Transcript Highlights:

• There is a process. This is not going to break the insurance companies.
• I sit on Appropriations, and my vote has been consistent through the process.
• So here's the bid on this page.
• It makes less of a competitive bid. We're trying to get competitive bids.
• Those do get factored into the bid. I don't know how we can argue otherwise.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Senate reconvened and handled several House messages and conference committee appointments before taking up a series of bills. It appointed conference committees on Senate Bill 2265 and House Bills 1454, 1448, and 1524. The chamber also adopted a Senate amendment to House Bill 1216, delaying its effective date for the copay accumulator prescription drug bill to January 1, 2026, with later renewal timing for non-PERS plans. House Bill 1216 then came up for final passage. Senators debated whether allowing copay accumulator programs to count manufacturer coupons toward deductibles would help patients with expensive drugs or unfairly shift costs to insurers and other policyholders. Supporters said it would help people afford life-saving medications and that the coupon payments go to pharmacies, not insurers; opponents argued it could raise premiums and create perverse incentives for drug pricing. The bill passed 29-18. The Senate also concurred in House amendments to Senate Bill 2160, which changes health insurance benefits under the Uniform Group Insurance Program to move from a grandfathered to a non-grandfathered plan, with supporters emphasizing added benefits and flexibility and opponents warning of higher costs and irreversible changes. That bill passed concurrence 33-14 and final passage 39-8. The Senate next concurred in House amendments to Senate Bill 2339, the wildfire mitigation bill, which requires utility mitigation plans to be updated every two years, incorporate national electric standards, and creates a rebuttable presumption of reasonable care if the plan is followed. The bill then passed final passage 46-1. The chamber also adopted conference committee reports and passed House Bill 1460 on adult foster care and monitoring devices, House Bill 1440 on cigar lounge tobacco use, and Senate Bill 2374 on insurance-related provisions including property insurance arbitration, managed repair programs, and surplus lines issues; SB 2374 also added a study on towing and recovery coverage. The session ended with announcements of upcoming conference committee meetings and adjournment until April 22, 2025.

Transcript Highlights:

• Bids were opened on February 10, 2026, in accordance with Arkansas bid law, and three bids were received
• The first bid was rejected because the company was a construction management firm rather than a turf
• The second bid was rejected because it offered an eight-year turf warranty.
• The second bid was rejected because it offered an eight-year turf warranty, while the RFP required a
• After reviewing the bids, Mr.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It greatly helps our process. Time permitting, we will also take testimony.
• It greatly helps our process.
• process of a project.
• It’s just the need for us to have more efficient processes.
• hauling, and we got zero bids.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused on Governor Healey and Lt. Gov. Driscoll’s Municipal Empowerment Act, with administration officials and municipal leaders broadly supporting the bill as a package of tools to help cities and towns manage rising costs, staffing shortages, and service demands. The administration highlighted procurement reforms, including raising Chapter 30B advertising thresholds, clarifying cooperative purchasing, and removing the Commbuys notice requirement; permanent authority to amortize emergency-related deficits over three years; expanded authority and enforcement for removing double poles; continued flexibility for hybrid and remote public meetings; regionalization options such as regional boards of assessors and intermunicipal agreements; cybersecurity reporting to EOTSS; and several local revenue options and other municipal finance changes. They said the bill was shaped by listening sessions with municipal officials and was intended to increase flexibility, efficiency, and stability without imposing broad mandates. Committee members asked about regionalization, cybersecurity costs, Commbuys, hybrid meetings, and double poles. Administration witnesses said cybersecurity reporting would help the state target resources and that existing Community Compact and capital grant programs, including IT and municipal fiber funding, could support local needs; they said EOTSS would absorb reporting within existing resources. On procurement, they said the Commbuys notice change would be optional and that other public notice methods would remain available. On hybrid meetings, they emphasized flexibility for different types of boards and the burdens a one-size-fits-all mandate could create for small towns and volunteer boards. On double poles, they said the bill’s main change from last session was to give utilities more time and improve the removal process while keeping enforcement mechanisms aimed at speeding removal rather than raising revenue. The Massachusetts Municipal Association, MAPC, the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission, and multiple mayors and town managers testified in support. They described the bill as a practical modernization measure that would help local governments operate more efficiently and respond to fiscal pressure. Witnesses from Northampton, Lynn, Gardner, Cambridge, Franklin, North Andover, Manchester-by-the-Sea, and Ashland praised the hybrid meeting provisions, procurement changes, regional service-sharing, and emergency deficit amortization. Several also urged adoption of local revenue tools, including meals and lodging tax options and other local fees, as ways to preserve services and staffing. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• proposals and submissions and other threshold requirements in the public improvement bidding processes
• rather than an executive process.
• And they are in the process of drafting their report from that process.
• So you go through the hiring process and the teaching process and getting them to do some work, but their
• Where does it flow through the process, right?

