, especially graduate, medical, and public service fields; it was also left pending. SB 1241, by Senator Millington, would expand acceptable college entrance exams beyond the SAT and ACT, including the Classic Learning Test, and was left pending after testimony from CLT, homeschool, and student groups in support. SB 1085, by Senator Blanco, would let Sul Ross State University offer lower-division courses at its satellite campuses in the Middle Rio Grande region; it too was left pending. The committee then took up a series of public school and higher education measures, voting several out favorably. SB 605, as substituted, limits commissioner approval of charter school expansion amendments for schools under conservatorship or a management team and was reported favorably 9-0. SB 1871 and SB 1873, both by Senator Perry, were revised to narrow teacher immunity, clarify removal and suspension procedures, require periodic review of in-school suspension placements, and align discipline rules; both substitutes were adopted and reported favorably. SB 1872, SB 1874, SB 762, SB 1962, SB 1750, SB 2252, SB 2253, SB 2365, SB 1924, and SB 37 were also considered, with most reported favorably on party-line or near-unanimous votes. SB 1750 would replace a flat charter school facilities funding cap with an attendance-based formula; SB 2252 and SB 2253 address kindergarten readiness, early literacy/numeracy, and educator preparation; SB 2365 concerns student phone use during instructional time; SB 1924 restores local citation authority for certain school offenses and adds reporting, notice, and completion requirements; and SB 37 would expand state oversight of higher education curriculum, governance, faculty senates, and compliance with state law. Other measures heard included SB 769, which would require a Coordinating Board report on barriers faced by students with disabilities in higher education; supporters emphasized the need for better data and accessibility, while witnesses suggested broader reporting on race, disability types, and K-12-to-college transitions. SB 2231 would designate a Free College Application Week in October and was left pending. SB 1878 would modernize the Josie School statute and provide formula funding and aid eligibility for Polytechnic College. SB 1409 would authorize universities to offer self-funded student health benefit plans, with Rice University and Texas 2036 supporting the measure as a way to lower costs and expand coverage. SB 2431 would require universities to give foreign language credit for study abroad programs, SB 2314 would require schools to inform students about opting in or out of record sharing for direct admissions through My Texas Future, and SB 2138 would extend the state’s anti-ESG contracting restrictions to public higher education endowments and governing boards; these later bills were introduced and left pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• If you have submitted testimony and you would like to stand on your written testimony, you can do so,
• Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um and I know um testimony.
• one thing that's not in the testimony one thing that's not in the testimony that<00:16:51.040>
• Um in your testimony. So um last Sure. Um in your testimony.
• your testimony, please. Okay. Thank you. your testimony, please. Okay. Thank you.
• However, I do want to testimony.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The joint committees on Education and Higher Education first heard HCR 75 and HR 67, which ask the Department of Education and the University of Hawaiʻi to assess criteria for building an educational pipeline and curriculum for advanced manufacturing and cybersecurity. The Department of Education said it would stand on its written testimony, and UH supported the measure, noting existing community college and four-year programs related to the topic. Members asked how DOE promotes cybersecurity opportunities and whether it provides funding; DOE said schools usually connect with partners and its office works with them, but it does not have separate funding for such efforts. UH also explained that some advanced manufacturing concepts may overlap with 3D printing, material sciences, and entrepreneurship, and described P20 as a forum for aligning K-12 and higher education pathways. The committees then recessed the joint hearing and moved to the Education Committee agenda. The committee next heard HCR 46 and HR 39, which would make DOE recreational facilities available to the public during non-peak hours and non-school days. DOE said it already uses facilities agreements with insurance, liability waivers, indemnification, and certificates of insurance to protect schools. The Attorney General opposed the resolutions, warning that unrestricted public use without safeguards could create substantial liability and cost risks for the state. The measure’s introducer said the goal was to help underserved communities that lack access to public recreation spaces, and DOE said it would be open to joint-use arrangements with larger organizations but remained concerned about vandalism and liability. The committee also heard HCR 86 and HR 80 on creating an Aloha Civics working group, with DOE offering comments and Common Cause Hawaiʻi strongly supporting the idea. DOE described a civic learning and engagement task force that met with stakeholders, including UH and the PACE Commission, and produced recommendations such as building partnership inventories, integrating civic learning across grade levels, and aligning the work with DOE’s HA framework and learner outcomes. Common Cause said civic education can be implemented effectively and affordably, citing existing school projects such as ranked-choice voting and classroom constitutions. Later, the committee took up HCR 87 and HR 81, urging an annual Climate Week in public schools. DOE again stood on written comments, while the Climate Change and Health Working Group, Climate Future Forum, a student from Kaimuki High School, and other supporters argued that a dedicated week would ensure consistent climate education, build resilience, and connect climate issues to health, food security, and disaster preparedness. Supporters said existing climate-related opportunities are uneven across schools and that a formal Climate Week would create a more equitable approach. The committee then heard HCR 95 and HR 91 on informing students about changes to gun safety and storage laws; DOE asked for clarification on the measure’s intended outcome, and one individual testified in support. Finally, the committee heard HCR 104 and HR 100 on strengthening farm-to-school initiatives. DOE said it is already working to improve menus, emphasize local products, and meet with distributors to increase local procurement, while the College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resilience offered food science, nutrition, and extension support. Climate Future Forum, the Hawaii Youth Food Council, and other supporters said farm-to-school efforts are important for student health, local farmers, and food sovereignty, noting that local food procurement in schools remains far below the state’s 30% by 2030 goal. DOE explained it is trying to provide distributors and farmers with more predictable demand and is meeting with distributors to set up next year’s supply chain.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, but I do want to testimony.
