Transcript Highlights:

• They said, “You know, we just need to sign these papers just in case.”
• There's been some unique cases, but in most cases it's usually a law enforcement officer that arrives
• According to this section of the legislation, that is the case.
• And I think that's the situation you're forcing in this case.
• Not the case at all.

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and approval of the House Journal by a 123-0 roll call vote. Members then used points of personal privilege to recognize National Police Week, honor Rep. Prouty, and share personal remarks, followed by numerous introductions of special guests, including school groups, interns, a militia reenactment group, and student teams from the University of Missouri and Hallsville FFA. The chamber then handled Senate messages and committee reports before taking up House Bills 1839, 2921, and 3015. Rep. from Cass explained a Senate amendment as a technical correction to House Bill 1839, which would add age-verification requirements for online pornography; the House concurred 104-30 and then finally passed the package 112-25. The House also adopted and then passed the conference committee report on House Bill 2596, which was described as modernizing pooled health plan language for small businesses and adding a provision expanding contraception insurance coverage from a six-month to a 12-month supply, while removing a Senate-added blood pressure cuff provision. The conference report was adopted 120-26 and the bill was third read and passed 119-27. The final major item was Senate Bill 905, creating the Missouri Ranger training program and allowing school districts to optionally place highly trained rangers on campus with narrow law enforcement powers. Supporters argued it would give districts another local-control option to improve school safety, especially where school resource officers are unavailable, and emphasized that it could be volunteer-based and not require state funding. Opponents argued the bill would add guns to schools, increase trauma and liability, and fail to address underlying mental health and school safety needs. After extended debate and a successful previous-question motion, the House adopted the amendment and continued consideration of the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, that's one of several cases that Marshall brought to break down separate but equal, Plessy v.
• Uh, that's one of several cases that Marshall brought to break down separate but equal, Plessy v.
• Uh, that's one of several cases that Marshall brought to break down separate but equal, Plessy v.
• I recommend a green vote. have in some cases unique health care have in some cases unique health care
• which is in this case me or you<00:52:55.680> right<00:52:56.000> now.

Keywords: House streaming session for Tuesday, March 31, 2026, 957, house, all

Summary: The House convened with prayer, quorum call, and approval of the previous day’s journal, then received Senate Bill 890 and several House committee reports. The first major measure taken up was House Bill 627, which establishes a Commission on Histories, Culture, and Civics in Education. Committee amendments clarified the commission’s purpose, membership, and charge to review curriculum materials and school calendars and make recommendations to the State Board of Education and the Maryland Higher Education Commission. Additional amendments added a disability community expert and preamble language. The bill prompted extended debate about whether the commission would promote diversity in curriculum, how it would address religious and ethnic representation, and whether it would include Christian or Catholic perspectives; supporters said it was meant to reflect communities that had requested inclusion and to improve the completeness of Maryland history, while critics questioned the need for a new commission and raised concerns about identity politics and curriculum control. The bill was ordered printed for third reading after second-reader consideration. The House also considered House Bill 1582, the Education Program Accountability, Comprehensive Outcomes and Measures of Progress for Supporting Schools (COMPASS) Act. An amendment removed references to advanced professional certificates and national board certification from school quality indicators and required annual reporting on the relationship between composite scores and concentrations of low-income students. During discussion, members asked whether the bill was changing the scoring system and how much weight academics would carry; the response was that academic indicators would remain a majority of the score, but no single indicator could exceed 20% of the composite. The amendment and favorable report were adopted, and the bill was ordered printed for third reading. The House then took up House Bill 1514 concerning Calvert County county officials and Board of Education salaries and benefits. Committee amendments were technical and removed a benefit provision related to a former commissioner; both the amendment and favorable report were adopted without opposition, and the bill was ordered printed for third reading. Finally, the chamber moved to special order calendar item Senate Bill 283, the Maryland Consolidated Capital Bond Loan of 2026. The House Appropriations Committee presented 198 amendments to the capital budget, describing them as balanced across regions and within debt affordability limits, and began moving the amendments in groups, starting with a technical amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Raise your hand if that's the case.
• Raise your hand if that's the case. Mr. Chair, could we have a list?
• The sad part is, in some cases, and I happen to know of one case, three children were returned to the
• The sad part is, in some cases, and I happen to know of one case, three children were returned to the
• Years ago that was four steps and in some cases five steps.