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you represent them in bid processes?
• My specialty is not bid protest. No, bid processes. Bidding processes for private companies, so...
• of where other bid processes have that requirement that in the middle. of a bid process, they give you
• No, I think the bid process is not. Part of the bill as I understand.
• No, I'm not talking about the bid process in particular.

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Frankly, their bids are not. competitive with the Chinese bids.
• In 2021, Hutchinson was awarded those two ports, Port Balboa and Port Cristobal, in a no-bid award process
• In the bidding process that the Panama Canal Authority developed, when they did have to ration these
• slots, it was a bidding process, and the highest bidder got the first slot, got the less of a delay.
• and be competitive in these bids.

Transcript Highlights:

• Bypassing the mandatory bid process because they get a percent and so they get even more of a cut and
• Ask the cities to follow that has the bidding process you get all the different bids.
• Can we streamline the current bidding process? We're both familiar with buying vehicles.
• This includes advertising the bids, releasing the bids. holding a sealed bidding process and rating each
• So, if I can, I'll have- walk you through kind of our bid process and then we can we can answer that

Bills: HB10, HB 12, HB675, HB10, HB12

Keywords: regulatory reform, government efficiency, administrative law, rulemaking, agency deference, judicial review, de novo review, Texas Government Code, Administrative Procedure Act, state agencies, plain language, regulatory burden, regulatory reduction, cost-benefit analysis, fiscal note, public benefits and costs, contested case, rule challenge, Texas Regulatory Efficiency Office, advisory panel

Transcript Highlights:

• And so it just kind of puts some guardrails in place so that we don't get into the process of making

Bills: HB227, HB454, SB323, HB266, SB52, SB53, SB296, HB37, HB429, HB93, HB249, HB328, HB111, HB132, HB26, SB261, HB227, HB454, SB323, HB266, SB52, SB53, SB296, HB37, HB429, HB93, HB249, HB328, HB111, HB132, HB26, SB261

Keywords: firefighter benefits, occupational disease, line of duty, disability pension, death benefits, retirement benefits, hypertension, heart disease, respiratory disease, cancer presumption, HIV, hepatitis, municipal firefighters, state firefighters, fire districts, workers' compensation, public safety employees, post-retirement benefits, benefit eligibility cutoff, occupational illness

Transcript Highlights:

• We went through a very complex and lengthy bidding process for the aerial tramway, and we received one
• What we also found through this bidding process was that one of the two prospective bidders opted not
• <03:59:35.960> process complex and um lengthy bidding process complex and um lengthy bidding
• uh through this bidding process was the uh through this bidding process was the uh one<04:00:17.439
• our bid specific bid specifications that our bid specific bid specifications fell<04:00:31.159> short

