Transcript Highlights:

• For the most part, there are different pockets of the way that we pay them.
• Part of what was frustrating was that we didn't know these providers were struggling.
• To Engage and Empower are both part of TFI.
• That's part of the metrics that we track. It's one thing to bring them back home.
• Let me start with the first part of that question.

Bills: SB596, SB961, SB1398, SB1183, SB1952

Keywords: DFPS, Department of Family and Protective Services, child protective services, foster care, child welfare, Family Code, conservatorship, managing conservator, parental child safety placement, authorization agreement, temporary authorization order, child abuse, child neglect, placement reporting, court-ordered removal, investigation, family preservation, transparency, public reporting, data reporting

Transcript Highlights:

• That's negligence and reckless right there on their part.
• So that's the unconstitutionality part of it.
• If the second part of your question on page...
• That's what your response is to part of it. Yes, sir. What's the other part then? Well, there...
• Um, and it adds back the words as part of which allows the... the words as part of which allows the judge

Bills: HB202, HB42, HB146, HB492, HB285, HB7, HB454, HB42, HB7

Keywords: law enforcement, immunity, civil liability, use of force, recruitment, bail reform, cash deposit, judicial discretion, criminal justice, Alabama law, youthful offender, capital murder, public safety, victims' rights, juvenile offenders, delinquent acts, juvenile court, nonfelony offenses, water safety offenses, HB285

Transcript Highlights:

• We've partnered with local businesses. to provide internships, apprenticeships, part-time jobs, giving
• That was part of that process.
• High school, are those students who are finishing the post-secondary part of their dual credit?
• Part some from the counselors, so let me see if I can get to find you a breakdown, you know, part of
• And they get part of their funding is based on those students actually had to find a job.

Bills: HB20, HB 120, HB20, HB120

Keywords: applied sciences, career education, high school diploma, certificate program, work-based learning, job placement, high-growth jobs, technical training, career readiness, education reform, workforce training, public schools, financial aid, fraudulent solicitation, disaster relief, nonprofit organizations, criminal penalties, consumer protection, fraud prevention, charitable donations

Transcript Highlights:

• Same thing that's part of the statute that's before you today.
• We had to do the exact same analysis as part of the CFWI legislation.
• Same thing that's part of the statute that's before you today.
• We had to do the exact same analysis as part of the CFI, CFWI legislation.
• We provided those rules to your staff on Friday as part of our response letter.

Summary: The Joint Administrative Procedures Committee met on February 3, 2025, with a quorum present and took up three main items. First, the committee considered a large set of recommended objections to Agency for Health Care Administration rules, all centered on sunset provisions stating the rules would expire after five years. AHCA asked for another deferral while it reviewed the rules, arguing the sunset language was a form of self-restraint rather than an invalid exercise of rulemaking authority. Committee leadership disagreed that further delay would resolve the issue and moved to a single vote covering all objections. The motion passed by roll call, and the committee informed AHCA that an objection would be filed unless the agency amended the rules within 30 days. The committee then heard an informational briefing from the Department of Environmental Protection on its Outstanding Florida Springs rule and stormwater rule. DEP explained that it did not prepare a statement of estimated regulatory cost for the springs rule because the proposed standards largely mirror existing water management district rules and the Central Florida Water Initiative framework, so DEP said there was no new regulatory burden. Members asked about permit authority, costs, and whether the rules were functionally different from prior rules. DEP maintained the rules set minimum standards and did not add costs beyond what regulated parties were already doing. DEP also described implementation of the stormwater rule adopted under the 2020 Clean Waterways Act and later ratified by the Legislature in 2024. DEP said the rule was the product of years of workshops and technical advisory committee meetings, and that the final version included lower-cost alternatives, grandfathering, and phased implementation. DEP estimated the rule’s cost at about $2,600 per acre in the revised CERC, while industry witnesses said the real cost could be much higher, especially if land costs are included. A home builders representative argued the estimate understated impacts, while a stormwater engineer said the rule gives more flexible, performance-based tools and could become more cost-effective over time. Finally, Senator Graal presented proposed Chapter 120 changes in SB 108, aimed at tightening and modernizing rulemaking. The proposal would require five-year rule reviews, annual agency reporting, faster notice of proposed rulemaking after authorizing legislation, electronic filing, public access to incorporated materials, clearer tracking of technical changes, and limits on how long rules can remain pending ratification. Members discussed whether the Legislature should be more specific in statutes about rulemaking deadlines and whether agencies should be more accountable when rules stall. No formal action was taken on the Chapter 120 proposals, and the committee adjourned after discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, I think that's part of the but-for; it isn't needed anymore.
• So, I think that's part of the but-for; it isn't needed anymore.
• So, I think that's part of the but-for; it isn't needed anymore.
• So, I think that's part of the but-for; it isn't needed anymore.
• So, I think that's part of the but-for; it isn't needed anymore.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> Um the another part big part of the $3.6 Um the another part big part of the $3.6 $6<00:04:39.759
• It's part, I do believe, as part of his power play whole initiative of energizing the state.
• </c> part I do believe um as part of his part I do believe um as part of his power<00:09:02.959><c> play
• </c><00:09:16.959><c> I</c><00:09:17.120><c> don't</c> front part of part of the page.
• I don't front part of part of the page.

