Transcript Highlights:

• data can be<00:04:32.560><c> used.
• </c> Axon and searches our residents data Axon and searches our residents data without<00:09:46.399><
• </c><00:10:07.680><c> sharing</c> access and requiring data sharing access and requiring data sharing
• But the ACLU of data can be used.
• It's that data sharing.

Summary: At a morning press conference, lawmakers and advocates discussed a bill by Rep. Tabke aimed at tightening Minnesota’s automatic license plate reader (ALPR) laws. Speakers argued that license plate data is being misused, especially in connection with immigration enforcement and “Operation Metro Surge,” and said motorists expect privacy for the personal information tied to their plates. Several individuals described incidents in which they believed federal agents used ALPR data to identify their homes, photograph their houses, or otherwise intimidate them after they had observed ICE activity. John Beler of the ACLU of Minnesota said ALPR systems capture plate numbers, time, date, and location, and that private vendors and out-of-state agencies can access the data with little oversight. He cited public records showing large numbers of searches, including one metro agency with about 425,000 searches in six weeks and another with nearly 100 searches explicitly for civil immigration enforcement. He said the bill would prohibit sharing ALPR data outside Minnesota unless authorized by a court order or judicial warrant, require data-sharing agreements among agencies, require signage for private ALPR use, and bar sale or transfer of the data without consent or legal process. In response to questions, speakers said the bill is intended to regulate local law enforcement and private vendors rather than federal agencies directly, by limiting how data is shared and accessed. They compared the issue to prior bipartisan concerns about driver’s license lookups and said they hoped the measure would advance out of judiciary later that morning and then to public safety, though they said they could not guarantee support or passage.

Transcript Highlights:

• Ten years ago, a big data center was a 40 megawatt data center. That was a big one. Okay. Yeah. Mr.
• And I know data centers use water.
• of data center capacity.
• But on this map, you can see the sort of a map of some existing data centers from a data source.
• Scott: Vantage is a leading developer of data centers and we operate hyperscale data centers.

Committee: House State Affairs

Summary: The Committee on State Affairs convened to discuss data centers and their impact on Texas's energy infrastructure. The meeting featured testimony from key representatives of the Public Utility Commission (PUC) and ERCOT, who outlined the evolving landscape of energy generation and the challenges posed by the rapid growth of data centers. Notably, ERCOT reported over 450,000 MW of generation resources planned for connection, with a significant portion attributed to data centers, which now represent around 87% of new large load interconnection requests. The committee explored proposed changes to the interconnection process, including a new 'batch study' approach aimed at streamlining the approval of multiple projects simultaneously. This change is intended to address the challenges of managing numerous simultaneous requests and to provide more certainty for developers regarding their energy needs. Testimonies emphasized the importance of ensuring that the costs of infrastructure upgrades are borne by the data centers rather than residential ratepayers, with discussions around the financial commitments required from developers. Several data center developers also provided testimony, highlighting the economic benefits of their projects, including job creation and increased local revenues. They expressed concerns about the potential for a moratorium on future growth due to the new interconnection rules and emphasized the need for a collaborative approach to address water usage and environmental impacts. The committee plans to continue discussions on these topics in future hearings, with a focus on balancing economic growth with energy reliability and resource management.

Transcript Highlights:

• The data I looked at today was the data.
• that data?
• , but to public health data, vital stats data.
• Do we need data sharing data. Do we need data sharing agreements?
• to</c><00:30:30.240><c> be</c> appropriate data and data sources to be appropriate data and data sources