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard a Department of Corrections capital budget presentation on HB 25, focused largely on urgent maintenance and security needs at the New Hampshire State Prison for Men and other DOC facilities. DOC officials described the governor’s proposed priorities: boiler surge and radiator tank replacements, electronic controls and camera upgrades, and replacement of HVAC units using R22 refrigerant. They also outlined additional requested projects totaling $15.4 million, including a body alarm/man-down system at Northern New Hampshire Correctional Facility, steam line and trap repairs, fire alarm replacements, and removal of an underground diesel tank in favor of above-ground storage. DOC testified that many systems are well beyond their expected service life, including 40-year-old boilers, outdated analog cameras, and HVAC equipment using discontinued R22 refrigerant. They said the men’s prison is relying on a leased temporary boiler, has significant steam leaks causing major water loss and reduced boiler efficiency, and is dealing with frequent fire alarm faults and deteriorating wiring. On the body alarm system, they said the vendor no longer supports the equipment and replacement parts are no longer available. On the diesel tank, members questioned whether it could be abandoned in place or whether fuel could be reused; DOC said it had not explored all alternatives and would follow up, while noting the tank is underground and tied into the warehouse system. Members also asked whether some current investments could be reused in the planned new men’s prison. DOC said some items, such as air handlers, might potentially be moved, but most projects are needed to keep the current facility operational and would not be practical to transfer. Questions were also raised about the leased boiler arrangement, the use of the man-down system by staff and visitors, and whether the kitchen project could be converted to a modular unit. DOC said the modular kitchen approach is necessary because the existing kitchen cannot remain fully operational during repairs. The committee then moved to lapse extensions, and DOC identified several projects no longer needing extensions, including items numbered 64, 65, and 66 in HB 25, with the chair noting those balances would be deleted and that the lapse amount was $550,500.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um so heavily involved in that process.
• Um and um process that we undertook.
• Well, last year, early last year, we went to bid on phase three, and we got three bids on that.
• <00:38:20.880> on and and we got um three three bids on and and we got um three three bids
• We uh denied all three bids. Okay. that. We uh denied all three bids. Okay.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We did put out a competitive bid process using our referral for an RFA, which is a referral for...
• We did put out a competitive bid process using our referral for an RFA, um, our referral for an RFA,
• <00:44:16.359> We<00:44:16.560> did back up for like a bid process?
• We did back up for like a bid process?
• > process<00:44:19.680> using<00:44:20.600> uh put out competitive bid process using

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first approved the March 10 minutes and then moved through a large agenda of contract reviews, including a deferred Kentucky Transportation Cabinet item tied to Louisville bridge tolling and RiverLink. Transportation officials explained that the contract was part of a bi-state arrangement with Indiana: Indiana Finance Authority held the main contract with HNTB, while Kentucky needed a mirror contract to pay its 50% share under the bi-state management agreement. Members questioned why the work was treated as effectively no-bid, how much input Kentucky had in vendor selection, RiverLink’s collection performance, and when tolls might end. Transportation said Kentucky had equal representation in selection, HNTB served as a toll services advisor, collections and customer service had improved, and tolls are expected to remain until debt obligations are paid off in 2058. Several members criticized the company’s past performance and voted no as a statement of concern, but the contract still moved forward. The committee then deferred a Kentucky State University item because the vendor was not registered with the Secretary of State. It also approved the overall agenda and contract review lists. A Board of Optometric Examiners contract drew significant discussion: board representatives said they had previously relied on the Public Protection Cabinet for legal services, but that office lacked staff and advised them to seek outside counsel. Some members argued the committee could not approve a contract that appeared to conflict with statute, while others said the board should not be left without legal counsel and that the Attorney General should be brought in to resolve the issue. The committee ultimately voted to defer the optometric contract for one month and requested the Attorney General appear at the next meeting. Finally, the committee reviewed an Administrative Office of the Courts amendment for the Court of Appeals building project. Staff explained that the General Assembly had authorized the project, the design contract had already gone through multiple approved phases, and the current item was only an administrative correction to a prior modification amount. Members approved the amendment, with one member noting appreciation that the project costs had been reduced when an error was found.

Transcript Highlights:

• We did last go out to bid for the 21-23 biennium.
• And we are just in the process of finalizing the RFP so that we can go out to bid for the 2027 to 2029
• The bids will be due back into our office by the end of July.
• Kind of final bids, if everything falls in place and we don't have to reject all the bids and go back
• the actuarial report or at any time during the process.