Bills: SB1041, SB1050, SB1131, SB1138, SB1249, SB1267, SB1272, SB1317, SB1461, SB1488, SB1504, SB1517, SB1523, SB1580, SB1582, SB1584, SB1585, SB1602, SB1630, SB1654, SB1672, SB1673, SB1718, SB1761, SB1819, SB1826, SB1827

Keywords: electronic monitoring, nursing care, assisted living, resident rights, privacy, consent, surveillance, veterans, lifetime pass, state parks, Arizona, access, disabled veterans, cardiac arrest, defibrillators, school safety, emergency response, CPR training, Arizona education funding, automated license plate readers

Transcript Highlights:

• The next service is targeted case management, which helps parents navigate the complexities of early
• In many cases, the cause of their pain is simple. hunger.
• So, how are you giving somebody all these tests and classes, but yet there's no case?
• The impact system of the current DFPS case management system was built in 1996.
• They closed the case and sent it over to their licensing board.

Bills: SB1, SB 1

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• One widely reported case urban settings.
• <01:44:38.080> has and suburban sprawl in many cases has and suburban sprawl in many cases
• <03:34:48.000> a they're seeing six to eight cases a they're seeing six to eight cases a year
• So I think was one of the earlier cases.
• <04:24:24.000> that there have been a number of cases that there have been a number of cases

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Yes, and unfortunately I can't protect my children in this case because of the way the law is written
• <01:05:46.760> load fiscal note is if the case load fiscal note is if the case load increased
• That is not the case in any way; it's just merely a typo.
• <04:34:42.639> in backwards that that is not the case in backwards that that is not the case
• <05:14:38.080> then yeah and so so if that's the case then yeah and so so if that's the case

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 187, which would allow parents or guardians to seek restraining orders on behalf of a minor child even when the alleged perpetrator is not a family or household member. Tracy Sirles testified that the bill was prompted by her family’s experience after being told by state police to seek a restraining order, only to learn the current law did not allow it because the offender was the child’s best friend’s father. Members agreed the change was straightforward, noted the fiscal note reflected only a small indeterminate cost to the judicial branch, and moved House Bill 187 ought to pass; the motion was approved unanimously. The committee then discussed House Bill 66, a Right-to-Know bill that removes “citizen” language in favor of “person” in some provisions and allows certain New Hampshire-connected requesters to seek records electronically if the records already exist in that format. Members reviewed concerns about defining “member of the media,” the scope of electronic requests, and a sentence stating appeals would have no filing fee or search charge. After debate, the committee voted to amend the bill by removing that fee-waiver sentence, then recommended House Bill 66 ought to pass as amended. The vote was 6-3. Next, the committee heard from the Environment and Agriculture chair about several solid-waste-related bills being folded into trailer bill language, including House Bill 215 and House Bill 171, with discussion of a possible three-year landfill moratorium and the need to address DEES staffing and funding concerns. DEES later clarified that the revised approach would not require new positions or create a fiscal impact because the new solid waste commission would be self-funded through filing fees. The committee voted unanimously to retain House Bill 215. Finally, the committee considered House Bill 566, which requires landfill permit applications to include a detailed leachate management plan and more information about disposal contracts. The sponsor said the bill was developed with DEES to address leachate problems and improve safety oversight. DEES testified that the bill largely reflects current practice and would have no specific fiscal impact, with existing staff able to absorb any review workload. The committee moved House Bill 566 ought to pass, and the motion was approved unanimously. The committee also briefly discussed House Bill 624, a grant program for local river management advisory committees, but no vote was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll just also mention um in case I'll just also mention um in case Senator<00:09:46.959> Dinski
• <00:29:27.840> this<00:29:28.000> case non-highway purposes and in this case non-highway
• If anybody can try, and if that's the case, Eric, what are you thinking?
• So, in this case, um, going to cost.
• wide open that um it could be the case wide open that um it could be the case that<02:55:09.439>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And that is very much the case. Started out with waves of prescribing in the 90s and early aughts.
• And then practical supports: housing, transportation, case management, care navigation, transportation
• That's not always the case. because the coalition in Missouri came from outside sources.
• That means that you don't lose your medications, as is the case for my patient earlier.
• That means that you don't lose your medications, as is the case for my patient earlier.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That happened, sort of most famously—I can't remember the name of the case at the United States Supreme
• It was the case that New York State brought against...
• constitutional or an ultra vires claim that you were following somebody else's advice up, in this case
• Um and then the long list of those case.
• Go ahead. >> Perfect. >> I thought you were doing a break just in case, or we're good.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The continued conference on House Bill 609 focused on reconciling House and Senate drafts dealing with firearms and other personal defense tools, local government preemption, and agency rulemaking. Representative Leyon walked through amendment 21107H, explaining that it narrows undefined terms, clarifies that the General Court has supremacy over local regulation, allows damages actions for violations of preemption law, and adds language limiting agency rules unless specifically authorized by statute. She also described a three-year sunset and a delayed effective date for new rules so existing rules could continue temporarily while the legislature considers any needed statutory carveouts. Members then debated the practical effect of the language, especially whether it would bar agencies from adopting internal employment rules or instead require those rules to come through JCAR and be tied to express statutory authority. Several examples were discussed, including state plow drivers, corrections employees, and other workers who may need to carry personal defense tools in the field. The committee also discussed a provision making a plaintiff a prevailing party if a municipality changes a challenged policy after suit is filed, and a clause stating that good faith or advice of counsel is not a defense, though it may be considered in mitigation. The discussion narrowed to the difference between the House approach, which some members read as an absolute prohibition on agency rules in these areas, and the Senate approach, which some members said would allow rules only when an agency can point to express enabling authority and JCAR can review them. Members agreed that the goal was to prevent agencies from adopting rules that conflict with the statute while still allowing legitimate safety-related regulations where the legislature has authorized them. The conference took a recess and later resumed with the chair stating the parties had reached an agreement in principle based on the latest Senate language, and Representative Leyon was asked to continue reviewing the draft line by line for remaining concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the key factor for understanding ...extreme cases injury.
• But each case, each individual case, has a lot of similarities, but also a lot of uniquenesses that Ms
• Owen, GOSEP in all cases is really in the asking business.
• And so, in some cases, those were divisions of three people.
• And that's worst-case scenario, but that's what we plan for.