Summary: The subcommittee held its first meeting to discuss creating a Healthcare Transparency Dashboard focused largely on Kentucky Medicaid. Members introduced themselves and described their interest in using data transparency to improve policy, access to care, and program efficiency. The co-chairs said the dashboard should begin with a basic framework and expand over time, with a mission centered on collaboratively designing and maintaining a secure, data-driven dashboard housed with the Legislative Research Commission. Discussion focused on what should be measured and how data should be organized. Members agreed the dashboard should segment Medicaid populations rather than aggregate them, with separate attention to aged and disabled enrollees, expansion adults, and children. Suggested measures included emergency department utilization and follow-up, cancer screenings, child and adolescent well visits, adult well visits, postpartum care, newborn screenings and follow-ups, hospitalization and readmission rates, pharmacy, behavioral health, and claims data. Several members emphasized the need to include demographic and geographic information, while noting some items such as education may not be readily available in Medicaid data and that HIPAA and access issues will affect how detailed the public-facing dashboard can be. Members also discussed existing data sources and warned against duplicating work already being done by the cabinet, the Office of Data Analytics, CMS scorecards, and university Medicaid directed payment reporting. The group was encouraged to review the Medicaid and CHIP scorecard, which includes quality, administrative, and program characteristic measures, as a possible model. No formal votes were taken, but the subcommittee agreed to continue refining the mission statement, identify priority metrics, and consider benchmarking, outcomes, data-sharing, and technical platform issues before the next meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:01:12.799><c> even</c> they are able to protect uh data even they are able to protect uh data
• on</c> classify data as private data on classify data as private data on individuals<00:04:03.959><c>
• data, and they don't get to hide it as private data on individuals.
• It can be any data, even data that doesn't implicate any particular person.
• </c><00:09:40.480><c> even</c><00:09:40.760><c> data</c> individuals it can be any data even data individuals

Summary: House Majority Leader Harry Niska discussed House File 20, a bill he said would amend Minnesota’s Data Practices Act by adding the words “on individuals” to clarify that the private-data exemption applies only to information actually tied to an individual person. He argued the bill would overturn a 2022 Minnesota Supreme Court decision in Energy Policy Advocates v. Allison that, in his view, allowed the Attorney General’s office to withhold policymaking and closed investigative data even when no individual privacy interest was involved. Niska framed the measure as a transparency and democracy issue, saying the Attorney General’s office should not have a special secrecy privilege that other state agencies and prosecutors do not have. In response to questions, Niska said the Attorney General opposed the bill, citing concerns about the cost and burden of data practices requests and raising a broader question about whether some businesses might have privacy interests similar to individuals. Niska said the bill is not meant to eliminate legitimate privacy protections for actual individuals, including sensitive investigative information, but to prevent the office from using the private-data category to shield non-personal information. He also said the issue arose in part from information about outside influence on the Attorney General’s office, including funding for positions through NYU and the Bloomberg Foundation. Niska said the bill had been introduced by Republicans two years earlier but did not receive a hearing, and he expected it to come to the House floor because Republicans now control committees. He said Democrats were expected to vote as a bloc against it, and he suggested the vote would show where members stand on transparency. He also said other GOP priorities may move through committees and to the floor as they are ready, mentioning permitting reform, repeal of the nuclear moratorium, and an OIG-related bill, but he did not provide a detailed schedule. No vote on the bill was taken during the exchange.

Transcript Highlights:

• Inaccurate and incomplete data limits the Liquor and Cannabis Board's capacity for data-driven regulation
• RAND used other data from LCB, data from other sources, and made assumptions where no data was available
• RAND used other data from LCB, data from other sources, and made assumptions where no data was available
• We also found that the weight data for wholesale cannabis is unreliable, which means the data cannot
• We also found that LCB's data system does not support a data-driven approach to regulation.