• testimony. We did read through it all. testimony. We did read through it all.
• We've submitted testimony.
• We've submitted testimony. We this bill. We've submitted testimony.
• testimony in strong opposition. testimony in strong opposition.

Bills: HB1924, HB2121, HB1928, HB1979, HB1650, HB1543, HB1981, HB1982

Keywords: mattress recycling, waste management, producer responsibility, environmental health, steafardship program, electronic cigarettes, disposable devices, environmental protection, plastic pollution, lithium batteries, pollution control, public health, deposit beverage container, bottle bill, container deposit law, container redemption, recycling refund, extended producer responsibility, EPR, deposit return system

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several measures related to waste, recycling, and environmental review. On HB 1924, which would establish a mattress stewardship program, the Department of Health said it stood on written testimony and offered comments, while Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition and one individual supported the bill and the International Sleep Products Association opposed it. No questions were raised and the committee moved on. A large portion of the hearing focused on HB 2121, which would prohibit the sale of disposable vapes in Hawaii. The Department of Health supported the measure but suggested the bill may be better placed in a different part of state law because the cited waste-management section regulates products after consumption, while still praising the effort to remove disposable vapes from the market and environment. Testimony in strong support came from the Coalition for Tobacco Free Hawaii Youth Council, Hawaii Public Health Institute, Hawaii COPD Coalition, Hawaii Health and Harm Reduction Center, the City and County of Honolulu, and many individuals; supporters emphasized youth vaping, toxic waste, lithium battery fire risks, and environmental harm. There was at least one opposing individual and the International Sleep Products Association was listed in opposition. The committee noted there were many written testimonies and no immediate vote was taken. The committee also heard HB 1928 on the deposit beverage container recycling program. The Department of Health stood on written testimony. The Solid Waste Task Force of Hawaii Environmental Change Agents and Upstream supported the bill but urged amendments to better integrate reuse and reusables, strengthen enforcement, clarify definitions, and protect existing redemption centers. The Hawaii Food Industry Association supported the concept of a backdrop program but preferred strengthening the existing program and raised concerns about undefined fees, existing infrastructure, and future audit costs. The Chamber of Commerce Hawaii supported the bill, and the chair said the measure needs work and that decision-making would occur in a few days. Finally, the committee took up HB 979 on environmental review and HB 1650 on environmental assessments. For HB 979, OPSD offered amendments, HCDA supported the bill but suggested clarifying the affordable-housing definition, Kauai Island Utility Cooperative supported it, and Earthjustice was asked about the court process for environmental challenges; the chair asked about shortening the challenge period and the relationship between environmental court, the intermediate court of appeals, and the Supreme Court. For HB 1650, OPSD and the State Historic Preservation Division stood on written testimony, OHA asked to retain historic sites, and several groups and individuals testified in support or opposition. Opponents argued that removing Wiki special district and historic sites from Chapter 343 trigger language would weaken environmental review and risk impacts to iwi kūpuna and historic resources.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:00:53.760> for going to live a testimony for going to live a testimony for individuals
• <00:01:50.759> opposition Ki has submitted testimony opposition Ki has submitted testimony
• We have our written testimony.