Summary: The committee met on May 26, 2026, and first approved the minutes from the May 22, 2025 meeting. The main topic was the Northwest Louisiana earthquake cluster, with testimony from Louisiana Department of Conservation and Energy staff, LSU and Tulane geoscientists, and later LSU law professor Keith Hall. Witnesses said the cause of the swarm has not been definitively identified, but induced seismicity from wastewater injection or hydraulic fracturing remains a concern. They described 50 earthquakes reported by the USGS in Red River, Bienville, DeSoto, and Natchitoches Parishes, including a magnitude 4.9 event on March 5, 2026, and explained that Louisiana’s sparse seismic network limits detection and depth/location estimates. C&E said it inspected Class II injection wells within 12 miles of the events, found no violations, now requires more frequent injection reporting, and is working with researchers and LSU on a possible state monitoring network and future policy changes. Committee members asked about injection depths, fault locations, whether the activity could be natural, and whether Louisiana should adopt stronger monitoring or a traffic-light regulatory system like other states. The witnesses said more data is needed before firm conclusions can be drawn, but that denser monitoring can detect smaller quakes and help identify patterns. Professor Hall summarized responses in other states, including more frequent reporting, increased monitoring, injection reductions, moratoria, and traffic-light systems in Oklahoma, Kansas, Texas, Ohio, and Illinois. Members also discussed whether operators should share more seismic and geologic data, and several said the state should avoid jumping to conclusions while still improving oversight. The committee then heard from William Berger, a Texas geoscientist, who described using AI and operator data to model wastewater injection and seismic risk, and said broader data sharing would improve forecasting and siting decisions. He and another witness emphasized that many earthquakes arise from clusters of wells rather than a single well, and that proprietary concerns limit voluntary disclosure. The committee also received a brief update from GOSEP and the Louisiana National Guard on the Barksdale Air Force Base drone incursions. GOSEP said it logged the incident in WebEOC and shared releasable information, while State Police and the FBI said they were limited in what they could disclose. Officers said a task force has been formed, some personnel have received federal drone-mitigation training, and House Bill 940 is intended to mirror the task force MOU. Finally, Major General Thomas Friloux and Brigadier General Jason Maffus updated the committee on the merger of GOSEP into the Louisiana Military Department. They said the merger has reduced GOSEP from seven divisions to three, brought back employees to in-person work, modernized the state’s common operating picture, and produced about $10.5 million in first-year cost avoidance through staffing and contract changes. They also noted the planned transfer of the Louisiana Center for Safe Schools to the Louisiana Commission on Law Enforcement, ongoing hurricane preparedness, and continued coordination with parish emergency managers. No votes were taken on the substantive topics, and the meeting ended with the committee moving through its agenda items and receiving informational testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• initiated, and case outcomes.
• <00:42:39.599> initiated, performance metrics, cases initiated, performance metrics, cases
• initiated, and<00:42:40.400> case<00:42:40.720> outcomes.
• The program sun sets and case outcomes.
• because there's a lot of theft uh cases because there's a lot of theft that's<00:43:55.760> going

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• How many cases do you adjudicate in any year's time? It varies from year to year.
• In this case, we are looking at two things.
• I've still not seen any examples of any of those cases, but in case they ever come up, we now have a
• I've still not seen any examples of any of those cases, but in case they ever come up, we now have a
• Case.