Summary: At the May 14, 2025 JLARC meeting, members approved the January 9 minutes and adopted the 2025–27 biennial work plan with a minor typo correction. Staff reviewed the new work plan studies, including a drug take-back program fee/expenditure review due in December 2025 and a state energy performance standard compliance review due in June 2027, and noted JLARC’s recent session activity, including several bills passed related to JLARC work and recommendations. The committee then heard a preliminary cannabis market study showing Washington businesses likely produced two to three times more cannabis than retailers sold in 2023. Staff and RAND said LCB’s data systems are incomplete and unreliable, limiting regulation, tax verification, and diversion tracking; they recommended that LCB submit a plan by year-end for collecting accurate data by the end of 2026. Members and LCB discussed the long timeline for a new traceability system, the causes of missing sales and weight data, overproduction, diversion, and the social equity program’s effect on producer licenses. JLARC also presented a preliminary hospital oversight report concluding that the Department of Health is late on many hospital inspections, does not verify third-party inspection standards, does not review adverse health event correction plans, and could make hospital data more accessible. The committee discussed fee funding, language access, and inspection timing, and DOH said it would work on a strategic plan and continue coordinating with JLARC. Members also heard a preliminary report on the public records survivor exemption, which found agencies are using it but need more guidance; JLARC recommended keeping the exemption and having the Attorney General provide additional training. Finally, the committee approved the DDA processes and staffing final report for distribution, which recommended performance metrics, stronger data quality controls, and workforce planning; DDA concurred. JLARC also introduced proposed study questions for a future DCYF juvenile rehabilitation review focused on safety, security, programs, staffing, education, and contraband, and the meeting adjourned after members asked about scope and facility conditions.

Transcript Highlights:

• the</c> and data stewards. data owners are the and data stewards. data owners are the folks<00:12:03.440
• . data. data.
• the data.
• </c> um inform data that what kind of data um inform data that what kind of data are<00:36:03.359><c>
• data.

Summary: The Interim Joint Committee on State Government met for its first meeting and heard a presentation from the Kentucky Center for Statistics (KY Stats) by Executive Director Matt Barry and Legislative Director Calli Arnold. The presentation reviewed KY Stats’ statutory background, its evolution from KESUS, its board membership, and its role in housing Kentucky’s longitudinal data system and labor market information office. Barry explained that KY Stats links data from multiple state sources, validates and cleans it, deidentifies it, and uses it to produce reports, evaluations, and responses to data requests for policymakers, practitioners, and the public. Barry described the scale of the system, noting more than 6,000 active data elements, 178 unique file types, and data from 48 sources across 26 agencies. He highlighted the agency’s privacy and security practices, including separate servers for source data and deidentified reporting data, and said KY Stats does not use real-time data. He also outlined the types of reports produced, including the annual high school feedback report and a recent life outcomes report tracking the 2017 public high school cohort’s postsecondary education, completion, wages, and employment outcomes. Members asked about the timeliness and availability of data, especially SNAP and Medicaid information, and Barry said most data arrive annually or quarterly and that Medicaid data had been used in a limited one-time project rather than as an ongoing feed. Questions also focused on artificial intelligence; Barry said KY Stats has not integrated AI but is exploring it cautiously because of privacy and security concerns. Several members encouraged further work with AI tools, while Barry emphasized that any use would need to protect confidentiality. The committee also discussed staffing and funding, with Barry saying KY Stats has about 49 total staff and annual funding of roughly $3.1 million in state general funds, plus federal labor-related funding. Committee members praised the agency’s work and suggested legislators may not fully understand its capabilities. No votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• data.
• Data that data from public disclosure.
• </c> 2 confidential data of 13.65. 2 confidential data of 13.65.
• through</c> and that data is data acquired through and that data is data acquired through communications
• </c> do with data practices. do with data practices.

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• data is 2025.
• overdose data, and our physical abuse data.
• data set.
• data.
• data?

Transcript Highlights:

• It's another topic that's often associated with data centers.
• It's going to a data center. I mean, that is where this information is.
• centers here, kind of what we do once the data centers are here, ...what we do once the data centers
• They're going to be here when the data centers are here.
• and information on data centers.