Keywords: Appropriations - Room 216, 28 January, 2026; 8:15 AM, 925, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Sort of one question, two parts.
• The quiet part out loud.
• It is hybrid, where part of the program is online, but a huge part of it is based on clinical skills
• That part doesn't really—that's not part of the conversation.
• That is part of that process.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And that's part of what we years.
• </c> talent from other parts of the country. talent from other parts of the country.
• </c><00:41:10.800><c> of</c> around the wealth migration part of around the wealth migration part of
• And so in other parts of the state.
• constituted by part-time workers and so constituted by part-time workers and so you<01:35:23.760><c>

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> We we're a part of southern district. We we're a part of southern district.
• Uh part of that was going to be session.
• </c><01:24:32.159><c> is</c> think the next and last final part is think the next and last final part
• ><c> of</c><01:26:16.320><c> education</c> part of the office of education part of the office of education
• </c> education is part of curriculum as well. education is part of curriculum as well.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The task force met with a quorum, approved the minutes from the August 20 meeting, and then heard testimony from Representative Steven Doan on House Bill 439, a school nutrition bill aimed at restricting certain ultra-processed foods in schools. Doan said the bill was inspired by his own health journey and his work in agriculture, and he described the measure as targeting specific chemical additives in foods served during the school day, not concession sales or after-hours activities. He said the bill would phase in later to give schools time to adjust and noted that the list of restricted additives was drawn from efforts in other states and advocacy groups. Members asked about the chemical abstract numbers, fiscal impact, summer meal programs, fundraisers, and whether the bill would affect parent-provided items; Doan said he had not done a fiscal note and explained that the bill was intended to apply only during instructional time on school property. Committee members generally reacted favorably, with some raising practical concerns about cost and implementation. One member asked about high fructose corn syrup, which Doan said was not included because it is too pervasive in the food system. Another member noted that schools already limit some homemade items and asked about the line between school-provided and parent-provided food. Doan also said the list was based in part on Turning Point USA materials and similar laws in other states, and he referenced federal efforts to define ultra-processed foods. The committee then heard from Kentucky Department of Education officials Matt Ross, Lauren Moore, and Katie Embry on school meals and nutrition programs. They outlined Kentucky’s school lunch, breakfast, summer meals, and other USDA child nutrition programs, including participation and reimbursement figures, and explained how community eligibility provision schools, meal patterns, offer-versus-serve, smart snacks, and local wellness policies work. They said USDA and FDA are currently seeking public input on a uniform definition of ultra-processed foods, that there are no current USDA requirements specifically on ultra-processed foods, and that schools already operate under federal and state rules governing competitive foods, including a state time restriction on smart snacks. They also discussed local purchasing, noting its benefits but also the procurement and staffing challenges schools face. No votes or final actions on the bill were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it's all part of the budget here, and that's why there's a small part of increase in revenues.
• So it's all part of the budget here, and that's why there's a small part of increase in revenues.
• So it's all part of the budget here, and that's why there's a small part of increase in revenues.
• </c> increases we have to remember a big part increases we have to remember a big part of<01:02:22.559
• That was part of the consideration.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• That probably part of the...
• That probably part of the...
• That probably part of the...
• part of the work so we assume let's part part of the work so we assume let's for<00:54:39.200><c> the