Bills: SB1108, SB1205, SB1241, SB1286, SB1366, SB1431, SB1473, SB1477, SB1478, SB1479, SB1492, SB1517, SB1563, SB1586, SB1665, SB1671

Keywords: cash transactions, mandatory rounding, swedish rounding, public notice, Arizona Revised Statutes, motor vehicle booting, private property, fees, dispute process, regulations, SB1241, private permitting provider, private permit, private certificate of completion, building permit, building plan review, inspection, single-trade residential construction, residential construction, municipal permitting

Transcript Highlights:

• costs increase above their projections or in case student enrollment in the program increases above
• I will say in the case of the In the case of those act appropriations, the $500,000s on lines 128, 129
• And so in a lot of those cases, parents are already notified.
• It's just when this case, in talking about materials, Mr. Chair, about instructional materials.
• My thing is that’s kind of the case with this one.

Summary: The committee first heard a detailed staff presentation on the LESC FY27 public school support recommendation. Staff reviewed the budget structure and explained that, despite a downward revision in state revenue estimates, the recommendation still relied on recurring and non-recurring revenue to support educator compensation, insurance, transportation, literacy, math, special education, and other school programs. Major recurring items included a 3% compensation increase, funding for an 80-20 health insurance cost share, insurance premium growth, and transportation adequacy funding. Staff also flagged a possible supplemental need of up to $35 million for virtual education tied to rapid enrollment growth in Chama and Santa Rosa, and members raised concerns about the quality, accountability, and funding model for virtual programs. Members asked questions about transportation for rural districts, the Martinez-Yazzie lawsuit fees, the treatment of enrollment declines in the school funding formula, and whether the word “average” in salary language should remain in the budget. Staff explained that the SEG should remain whole, that the insurance and transportation recommendations applied to all public school employees but not contractors, and that the budget included multiple math-related investments spread across several lines rather than one single appropriation. There was also discussion of out-of-school learning grants, school meals, literacy center operations, special education training, and the Public Education Reform Fund, including the use of multi-year, evaluation-based appropriations for high-impact tutoring and community schools. After discussion, the committee adopted the LESC budget recommendation. The committee then moved to endorsed legislation proposals. It endorsed a bill allowing the secretary to suspend an individual school board member, with notice and appeal procedures clarified, and a bill creating an 80-20 health insurance cost-share requirement for public school employees, along with a study of the sustainability of public school insurance programs. It also endorsed a bill on attendance provisions for students with severe medical conditions, which would keep those students from being classified as excessively absent. Finally, the committee discussed a teacher residency bill that would raise stipend levels, allow residents to complete service anywhere in New Mexico, and remove the requirement that sponsoring schools must hire them, though the bill did not include an appropriation. Members also raised questions about bilingual, Hispanic, and Black education funding, cultural and linguistic supports in teacher preparation, and where various programs should be placed in the budget or PERF framework.

Transcript Highlights:

• The first paragraph clarifies that in cases where a bill or section of a bill cannot be implemented due
• where a bill or section of a bill cases where a bill or section of a bill cannot<00:03:18.640> be
• challenged in the courts in which case challenged in the courts in which case we<00:05:31.919>
• This isn't a case where legal challenge.
• This isn't a case where the<00:05:37.120> agency<00:05:37.520> can<00:05:37.840> say