Committee: House Utilities

Summary: The Missouri House Committee on Utilities held an informational hearing on data centers, with the chair saying the goal was to hear different perspectives and better understand the issue before future legislation. No public testimony was taken, but three invited speakers presented: a labor representative, an Ameren Missouri executive, and a consumer advocate. The discussion focused on the economic benefits of data centers, including construction jobs, local hiring, apprenticeship opportunities, tax revenue for schools and local governments, and related spending by Missouri businesses. The labor witness described current Montgomery County projects, said hundreds of Missourians were already working there, and argued that closed-loop cooling and generator noise were manageable. Committee members also raised questions about water use, noise, cybersecurity, local hiring, and how much tax revenue a project could generate annually. Ameren’s Rob Dixon said Senate Bill 4 and the PSC’s large-load tariff provide key protections for ratepayers by requiring large customers to pay their own interconnection costs, sign long-term contracts, post collateral, and pay for most of their requested load even if they use less. He said those rules help prevent costs from shifting to other customers and that large loads can put downward pressure on rates by contributing to fixed system costs. Dixon also said Ameren is planning for significant new generation, including gas, nuclear, hydro, coal, and renewables, and that data centers are subject to the same load-shedding and emergency restoration rules as other customers. He noted that the protections apply to investor-owned utilities, not co-ops or municipal utilities. John Kaufman of the Consumers Council of Missouri argued the PSC protections are still too weak and warned that data centers could raise rates through construction work in progress, stranded generation costs, and other risks if projects are delayed, shrink, or fail. He urged stronger consumer protections, more upfront financial commitments from data centers, and greater transparency for ratepayers, while also suggesting community benefit agreements and cautioning against over-reliance on utility projections. Several members pushed back on his characterization of Senate Bill 4 and QIP/CWIP provisions, and the hearing ended with the chair thanking the witnesses and adjourned the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> and</c><00:38:02.000><c> then</c> um data stewards, data council, and then um data stewards, data
• c> and</c> the IT data sec- data security and the IT data sec- data security and privacy<00:38:07.560
• It also, data and it is concerning data.
• . data. data.
• </c> and their data. and their data.

Summary: The committee met on May 29 and approved the draft minutes. DHHS Commissioner Weaver then opened the department update by asking Medicaid Director Henry Litman to brief members on federal and state Medicaid changes, and later turned to DHHS Chief Operating Officer David Weathers for an update on data governance. Members also asked that acronyms be spelled out in future materials and requested a follow-up on the federal Medicaid rule once it is published. Litman reviewed several federal Medicaid provisions tied to HR 1/"OBBA" and related state implementation issues. He said the first major change would be restrictions on certain non-citizens’ Medicaid coverage, affecting about 400 people in New Hampshire, with notices likely 30 to 60 days before the effective date. He also discussed new work requirements/community engagement rules, saying New Hampshire is on track to implement them and will likely need a state plan amendment rather than an 1115 waiver. Other changes included shorter retroactive coverage periods, a new state option for certain community-based services with an estimated $740,000 in implementation support, a freeze and phased-down reduction in the Medicaid enhancement tax beginning in state fiscal year 2029, and limits on directed payments to hospitals after a grandfathering period. He also noted that Medicaid enrollment has fallen from pandemic-era levels, with about 167,000 people covered as of May 1, and that the department is working with CMS on child premiums and other cost-sharing changes approved in HB 2. Committee members asked how the department could plan for the 2029 changes given the number of elections before then, and Litman said federal rules may be adjusted over time as states and stakeholders raise concerns. He emphasized planning for the worst while hoping for the best, and said rural health care transformation funding would help the state prepare. In the second presentation, Weathers explained that data governance is now embedded in DHHS operations to control access, manage reporting, and respond to risk. He defined it as managing what data is collected, how it is used, who can access it, and what laws apply, and said DHHS has moved from governance as a committee to governance as an operational process. He described privacy impact assessments for new systems going into production, monthly privacy and security training, and ongoing review of access controls and data-sharing rules.