Summary: The Employee Benefits Committee met to approve prior minutes, hear presentations on state employee health insurance, compensation, leave, and related policy issues, and then recess for lunch. PERS reviewed the history and structure of the state health plan, noting the long-standing state-paid family coverage, cost-control measures, wellness incentives, the current grandfathered PPO and high-deductible options, and the effects of recent benefit mandates such as insulin caps, prosthetic coverage, medication management, prescription copay changes, and ambulance balance-billing limits. Committee members questioned the fiscal impact of adding benefits and the possible cost of moving to a non-grandfathered plan, while PERS and HRMS emphasized that health insurance remains the top-ranked employee benefit and that any major plan changes should be considered carefully. HRMS also presented compensation comparisons showing state pay generally below private-market benchmarks, discussed targeted market equity adjustments, identified ongoing recruitment and retention concerns in fields like nursing, IT, engineering, and attorneys, and reviewed leave policies, tuition reimbursement, and family leave comparisons with neighboring states. Job Service provided labor market data showing low unemployment, high labor force participation, and wage growth that still trails some neighboring markets, and OMB explained that prevailing wage requirements apply to federally funded projects under Davis-Bacon, not to ordinary state contracts. After lunch, the committee took up the required process for health insurance mandate bills and adopted an amendment to Joint Rule 211. The amendment clarified that the deadline for submitting mandate measures is intended to allow time for all required reports, including both the cost-benefit analysis and any Employee Benefits Committee actuarial report, while leaving the existing deadline unchanged. The amendment was adopted on a roll call vote, with several members voting yes and a few no votes recorded. The committee then moved into its jurisdiction review of bill drafts, beginning with a bill that would automatically renew pre-tax dental and vision elections; members debated whether it had any actuarial or administrative impact on PERS or the state, and the chair explained that the committee’s role was only to decide whether further analysis was needed before later testimony and recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• We then put those out for a competitive bidding process where any qualified contractor that has enough
• capacity to bid on the project can bid on it.
• It's very different than design-bid-build.
• Design-bid-build, once we get to bid and award that project to a contractor, we have a pretty good sense
• The JTC's participation in the WTP process in June of 20th... In the WTP process.

Summary: The committee first heard a presentation from WSDOT on balancing uncertainty in capital program estimates and cash flow management. WSDOT explained the differences between design-bid-build and design-build delivery, its tiered risk-assessment process by project size, and how it uses base estimates, inflation, and risk modeling to set budgets. Staff said design-bid-build estimates are generally accurate within about 1% across the program, while design-build projects carry much wider uncertainty and are better communicated as ranges; they cited a P85 budget approach and noted that large, complex projects can be affected by market competition and long procurement timelines. Members asked about the Columbia River Bridge cost growth and about value engineering, and WSDOT said it uses value engineering but has limited scope to cut costs because of project requirements and policy mandates. Troy Swing also discussed cash flow, noting that a few large projects can significantly affect biennial funding needs, and said a risk pool would not reduce overall program risk but could help manage timing if paired with appropriation and cash-flow controls. The committee then received the final presentation in the WSDOT Project Delivery and Innovative Practices study from HKA Global. The consultant said WSDOT’s estimating practices are generally robust and recommended improving transparency by presenting budget authorizations as ranges or estimate classes, better tracking estimate growth over time, and adjusting advertisement timing to avoid competing lettings. The report also discussed surety bonding, suggesting the legislature consider restoring authority for reduced bonding on select large design-build projects or using phased bonding and alternative securities. On indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contracting, the consultant said current job order contract rules are restrictive and recommended legislative changes to make such tools more usable, especially for smaller tasks and to help use unspent funds more flexibly. The committee also heard a follow-up presentation on transit-oriented development policy recommendations tied to HB 1491. The Urban Institute’s Yona Freemark said Washington has been a national leader on TOD but that housing construction, especially in the Puget Sound, has slowed sharply since 2022. He said rising construction costs, high financing costs, and local tax and rent conditions are making many TOD projects infeasible, and recommended that the state fill infrastructure funding gaps around stations, revisit MFTE affordability requirements, consider minimum rather than average density requirements near transit, and create a statewide system to track TOD outcomes such as affordability, gentrification, and transit access. Members questioned the study’s developer interviews, the role of rent control and crime, property tax assumptions, and parking needs; the presenter said the study included five private developers, that rent control was not part of the study scope, and that parking was included in the model assumptions. Finally, the committee began a presentation on regulating emissions from ocean-going vessels at berth. Staff and consultants described California-style at-berth rules, which require shore power or equivalent emissions controls so ships can shut off diesel auxiliary engines while docked. The study is examining vessel traffic, emissions reductions, implementation costs, labor and operational needs, and possible effects on port competitiveness and cargo diversion. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• they're bid. They are competitively bid. they're bid. They are competitively bid.
• Um, and real properties is in the process of bidding out 43 phase 3A and closeout phase site acquisitions
• > 3A the process of bidding out 43 phase 3A the process of bidding out 43 phase 3A and<00:52:37.119
• it does use a competitive bidding process.
• did not bid on. did not bid on.