• DOE will stand on our testimony. Laura Breer has a testimony in support.
• DOE will stand on our testimony. Laura Breer has testimony in support.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint hearing began with SB 133 on energy, which drew opposition testimony from James Abraham, who said the bill was unnecessary because the Public Utilities Commission had already opened a proceeding to investigate wheeling, including intergovernmental wheeling, and should be allowed to finish its collaborative process. The committees then moved to SB 161 on county permitting and inspection, where several agencies submitted written comments or opposition, while the Grassroots Institute and HCDA-related testimony supported the measure. Members raised concerns about accountability and whether state agencies would report back on projects approved under any permitting exemption, and witnesses suggested annual reporting or amendment language to address that issue. The hearing then turned to SB 232 and SB 588, both related to renewable energy permitting. Testimony on SB 232 was largely supportive, but Rocky Mold of the Hawaii Solar Energy Association said SB 232 was an older version of a bill and that SB 588 was the preferred, updated measure. Members discussed whether the bill should be limited to residential or behind-the-meter customer-sited systems rather than utility-scale projects, and Mold clarified that the proposal was intended for customer-sited systems, not utility-scale facilities. For SB 588, the Department of Land and Natural Resources warned that state or county laws inconsistent with the National Flood Insurance Program could jeopardize flood insurance eligibility and related federal assistance, while Mold argued the bill’s FEMA floodway exemption was needed to avoid blocking solar installations on existing structures. The chair expressed concern about risking federal funding and questioned whether the exemption could be narrowed without defeating the bill’s purpose. SB 412, also on renewable energy, received supportive testimony from the State Energy Office and others. Members questioned whether a single coordinating entity should compile agency assessments, and Mark Glick said the Energy Office could take on that role if given the duty and sufficient staff. The committee then discussed SB 635 on energy efficiency, which would require state agencies to use energy-efficient lighting. Mark Glick testified that much of the work was already underway through benchmarking and related contracts, and a DAGS representative said the state was already assessing 590 buildings over 10,000 square feet, with results expected around 2027. Members suggested amending the bill to require annual status reports so the committees could track progress and avoid duplication. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• If you prefer your testimony to be sent to us in confidence, feel free to send that testimony to our
• Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you, Paul, for your testimony. Thank you, thank you, Paul, for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. Christina, thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony, Ellen. Thank you for your testimony.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing opened with the co-chairs introducing House and Senate members and explaining the hybrid format, three-minute testimony guidance, and the deadline for written testimony. The committee then heard extensive testimony on S. 2665, which would require employers to post notice to employees when an I-9 audit or similar federal immigration inspection is underway. Supporters, including immigration attorneys, a pediatrician, a labor leader, and an affected family member, argued the bill would protect privacy, give workers time to gather documents and consult counsel, and reduce fear and wrongful arrests. One witness from Illinois described a similar law there and said it had not caused the problems employers feared, while others said recent ICE enforcement has made notice especially important. The committee also heard testimony on S. 1360, a bill affecting collective bargaining rights for State Police, with the State Police Association arguing that a statutory gap lets departmental rules override their contract and that the bill would restore intended bargaining protections. A separate labor bill, S. 1305, was also briefly supported by the AFL-CIO as part of broader worker-classification protections for app-based delivery drivers. A large portion of the hearing focused on H. 2066, which would impose fines on transportation network drivers who refuse rides to people with disabilities using service animals. Testimony from blind and disabled riders, service dog users, advocates, and the Disability Law Center described repeated ride cancellations, drivers pulling away after seeing a service animal, and the difficulty of enforcing existing anti-discrimination laws through MCAD or other agencies. Witnesses said the current system leaves riders without practical recourse because drivers are hard to identify and complaints can take years, and they argued that fines on individual drivers would create a real deterrent. Several witnesses also described the impact on employment, medical appointments, and daily independence. Committee members asked about service-animal verification, whether refusals are ever appropriate, and whether penalties should target drivers or companies; witnesses said legitimate refusals are limited to misbehaving or unsafe animals and that companies already have policies and some training, but enforcement remains weak. The committee also heard from a witness supporting a related bill on rideshare accessibility and from advocates describing broader transportation discrimination issues. One witness discussed a separate proposal to study service-animal denial, and others noted that Uber’s self-identification feature and company policies have not solved the problem. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the meeting ended after the final witnesses on the service-animal bill and a brief organizational discussion about related legislation and committee business.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:14:06.120> reflects please I know the testimony reflects please I know the testimony reflects
• UH has your testimony. We can stand on our testimony.