Transcript Highlights:

• employee data.
• source, where that data comes from, how that data is captured, how it's made available, and then how
• source, where that data comes from, how that data is captured, how it's made available, and then how
• submitted into the data set.
• submitted into the data set.

Summary: The committee began with an extended work session on the long-term care workforce. DSHS Assistant Secretary B. Rector described the new Home and Community Living Administration and outlined major workforce pressures: Washington had about 126,000 long-term care workers in 2022, with demand expected to outpace supply as the 85-plus population and dementia prevalence rise sharply. She emphasized that direct care workers are largely women, people of color, and immigrants, and that family caregivers are also a major part of the system. She highlighted recruitment and retention efforts funded through federal Money Follows the Person dollars, including high school training partnerships, a retention toolkit, transportation support, caregiver newsletters, tribal workforce navigators, and a remote caregiving pilot. Committee members asked about career pathways, technology use, and turnover drivers; Rector said wages, benefits, unstable hours, and workplace support are key issues and promised follow-up data. Aidan Swain of the Washington Health Care Association said skilled nursing and assisted living facilities face acute RN vacancies, wage pressures, and Medicaid reimbursement that does not cover costs, and urged modernization of training, better reimbursement, and continued support for facility-based care. Maddie Fouch of SEIU 775, representing about 55,000 caregivers, said low wages, weak benefits, lack of voice, and certification delays are driving turnover and shortages, and argued for higher compensation, better worker protections, and more transparent reimbursement. Catherine Smith of Behavioral Health Solutions described growing behavioral health needs in nursing homes, the role of expanded behavioral supports programs, and credentialing delays that slow hiring. No votes were taken; the panel was informational only. The second agenda item was an overview of the palliative care benefit work group report required by 2024 legislation. Nico Jansen of the Office of the Insurance Commissioner explained that the work group, convened with the Health Care Authority, studied a potential palliative care benefit for fully insured commercial plans and also Medicaid, PEBB, and SEBB. He said palliative care is a philosophy of care focused on symptom management, coordination, and support for serious illness, and is distinct from hospice because it can be provided alongside curative treatment. The actuarial analysis concluded that creating a new benefit would likely increase costs, estimating about a 28-cent per member per month increase overall and roughly $2.6 million to $4.5 million in annual state Medicaid costs if implemented in 2027. Jansen said the consultants did not find sufficient evidence to assume savings from avoided hospitalizations or long-term care, though several work group members disagreed and submitted response letters. Senators asked about other states, Medicare, health homes, and whether more research could clarify cost savings; OIC said some states, including Hawaii, are moving ahead with Medicaid palliative care benefits, Medicare covers some related services but not in the same way, and further evidence may emerge over time. OIC did not take a position on whether the Legislature should create the benefit. The final presentation covered health care price transparency tools in Washington and federally. Evan Klein and HCA Chief Data Officer Vishal Chaudry reviewed federal hospital and health plan transparency rules, the state all-payer claims database, prescription drug price transparency, the Health Care Cost Transparency Board, the Prescription Drug Affordability Board, and other reporting systems. They explained that the APCD contains claims from fully insured commercial plans, Medicaid, and public employee programs, but not self-insured employer data except for limited voluntary submissions. They also described how machine-readable files, consumer price tools, and aggregated dashboards are used, and noted that data limitations, delays, and complexity remain significant. Senators asked about voluntary self-insured participation, the role of AI in making data more usable, and whether transparency can really help consumers given access barriers and medical debt. HCA said AI is increasingly used by private entities to mine large transparency datasets, but state agencies still face limits in data access and analytic capacity. The committee did not take action; the session was informational and ended with a discussion of how transparency data might better inform policy and purchasing decisions in the future.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, so Data USA we believe is one of the most complete data sets in the U.S. today.
• There's 330 million rows of data in this data set.
• There's 330 million rows of data in this data set.
• That Data USA is Your first question, I believe, is on what type of data, or where does the data sources
• data, non-personal health information data, because I'm not allowed to have that.