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Legislative Budget Caucus Public Commission met with a quorum present, approved the September 3, 2025 minutes, and then heard a presentation from Legislative Budget Office Director Christian Larson on proposed updates to the fiscal note uniform standards and procedures. The main changes clarified that agencies must still complete a fiscal note when a bill or section cannot be implemented because of federal law, with the note explaining the implementation issue and costing only the portions that can be implemented. A second change said technical comments about possible future litigation may be included in the narrative but not in the cost tables. Members discussed how these rules would apply when only part of a bill is unimplementable versus when an entire bill is, and whether requiring a note in those cases is the best use of agency time. The commission also approved a new procedure on funding-source assumptions for expanded programs, including assuming the current funding source unless the bill says otherwise and defaulting to the general fund if no source is identified. The updated standards and procedures were adopted by a 7-0 roll call vote, with Senator Wickland excused. The commission then received a second presentation from Director Larson on a possible analysis of the accuracy of fiscal estimates and budget items after enactment. He described this as a variance analysis comparing fiscal note estimates to actual fiscal impacts, intended to improve future estimates, inform the legislature, and increase accountability. He summarized practices in other states, noting that most variance reviews are ad hoc, while Utah and Tennessee have more formalized legislative reports; he also referenced an LBO pilot review done in 2022 based largely on Tennessee’s model. The presentation outlined possible report formats, including a single annual report, standalone briefs, or topic-specific reviews, and raised implementation questions such as who would select items for review, whether the analysis should be limited to fiscal notes, what statutory authority or data access would be needed, and what resources would be required from both agencies and the LBO. Members did not take action on the second presentation. Representative Anderson and Vice Chair Pratt commented that the proposal is complicated but potentially useful for improving future fiscal notes and transparency, and the chair indicated the discussion was for future consideration rather than an immediate decision.

Transcript Highlights:

• There is a case for it, particularly at airports.
• Level one is a genius idea for airports, but they're a unique case. Yeah.
• So you're not going to see double duty in a lot of cases here.
• So this really expands the use cases that we have going forward. It allows for...
• That's been the case for us.

Summary: The joint informational hearing of the Select Committee on Electric Vehicles and Charging Infrastructure focused on California’s EV market, charging infrastructure, and the effects of recent federal actions. The chair opened by emphasizing California’s progress on EV adoption and charging reliability, but also noted ongoing challenges with affordability, access, interoperability, heavy-duty electrification, and federal headwinds. She highlighted interest in technologies such as inductive charging and thanked host organizations and staff before moving to the first panel. State agency witnesses from Go-Biz, CARB, and the California Energy Commission described current programs and priorities. Go-Biz outlined its role in coordinating agencies, supporting permitting, and advancing the state’s ZEV market development strategy and equity action plan. CARB discussed federal attacks on its clean vehicle regulations, litigation to defend waiver authority, and the importance of incentives and regulatory programs such as Advanced Clean Trucks, Advanced Clean Fleets, Clean Truck Check, HVIP, and Clean Cars for All. The CEC detailed its funding and regulatory work on charging and fueling infrastructure, charger reliability, payment methods, roaming, and statewide planning, while stressing the need for more charging in multifamily housing and more public DC fast charging. All three agencies said federal rollbacks and permitting delays are major obstacles, but that California remains committed to expanding ZEV adoption. The second panel featured advocates, local government, utility, and research perspectives. CalETC urged continuous state funding through the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and emphasized the low-carbon fuel standard, multifamily charging, and managed charging. An EV advocacy group proposed a conquest-style state incentive for new and used EV buyers and argued that multifamily housing is a major untapped market, while also favoring Level 2 charging over Level 1 for most home and apartment settings. Los Angeles County and LADWP described large-scale local deployment of chargers, fleet electrification, workforce training, and the need for sustained funding, agency coordination, and streamlined permitting and grid interconnection. UCS recommended prioritizing replacement of older high-emitting vehicles, using fuel policy revenues to support cleaner cars, and expanding bidirectional charging. The chair closed by asking for more discussion on Level 1 versus Level 2 charging and noted the importance of education, affordability, and practical deployment strategies.

Transcript Highlights:

• And this is also why it works in six other states that have had very similar legislation; in one case
• There are few cases when this is actually used, and that's meant to be how it's supposed to work so that
• overassert them, so there should not be concerns that this will lead to an increase or a number of cases
• for almost 20 legislation uh in one case for almost 20 years<00:03:26.560> um<00:03:26.720>
• lead to an increase or a number of cases lead to an increase or a number of cases um<00:03:44.840