• Is that part of...?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Finance Committee Division II met with the New Hampshire Department of Education to review school nutrition programs and related funding. Department staff Melissa White and Kelly Rambo walked through a packet covering the National School Lunch Program, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, Community Eligibility (CEP), After School Snack Program, Child and Adult Care Food Program, and Summer Food Service Program, explaining that these are federally funded USDA programs, with some state supplemental funding in certain areas. They also reviewed reimbursement rates for lunch, breakfast, child/adult care, and summer meals, noting that summer rates follow calendar-year timing while most others follow the state fiscal year. Members asked several questions about how the funding works, especially the difference between federal reimbursements and the state match. Staff explained that the state lunch line in the budget is a fixed match amount tied to federal participation, while breakfast funding is broken out by meal type and reimbursement category. They also discussed why FY 2022 federal spending was much higher during COVID, when USDA covered meals at the free rate for all students, and why FY 2023 and FY 2024 dropped as normal income-eligibility rules returned. A committee member also asked about the “severe need lunch” two-cent rate, and staff said they did not know USDA’s formula. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on summer meals and the distinction between the Summer Food Service Program and Summer EBT. Staff explained that SFSP provides meals at approved sites, which can be open or closed sites, while Summer EBT is a separate DHHS-operated benefit program that provides funds to families. They said some schools or sites may not qualify under USDA rules, but eligible children can often use another nearby open site, and the department posts an interactive map and phone line to help families find locations. The committee also discussed the Community Eligibility Provision. Staff said New Hampshire currently has three CEP schools, that the eligibility threshold had recently been lowered from 40% to 25% identified students, and that the program allows participating schools to offer free meals to all students while the local district covers the non-federal share. Members asked whether any districts in the 25% to 40% range had joined; staff said no. The department offered to provide the eligibility report in Excel and noted that the CEP intent is to reduce application burden, though the lower threshold can make the local cost share harder for some districts to absorb.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's part of the National Forensic League.
• I heard the main part of the question.
• Senator Yarbrough: So it's a two-part question. Senator Yarbrough: So it's a two-part question.
• So it's a two-part question.
• It took a lot of patience on your part.

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and several introductions and memorial remarks, including a moment of silence for service members killed in the conflict in Iran. The chamber then moved to special orders and took up a series of bills, with many measures passing unanimously after brief explanations and, in several cases, substitution of House companions. Early bills included CS/CS/SB 1062 on speech and debate education, which drew extensive supportive debate about the civic value of debate programs and passed 37-0, and SB 1072 on an anti-Semitism task force, which was amended to clarify that criticism of Israel is not prohibited and then passed 37-0. The Senate also approved CS/CS/SB 1230/HB 1019 on PFAS chemicals and firefighting foam, with discussion focused on phasing out AFFF, testing requirements, exceptions for federal aviation and military uses, and support for firefighters and water quality; the bill passed 37-0. Other measures passed without opposition included SB 1706 on the My Safe Florida Condominium Pilot Program, SB 186 on student health and safety and seizure response training, SB 598 on funeral and cemetery services, SB 990/HB 883 on protected cell captive insurance companies, SB 554 on nonprofit corporations, SB 560 on child welfare and foster care medication procedures, SB 684/HB 961 on electronic signatures for salvage titles, and SB 778/HB 569 on forensic client services. Two bills, SB 432 on intoxicating substances and SB 928 on dangerous crimes, were temporarily postponed. A major portion of the meeting was devoted to SB 1134 on official actions of local governments and DEI-related activities. The sponsor argued the bill would prevent counties and municipalities from funding or promoting DEI efforts he described as discriminatory or indoctrinating, while opponents offered amendments to narrow the bill to spending only, add an intent requirement for penalties, and preserve local proclamations and observances. Those amendments were debated at length but were not adopted. The sponsor then continued explaining the bill’s exceptions, including references to holidays, heritage sites, and the Pulse Memorial, and the chamber was still in debate on the underlying measure when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• That evaluation is supposed to occur as part of the DUI classes.
• I mean, that is certainly part of our annual grant application process.
• Thank you so much for inviting me to be a part of this joint hearing.
• And so all of that gets reported to the DMV as just part of their daily duties.
• And I forgot this part.