Bills: SB1020

Committees: House Artificial Intelligence & Innovation , House House Artificial Intelligence & Innovation Committee of Reference

Keywords: special plates, Arizona Space Commission, transportation, funding, space exploration

Transcript Highlights:

• district data.
• The 2020 data, The 2020 data showed a 276% increase in individuals identifying as multiracial, being
• And block data is the data used for redistricting.
• And block data is the data used for redistricting.
• Nevertheless, there will probably be some form of PL 94-171 data providing basic data.

Committee: Senate Senate Committee on the Census

Summary: The Senate Committee on the Census held a hearing on July 7, 2026 focused on how the census defines and tabulates race and ethnicity for redistricting. The sole witness, Professor Jeffrey Weiss, reviewed the history of Public Law 94-171, the Voting Rights Act, and Census Bureau race categories, explaining how block-level census data has been central to one-person, one-vote compliance and to enforcing Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. He described the evolution from separate race and Hispanic-origin tabulations to multiracial reporting, the addition of voting-age and citizen voting-age data, and the increasing complexity created by coalition districts and multiracial populations. A major theme was uncertainty about Census 2030. Weiss said the federal government is considering changes to race and ethnicity questions, possible elimination of the MENA category, reduced multiracial detail, and discontinuation of differential privacy, while also discussing a possible citizenship question and other procedural changes coming through the Commerce Department rather than the Census Bureau. He warned that these shifts, combined with staffing cuts, reduced outreach, and scaled-back testing, could affect the availability and granularity of redistricting data and may trigger litigation. Committee members pressed him on the Biden-era revisions, the Trump administration’s current actions, and whether future data might have to be reported at a higher geographic level if block-level privacy protections are removed. Weiss also summarized Supreme Court redistricting doctrine, describing the move from Baker v. Carr and Reynolds v. Sims to the Gingles framework, then to later decisions limiting race-conscious districting, including Shelby County, Rucho, and the recent Louisiana v. Calais decision. He said Calais significantly narrowed federal Section 2 protections but does not directly preempt state voting rights acts, which he noted are being adopted in several states and may still allow coalition-based protections. The hearing ended after questions from the chair and vice chair, with no votes or formal committee actions taken, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• The 2020 data, The 2020 data showed a 276% increase in individuals identifying as multiracial, being
• The data has also served to complicate The data has also served to complicate redistricting a bit.
• To help the states produce the data more efficiently, the Bureau provided the data both in the legacy
• And block data is the data used for redistricting.
• Nevertheless, there will probably be some form of PL 94-171 data providing basic data.

Committee: Senate Senate Committee on the Census

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:15:13.360><c> that</c> talking about data and data sets is that talking about data and data sets
• use of the data.
• Um, Um, Um, as<00:17:31.679><c> the</c><00:17:31.840><c> data</c> as the data as the data uh,<00:17:33.600
• :19:00.520><c> health</c> selling personal claims data, health selling personal claims data, health data
• to their own data?