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 132, a health care conscience-protection measure. Supporters said the bill would protect health care professionals from being forced to participate in procedures or services that violate sincerely held religious or ethical beliefs, while explicitly excluding emergency care. They argued it would help recruit and retain providers, preserve ethical integrity in medicine, and has worked in several other states. Supporters also emphasized that the bill is aimed at procedures or services, not at denying care based on who a patient is, and noted that the bill includes a civil cause of action to give it enforcement teeth. Several supporters described personal experiences. A nurse said lack of conscience protections affected her career choices and limited her path into women’s health. Dr. Warman said he had requested not to perform anesthesia for abortions and later chose non-narcotic pain management because he objected to heavy opioid prescribing, saying conscience protections allow professionals to practice responsibly. Senators asked about examples, the bill’s scope, whether it could be used to discriminate, and which states have similar laws; Mississippi, Florida, Montana, Ohio, South Carolina, and Arkansas were named. Questions also focused on the bill’s civil enforcement provisions and whether it could be used against patients based on identity or religion. Opponents warned the bill was overly broad and could allow refusals of care by a wide range of health workers, including clerks, ambulance drivers, pharmacists, nurses, and physicians. Dr. Karen Abrams said it could lead to denial of birth control, Plan B, blood transfusions, and other care, especially in rural areas with few alternatives, and could worsen Kentucky’s provider shortages. David Conway said the bill lacked patient protections, could increase delays and discrimination, and could prevent reassignment of objecting staff. The chair noted there were seven people signed up in opposition, limited testimony to two minutes each, and said the committee would return to the bill after hearing additional opposition and other pending bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're looking at 20 to 40 more cases per year, a 10 to 20% bump.
• I don't know, two to four hours per officer at $200 to $400 per case.
• <01:29:17.920> a cases like family law or evictions. a cases like family law or evictions.
• Um, you know, they need the protection of a firearm in some cases.
• Um this was published and custody cases.

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:40:46.079> where fact there was a actual case where fact there was a actual case where
• <00:55:52.720> No deidentified case information. No deidentified case information.
• taking on in that in that case. Thank taking on in that in that case.
• That may not be the case. But voting. That may not be the case.
• Is that the case?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard Senate Bill 254, which Senator David Roford described as a technical correction to controlled substance inventory law for pharmacies. He said the bill would remove outdated language requiring inventories to be done in an odd-numbered year, while keeping the existing requirement that pharmacies conduct a full controlled substance inventory every two years in line with federal law. Members asked several clarifying questions about whether the requirement is pharmacy-by-pharmacy, whether new pharmacies would be affected, and whether the change would alter scope or compliance; the sponsor and a representative of the New Hampshire Pharmacist Association said it would not, and that it mainly provides clarity for pharmacies and inspectors. The public hearing on SB 254 was then closed, and the committee also heard support from a representative of the pharmacist community, who said the association supports the bill. The committee then discussed a non-germane amendment to SB 254 dealing with FBI background checks for educational surrogate parents under the Department of Education. Representative Leyon explained that the amendment was requested by the Department of Education after the FBI rejected prior statutory language, and that the goal was to allow people serving as educational surrogate parents to complete FBI fingerprint-based background checks so they can perform their duties. Department of Education and Department of Safety staff testified that the amendment mirrors language that has worked in other education-related background check statutes, including provisions with specific disqualifying offenses tied to child safety, and that the FBI requires precise statutory language and direct transmission of records through the Department of Safety. Members questioned why the FBI’s approval was needed, whether individuals could simply provide their own records, and whether changing federal leadership could require future changes; witnesses said the state needs both state and national records, that records must come directly from the FBI through the Department of Safety, and that the language is intended to satisfy current federal requirements. During the discussion, some members expressed skepticism about the need for the amendment and about placing it on a bill about controlled substance inventories, but no vote was taken during the portion of the transcript provided. The committee also briefly discussed a separate bill on physician assistants/physician associates, with members noting that the proposed name change would not alter scope of practice and that some outside groups had raised concerns about transparency, but that discussion was interrupted and not concluded in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• would be difficult or in some cases would be difficult or in some cases impossible<04:31:02.239>
• Now some may say that we need this legislation just in case, but there is no just in case because we
• Now some may say that we need this legislation just in case, but there is no just in case because we
• Now some may say that we need this legislation just in case, but there is no just in case because we
• Now some may say that we need this legislation just in case, but there is no just in case because we

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• gives them the flexibility to open an adjudicative proceeding and to look at something that, in this case
• So it would allow the utilities to bypass PUC review in that case, and they could cleverly manipulate
• 10:39.880> that utilities to bypass pu review in that utilities to bypass pu review in that case
• they<03:10:42.319> could<03:10:42.600> cleverly<03:10:43.319> manipulate case
• I do take the point that if it's an uncontested case, you know, the concern is, well, if everybody here

Keywords: 1189, house, all