Summary: The joint Senate Public Safety and Transportation hearing focused on DUI, impaired driving, speeding, distracted driving, road design, and the broader traffic safety system in California. Chairs Jesse Arreguín and Dave Cortese said the purpose was to inform upcoming legislation and noted that no bills would be acted on at the hearing. They emphasized the scale of the problem, including thousands of fatal and serious injury crashes each year, and framed the discussion around a Safe System approach that combines infrastructure, enforcement, education, and technology. The first panel covered current DUI law and traffic safety research. Thomas Nozowitz of the Committee on Revision of the Penal Code outlined California’s DUI penalty structure, including escalating misdemeanor and felony penalties, license suspensions, ignition interlock devices, Watson advisories, and homicide-related offenses such as vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated and Watson murder. Stephanie Doherty of the Office of Traffic Safety described statewide crash trends, the role of alcohol, drugs, and speeding in fatalities, and state efforts such as the Safe System approach, safety corridors, and grant funding for impaired-driving countermeasures. Dr. Julia Griswold of UC Berkeley SafeTREC presented research favoring systemic interventions like self-explaining roads, safer speed limits, speed safety cameras, intelligent speed assistance, ignition interlocks, sobriety checkpoints, and treatment for chronic offenders, while noting that first-time DUI offenders account for a large share of fatal crashes. Members pressed the panelists on first-offense DUI treatment, ignition interlocks, speed governors, diversion, and whether tougher sanctions or vehicle technology would better reduce recidivism. Several senators raised concerns about repeat offenders, alcohol-use disorder, and the need for earlier intervention, while others questioned the effectiveness and cost of in-car devices. The panel also discussed data gaps and the need for better reporting and coordination between courts and DMV. The second panel, with DMV Director Steve Gordon and Judge Lisa Rodriguez, explained how administrative and court processes work in parallel: DMV receives court abstracts and can impose administrative per se suspensions quickly, while courts handle criminal cases, probation, and sentencing on a slower timeline. Both witnesses said the system is complex and paper-heavy but improving, and they acknowledged the need for better integration, clearer statutes, faster reporting, and more timely license actions to keep impaired drivers off the road.

Transcript Highlights:

• That evaluation is supposed to occur as part of the DUI classes.
• Thank you so much for inviting me to be a part of this joint hearing.
• Senator Blakespear: I forgot this part.
• So this is just the reinforcing that the part, then it won't happen.
• And I forgot this part.