• UH has your testimony. We can stand on our testimony.
• testimony we can stand on our testimony testimony we can stand on our testimony um<00:26:49.440>
• <00:27:39.760> and yes uh we'll stand on our testimony and yes uh we'll stand on our testimony

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Higher Education met on March 14, 2025, and heard five University of Hawaii-related bills. SB 741 would create an external audit committee for the UH system and Board of Regents; UH and UHPA opposed it, saying existing internal and external audits already provide robust oversight, and the committee later recommended deferring the bill indefinitely as duplicative. SB 1252 SD2 would create a dementia training program for health care providers; the Alzheimer’s Association and other supporters said broader training is needed across the care workforce, while the university discussed using JABSOM as a coordinator. The committee deferred the bill to March 19 for an HD1 reflecting JABSOM’s suggestions and removing the appropriations/FTE language. SB 1502 SD1 would fund faculty positions, student programs, and facilities at UH Manoa and West Oahu for defense-sector workforce development. UH and Chamber of Commerce Hawaii supported the measure, describing a pipeline for students into intelligence, cybersecurity, and related fields, while one individual opposed it as too closely tied to military contracting and urged investment in other sectors instead. The committee amended the bill to remove FTE references and advanced it; the vote to pass with amendments was adopted, with several members voting aye and some excused. SB 1530 would require performance-based allocation of UH general funds and efficiency reporting. UH and the Attorney General’s office raised concerns, saying the bill’s metrics would apply across the entire general fund budget and were not practical as drafted; the committee also noted opposition from the Budget and Finance Department and individuals. SB 1624 SD1 would restrict RIM funds to renewing, improving, or modernizing existing facilities and require annual reports. UH opposed the bill and explained that RIM is a lump-sum approach used to address deferred maintenance and capital needs, with Board of Regents approval and quarterly reporting already in place; the Attorney General suggested constitutional amendments. The transcript ends during discussion of SB 1624, with no final action shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• That’ll be in some written testimony.
• I appreciate your testimony. Great question.
• Thank you for your testimony. Thank you.
• Thank you for your testimony. Thank you. I see no questions. Thank you for your testimony.
• Okay, thank you for your testimony.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources held a hearing on several late-file bills and home rule petitions, with testimony focused mainly on coastal access and wildlife management, rodenticide restrictions, and a local land-use request. Rep. Scarsdale testified for H.5113, which would name an accessible trail in Groton’s J. Harry Rich State Forest the Marion Stoddard River Walk in honor of the activist who helped restore the Nashua River. Groton Trails Committee chair Paul Fung also supported the bill, describing the trail, educational signs, and DCR’s involvement. Rep. Sweezey presented a package of Duxbury Beach bills—H.5141, H.5140, and H.5139—intended to align state shorebird protections more closely with federal standards, create parity in beach management tools, and require periodic review of outdated recreational-use guidelines; he said the bills were developed with local and agency input and aimed to balance conservation with beach access. A large portion of the hearing concerned local petitions to restrict second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides and other pesticides. Supporters from Mass Audubon, Sierra Club, Animal Defenders International, wildlife rehabilitation groups, and residents from towns including Grafton, Billerica, Manchester-by-the-Sea, Eastham, and Truro argued that these poisons harm raptors and other non-target wildlife through secondary poisoning, persist in the environment, and are increasingly ineffective. Several speakers said local town meetings had approved the restrictions and urged favorable reports on the petitions. Opponents, including a representative of the New England Pest Management Association, argued that regulation should remain at the state level under MDAR to avoid a patchwork of local rules and noted that the agency was already reviewing rodenticide regulations. Committee members asked questions about agency consultation, the relationship between state and federal bird listings, and how local beach rules would work in practice. The committee also heard testimony on H.4700 and related local pesticide-reduction petitions for Eastham and Truro, with witnesses describing groundwater concerns, pesticide drift, and wildlife impacts. Finally, the committee took testimony on S.2961, a Dighton bill authorizing the use of a small portion of conservation land for public way purposes to replace the Pleasant Street Bridge and add pedestrian and bicycle accommodations; the witness said the affected area was limited and necessary for safety improvements. The hearing ended after testimony concluded, with the chair turning the gavel over and the committee adjourning.