Summary: The committee took up House File 4466, the Health Finance and Policy bill, and first adopted the A8 amendment, described as a set of technical fixes. Members then considered a large A9 amendment that bundled a wide range of Children and Families provisions, including child care licensing modernization, crisis nursery licensing, SNAP/MFIT-related language, child care provider self-reporting, a physical abuse recognition poster, child protection and welfare provisions, funding for parent support outreach, and forensic interview training scholarships. Supporters described it as bipartisan work with relatively small fiscal impact, while opponents said it greatly expanded the bill and should be handled separately; after a roll call, the A9 amendment failed 7-14. Representative Scott then offered the A11 amendment, raising concerns about new all-payer claims database language and whether it should have been heard in the Judiciary and Civil Law Committee. Department of Health staff explained the data-sharing safeguards, de-identification process, fee structure, and enforcement provisions, but Scott remained concerned about privacy and the scope of the program and withdrew the amendment. The committee then moved to final bill discussion. Members and authors described HF 4466 as a lean health finance bill largely conforming Minnesota law to federal HR1 Medicaid-related changes, including work requirements, retroactive eligibility limits, cost-sharing, and home equity provisions. Supporters argued conformity was necessary to avoid major federal funding losses and noted a few additional member bills in the package; opponents criticized the federal changes as harmful, especially for vulnerable populations such as victims of trafficking and domestic violence. Fiscal staff said the bill would save just over $2 million in FY 2026-27 and almost $98 million in FY 2028-29. No final vote on the bill itself was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> sustainable data center deployment. sustainable data center deployment.
• </c> we're all data center users. we're all data center users.
• . data. data.
• what happens with that data and who is profiting off of that data.
• </c> data from multiple sources. data from multiple sources.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's another topic that's often associated with data centers.
• It's going to a data center.
• centers here, kind of what we do once the data centers are here, ...what we do once the data centers
• They're going to be here when the data centers are here.
• and information on data centers.

Committee: House Utilities

Transcript Highlights:

• That's about 1% of what a typical data center uses today.
• Data centers on average are about 400 megawatts.
• 1% of what a typical data center uses today data centers on average are about 400 megawatts that's about
• So Virginia might stop the most data centers, but Phoenix will have the most data centers of cities.
• We did start seeing data center growth back in 2017.

Committee: House House Artificial Intelligence & Innovation Committee of Reference

Summary: The House AI and Innovation Committee first heard a presentation from APS on its data center strategy and the rapid growth of AI/data center demand in Arizona. APS said it is trying to protect reliability and affordability for existing customers while preserving capacity for other growth, and emphasized that “growth should pay for growth.” APS described its current peak load, projected growth, and the scale of potential data center demand, and explained that data centers differ from other customers because they use large amounts of power around the clock and require major new infrastructure. APS said it has proposed two ways to serve them: a revised data center tariff filed with the Corporation Commission and separate bilateral contracts with upfront customer contributions. Committee members asked about whether residential customers are subsidizing data centers, the proposed 45% increase for the data center rate class, possible impacts on development, self-generation behind the meter, seasonal load, and APS’s longer-term resource plans, including nuclear, gas, renewables, and possible SMRs. APS said residential customers are not intended to subsidize data centers and that the proposal is designed to assign costs directly to those customers. The committee then took up House Bill 2133, which requires commercial entities that knowingly distribute or publish sexual material online to obtain reasonable consent and age verification, including for synthetic or AI-generated or altered images, and authorizes civil penalties for violations. A five-page amendment in Representative Kupper’s name narrowed the bill by excluding internet service providers, affiliates, subsidiaries, search engines, and cloud providers from responsibility for content they do not create or directly host. Representative Kupper said the bill is intended to protect people in adult content from exploitation and non-consensual use, including trafficking-related material and revenge porn, and compared it to existing age- and consent-verification practices in the physical adult-content industry. He said the penalties mirror those used in related laws, including a $10,000-per-day structure. During debate, several members said they supported the bill’s intent but wanted to reserve the right to change their votes after further stakeholder discussions, citing First Amendment and implementation concerns. One member noted a similar federal proposal with a higher fine structure. After no public testimony was offered, the committee adopted the amendment and then voted 5-0 with two members present to give HB 2133, as amended, a due pass recommendation.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> for more data. for more data.
• </c> forgetting which data center this is. forgetting which data center this is.
• , super valuable data.
• And just a data, super valuable data.
• some of that data.