Summary: The joint Senate Public Safety and Transportation hearing focused on DUI, impaired driving, traffic violence, speed management, and how criminal and administrative systems interact. Chairs Jesse Arreguín and Dave Cortese said the hearing was intended to inform upcoming legislation and noted that no bills would be acted on that day. They emphasized the scale of roadway deaths and serious injuries, the need for a holistic Safe System approach, and the importance of hearing from law enforcement, researchers, victims’ advocates, judges, and DMV officials. The first panel reviewed current DUI law and research. Thomas Nozowitz of the Committee on Revision of the Penal Code outlined California’s DUI penalties, including escalating misdemeanor and felony consequences, ignition interlock device requirements, license suspensions, Watson advisories, and homicide-related offenses. Stephanie Doherty of the Office of Traffic Safety described statewide crash trends, the role of alcohol, drugs, speed, and vulnerable road users, and the state’s Safe System and safety corridor efforts. Dr. Julia Griswold of UC Berkeley presented research supporting systemic interventions such as self-explaining roads, safer speed limits, speed safety cameras, ignition interlocks, sobriety checkpoints, and treatment for chronic offenders; she also noted that many DUI fatalities involve first-time offenders and that punitive measures alone have limited effect on high-risk drivers. Members pressed witnesses on ignition interlocks, speed governors, DUI treatment, diversion, and whether current penalties are strong enough. Several senators, including Archuleta and Blakespear, argued for stronger immediate consequences and better use of in-car technology, while witnesses said chronic offenders often need treatment and that some existing programs may be underused or inconsistently effective. The discussion also touched on data gaps, the need to distinguish alcohol- from drug-involved crashes, and the possibility of allowing diversion for some first-time DUI cases while preserving consequences for repeat offenses. The second panel addressed DMV and court processes. DMV Director Steve Gordon said the department handles mandatory, court-ordered, and administrative actions, and that recent process changes have reduced DMV hearing delays from roughly 170 days to under 70 days in many cases. Judge Lisa Rodriguez explained that county-by-county court practices, case filing delays, sentencing timelines, and paper or mixed electronic systems can slow reporting to DMV, especially for misdemeanors and felonies. She said courts are reviewing reporting requirements, training, and case-management coding to improve transmission of DUI orders, while DMV said it is open to simplification and better coordination but is constrained by aging systems and the motor vehicle account’s financial limits. No votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• I am part I'm a senior director by Vic.
• <c> data</c><00:04:22.000><c> and</c> at Gartner and I'm part of the data and at Gartner and I'm part
• And the second part of that one right?
• ><c> the</c><00:35:48.840><c> foundational</c> part of the journey, the foundational part of the journey
• </c><00:43:31.400><c> Because</c> part of the trust agreement. Because part of the trust agreement.

Keywords: Technology - Room 409, 5 March, 2026; 8:00 A.M., 925, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That's the second part of your question.
• That's the second part of your question.
• They're part of everyday life for many Floridians.
• They're part of everyday life for many Floridians.
• of, but that's the part you have to be a part of when you represent two cities in this manner.

Summary: The committee first took up CS/SB 1730, a Live Local Act bill on affordable housing. The sponsor described it as a set of technical and policy adjustments to strengthen implementation, including changes to zoning, height, parking, moratoriums, attorney fees, and related land-use rules. An amendment by Senator Claudio was adopted, adding provisions such as a 10-story height limit near single-family neighborhoods, exclusions for certain protected areas, and changes to fee and use definitions. The committee then reported the bill favorably. Members next considered CS/SB 1674 on unrated bonds for Israel bonds, with a clarifying amendment adopted to make clear the bill applied only to Israel bonds. CS/SB 140 on charter schools was also approved after debate over parent-led conversion of public schools, municipal job-engine charter schools, and surplus school property; opponents warned about local control and impacts on teachers and communities, while the sponsor said the bill preserved district authority and created new school-choice and economic-development options. The committee also passed SB 96, a claims bill for Jacob Rogers, and CS/SB 954 on recovery residences, after strike-all amendments that addressed zoning, ADA concerns, bed caps, staffing ratios, and limits on operation in certain multifamily settings. Senators expressed support for expanding treatment housing but also raised neighborhood and staffing concerns. The committee then approved CS/SB 1714 on local housing assistance plans, which would allow SHIP funds for limited lot-rental assistance for mobile-home owners and require local plans to address mobile-home park closures. SB 658 on standardized construction lien release forms was reported favorably despite testimony from contractors and lawyers warning about possible effects on lien rights and the separate House proposal. The committee also reconsidered and then approved CS/SB 482 after a late-filed amendment addressing local government art fees and a key issue over defining “extraordinary circumstances,” with counties and cities saying more work remained. Finally, the committee passed SB 24 and CS/SB 4, both local claims bills, CS/SB 712 on synthetic turf and related construction rules, SB 952 repealing the emergency firearms/ammunition restriction, CS/SB 1164 allowing email notice delivery in landlord-tenant matters with opt-in safeguards, and SB 202 on municipal water and sewer rates, which drew extensive opposition from North Miami Beach and Miami Gardens officials over utility surcharges and revenue impacts. The meeting ended with SB 202 still under heavy questioning and testimony about the fairness and financial consequences of the surcharge structure.