Keywords: Call to Order and Roll Call- 00:00:01 Staff Report on Statewide Emergency Responder Voice System- 00:01:09 Kentucky State Police and Finance and Administration Cabinet Response to Staff Report- 00:48:37 Adjournment-01:34:512, 958, all

Summary: The committee heard a staff report on Kentucky’s statewide emergency responder voice system (SERVS), a multi-phase project intended to improve interoperable radio communications for first responders. Staff said Kentucky State Police did not appear to have violated statutes or regulations, but the project lacked an overall master plan, clear milestones, and consistent documentation, which contributed to delays, spending issues, and deployment problems. The report recommended updating the Kentucky Field Operations Guide to reflect SERVS and noted that the project has been funded in phases since 2018, with appropriations totaling roughly $216 million across 2018, 2020, 2022, and 2024, while about $109 million had been spent by the end of fiscal year 2025. The report raised concerns about project sequencing and oversight. Staff said most spending was concentrated in special mobile equipment, with Motorola accounting for about two-thirds of all SERVS expenditures and the top four vendors making up 81 percent of spending. They also said a sample of Motorola payments suggested possible late payments, though they could not confirm whether interest was paid. Staff criticized the use of master agreements for a project of this size, the lack of a centralized ledger, and the absence of a documented timeline or risk mitigation plan. They recommended stronger procurement and planning requirements, including possible legislative changes requiring approved master plans for large capital projects and additional funding conditions tied to SERVS master agreements. Land acquisition and deployment progress were identified as major bottlenecks, especially in Eastern Kentucky. Staff said the project began in western Kentucky using existing tower sites, but the remaining work is concentrated in harder-to-acquire areas, with more than 95 percent of new towers still incomplete. They said the Division of Real Properties did not begin formal contract work on acquisition until October 2024, despite earlier coordination, and recommended earlier consultation on future projects. Staff also noted that the Kentucky Wireless Interoperability Executive Committee had not been active in oversight, and survey results showed limited awareness and involvement among first responders. Committee members agreed that the lack of an initial implementation plan and the continuing need for funding reflected broader planning problems, and they discussed the need for a clearer end-to-end game plan rather than continuing to fund the project without a defined completion path.

Transcript Highlights:

• had always been an RFB, a bid process, and we did not have the time.
• And under the bid process, we were only getting one company to respond.
• did been a an RFB, a bid process, and we did been a an RFB, a bid process, and we did not<00:14:42.639
• :15:26.160> there<00:15:26.399> was a bid process uh before and there was a bid process
• past for broker fees under the bid past for broker fees under the bid process,<00:16:31.680>

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Government Contract Committee met with a quorum, observed a moment of silence for Representative McCool after the death of his sister, and approved the April 14 minutes. The committee then reviewed a large agenda of contracts and amendments, beginning with a deferred Office of the Controller procurement involving broker services. Members questioned why a contract that had previously been handled for about $300,000 annually was now priced at about $1 million, and why the procurement was limited to one year. Office of the Controller staff said the prior vendor had held the work for more than 20 years, the work had previously been treated as not practical to bid, and the new RFP was intended to increase competition. They said the technical evaluation was scored before cost was considered, that past performance was not scored because it was seen as unreliable, and that AON received the highest technical score despite not being the lowest bidder. After discussion, the committee voted to take no action and let the contract proceed to the Finance Cabinet, with members noting continuing concerns about the pricing and process. The committee next considered a DCBS memorandum of agreement amendment for language services. DCBS representatives said the additional funding did not come from a new cut elsewhere, but from reduced spending on interpreter services because commonly used forms had been translated into other languages, freeing up funds for the contract. The committee approved the item unanimously. The final major item discussed was an initial contract for the Board of Hairdressers and Cosmetologists for legal services. Board staff said the board had been without a permanent general counsel since March 2024 and had relied on special and conflict counsel because of unusually heavy litigation, including 11 active cases, plus broader disciplinary and licensing changes tied to recent legislation and an oversight report. They said the contract was a not-to-exceed amount funded entirely by agency fees and that the board was currently running a surplus. Senator Thomas urged support, citing prior legislation and oversight findings about problems at the board and saying the contract was needed to help the board address ongoing litigation and corrective work. The committee approved the contract and then approved the remaining agenda items without objection, sending them forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• Showing about a 1% increase over those bid amounts.
• Fundamentally, the final amount comes with the bid award.
• real competitive bid.
• So, what we've elected to do is re-bid that project so that we can reset the process and get all new
• bids in to start from square one.