Summary: The Intelligence Task Force met with a quorum present and approved the minutes from the August 14 meeting. The first presentation was from the National Retail Federation on artificial intelligence in the retail sector. NRF described AI use cases in three areas: consumer-facing tools such as chatbots, product descriptions, and marketing; employee-facing tools such as company-specific apps trained on employee manuals; and internal uses such as supply chain forecasting, inventory planning, fraud detection, cybersecurity, and coding support. The presenters said retail has been among the top deployers of AI and emphasized that the goal is to improve both customer and employee experience. NRF also outlined its principles for responsible AI use, organized around governance and risk management, customer engagement and trust, workforce applications, and business partner accountability. The group said retailers should maintain strong internal oversight, be transparent with customers, ensure compliance with existing laws, closely review workforce-related uses because they can be high-risk, and clearly define responsibilities between retailers and third-party developers. In policy discussion, NRF urged a tiered approach focused first on high-risk uses such as hiring, health care, financial, mortgage, and rental decisions, warned against fragmented rules that could favor only the largest firms, and encouraged voluntary standards and worker upskilling incentives. In response to a question about dynamic pricing, NRF said its members do not target consumers based on pricing and offered to follow up with more information. The committee then moved to a follow-up discussion on energy policy and data centers, hearing from Bartley Cleland of NetChoice. He explained that AI runs largely in data centers and that cloud computing shifts processing and storage away from individual devices, which he argued improves efficiency and can reduce costs. He said electricity demand has been rising over time and that AI will increase compute-related electricity use, but framed electricity as a normal input to economic growth. No votes or formal actions were taken after these presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> data sets that inform those reports. data sets that inform those reports.
• or reliable data or data that may be of special interest to the General Assembly.
• or reliable data or data that may be of special interest to the General Assembly.
• . data. data.
• Each page contains trend data for the previous year and up to 10 years of data.

Summary: The subcommittee opened its first meeting with roll call and procedural business, including elections of co-chairs. The House elected Representative Truett as House co-chair, and the Senate elected Senator Denine as Senate co-chair. After the organizational votes, the committee heard the Office of Educational Accountability’s annual report, beginning with Brian Jones and Deborah Nelson describing OEA’s investigations and research divisions and recent staffing turnover. On the investigations side, OEA said it handled complaints only when submitted in writing and generally opened cases only when it had enough facts to evaluate. Jones reported complaint volume declined from 805 in 2023 to 738 in 2024, with 325 in the first half of the current year. He outlined the kinds of matters OEA investigates, including school-based council issues, open meetings, board eligibility, nepotism, conflicts of interest, certification, activity funds, and surplus property, while noting that routine personnel matters, bullying, child interviews, and cases tied to litigation are generally handled locally or referred elsewhere. He also said OEA refers special education, assessment/testing, discrimination, and serious misconduct matters to the appropriate agencies, and that he did not see a need for statutory changes to improve OEA’s work, though he said cases should move more quickly. The research division presentation focused on OEA’s district data profiles and annual research agenda. Nelson explained that OEA reviews KDE-reported data and underlying datasets to verify accuracy, analyze trends, and produce reports for the General Assembly. She highlighted 2024 publications on district governance models and student achievement, and said this year’s agenda includes district data profiles, student discipline analysis, and a review of early childhood regional training centers. She also noted OEA received an NCSL notable document award for its 2023 staffing shortages report, its 10th such award. Sabrina Smith then walked through the district data profiles, which compile demographic, staffing, finance, and performance data for all 171 districts, plus statewide and comparative data. She noted changes in the report format, the continued availability of an online interactive version, and several trends: adjusted average daily attendance declined statewide from 2015 to 2024; the counselor-to-student ratio has improved but has not yet reached the statutory goal of one counselor per 250 students; the share of teachers moving from rank three to rank two has declined; special education identification has risen from 13% to 16%; and starting teacher salaries vary widely by district, with Kentucky’s average starting salary around $40,000 ranking near the bottom compared with surrounding states and the nation. Members asked about the history of the research division and whether the paper copies of the district profiles would continue, and staff said the printed versions would continue unless legislators asked otherwise.