Transcript Highlights:

• The elementary is... and then what region are you part of? Old Rochester? Okay.
• Part of the financial issues that regional schools face is tied to transportation.
• These extracurricular activities are the most enjoyable part of school.
• For example, right now we are making wind turbines as part of our engineering unit.
• I would like more kids to come and take part in this learning.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused primarily on H. 517/S. 314, a bill to provide a sustainable future for rural schools, and H. 697, a bill to require full funding of regional school transportation. Witnesses from rural districts, school committees, superintendents, students, and local officials described chronic underfunding, declining enrollment, high fixed costs, special education and transportation burdens, and the loss of programs, staff, and extracurriculars. Several speakers argued that rural aid should be funded at $60 million annually and made non-discretionary, while others emphasized that transportation reimbursement for regional districts has repeatedly fallen short of the state’s promise and is driving budget crises and overrides. A number of students testified in support of rural aid, describing cuts to classes, counselors, and activities, and the impact on their schools and communities. Committee members also discussed whether transportation policy should be revisited to address underlying cost drivers, including bus bidding practices and whether regional districts should have more flexibility in transportation requirements. The committee also heard H. 515, concerning Hancock Elementary School and a school choice-related exemption from a state requirement that has created a large financial burden for the district. Hancock’s superintendent and Rep. John Barrett explained that a decades-old regulation, recently enforced by DESE, would require Hancock to pay tuition for choice-in students through high school graduation even though the district only serves pre-K through grade 6 and sends its own students elsewhere for middle and high school. They said the rule creates a significant per-student shortfall and has forced Hancock to opt out of school choice. Committee members asked for clarification about how the arrangement works and how the costs fall on Hancock. Additional testimony supported related transportation bills for non-regional districts, especially Plymouth/Carver and North Middlesex, describing high and rising bus costs, special education and McKinney-Vento transportation expenses, and the strain on local budgets. Speakers repeatedly said that state reimbursement has not matched actual costs and that communities are being forced to choose between transportation and classroom services. No votes or final actions were taken in the hearing; the committee simply received testimony and closed the hearing on the bills discussed.

Transcript Highlights:

• And the ocean is a big part of who we are as people of Hawaii.
• We're responding part of the 911 system.
• </c> to emergencies and being part of that. to emergencies and being part of that.
• 17:06.560><c> advisory</c><00:17:07.079><c> board,</c> part of the governor's advisory board, part of
• And But part of that invasive out.

Bills: SCR56, SCR25, SCR79, SCR179, SCR181, SCR182, SR54, SR22, SR81, SR174, SR176, SR177

Keywords: lifeguards, first responders, public safety, ocean safety, emergency response, community wellbeing, Pohakuloa, condemnation, federal government, land sovereignty, Hawaii, native Hawaiians, public trust land, invasive species, octocoral, Pearl Harbor, environment, Navy responsibility, marine ecosystem, ecosystem preservation