Transcript Highlights:

• bidding on a contract.
• And If in a perfect world people are bidding.
• Competitively in the marketplace in the bids for projects.
• The second thing this bill does is create a similar process within our Rule 202 process which allows
• process.

Transcript Highlights:

• requirements do not apply to all fair contracts, allowing the bids Contracting Code's competitive bidding
• requirements do not apply to all fair contracts, allowing the bids to be tailored or written to suit
• bids through contract execution and performance?
• How would it affect the day-to-day procurement and the contracting process?
• They know who the people who bid on these carnival contracts are.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• bid process because they've already shown that they can actually do the work.
• But anyhow, I'm just concerned about a no-bid process, and I do appreciate you and appreciate your explanations
• It cannot give this bid out. That only the... ...cannot give this bid out.
• All I'm removing is their ability to do no-bid contracts, to okay no-bid contracts. to do no-bid contracts
• I just think, you know, bidding process is how we keep it open and honest.

Bills: HR320, HR321, SCR55, SCR69, SCR75, SCR77, SCR78, SCR79, SB259, SB295, SB312, SB348, SB444, SB485, HR73, HR118, HR144, HR196, HR237, HR249, HR260, HR267, HR272, HR278, HCR85, HCR100, HCR105, HCR107, HCR114, HR245, SCR5, SCR29, SCR33, SCR37, SCR63, SCR30, SCR40, HB62, HB193, HB210, HB220, HB246, HB364, HB420, HB475, HB584, HB622, HB772, HB784, HB949, HB953, HB1043, HB1070, HB1092, HB1134, HB1162, HB1176, HB1196, HB1214, HB119, HB129, HB233, HB283, HB538, HB789, HB850, HB870, HB1236, HB1241, HB54, HB137, HB321, HB368, HB386, HB414, HB431, HB552, HB555, HB578, HB590, HB593, HB618, HB638, HB670, HB692, HB707, HB708, HB715, HB718, HB732, HB741, HB748, HB776, HB796, HB807, HB822, HB848, HB856, HB887, HB888, HB917, HB921, HB1082, HB1243, HB1246, HB378, HB509, HB1090, HB1259, SB80, SB131, SB143, SB251, SB254, SB279, SB367, SB384, SB388, SB389, SB398, SB408, SB431, SB468, SB469, SB496, SB4, SB52, SB57, SB83, SB145, SB152, SB194, SB276, SB319, SB333, SB448, SB450, SB465, SB484, SB501, SB509, SB149, HR168, HB463, HB998, SB123, SB353, SB479, SB495, SB82, SB97, SB283, SB326, SB518, SB197, SB268, HB901, HR20, HR74, HCR65, HCR71, HCR98, HB284, HB306, HB341, HB366, HB393, HB458, HB577, HB603, HB605, HB614, HB625, HB646, HB733, HB752, HB773, HB798, HB911, HB955, HB996, HB1035, HB1069, HB1113, HB1140, HB1180, HB1191, HB1240, HB1255, SB89, HB74, HB134, HB258, HB359, HB468, HB956, HB1117, SB29, SB42, SB43, SB78, SB208, SB217, SB274, SB300, SB341, SB379, SB382, SB387, SB401, SB441, SB449, SB487

Keywords: Arsenal, Arsenal F.C., Premier League, English football, soccer, football club, Mikel Arteta, Emirates Stadium, North London, Tottenham Hotspur, Gunners, sports resolution, commendation, celebration, championship, silverware, Louisiana House Resolution, ceremonial resolution, domestic violence, forensic medical examinations

Transcript Highlights:

• Didn't even bid on it.
• process?
• Didn't even bid on couple of years ago. Didn't even bid on it. it. it.
• process? process?
• Um, they bid on this.

Keywords: 924, joint, all