Summary: The committee first heard SCR 56 and SR 54, which recognize open water lifeguards as first responders and acknowledge their role in emergency response and public safety. Testifiers from the Hawaiian Lifeguard Association, Hawaii Water Safety Coalition, Honolulu and Kauai Ocean Safety, and a junior guard all strongly supported the resolutions, describing lifeguards as often first on scene for drownings, cardiac arrest, spinal injuries, flooding rescues, and other emergencies. Several speakers said formal recognition would better reflect the work lifeguards already do and could improve training, support services, pay equity, and access to benefits such as retirement and trauma resources. Members asked about what legal or administrative changes would follow, and the discussion suggested the resolutions were a first step toward broader recognition and related policy changes. The committee then took up SCR 25 and SR 22, opposing federal condemnation or threats of condemnation to take control of Pohakuloa and other state land. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs supported the resolutions, saying Pohakuloa has deep historical, cultural, genealogical, and ecological significance and that any future decisions should go through existing state legal processes with meaningful consultation with Native Hawaiians. Members discussed the role of the governor’s advisory process, the need to follow DLNR/BLNR procedures, and concerns about environmental and health violations at the site. The committee also noted 14 written testimonies in support. Next, the committee heard SCR 79 and SR 81, urging the U.S. Navy to take responsibility for eradicating octocoral and other invasive species in Pearl Harbor waters, including West, Middle, and East Loch. DLNR supported the resolutions, and testimony focused on the spread of invasive coral, the difficulty of eradication, and the limited access state agencies have inside Pearl Harbor. Members raised concerns about contamination, responsibility for the problem, and whether the Navy should fund or carry out the cleanup; DLNR said it could not speak to broader contamination issues but supported the resolution as a way to encourage action. The committee then began discussion of SCR 179 and SR 174, which urge Maui County to enforce fire code provisions on brush clearance, fuel breaks, roadside vegetation clearing, and emergency access, with written support noted from Aloha Independent Living Hawaii.

Transcript Highlights:

• I was in another meeting in a different part of the building, so I only caught the very last part of
• I mean, that's going to be a part of the pricing of the retail. that's going to be a part of the pricing
• solar, some part natural gas, some part, you know, all different areas.
• Actually, re-regulation is actually beginning to be part of the trend in the country right now.
• So is the trend line, but also maybe some mismanagement on their part.

Summary: The committee first met in executive session, laying over H.J.R. 153 and H.J.R. 119, then unanimously advanced HB 2904 after adopting a committee amendment and substitute. HB 2904 passed 13-0. The committee also adopted a substitute for HB 2933 and sent that bill do pass by a vote of 11-3. The committee then moved into regular session and heard HB 2266, which would add the attorney general and staff, or as members suggested possibly assistant attorney generals, to the list of officials authorized to concealed carry while performing duties. The sponsor and an assistant attorney general testified that the bill was intended to protect AG staff who travel and work in courthouses and hotels; some members raised concerns about the breadth of the term “staff,” and one witness urged clearer limits and identification safeguards. No vote was taken on HB 2266 in the portion provided. The committee then heard HB 2207 and HB 2233 together, both aimed at restructuring Missouri’s electric industry to allow competitive generation while keeping transmission and distribution regulated. The sponsors argued that competition would lower costs, improve reliability, spur innovation, and let customers choose suppliers, while preserving PSC oversight of the grid and default service. Supporters, including a market think tank and retail energy advocates, said competitive states have seen more generation investment and that private generators bear their own risk rather than ratepayers. Opponents, including Evergy, argued deregulation has not delivered promised savings, can increase fraud and consumer confusion, and would force divestment of utility generation assets without clear guardrails. Members pressed witnesses on comparisons to Illinois, Texas, Pennsylvania, legacy costs, divestment mechanics, and whether the PSC would still set generation-related rates; witnesses disagreed sharply on the likely effect on residential prices and on whether the bill’s structure was sufficiently specific.

Transcript Highlights:

• Ensuring access to care is also an important part of fulfilling our mission.
• Is that the one that you're referring to that might be related to parts of sex offenders?
• This is parts of it, yeah. Yeah? This is a bill you're bringing back, right?
• This is parts of it, yeah. So the first part was from a year and a half ago, two years ago.
• And then the second part of the bill having to do. and it works is critical.

Keywords: 999, senate, all